|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Articles
|
||
|
Articles |
The People Who Could Save the BridewellDateline: 23rd November, 2004The news in October that the Bridewell was to close came as a blow to all those who love music theatre, but at least the news was tempered with the undertaking that the company's work in developing new musicals would continue. Now we learn that it is to close completely. On receiving the latest press release, my first reaction was great sadness, but then the thought occurred, "Well, at least Mercury Musical Developments continues to exist." So I went along to their website and what did I find on the front page? - Adverts for nine rehearsed readings of new musicals to be held ... at the Bridewell! So MMD, which serves a similar but different function to the Bridewell, is also going to be adversely affected by the closure. The two complement each other. Jenifer Toksvig, who with David Perkins has written a number of very successful musicals aimed at children and young people, said, "I just did one of those MMD readings there, and I'm gutted that they're closing. It's a fantastic space, and finding a place in London that will give you the chance to put your work on its feet, especially during the critical development stage, is becoming more and more of an impossible (or very expensive) task. Also, most venues are just venues. The Bridewell is a home for new musicals. The day it closes will be a sad one for writers and composers." MMD Executive Director Georgina Bexon added, "MMD is bitterly disappointed at the imminent closure of the Bridewell, which has done so much in the past decade to promote new musical theatre. The lack of support for new musical theatre writing extends far beyond the Bridewell crisis - there are many talented composers and writers in Britain who are simply not receiving the vital support they need to develop and hone their writing skills, nor to develop their work through dramaturgy, workshops, small-scale try-outs, etc. "Without this crucial support, musical theatre in Britain will continue to stagnate,'dumb down', and lose audiences. Compared to the long-term financial support and resources provided to dramatists from ACE, independent funders and regional and commercial theatre in the UK, musical theatre writers are not so much the poor relation of the theatre world, but the beggar at the door..." I asked the Bridewell if approaches had been made to the major companies in the industry, such as RUG and Cameron Mackintosh, and was told that indeed they have, but with no success. The Bridewell has a core of enthusiastic supporters, many of whom put their money where their mouths are and support the theatre with relatively small donations because they believe in what the company is doing. But not only is the amount concerned small but it is also, as Carol Metcalfe says, unfair on the donors that money they give to aid the development of new music theatre should be spent on such mundane items as telephone bills, vital though they may be. It is not what it was given for. No one - except the most perversely optimistic - writes for music theatre in the expectation of making a fortune. Indeed, no one writes for theatre with that kind of expectation, but what strikes me as being most significant is that musical theatre is very defnitely a commercial operation. Some work is, of course, done in the subsidised sector but even the National Theatre tends to go for the tried and tested sure-fire commercial successes, which it then transfers to the west End. One might argue that this is not what a publicly-funded national theatre organisation should do, but at least the income goes to subsidise the work expected of such an organisation. But there are commercial organisations which make a lot of money from music theatre - the aforementioned Really Useful Group and Cameron Mackintosh being the obvious examples. And then there are companies like Clear Channel and ATG which are happy to have the income from successful music theatre tours. Leaving aside any moral obligation that we may feel they have for supporting the lower levels of the industry that makes them their money, surely it is in their best interests to nurture a healthy growth of new work? What the Bridewell produces today could be their money-spinner of tomorrow. What has caused the crisis at the Bridewell is the new necessity to pay £90,000 per annum in rent. If that was taken care of, it could continue its operations as before. £90,000! Split that between the four companies mentioned above and it's the salary of a middle-ranking employee. Even for one it's almost certainly considerably less than the salary of a director. Andrew Lloyd Webber, wearing his Really Useful Theatres hat in the House of Lords, has been in the forefront of those asking for public subsidy to enable theatre owners in the West End to improve their buildings, which are, he argues, national assets. And who is to say he is wrong in that assertion? But what is sauce for the noble lord's goose is surely also sauce for the Bridewell's gander. The Bridewell is an asset to the music theatre industry: to keep it not merely afloat but making an invaluable contribution should be the concern of all within the industry. Come on RUG, CM, CC, ATG and all the others. Between you, you could keep this proving ground for music theatre flourishing at very little cost to yourselves. One of you could do it and hardly notice it. And you'd earn the gratitude of all the fans of the genre on which your business is built.
|
|
|
|