|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2017 14:52:24 GMT
I’ll say again that this post presents a paradox: the poster claims to be an ethnic minority yet refuses to support a programme that has diversity as its main focus. I don’t get it. If you want the Theatre to fill up then book for your family and friends, put the word out for people to attend the shows. A post like this is incredibly damaging for the artists involved, especially the writers. If the original poster supports new writing then surely they should support this theatre. Parsley, I have already booked for Leave Taking. Perhaps I’ll see you there? We Were supporting the Bush from many many years ago My point is Having seen the decline over 15-20 years I no longer find anything relevant for me there Compare the the RC which has a well established International playwrights scheme Many of the RC plays are not done as audience pleasers But to offer a different point of view This is why I liked Goats It wasn’t the best play But the subject matter is potent And the casting was very varied and diverse It was weird to programme it over Xmas From a commercial point of view But this is the sort of risk which for me Pays off time and time again and the RC What plays has The Bush Presented recently Which deal with such issues Parliament Square was laughable There are only so many times I will go to a venue Before they lose their nine lives I am Interested in high quality new writing Not just new writing full stop The Bush doesn’t have quality at the top of their agenda anymore There are plenty of other places to go and see new plays The Bush seem to just want to fill up their schedule It’s also interesting how not that many playwrights present successive shows at The Bush anymore As they often do at the RC |
|
84 posts
|
Post by jasper on Dec 29, 2017 15:55:45 GMT
So basically anything Parsley doesn't personally like shouldn't exist? (99% of all theatre then.) What a horrible, bigoted attitude. The Bush regularly sells out and has amazing ticket sales, and punches far above their weight in terms of critical acclaim. They are beloved by the local community (they run several community programmes) and exist to serve an audience demographic that is woefully underserved by the mainstream theatre industry. They do more to encourage and develop new talent and especially diverse new talent than most theatres out there. What other small theatre gives out the same number of new writing commissions per year? But they aren't making theatre exclusively for old white men so obviously the Parsleys of this world froth at the mouth. Nothing interesting in the Daily Mail that day, I guess. |
|
84 posts
|
Post by jasper on Dec 29, 2017 16:04:30 GMT
So basically anything Parsley doesn't personally like shouldn't exist? (99% of all theatre then.) What a horrible, bigoted attitude. The Bush regularly sells out and has amazing ticket sales, and punches far above their weight in terms of critical acclaim. They are beloved by the local community (they run several community programmes) and exist to serve an audience demographic that is woefully underserved by the mainstream theatre industry. They do more to encourage and develop new talent and especially diverse new talent than most theatres out there. What other small theatre gives out the same number of new writing commissions per year? But they aren't making theatre exclusively for old white men so obviously the Parsleys of this world froth at the mouth. Nothing interesting in the Daily Mail that day, I guess. I fell troubled and saddened by this post. I feel that as an old white man I am having opinions and attitudes ascribed to me on the basis of my physical characteristics alone. As I was musing on this on the train I noticed the person siting next to me was reading a copy of the Daily Mail. I suppose she would identify herself as younger than me, black, female and with a disability. It made me think that we should not ascribe to other groups opinions we do not know them to hold. It made me sad. I cannot help being old, white and male, but I do not need others to ascribe opinions to me that I do not hold. Living as we do in the 21st century we have learnt from out recent past where such attitudes lead. I am sad since this post makes me feel i would not be welcome at the Bush. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2017 16:34:00 GMT
To return to facts from fantasy, the Bush has always had some co-productions and presented very many visiting companies throughout its forty-odd years.
But the Theatre now has an audience capacity about three times greater than the original venue so really it's a very different theatrical operation.
