2009 - some year, eh? ~ theatre notes

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

2009 - some year, eh?

Yep, it's been a big twelve months for Ms Geraldine Pascall Crrritic of the Year. And it behoves me, before I hang up the sash and hand over the crown, to tug my forelock at Yuletide crrritical tradition: viz. write my magisterial overview of the year. But first, a confession.


Because 2010 is round the corner, the media is bristling with Best of Decade lists: best music, best books, best video games, best movies, best literary feuds, best comics ... well, you get the picture. And really, who gives a rat's arse? (It must be admitted nevertheless that some of the "worst of" teardowns can be quite a lot of fun.)

Although I'm always prepared to spit in the face of futility, Ms TN can't do a best of decade list, and not only because - as all pedants know - it isn't the end of the decade until December 31, 2010. The fact is that TN has only been around for five years, and while in web-time that's approaching Methuselah status, it's still only half of ten. So I'll stick to the 2009 highlights reel, with the caveat that there was also a lot that I didn't see, and let everyone else argue.

While Hugh Grant and others have been complaining about how only five per cent of plays are worth the eye-time, Ms TN - always the half-glass-full type - has been doing her own mathematics. This year, I saw 66 shows, and deep meditation with a pencil has revealed that of those, around seven made me want to shoot myself. Which works out to 10.60606 per cent.

Of those 66, 20 (30.30303 per cent - how I love the symmetry of numbers) sent me out of the theatre humming with happiness; or, if not precisely with happiness, with faith rewarded, the spirit nourished, the intellect bracingly buffed and the heart called to its truthful home. The remaining 54.54545 per cent were the shows where, to varying degrees, the interesting and the less interesting marbled into deeply discussable experiences. Of these, surprisingly few were merely mediocre.

Which means that 84.3934 per cent of the time, I've had a much better time in the theatre than Hugh Grant. Is it me? Of course it is. But it is also Australian theatre. I love you, Australian theatre. You're beautiful, smart, curious, truthful, brash, skilful, intelligent, funny, passionate and unafraid. And you have a very charming seriousness.

For the listmaniacs among you, here, in strictly alphabetical order, are my Top Five Shows of 2009, complete with handy links to the original reviews:

Glasoon, Black Lung: Thomas Henning and the Black Lung gang reached a reductio ad absurdum in this show which, from their earlier work, ought to have been impossible.

Happy Days, Malthouse Theatre: Michael Kantor's best work to date, featuring a definitive performance of Winnie from Julie Forsyth.

Peer Gynt, VCA School of Drama: Daniel Schlusser showed how blowing up the classics can bring them to life. Exemplary, stunning work.

Poppea, Sydney Opera House: Barrie Kosky's sublime mating of Cole Porter and Monteverdi. A great director at his best.

The War of the Roses, STC Actor's Company: Benedict Andrews' astounding reworking of Shakespeare's History Plays: theatre of a rare and desolating beauty.

That's the best of the best. I'll put my extended best list at the bottom, for those who get that far.

As for the shows that made me lose faith and gave me colds (they do, bad art really does make you ill): the MTC features more than it should. The razzamatazz of the gorgeous new theatres hasn't been matched by many of the productions. The whole was still an improvement on previous years, with the Lawler Studio giving the company a little wiggle-room in what is really subscriber-bullied programming. Low points for me were the MTC's productions of Grace (theatre reduced to a school lesson), Andrew Bovell's teeth-achingly saccharine When the Rain Stops Falling and Guy Rundle and Max Gillies' flat satire Godzone.

The Malthouse gets a guernsey with an ill-considered production of David Harrower's sublime play Knives in Hens, which was an expense of talent in a waste of shame. The visiting avant garde didn't do too well either: Forced Entertainment's Spectacular brought theatre to stunning new levels of patronising tedium. On the other hand, it was several hours shorter than the much-lauded and hugely pretentious Gatz, which came from the New York company Elevator Repair Service to the Sydney Opera House with a thin idea and even thinner performances.

Aside from those in the productions already listed, there were some notable performances. Simon Phillips' excellent MTC production of August: Osage County featured two of them. The play itself failed to fire me with enthusiasm, but Robyn Nevin and Jane Menelaus showed how good acting can be. Pauline Whyman shone in an indifferent (and controversial) production of Pinter's The Birthday Party. And it's hard to hold a candle to the entire cast of Hayloft's equally controversial production 3xSisters which, for all its lively division of audience response, had everyone united in their admiration of the actors.

