|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2018 8:30:03 GMT
I saw this on Friday and there was something interesting there but I was mostly just baffled by how mad the mother was. My knee-jerk reaction was 'another male writer with really weird ideas about women' but then I remembered BN's other plays and he isn't someone who usually writes cartoon characters. I wonder if he just felt he had to go big for a bigger venue and ended up going over the top?
I tuned out in the second half so don't remember much about it. Not a hit for me, but still enjoyable to go to this venue on such a nice evening. I'm forgiving it as a noble failure!
|
|
213 posts
|
Post by peelee on May 24, 2018 10:22:37 GMT
I saw this on 7 May and liked it a lot. While straining to hear some initial exchanges from backstage between two characters as a pipeline supplying energy was being tampered with in order to be shared with this farm, things soon moved closer and became easier to hear. I wondered whether the stage could have been set up to capture speech a bit better.
A small domestic drama, on the face of things, yet with an epic quality. All four in this cast play their parts well and from a slow start each character's intertwined dilemmas are revealed and yet not easily to be solved. It was all plausible and much of it true enough. Taking power from an energy company, and a farm owing money to a bank that wants repaying — the ironies that operate in contemporary Britain and the pressures such organisations exert on so many people form the wider context for the play. Two articles in the theatre programme, by the playwright Barney Norris and by author of Romantic Moderns, Alexandra Harris, underline the significance of what the play is about and which only Libby Purves, reviewing the play on Theatrecat website, seemed to sense the importance of.
Beautifully written, well acted, all characters making mistakes yet having a point, this important play could be just the kind of thing that college and university theatre clubs consider staging in their own right, and just as tempted into staging it will be local dramatic societies.
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on May 24, 2018 11:30:02 GMT
the theatre was way too big for the writing. Agreed. And I know it's called Nightfall, but it might have helped if they'd turned the lighting up. I was on row D and in new glasses but even so the actors' faces were often indistinct. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2018 15:17:29 GMT
Two articles in the theatre programme, by the playwright Barney Norris and by author of Romantic Moderns, Alexandra Harris, underline the significance of what the play is about and which only Libby Purves, reviewing the play on Theatrecat website, seemed to sense the importance of. When the audience/critics have to rely on programme notes to give a real flavour of what the play is aiming to be "about" then I think the play has probably failed to do it on its own terms... |
|
392 posts
|
Post by lichtie on May 24, 2018 16:43:41 GMT
I did like the staging which is an area I think the Bridge do well at - but the actual play could have been compressed easily so it all fitted into the pre-interval half without losing anything, and it would probably still have been lacking in drama...
|
|
1,502 posts
|
Post by foxa on May 24, 2018 20:07:31 GMT
I saw this on 7 May and liked it a lot. While straining to hear some initial exchanges from backstage between two characters as a pipeline supplying energy was being tampered with in order to be shared with this farm, things soon moved closer and became easier to hear. I wondered whether the stage could have been set up to capture speech a bit better. A small domestic drama, on the face of things, yet with an epic quality. All four in this cast play their parts well and from a slow start each character's intertwined dilemmas are revealed and yet not easily to be solved. It was all plausible and much of it true enough. Taking power from an energy company, and a farm owing money to a bank that wants repaying — the ironies that operate in contemporary Britain and the pressures such organisations exert on so many people form the wider context for the play. Two articles in the theatre programme, by the playwright Barney Norris and by author of Romantic Moderns, Alexandra Harris, underline the significance of what the play is about and which only Libby Purves, reviewing the play on Theatrecat website, seemed to sense the importance of. Beautifully written, well acted, all characters making mistakes yet having a point, this important play could be just the kind of thing that college and university theatre clubs consider staging in their own right, and just as tempted into staging it will be local dramatic societies. I didn't get the programme but did see the play. So what was it about? (Feel shame-faced that Theatre Cat understood it and I didn't.) |
|
213 posts
|
Post by peelee on May 25, 2018 11:41:18 GMT
"When the audience/critics have to rely on programme notes to give a real flavour of what the play is aiming to be "about" then I think the play has probably failed to do it on its own terms..."