And it's less than a year since reopening after redevelopment, so it's a bit soon to start moaning that there haven't been successive shows by many playwrights.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2017 19:58:24 GMT
To return to facts from fantasy, the Bush has always had some co-productions and presented very many visiting companies throughout its forty-odd years. But the Theatre now has an audience capacity about three times greater than the original venue so really it's a very different theatrical operation. And it's less than a year since reopening after redevelopment, so it's a bit soon to start moaning that there haven't been successive shows by many playwrights. This is why I am somewhat mistrustful of the motives behind this post. I honestly don’t understand what the poster is going on about. I can’t see how you can compare The Bush and the RC - what’s the point? And as for the idea of repeat plays by playwrights... perhaps they want to open up to new voices. There are only so many commissions one can give each year and if they all go to the usual suspects how do you give access to newcomers? In truth, most writers would give their right arm to have their work produced at any venue in London whether it is a studio over a pub or the Olivier so I doubt very much that there are writers who refuse to have their work staged at The Bush. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2017 19:59:39 GMT
To return to facts from fantasy, the Bush has always had some co-productions and presented very many visiting companies throughout its forty-odd years. But the Theatre now has an audience capacity about three times greater than the original venue so really it's a very different theatrical operation. And it's less than a year since reopening after redevelopment, so it's a bit soon to start moaning that there haven't been successive shows by many playwrights. This is why I am somewhat mistrustful of the motives behind this post. I honestly don’t understand what the poster is going on about. I can’t see how you can compare The Bush and the RC - what’s the point? And as for the idea of repeat plays by playwrights... perhaps they want to open up to new voices. There are only so many commissions one can give each year and if they all go to the usual suspects how do you give access to newcomers? In truth, most writers would give their right arm to have their work produced at any venue in London whether it is a studio over a pub or the Olivier so I doubt very much that there are writers who refuse to have their work staged at The Bush. Addendum: I should make it clear that I am referring to the original post and not the one quoted. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2018 15:36:16 GMT
Took them to task on twitter for ageism but don't get the impression they see the problem. But try inserting any other group of the population instead of "elderly" in the original tweet they quoted ("Thoroughly enjoying watching 2 elderly people squirm in a sea of young people at a Wednesday matinee trip to the theatre")!
|
|
84 posts
|
Post by jasper on Apr 4, 2018 18:18:33 GMT
Took them to task on twitter for ageism but don't get the impression they see the problem. But try inserting any other group of the population instead of "elderly" in the original tweet they quoted ("Thoroughly enjoying watching 2 elderly people squirm in a sea of young people at a Wednesday matinee trip to the theatre")! I agree with you. I have noticed how casual references to people of an older age is seen as something that is a negative. Any mention of a mid week matinee or of certain venues like Chichester or Jermyn Street seem to bring out these sort comments. I notice mention of a younger audience seems to be seen as a positive. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2018 18:48:25 GMT
Took them to task on twitter for ageism but don't get the impression they see the problem. But try inserting any other group of the population instead of "elderly" in the original tweet they quoted ("Thoroughly enjoying watching 2 elderly people squirm in a sea of young people at a Wednesday matinee trip to the theatre")! I saw that tweet and thought it was very misjudged as well. Seriously, theatres should be trying to make paying punters feel uncomfortable because of the age bracket they are in?? Being older doesn't equal wanting to watch Miss Marple. |
|
4,974 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Phantom of London on Apr 5, 2018 12:07:02 GMT
I have to say geographically I am in the wrong part of London, any theatre that I have to make 2 changes to get to leave me cold, however I have done the 2 changes and have seen several things.
I half get the OP argument, but would have tried to be politer about it. I don’t get why this theatre has a studio space, I thought they would want to focus their attention on quality rather than quantity.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2018 13:19:51 GMT
Talk about London privilege! There's literally only maybe three theatres I can get to without having to change tube line, and two of them still require a bit of walking at the other end, but it doesn't stop me making over 150 theatre trips a year.  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2018 14:50:17 GMT
Oh not this again! Why are we knocking an important London venue which is just about to celebrate its first year in a new building. That’s right. It’s FIRST YEAR. As for the ageism thing: the Theatre was careful, in its reply, to avoid the language of the original tweet while exploiting the opportunity to publicise the fact that the current play is attracting a younger audience. In my mind (as an older person) that is something to celebrate. When I look around theatres they don’t seem to be engaging younger people. The original tweet was from an audience member, not the Theatre. I would also cut the unfortunate tweeting youngster some slack...I doubt they meant it to sound as bad as it does. That’s the problem with social media people can run with your mistakes and, before you know it, it’s become a whole big devastating event. Also, when I was young I never imagined that I too would one day get older and that the world wasn’t all about me me me. The issue of ageism is really serious when it means that artists don’t get commissioned or have their work produced or are given parts that fall into stereotype. That’s enough rambling from a (soon to be) senior citizen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2018 15:38:53 GMT
Erm, because it's a Theatre Board? Where people discuss theatre? <insert youthful upward inflection>
@cleoskryker you are 100% entitled to have your opinion and express it. What you're not entitled to do is tell other people that they can't have and express their opinion. Disagree as vehemently as you like but don't try to shut down a conversation.