Uschi Felix and Dion Mills both gave exemplary, disciplined performances in André Bastian's fine production of five short Beckett plays at La Mama. And I'm prepared to be strung up for it: but it would be wrong of me not to mention Jan Friedl and Bruce Myles' gut-wrenching performances in The Cove, a season of Daniel Keene's plays that were directed at the Dog Theatre by Matt Scholten.

And I haven't even mentioned dance. It's been a rich part of my year: perhaps my favourite in a very distinguished bunch was Splintergroup's Lawn, which was at the Malthouse as part of Dance Massive early this year. I also loved Meryl Tankard's The Oracle (I fear I ran out of gas and didn't write about this, despite the magnificence of Paul White's solo performance), BalletLab's Miracle, Michelle Heaven's Disagreeable Object, and Lucy Guerin's remarkable piece on the West Gate Bridge disaster, Structure and Sadness.

What else? I missed the Melbourne Festival and so have no magisterial opinion to opinionate, because to my surprise (and, it seems, to everyone else's) I won the Australian Poetry Centre's poetry tour prize, and was touring the British Isles with my lovely colleague, Robert Gray. I doubt this will happen next year, so I'll get to see AD Brett Sheehy settling into his stride at MIAF. Reports reached me nevertheless: and it has to be said there was a palpable sense that the excitement that has sparked the past few years under Kristy Edmunds' aegis was somewhat dimmer. Aside from the program, which seemed to strike more as a series of events than an integrated festival, people missed the Spiegeltent and, even more crucially, the delightfully democratic (anyone could go) and cheaply-priced artists bar.

Melburnians, after all, love to talk.

As for me, I got my share of brickbats. In the midst of what has undoubtably been the Issue of the Year - the lack of women in key creative positions - I got outed as a hairy-legged feminist. (I admit it, it's true, especially when my razor is blunt and the boys have hidden theirs.) Earlier this year, Julian Meyrick got cross with me for being an aphasic racist, which was fun rather than otherwise; and then Neil Pigot attacked me with a blunt knife. This last depressed me so much - what's the point of writing all these words if your critics don't bother to read them? - that I thought of giving up the blog. But then, after a month of being rained on in England, I unthought it. The blog is too much fun, and I would miss the theatre terribly.

All the same, I am going to be a writer first and blogger second next year. Firstly because writing is how I make my living, and I need to live; and secondly, because that part of me that likes making things up has lain fallow long enough, and is getting bored with itself. That means that I'll probably see less theatre, and won't write about everything I see. Or at least, that's the resolution. Such is my track record with resolutions that this remains to be seen: but I'll definitely be putting my primary energy into novels next year.

As a postscript, you can don your quizzing glasses at the end of January to witness me in my guise as hapless reality tv poet. Some of you might remember I shot an episode of the series Bush Slam in March, going head-to-head with my dear friend John Kinsella. And yes, it's finally making it to prime-time ABC-TV (in the silly season, of course). I doubt I'll be watching, but I'll make a brave face on any mockery. None could be crueller than that of my children.

All that remains is to thank you, my readers, for coming here. I owe thanks too to the theatres who have provided tickets, to the artists who bear with my opining, and to the countless people (You Know Who You Are) who have encouraged and supported me this year. I wish you all a happy Christmas and, despite the worst efforts of the world's politicians, a healthy and enjoyable 2010.

The shows I loved in 2009

3xSisters, The Hayloft Project
Africa, My Darling Patricia, Malthouse Theatre
Beckett's Shorts, La Mama
Care Instructions, Aphids/Malthouse Theatre
Disagreeable Object, Chunky Move Studio
Glasoon, Black Lung Theatre and Whaling Firm
Happy Days, Malthouse Theatre
Lawn, Splintergroup/Malthouse Theatre
Life is a Dream, Store Room
Miracle, BalletLab
Peer Gynt, VCA Drama School
Poppea, Sydney Opera House
The Apocalypse Bear Trilogy, Arena/MTC
The Man from Mukinupin, MTC/Belvoir St
Structure and Sadness, Lucy Guerin Inc/Malthouse
The Cove, Dog Theatre (no review)
The Oracle, Sydney Opera House/Malthouse Theatre (no review)
The War of the Roses, Sydney Theatre Company
Tom Fool, Hoy Polloy
Wretch, La Mama
Yuri Wells, The Hayloft Project

Picture: a touching domestic scene from the Croggon-Keene household, posted instead of production photos already published on the blog. The duck says Happy New Year.