I didn't need to rely on 'programme notes'. I was absorbed by the play and followed what was going on, but only read the programme a day or so later. I remarked on how interesting to me were two articles in the programme, and I did so because they led to awareness of the existence of a writer whose work I didn't know and which indicated to me why she was attuned to something like Norris's plays and books. See book reviews of her much praised Romantic Moderns. Norris's article interested me because it expressed his concerns about the kind of people and places he has known, that have had a bearing on other things he has written some of which I have seen and read. From what I could pick up, he and I think differently about some contemporary issues though I share other of his concerns, things that have concerned me for longer than he's been alive. There are other comments and excerpts of poetry in the programme, that all taken together enhanced my appreciation of the play. That other theatregoers do not want to read the theatre programme or the play text, is fine by me and presumably by them.
|
|
4,153 posts
|
Post by kathryn on May 26, 2018 19:16:48 GMT
I am curious what the programme notes said to throw light on the production, because it seemed very unfocused to me.
|
|
1,217 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Jun 29, 2018 20:28:09 GMT
For those seeking some answers as to why this was so bad (and why Barney Norris' long term director Alice Hamilton wasn't at the helm of the show) check out Barney's twitter feed.
He has gone into detail, over a long thread of tweets, as to whom he felt the problem was. And it's not pretty. #thedirector
|
|
1,502 posts
|
Post by foxa on Jun 29, 2018 23:04:19 GMT
That was interesting, thanks for the heads up. Something clearly went wrong with that production.
|
|
1,217 posts
|
Post by nash16 on Jun 29, 2018 23:08:32 GMT
That was interesting, thanks for the heads up. Something clearly went wrong with that production. Yes, it's very sad and must have been a horrible time for him. Very brave of him to voice what happened. |
|
270 posts
|
Post by littlesally on Jun 29, 2018 23:10:34 GMT
Explains a lot...
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Jun 29, 2018 23:54:45 GMT
I know Barney from his time in Oxford and I salute his forthright defence of his work and his rights as a writer.
Hopefully he will be able to put this experience behind him and continue on the path he deserves.
|
|
3,303 posts
|
Post by david on Jun 30, 2018 0:23:51 GMT
Having read his posts on his twitter account, you really do have to respect the guy for his honesty in his assessment of what happened as well as making it public. It cannot have been easy for him to have made the decision to do what he did and he has my full respect for taking this action. Hopefully he can turn what has been an unpleasant experience into something positive long term,
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2018 7:44:35 GMT
So in a case like this where there's a dispute between writer and director, what if anything is the role of the theatre that commissioned the work? Should it intervene/take sides or leave them alone to negotiate it between them?
Any other cases where the relationship between writer and director has broken down when the work is being rehearsed/developed
|
|
|
|
Post by Boob on Jun 30, 2018 16:57:54 GMT
Happens so often. The producing theatre wants what they think will be the best work! That may mean they end up coming down on one side of the fence (whether their judgement is, in the end, right) rather than worrying too much about the relationship management. Although newer writers being thrust in the spotlight need nurturing and support - and it’s a huge shame that this was not the case for BN. God, creative industries are TOUGH.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2018 17:18:32 GMT
Having read his posts on his twitter account, you really do have to respect the guy for his honesty in his assessment of what happened as well as making it public. It cannot have been easy for him to have made the decision to do what he did and he has my full respect for taking this action. Hopefully he can turn what has been an unpleasant experience into something positive long term, It seems a bit unprofessional To air this on Twitter If you do this as a doctor (for example) And air discontent in this way You can end up on dodgy ground I think it’s the choice of media and medium Rather than what he has to say |
|
3,303 posts
|
Post by david on Jun 30, 2018 17:32:41 GMT
Having read his posts on his twitter account, you really do have to respect the guy for his honesty in his assessment of what happened as well as making it public. It cannot have been easy for him to have made the decision to do what he did and he has my full respect for taking this action. Hopefully he can turn what has been an unpleasant experience into something positive long term, It seems a bit unprofessional To air this on Twitter If you do this as a doctor (for example) And air discontent in this way You can end up on dodgy ground I think it’s the choice of media and medium Rather than what he has to say Fair point. I wonder if he had aired his concerns through official channels if there are any but felt they where not being addressed behind closed doors and felt he had no other option but to air the issues through social media. Definitely agree that maybe in the cold light of day it may of been wiser to of taken an alternative approach to airing any grievances with the director. |
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Jun 30, 2018 18:18:40 GMT
It seems a bit unprofessional To air this on Twitter Well, having only seen Nightfall I thought the fault lay with the writing (assuming that's what the tweets were about), but having read his tweets about the production I'll try to seek out his other work, and maybe avoid the director's! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2018 18:27:50 GMT
It seems a bit unprofessional To air this on Twitter If you do this as a doctor (for example) And air discontent in this way You can end up on dodgy ground I think it’s the choice of media and medium Rather than what he has to say Fair point. I wonder if he had aired his concerns through official channels if there are any but felt they where not being addressed behind closed doors and felt he had no other option but to air the issues through social media. Definitely agree that maybe in the cold light of day it may of been wiser to of taken an alternative approach to airing any grievances with the director. Twitter is very reactionary And it can come across the wrong way you see |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2018 9:19:27 GMT
We have had discussions on here before about how behind the times Theatre is when it comes to codes of professional conduct. For example, I find it so weird that Vicky Featherstone is woman of the moment simply for drawing up guidelines which should have been implicated decades ago. “artistes” get away with murder as obnoxious or bullying behaviour is attributed to artistic temperament. Norris may be justified but I agree with Parsley that his outpouring on Twitter is unprofessional and so raw that it is quite difficult to read but I presume there was no other way for him to air his views. Tricky.