Just for the record, I really like the Bush. I also think that tweet was misjudged.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Apr 5, 2018 15:41:29 GMT
Took them to task on twitter for ageism but don't get the impression they see the problem. But try inserting any other group of the population instead of "elderly" in the original tweet they quoted ("Thoroughly enjoying watching 2 elderly people squirm in a sea of young people at a Wednesday matinee trip to the theatre")! Not a surprise. They pretend they want to reflect their local community and to have a diverse audience but they don’t. Specifically they don’t want anyone there from the white, middle-aged and wealthy Brackenbury Village area to the immediate south of their location. That includes me. Their AD has made it abundantly clear he wants a young minority/ethnic audience - that is fine but let’s not pretend that is the same as wanting a diverse audience. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2018 15:42:08 GMT
Erm, because it's a Theatre Board? Where people discuss theatre? <insert youthful upward inflection> @cleoskryker you are 100% entitled to have your opinion and express it. What you're not entitled to do is tell other people that they can't have and express their opinion. Disagree as vehemently as you like but don't try to shut down a conversation. Just for the record, I really like the Bush. I also think that tweet was misjudged. The point is they did not tweet it and it is misleading to suggest that they did. As far as I can see the original tweeter was a young white woman (I only mention her ethnicity as posters seem to be running with the idea of reverse social exclusion). My point is that we should stick to the facts. And I am going to have to bow out of the discussion here and leave you all to it. The original trolley which started this discussion (from last year, not Abby’s post) seems to be bearing fruit. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2018 15:48:30 GMT
Erm, because it's a Theatre Board? Where people discuss theatre? <insert youthful upward inflection> @cleoskryker you are 100% entitled to have your opinion and express it. What you're not entitled to do is tell other people that they can't have and express their opinion. Disagree as vehemently as you like but don't try to shut down a conversation. Just for the record, I really like the Bush. I also think that tweet was misjudged. The point is they did not tweet it and it is misleading to suggest that they did. As far as I can see the original tweeter was a young white woman (I only mention her ethnicity as posters seem to be running with the idea of reverse social exclusion). My point is that we should stick to the facts. And I am going to have to bow out of the discussion here and leave you all to it. The original trollery which started this discussion (from last year, not Abby’s post) seems to be bearing fruit. |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Apr 5, 2018 15:49:23 GMT
Erm, because it's a Theatre Board? Where people discuss theatre? <insert youthful upward inflection> @cleoskryker you are 100% entitled to have your opinion and express it. What you're not entitled to do is tell other people that they can't have and express their opinion. Disagree as vehemently as you like but don't try to shut down a conversation. Just for the record, I really like the Bush. I also think that tweet was misjudged. The point is they did not tweet it and it is misleading to suggest that they did. As far as I can see the original tweeter was a young white woman (I only mention her ethnicity as posters seem to be running with the idea of reverse social exclusion). My point is that we should stick to the facts. And I am going to have to bow out of the discussion here and leave you all to it. The original trolley which started this discussion (from last year, not Abby’s post) seems to be bearing fruit. They retweeted it approvingly. You are splitting hairs to say “they did not tweet it”. It is a sign of the narrow-mindedness of some of today’s yoof that they equate being white and middle-aged with being bigoted Daily Mail readers. In fact this is far from the truth for the Bush’s “local community” in that demographic. Having being brought up in the 60s they are often far more liberal and open-minded than the easily-offended and somewhat puritanical younger generation, their newspaper of choice is the Guardian and they voted against Brexit by a larger margin than almost anywhere else in the UK (over 70%). |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2018 15:55:09 GMT
By retweeting it in a celebratory way, they basically endorsed the original not very nice message, though clearly that's not what they intended to do.
Look, I don't think it's a big deal - just a bit misjudged, as I said. Anyone who has managed any type of communications channel for an organisation has made mistakes in tone or content at some point - it's very easy to do. It's not a witch hunt or a conspiracy to express the opinion that they got it wrong on this occasion.