29 comments:

sydney arts journo said...

Thanks for a great year AC! It's been a thoroughly enjoyable year as always... reading your thoughts... watching the fray.

And as always - thanks for the support.

Nick

Alison Croggon said...

Absolutely my pleasure, Nick! Prost!

André Bastian said...

It's great to have you and your site!

Enjoy the festive days and all the best for next year.

André

Anonymous said...

'How many plays have been written in French?' he asked.
'About five or six thousand,' replied the abbe.
'That's a lot,' he remarked; 'how many are good?'
'Fifteen or sixteen,' replied the other.
'That's a lot,' said Martin. (Candide).

I'm with Hugh.

Alison Croggon said...

On the question of plays or of productions, as a matter of interest?

Anonymous said...

Well both. The distinction being obvious - there is a correlation nonetheless.

Alison Croggon said...

It just made me reflect that of my top 5 shows, only one is a new play.

Alison Croggon said...

...and that if I were to list top 5 plays, it would be a different list.

Jason said...

Great as always, Allison.

For those interested, I've picked my top picks for the Brisbane theatre scene. See: http://importanceofideas.com/2009/12/27/my-year-of-magical-theatre-the-top-five/

Alison Croggon said...

Thanks Jason. Yes, good theatre needs good writing. (And direction. And performance. And design.) No wonder it's such a frustrating and beautiful artform!

Gilligan said...

Hi Alison,

Thanks for a great year of reviews. It's so great to have a place like this where productions and issues can be discussed so openly.

Enjoyed your list and wrap-up. Although I have to disagree with a few- 3xSisters, africa, care instructions, Mukinupin, the cove.

My top ten for 2009 (Alphabetical order)-

- Apocalypse Bear Trilogy (Stuck Pigs/ Mtc/ MIAF)
- Glasoon (Black Lung)
- Happy Days (Malthouse)
- Lawn (Malthouse)
- Life is a Dream (Store Room Theatre)
- Once and For All We're Gonna Tell You Who We Are So Shut Up and Listen (Ontroerend Goed)
- Optimism (Malthouse)
- Peer Gynt (VCA)
- Red Sky Morning (Red Stitch)
- Shamelessly Glitzy Work (Post)


Also, not really trying to make a statement here, but just a bit of statistical analysis of your list in regards to the "issue of the year".

- All of your top 5 productions were directed by men.
- Of the extended list of 21 productions, 14 had male directors/ choreographers (including 1 dance piece).
- 6 had female directors/ choreographers (including 3 dance pieces).
- I left Lawn neutral as it was choreographed by the three male dancers but had a female rehearsal director.
- That leaves 3 theatre pieces on your list directed by women- Africa, Care Instuctions and Yuri Wells.

Again, I'm not trying to say anything, everything I just listed is pure observation. Whether that is any indication of anything else is up to everyone else.

Happy new year.

Alison Croggon said...

Hi Gilligan - thanks for that. And also for your contributions to this site's liveliness! (Speaking of which, I would have been astonished had you agreed with my listing of 3xSisters - for my part, a work's vitality will often trump its imperfections...) Just as an aside, I missed this year's production of Red Sky Morning, although it made my list last year. And I missed others too, like Moira Finacune's The Flood at La Mama, which might have been on that list. I can't pretend to an omnipresence here; and it would be great if others could list other shows.

And now, loins girded, to the gender question, which I (couldn't but) notice. One correction: you missed Susie Dee's direction of Wretch, although I guess it was more properly co-directed and so neutral, like Lawn. Which still leaves three listed women directors, if you don't count the choreographers.

I admit, the top five testosterone quotient gave me pause. But I'm not going to reshuffle it just to make it easier on myself. Those were the productions I saw this year that I liked best.

I do think it illustrates something about the mentorship and nurturance of emerging directors. Of the five directors, three - Barrie Kosky, Benedict Andrews and, to a lesser extent, Michael Kantor - have been richly nurtured. Kosky was picked up at - was it 20? to direct Michael Tippet at the Melbourne Festival by John Truscott, and afterwards was directing at the MTC and AO from a precocious age, before he went off and made Gilgul. Andrews was nurtured by Robyn Nevin over many years, even if the productions tanked at the box office. The current equivalent golden boy is probably Matt Lutton.

