|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2017 14:56:16 GMT
Also, a smart move to revert to someone who knows the building/people- there's a lot to be said for getting what you want by knowing your way around (and around people). Anyway she's got a great background, and is an exciting appointment in a situation that could have gone a very safe and predictable route after Rice.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2017 15:05:16 GMT
Can anyone recall what the response was to an anti-Stratfordian being employed in the role? To be honest, that is the one thing that would make me question their suitability. I know it's always down to what they do but it just seems sacrilegious to have the head of a Shakespeare theatre not believing in Shakespeare's authorship. The authorship stuff is actually on the less nutty side of Mark Rylance's belief spectrum so I guess it was less noticeable than it would have been in anyone else!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2017 15:16:12 GMT
I suspect that back in the day, any public concern about the Globe would have been based more on it being a theme park sort of experience than a legitimate theatre. Also, how well known was Mark Rylance back then? I wasn't into theatre in a big way in the '90s, but I'd be surprised if his views were publicly known enough to have more of an impact than any overall suspicion of the Globe project in its entirety. Indeed, he's now an Oscar winner and his views as an anti-Stratfordian are widely known, but people still cast him in Shakespeare plays and transfer them to the West End and Broadway and give him Tony nominations and awards for them. As controversial beliefs go, it's a pretty benign one (compared with, say, the anti-vax brigade, though it's still classist and elitist), and it never seems to have affected his ability to give a good performance.
|
|
Xanderl
Member
Not always very high value in terms of ticket yield or donations
|
Post by Xanderl on Jul 24, 2017 15:22:58 GMT
One of my favourite facts from the very interesting book on the Shakespearean authorship debate, "Contested Will", is that Malcolm X was an anti-Stratfordian.
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Jul 24, 2017 15:23:58 GMT
I'd be surprised if his views were publicly known enough to have more of an impact than any overall suspicion of the Globe project in its entirety. He had founded and run a touring classical theatre company called Phoebus Cart which staged plays in significant leyline locations including Bankside and the prehistoric Rollright Stones circle, where I saw The Tempest. So his views were publicly manifest. And he had played many leaading roles at the RSC and NT so he was known theatrically in those limited circles too.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2017 15:27:25 GMT
Hence "publicly known enough". I don't doubt for a second that the mid-'90s equivalent of us lot knew his oeuvre and opinions intimately, but theatre audiences have always been made up of FAR more than just the hyper-devotees. Your use of the word "limited" suggests you perfectly understand my point, but that's okay, I understand that sometimes you just enjoy disagreeing.
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Jul 24, 2017 15:28:54 GMT
I don't think I've ever encountered Michelle Terry, although it's quite possible that we unknowingly passed during her time as an undergraduate at Cardiff University which was in the depths of our theatrical Dark Age which lasted from the demise of Moving Being and Brith Gof in the early 90s until the creation of National Theatre Wales and The Other Room nearly two decades later.
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Jul 24, 2017 15:42:11 GMT
Hence "publicly known enough". I don't doubt for a second that the mid-'90s equivalent of us lot knew his oeuvre and opinions intimately, but theatre audiences have always been made up of FAR more than just the hyper-devotees. Your use of the word "limited" suggests you perfectly understand my point, but that's okay, I understand that sometimes you just enjoy disagreeing. There was a small public exhibition on display at Shakespeare's Globe last year of a few documents from the project to build Shakespeare's Globe. They included press features of Phoebus Cart performing at or near the Bankside site, with Mark Rylance's explanation of how the site is at a meeting point of several leylines running through London. So, people who might later have been interested in the artistic directorship of the Globe when it was later opened would already have been aware of these views. And because they had been clearly expressed and reported, as part of the ongoing development of the Globe project, they were picked up and repeated in initial media commentary on the appointment of Mark Rylance.
|
|
5,432 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Jul 24, 2017 15:44:02 GMT
It is good to see that the commitment to touring is still part of the candidate specification. I think it is a massive shame that there is no tour this year - reaching out to audiences in the provinces is an important part of what the Globe has done over the past decade or so. In the early days it was very much in the spirit of the early troupes of travelling players - packing everything into the back of a van and using that as part of the set. More recently it has been a bigger, more elaborate affair (at least here in Oxford)
But taking the Globe style of Shakespeare round the country every summer is something that should return. Let's hope it does.
|
|
5,432 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Jul 24, 2017 15:52:25 GMT
Wasn't it pretty much the case that Sam Wanamaker made it very clear that Rylance was his first choice to be his successor? There was clearly a strong relationship between the two.
And the reason why Rylance's appointment wasn't subject to quite so much 'analysis' is probably because it took place before every armchair critic had easy access to internet forums where they could pick apart every part of his career to date!