I'd have forgotten about it by now if you hadn't got so excited about it!
|
|
1,502 posts
|
Post by foxa on Apr 5, 2018 16:11:12 GMT
FWIW, I went to see B*easts at the new Bush - partly inspired by the key involvement of Monica Dolan whose work I rate and partly because I felt guilty that I hadn't been there for years - I was reminded of this by this topic when it first opened.
I think it is a beautiful venue - particularly good (if you are the sort of person who cares about these things, and I am) the public spaces. There is a quietish library bar and a more lively area around the actual bar with lots of seats/tables also available near the new studio area. It feels airy and roomy (lots of natural light.) And a nanosecond from the tube. I liked it so much that when we had some friends from out of town visiting I suggested that we meet there - and they liked it too.
The new theatre is definitely more comfortable than the old black box. I don't know how flexible the space is - it was arranged in a traditional end-on when I was there and it felt a bit long and narrow, so I was a little farther away than I had expected. But still absolutely fine. Certainly felt I could appreciate Dolan's fine performance. I would go back. And they do seem to be nominated for some awards....
Re: the tweet - I saw that - the word 'squirm' made me...er...squirm a bit. It was careless and silly - and worth having it pointed out. One reason why I continue to colour my hair is the fear of being lumped in with the much despised grey-haired audiences ;-)
Next, I'm returning to Theatre 503 tonight after a long time away.
|
|
|
|
Post by profquatermass on Apr 5, 2018 18:05:00 GMT
Oh not this again! Why are we knocking an important London venue which is just about to celebrate its first year in a new building. That’s right. It’s FIRST YEAR. As for the ageism thing: the Theatre was careful, in its reply, to avoid the language of the original tweet while exploiting the opportunity to publicise the fact that the current play is attracting a younger audience. In my mind (as an older person) that is something to celebrate. When I look around theatres they don’t seem to be engaging younger people. The original tweet was from an audience member, not the Theatre. I would also cut the unfortunate tweeting youngster some slack...I doubt they meant it to sound as bad as it does. That’s the problem with social media people can run with your mistakes and, before you know it, it’s become a whole big devastating event. Also, when I was young I never imagined that I too would one day get older and that the world wasn’t all about me me me. The issue of ageism is really serious when it means that artists don’t get commissioned or have their work produced or are given parts that fall into stereotype. That’s enough rambling from a (soon to be) senior citizen. When did it move to a new building? I don't go to much there but I thought it had moved back into the old library it's been in since about 2010. Has it moved somewhere else? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2018 19:44:25 GMT
Oh not this again! Why are we knocking an important London venue which is just about to celebrate its first year in a new building. That’s right. It’s FIRST YEAR. As for the ageism thing: the Theatre was careful, in its reply, to avoid the language of the original tweet while exploiting the opportunity to publicise the fact that the current play is attracting a younger audience. In my mind (as an older person) that is something to celebrate. When I look around theatres they don’t seem to be engaging younger people. The original tweet was from an audience member, not the Theatre. I would also cut the unfortunate tweeting youngster some slack...I doubt they meant it to sound as bad as it does. That’s the problem with social media people can run with your mistakes and, before you know it, it’s become a whole big devastating event. Also, when I was young I never imagined that I too would one day get older and that the world wasn’t all about me me me. The issue of ageism is really serious when it means that artists don’t get commissioned or have their work produced or are given parts that fall into stereotype. That’s enough rambling from a (soon to be) senior citizen. When did it move to a new building? I don't go to much there but I thought it had moved back into the old library it's been in since about 2010. Has it moved somewhere else? Same building - the old Passmore Edwards Public Library - but re-opened following a significant re-development - including the additional 70-seater studio. So, while technically not a new building, a fairly marked new physical identity. |
|
|
|
Post by profquatermass on Apr 5, 2018 20:24:55 GMT
Fair enough. A refurbishment isn't my definition of a new building but I guess people use different terms for these things
|
|
1,502 posts
|
Post by foxa on Apr 5, 2018 20:43:49 GMT
This was all new to me as I hadn't been to the Bush since it moved to the Passmore Library - I last went when it was the classic room above a pub (well before 2010.)
|
|