This doesn't take away from their talent, but I don't know of many women theatre directors who have had the same kind of nurturance through their younger years, and I know of none who are anointed as young geniuses, even if their work is prize winning and exciting. This is definitely gendered, and it creates a feedback situation in terms of an artist's confidence and boldness: which loops back to my comments a few months back about how gender expectations can be internalised. And that's deeply complex.

Black Lung are a bit sui generis; I think their work really does step outside these structures in fruitful ways. And Daniel Schlusser was able to make his impressive VCA trilogy in the shelter of that institution, with all its resources (If I had been in the country for Tanya Gerstle's end of year VCAM production Invisible Stains, there might have been a feminine rhyme there).

For my part, I'm going to attempt to be a little more gender conscious about the shows that I choose to see next year; ie, try to make the quota a little more equal. I don't doubt that I saw many more shows directed by men than women this year, although I don't have the wherewithal to go and count up the figures. I don't actually believe there is such a thing as a "feminine" aesthetic (although I do know there are realities that [some] women are more likely to explore than [some] men) so I think it is unlikely that there is a gendered bias in terms of how I respond. Always possible, I guess; but I can at least say honestly that my qualitative judgments are self-questioning.

One thing that these - very wobbly - figures do reveal is that dance is way ahead of theatre on this issue. It might well be worth asking why, and perhaps taking a few leaves from that book.

Anonymous said...

Speaking of dance- worst dance piece of 2009 was Chunky Move's 'Black Marrow'; an over-long, turgid, regressive crawl back to primordial ooze.
Too much contemporary dance resists uprightness- 'Black Marrow' wallowed around in ideas now hackneyed and largely irrelevant.
Let's hope more at the front line can embrace the challenges and complexity of the times, rather than continue to draw from the 20th century.
Thanks Alison and Happy NY.

Gilligan said...

Thanks Alison,

Although I hated 3 x Sisters, I still think it was an important production in terms of asking questions about certain things. I really liked Yuri Wells, so it's nothing against Hayloft.

The mentorship question is an interesting one. But that doesn't really explain the gap in the longer list, which included plenty of indi shows. I just noticed my list was even more male dominated than yours.

It does seem that male directors seem to be the ones exploring a certain style and aesthetic at the moment, which is proving to be more popular. You can easily see certain links between directors like Kantor, Andrews, Kosky, Schlusser, Henning, Stone etc. I can't think of many/any female directors doing this kind of work. That's not to say that female directors aren't doing good work, but perhaps it's not as fashionable/contemporary/interesting at the moment. If this isn't the case, I can't really see any other reason for the gaps in both our lists. Whether that kind of work relates to gender or not I'm not sure.

One thing that I pointed out a little while back, which didn't get a mention, was Red Stitch's fully female directed season 1 next year. Step in the right direction I think. May provide an opportunity for those directors to step to the main stages. Sam Strong is the only new director at MTC next year, and he clearly got that gig after Red Sky Morning. Red Stitch could be very important.

Alison Croggon said...

Quite right, Gilligan. I'm personally excited to see that Marcelle Schmitz is one of the directors working there - she's been over in Perth and I haven't had a chance to see her work, although I've long been aware of it.

The only way to really see clearly what might be going on would be to analyse every production on in Melbourne, indie and main stage. And then see what percentage of those we choose to see (to check bias in the initial choices, which for me might be a major issue: although I'm obliged to see the main stage shows, which buuilds a bias in from the beginning).

If the total amount of productions on show a gender bias, then the issue is wholly endemic. (There's a whole thesis in there, theatre academics...and it would be very useful research).

Re style: there are women in Melbourne with precisely that kind of flair and ambition. I mentioned Tanya Gerstle; Kirsten von Bibra is another, her VCA production of Helene Cixous's The Perjured Cty a few years back was mindblowing. You could add Mary Sitarenos, although she doesn't have access to the same kind of ensemble acting that VCAM offers. Kate Davis and Emma Valente (who have mainly worked in Sydney with their company The Rabble) are others. The women in My Darling Patricia another example still. They're around and working.

Gilligan said...

Ah yer someone else will have to do the research...

In regards to those particular directors, I don't think their individual styles really fit in with the group I mentioned. Gerstle's work is much more physical than any of the artists I mentioned. And Von Bibra's work is much more interested in language than aesthetic or style, although I didn't see Perjured City.