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Jul 24, 2017 17:37:40 GMT
I don't think I've ever encountered Michelle Terry, although it's quite possible that we unknowingly passed during her time as an undergraduate at Cardiff University which was in the depths of our theatrical Dark Age which lasted from the demise of Moving Being and Brith Gof in the early 90s until the creation of National Theatre Wales and The Other Room nearly two decades later. She was outstanding in the Katie Mitchell revival of Cleansed, I also loved her in the divisive In the Republic of Happiness at the Court. Only seen her in one live Shakespeare (as opposed to DVD), All's Well at the National in a decent Marianne Elliott production, and she was effective in that. It's to be hoped that she can get directors of the calibre of Mitchell and Elliott at the Globe.
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Jul 24, 2017 17:46:41 GMT
She's one of the best doing Shakespeare on stage for me and her appointment seems to have gone down well in the theatre world if reactions are anything to go by, think the Globe could have pulled a real rabbit out of the hat with this one, interesting times.
|
|
1,119 posts
|
Post by martin1965 on Jul 24, 2017 18:21:20 GMT
She's not a director and a middle range actress, best in comedies from what ive seen Her first season will be interesting, she has time of course as the Globe is programmed to next spring. Lets see if she can improve on the calibre of directors prepared to work there. Wonder who else applied?
|
|
4,038 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Jul 24, 2017 18:24:32 GMT
My hazy recollection from the 90s is that people in general were more interested in the Globe as a building than who was going to be its artistic director, and it was seen very much as a tourist attraction/educational experience first. But then I wasn't a proper theatre geek back then. Rylance' views were known but not considered overly important. I saw him in Anthony and Cleopatra there when I was studying it for A level English and I think it was briefly mentioned when we were talking about it. It was just an amusing quirk, though.
|
|
5,585 posts
|
Post by lynette on Jul 24, 2017 19:10:24 GMT
My hazy recollection from the 90s is that people in general were more interested in the Globe as a building than who was going to be its artistic director, and it was seen very much as a tourist attraction/educational experience first. But then I wasn't a proper theatre geek back then. Rylance' views were known but not considered overly important. I saw him in Anthony and Cleopatra there when I was studying it for A level English and I think it was briefly mentioned when we were talking about it. It was just an amusing quirk, though. You are right, Kathryn. It was all about getting the building built and the fund raising was exceptional, set a marker for other arts organisations. We knew about the ley lines..ahem.. but I for one didn't know Rylance thought that ' someone else ' wrote the plays. The place was a novelty at first but Rylance was the right guy for the job because he turned the novelty into great productions. He served the plays and it didn't matter who wrote them. A lot of the magic was the ' natural' lighting as the light fell in the evening. I wish Michelle all the luck in the world.
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Jul 25, 2017 12:28:20 GMT
From what I've read yesterday, she has a sound academic background in English Literature, and I feel that this will stand her in good stead at Shakespeare's Globe where the Performance and the Academic Research arms of the organisation (and also Education) are all crucial to the whole operation of the Trust. She will fully understand where they are coming from and mutual respect and harmony should freely flow!
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Jul 25, 2017 12:38:16 GMT
There is an established Executive Director who leads on those fronts. And she has six months there as Artistic Director Designate which gives opportunity to fill in any gaps and proceed up the learning curve, where necessary and desirable, ready to start, fully prepared, as Artistic Director.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Jul 25, 2017 13:03:05 GMT
Don't forget that she holds the cards here, The Globe cannot afford to block another AD's vision, once is a big mistake, twice would be evidence of inherent dysfunction. One of the Guardian trolls was extolling her as the 'conservative choice' yesterday, I don't think they will be as happy some years down the line.
Their problem with directors is still a festering issue, though. By employing an actor who it seems won't be directing, then that further reduces the expertise on hand in that area. Will there be a head of production answering to Terry? In which case the issue has just been shunted a little down the line.
|
|
Xanderl
Member
Not always very high value in terms of ticket yield or donations
|
Post by Xanderl on Jul 25, 2017 13:40:51 GMT
|
|
Xanderl
Member
Not always very high value in terms of ticket yield or donations
|
Post by Xanderl on Jul 25, 2017 14:11:40 GMT
Well, it answers the question in that the reference to budgets in the first point is one of the key differences between the new and old job descriptions
Old:
New:
Which is fair enough I think: "Here's your budget for the theatre, here's the rest of the budget which is for education, touring programmes, etc etc."
Also note this one:
Old:
New:
As I say, anything you want to know about any changes in the role and interaction with Globe management can be found by reading the job descriptions.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Jul 25, 2017 14:32:21 GMT
It refers to planning of, approval and control of productions but that could mean many things. Overseeing it all herself or using someone with directorial experience to oversee the other directors? I imagine that she would benefit from the latter, given her lack of experience in the area so that might mean a beefed up role for the Matthew Dunster position (Imogen, Hangmen, Tale of Two Cities (whoops)) wouldn't it? Is his role up for grabs? Who would be in the frame if it is, etc.?
|
|
|
Post by Honoured Guest on Jul 25, 2017 15:32:23 GMT
It does seem a trifle like the board are protecting themselves from a repeat, doesn't it. But probably some of the non-Performance factions will oppose some other aspect of the Performance programme in future that they haven't considered as a possibility and and so haven't yet proclaimed an official stipulation to prevent. That's where Michelle Terry will be in a stronger position to stand up for her position against the Academics and Heritageista and Traditionalist factions because she'll be able to smile sweetly and say: "Sorry, it's what Shakespeare would have wanted!" whereas Emma Rice could only say "Sorry, it's what 99% of the theatre world wants" which wasn't sufficient to placate the nuttier elements of the Globe.
|
|
5,432 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Jul 25, 2017 15:49:36 GMT
Sorry HG but 99% of the theatre world doesn't want Emma Rice style theatre. There is absolutely a place for her work as part of our broader theatrical landscape but hers is not the only way of making theatre or of telling stories.