|
|
923 posts
|
Post by Snciole on Jul 3, 2018 9:46:47 GMT
I think a lot of people have been in Norris' position. You've given up successful working relationships for the cash monies, only for it not to work out.
I said earlier in the thread that The Bridge and other theatres needed to support emerging writers better because such critical panning (both professional and word of mouth) can destroy careers. Ultimately Norris is covering his arse, he needs to work again and he may be valid in his criticisms of the director and the production but sadly what has gone cannot be undone.
I think Hytner and Starr underestimated what made Norris work, I think Laurie Sansom probably wasn't the best person to direct it but if it had been a better work from Norris then maybe these issues wouldn't be so prevalent.
I think he makes good points about transfers such as Misty, Nine Night etc needing to change production teams to cope with the new space and I agree that artistic relationships are important but whilst I think he has been as diplomatic as he can there will be people who won't forget his 'unprofessionalism'.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2018 12:07:32 GMT
I think a lot of people have been in Norris' position. You've given up successful working relationships for the cash monies, only for it not to work out. I said earlier in the thread that The Bridge and other theatres needed to support emerging writers better because such critical panning (both professional and word of mouth) can destroy careers. Ultimately Norris is covering his arse, he needs to work again and he may be valid in his criticisms of the director and the production but sadly what has gone cannot be undone. I think Hytner and Starr underestimated what made Norris work, I think Laurie Sansom probably wasn't the best person to direct it but if it had been a better work from Norris then maybe these issues wouldn't be so prevalent. I think he makes good points about transfers such as Misty, Nine Night etc needing to change production teams to cope with the new space and I agree that artistic relationships are important but whilst I think he has been as diplomatic as he can there will be people who won't forget his 'unprofessionalism'. He has also potentially harmed Sansom's career by traducing them. Not very good. Norris's reputation won't be hurt by the Bridge experience because the play wasn't an abject failure and because Norris has had big successes in the past - wasn't he named on Billington's best plays since 2009 list? Besides bad reviews don't seem to hurt the careers of men so much. Look at Rory Mullarkey: terrible reviews for St George and the Dragon and now he's got another main stage production at the Royal Court. I can't think of a female playwright that has ever happened to. So, I don't think we need to shed too many tears for Norris. Only someone confident that there won't be too many repercussions would ever put out a tweet like that. |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Jul 3, 2018 15:03:41 GMT
A bit of a sense of entitlement on display there ? Very unprofessional to air it on Twitter. In film, where most of our writers and directors are keen to work, the writers’ work is routinely altered by others. The commercial theatre (The Bridge) is a step down from that but ultimately something has to be done if the text isn’t good enough.
Theatre directors, either directly or by proxy, routinely alter and add to texts but normally the writer is dead so no one seems to care, witness the hatchet jobs perpetrated by young British playwrights on classic plays by Ibsen and Chekhov which have been highly praised rather than being the subject of condemnation on Twitter citing the sanctity of the writer’s text.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2018 15:43:22 GMT
The first production of a play is commonly seen as different in terms of the writer’s position. That the author is initially given the greater input for it seems fair to me, seeing as the more it is produced (if it is produced) the more it is going to be seen as interpretable, Regarding that, those such as the Beckett estate do no favours by demanding the final say in perpetuity.
Workplaces are changing so that power can’t be wielded with the impunity it has previously. Theatre should be no different and no less open. Norris doesn’t seem to have said anything that won’t have already been known but, as with other recent revelations, it only serves the powerful by suggesting that saying anything in public is wrong.
|
|