Sitarenos actually directed a show at VCA this year. It was a second year production of Jenny Kemp's Black Sequin Dress. Again though, I don't think she really fits with the others I mentioned. Her work is great (I was suprised Oedipus didn't make your list) but I think its much more intimate and language based than that wave of male directors.

I haven't seen any work by The Rabble but photo's and descriptions suggest they are probably the closest of the ones you suggested. I've only seen Africa by M.D.P, and I was pretty dissapointed.

I think the thing with those male directors I mentioned is they all have a similar focus- classical works most of the time, post-modern approach, a certain flashyness to the work, a certain energy and intensity. There just seems to be something very contemporary about their work that audiences are responding too, as reflected in your list, and for some reason it just seems that this work is really only coming from men.

I'm just wondering whether there's anything about this particular style of work that is based in a male mentality? Or is it a product of something else- like opportunity or training or culture? Or just coincidence?

Alison Croggon said...

Ouch. This is getting a little close to gendered essentialism for my liking... Do you think those differences might be as much in the perceiving: that you filter the work through glasses conditioned by gender, picking up vibes you think of as "masculine" whether or not they might be?

All the directors I mentioned employ spectacle, for instance... Perjured City was huge on spectacle. And although you can trace relationships between Kosky and Kantor, including a pool of common collaborators, and at more of a stretch (through a European influence) Andrews, that too easily glosses their differences from each other, which are considerable. Kosky's music-based practice, eg, compared to Andrews' text-focused approach, or Kantor's on rough/popular theatre.

Gender counts for Black Lung, because to my mind it's a large part of what they are exploring. Kosky uses it to subvert its expectations - there's always a lot of gender bending in his shows. I notice that you didn't care for Care Instructions and Africa, both shows which foregrounded feminine concerns (I loved them), although I'd hesitate for a long time before I'd say they employed a "feminine" aesthetic, in the same way I'd hesitate to say that Black Lung employ a "male" aesthetic. That's entering dodgy ground imho, placing a too-generalised grid on what are detailed and specific practices that are particular to those artists, irrespective of gender.

Does her employment of spectacle make Mnouchkine a "masculine" director (given her collaboration, say, with one of the most famous feminist theorists in the world, in Helene Cixous)? If a woman had directed Life is a Dream, would you have characterised that as intimate and language based, say? It was certainly both of those, and also un-spectacular...

Gilligan said...

I feel I should clarify what I'm getting at a little. I'm certainly not trying to suggest there is a male and female theatre. However, I have noticed that currently there is a style of theatre, or an approach to theatre, that is very popular. I have also noticed that when you look at these productions, nearly all of them are being directed by men. I'm not suggesting that women can't do this sort of work, but it seems that they're not really interested.

When you look at your list, and mine, and you see Happy Days, Peer Gynt, Poppea, War of The Roses, 3xSisters, Beckets Shorts, Life is a Dream, Glasoon, Optimism etc. There's a pretty distinct line there. And when you look at the three theatre pieces directed by women on your list- Care Instructions, Africa and Yuri Wells- none of them really fit with that list of male directed productions.

I think we're all pretty aware of the popularity of post-modern interpretations of classical texts in Melbourne at the moment, and they dominate both our lists. All I'm wondering if there is perhaps something that is causing this specific style of work to be coming from men rather than women.

In regards to Von Bibra, as I said I didn't see Perjured City, so I can't really comment on that. However, of the work of hers I've seen, which I wasn't very impressed by, it wasn't at all of the nature we're talking about- much more a physical approach to text, but very minimal in aesthetic. Again, I don't think there is a masuclin and feminine aesthetic. Gerstle's approach again is more of what she calls "a text based physical theatre", and like Von Bibra is usually quite minimal, focusing rather on the physicality of the actors. But I didn't see Invisible Stains.

In regards to Care Instructions, I didn't hate it. It certainly was exploring something about a feminine mentality or existence. I thought there was something very interesting about the use of language in it, but I didn't really feel they got where they were trying to go. The woman I saw it with completely hated it.

I had high expectations for Africa, and it fell well short. I thought what you said at the time about it being an exploration, in part, about feminism was interesting. However, I thought it's exploration of the suburban existence, even in regards to feminism, was very shallow. It's a rich and complex subject matter, which has always been explored better by visual artists such as Brack, Arkley, Watson etc.