Every major arts provider needs a range of voices and not all of them will please everyone - I am sure a very diverse group of directors will work in the Terry Globe, some you will like more than me, some I will like more that you. Which is as it should be.
|
|
45 posts
|
Post by publius on Jul 25, 2017 15:55:53 GMT
Sorry HG but 99% of the theatre world doesn't want Emma Rice style theatre. There is absolutely a place for her work as part of our broader theatrical landscape but hers is not the only way of making theatre or of telling stories. Every major arts provider needs a range of voices and not all of them will please everyone - I am sure a very diverse group of directors will work in the Terry Globe, some you will like more than me, some I will like more that you. Which is as it should be. There are plenty of theatres for traditional (or as close to it as possible before the pedants get involved!) and the innovative that, amongst others, Emma Rice falls within. There must, however, be equal protection for both traditional and innovative and its all very well saying that theatre must be more inclusive (something that is close to my heart) but it must not be at the expense of preserving heritage and culture that is currently out of vogue.
|
|
Xanderl
Member
Not always very high value in terms of ticket yield or donations
|
Post by Xanderl on Jul 26, 2017 11:56:38 GMT
Wonder if Michelle Terry's close relationship with the RSC (she's currently an Associate Artist) could lead to a closer relationship between the two. You could see (for instance) something like Nell Gwynn working well in a transfer to the RSC or Queen Anne working better at the Globe or Sam Wanamaker than it does in the Haymarket.
|
|
|
Post by Coated on Jul 26, 2017 13:14:19 GMT
Michelle Terry has directed three short films, King John, Richard III and As You Like It for the complete walk project according to the telegraph. That might have been enough to indicate to the hiring panel what kind of director she would be, even if it's not stage directing
|
|
1,093 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Jul 26, 2017 13:30:00 GMT
I hope so. I attended a QA with Lucy Bailey some years ago where she talked about there being a division in British classical theatre between "Globe people" and "RSC people" and implied you had to pin your colours firmly to one mast or the other, and never shall the twain meet. I hope that is not the case. Doesn't seem to be for actors, at any rate.
|
|
5,585 posts
|
Post by lynette on Jul 26, 2017 14:56:42 GMT
I hope so. I attended a QA with Lucy Bailey some years ago where she talked about there being a division in British classical theatre between "Globe people" and "RSC people" and implied you had to pin your colours firmly to one mast or the other, and never shall the twain meet. I hope that is not the case. Doesn't seem to be for actors, at any rate. Eh? I was an early supporter of The Globe even before it was built. I am quite happy with its development particularly the way it draws younger theatre goers and tourists. On the whole I have enjoyed the shows I've seen there. I'm on the keep the techie stuff to the minimum side but I didn't see any of the Rice regime shows. I will be seeing Much Ado soon. No reason why Ms Terry shouldn't do a decent job. AND I'm a supporter of the RSC...who knew? I see no problem pinning my lovely colours to both. The RSC has had its duds...Tamar's Revenge, anyone? But I'm a long term gal, a keeper.
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Jul 26, 2017 19:15:45 GMT
I hope so. I attended a QA with Lucy Bailey some years ago where she talked about there being a division in British classical theatre between "Globe people" and "RSC people" and implied you had to pin your colours firmly to one mast or the other, and never shall the twain meet. I hope that is not the case. Doesn't seem to be for actors, at any rate. Eh? I was an early supporter of The Globe even before it was built. I am quite happy with its development particularly the way it draws younger theatre goers and tourists. On the whole I have enjoyed the shows I've seen there. I'm on the keep the techie stuff to the minimum side but I didn't see any of the Rice regime shows. I will be seeing Much Ado soon. No reason why Ms Terry shouldn't do a decent job. AND I'm a supporter of the RSC...who knew? I see no problem pinning my lovely colours to both. The RSC has had its duds...Tamar's Revenge, anyone? But I'm a long term gal, a keeper. Oh I read that and thought it meant sort of artistically professionally rather than as an audience member, I've done both and seen great and not so great at both, it's just the Globe is much more accessible for me and has cheaper options. Will look forward to your views regarding Much Ado lynette
|
|
1,103 posts
|
Post by mallardo on Jul 26, 2017 19:37:20 GMT
Do we know weather or not Michelle Terry will continue her acting career?
|
|