I see what you mean about both these works being somewhat feminine in nature, I certianly don't think that affected how I viewed the work. But I didn't think they were great pieces. I also don't think they are at all close to that group of male directors in terms of style.

I don't think spectacle is exclusively male, but in Melbourne at the moment I think it is being used by male directors more than women. Life is a Dream was intimate, but i think it certainly had an energy and intensity about it that is similar to Schlusser's other work, and the work of those other directors- eg walking into that room and walking into Glasoon.

Do you think there is something about the post-modern approach to classical texts, using that spectacle and energy and intensity that has something to do with masculinity? Otherwise I don't really know how to explain that group of productions I named above from your list. This, I suspect, has something to do with Simon Phillips comment about peacocks and male directors coming to the top.

I suppose the question really is- and I'm not suggesting this is the case- but could part of the lack of female directors getting gigs at the moment be in part due to audiences current preference for a particular style of theatre at present? Your list would certainly suggest that we do.

Alison Croggon said...

I'm only one audient. You're only another. It's not audiences who decide what goes into theatres; they only decide what they want to see.

I'm not denying the gender-specific nature of the directors my Top 5 Gigs (although maybe it's worth pointing out here that women featured in all of them). And those are straight qualitative judgments - I picked those as productions in which all the aspects worked together to make an experience of TOTAL THEATRE. Meaning, highly developed skills at all levels of collaboration.

I'm just signaling that to deduce -as some do - that this signals something essential about Man and Woman and differences thereof is reductive. And that this might - speculation of course - have more to do with gendered structures of nurturance/mentoring etc within, god help us, the "industry".

A personal segue to perhaps illustrate why this kind of gender essentialism makes me so uncomfortable: in my younger days, older men often used to "compliment" me by saying that I wrote "like a man". I didn't know what it meant (I wasn't a man, after all) and moreover, it suggested that even though I was visibly female, the writing I did couldn't - clearly - come from a woman. I had to be a pretend-man to be any good. Even though I was - clearly - a woman. Confused? I was. And eventually angry.

Anonymous said...

I write like an eagle.

Alison Croggon said...

A tiercel or a falcon-gentle?

Anonymous said...

A bald eagle. I have a spare and noble prose.

Alison Croggon said...

Admittedly a little heavy-handedly, my quaint jest was an attempt to establish your gender (falconry is full of temptingly gorgeous archaic terms)... On the one hand, "spare and noble" are qualities usually filed, not necessarily with any justification, under "masculine". In raptor-land, on the other, the female is generally bigger and swifter than the male. Which may or may not confuse things.

But perhaps, in the world of imagination, one's sex doesn't determine anything.

In any case, it seems the fumes of Christmas brandy are fogging my brain.

P.Dantic said...

Is a falcon an eagle?

Alison Croggon said...

No. I admit I cheated; I couldn't find a cute word for female eagle. Although falcon-gentle is an archaic term for a female raptor. Or so I read in some falconry dictionary.

Anonymous said...

Oh man, that Telegraph article is a shocker.

You have been appropriated, Ms Croggon.
Do you feel violated?

Alison Croggon said...

I'm kind of used to being either misquoted or quoted out of context (Andrew Bolt is a master of the dark arts). To be fair, the Telegraph "staff writer" didn't misquote me. Just welded me to a diatribe full of the usual lying shit about wanka artists.

I of course posted a comment that politely corrected some misconceptions at the bottom of the story this morning. No sign yet of it seeing the light of day... maybe the subs are down at the pub.

Gilligan said...

Hi Alison,

Yes that whole "you write like a man" thing is obviously complete bullshit. No wonder you got angry.

Again, I'm not suggesting that one makes theatre like a man or a woman. What I'm talking about is a specific style of theatre that could be done by both, but is seemingly only being done by one at the moment, in Melbourne at least.

I'm not really sure if one can answer the question I presented. Or at least not very easily. I think it's worth some thought from "the industry" though, especially those trying to nut out why there aren't more women getting gigs.

Anyway, that will do for this year. Thanks again. Hope you have a good New Years, don't drink too much cask wine now Ms TN.

TTFN

Gilligan

Alison Croggon said...

Thanks Gilligan - I suppose the obvious thing to point out is that spectacular, large scale theatre requires quite a lot of money and other resources. You can't just do it on your own. And that is a social/institutional issue, rather than a question of the inclinations etc of different genders.