Macbeth ( NT 2018)

[Someone in a tree]

Very good points. But back to Macbeth, although the NT’s choice of soft furnishings is unfortunately more interesting

[bramble]

A strong straightforward easy to understand production Perfectly acceptable.

[Deleted]

Mar 27, 2018 19:32:55 GMT bramble said:

A strong straightforward easy to understand production Perfectly acceptable.

You are Rufus Norris and I claim my ten pound voucher for a show at the NT.

[n1david]

Rufus Norris thinks he got it right - long interview in The Times today (paywall)
www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/rufus-norris-interview-a-school-without-five-minutes-of-arts-can-get-a-good-ofsted-rating-sktrmxgnd

The most he will concede is that historically Macbeths have worked better in smaller spaces and his “contextualisation” might have been more cleverly done. He was, he explains, trying to create a piece that looked like a “society at the end of a long civil war”.

Brexit, I suggest, knowing the 2016 vote caused him angst. “God no, we have not had a civil war! It’s Syria or the Congo or, a few years back, the Balkans.” Still, I say, Macbeth with Rory Kinnear and Anne-Marie Duff, how could you fail? “Well, we haven’t failed. We haven’t. I think it’s great. I’d love you to see it. Rory and Anne-Marie are absolutely brilliant in it.” How are their spirits? “They’re robust. They’re pros. Actors deal with that stuff in very different ways, but it’s a very, very strong company and the theatre’s full with a really appreciative audience.”

[underthestudy]

What else could he say? "Yeah got the concept wrong and it's rubbish?". The more interesting interview about it will be in a few years.

[Deleted]

Upbeat interview in general - he is enjoying the job and would like a second term.

[Jan]

"Rufus Norris interview: A school without five minutes of arts can get a good Ofsted rating"

Lucky there aren't any then isn't it ?

[Polly1]

"It’s not nice to be hammered or traduced or whatever way you put it. It’s interesting, actually. There’s sort of two experiences. There’s the experience of getting hammered for something and you quietly think they’re sort of right — there’s something about it that isn’t quite right. And then there’s the other one where you go, ‘Actually, I really stand by this piece of work’. And that’s painful in a very different way.”

He puts Macbeth in the latter category- of course - but if Common and Salome, referred to before this quote, are in the former, why on earth didn't he DO something!

[Deleted]

Apr 7, 2018 10:17:28 GMT Jan said:

"Rufus Norris interview: A school without five minutes of arts can get a good Ofsted rating"

Lucky there aren't any then isn't it ?

It’s an exaggeration but some of the reductions in arts provision have been massive; the arts are seen as an ‘add on’ in many schools now, rather than being part of a rounded education.

It’s a crisis, there is no other word for it.

[oxfordsimon]

When I was at school, theatre trips were paid for by parents. That is part of how I discovered a love of theatre.

When it was decided that schools needed to pay for such trips, it was inevitable that far fewer trips would take place.

I was lucky to have been taught how to read music at primary school - the headteacher did that himself every year. I was the wrong year to do the school production of Joseph - it was only done every other year. I did do all the nativity plays - progressing from myrrh through to gold in three successive years.

Once at upper school, there was one teacher in the English department who decided to do a school play - and decided on Our Town for the first effort and then Waiting for Godot the following year.

Drama wasn't part of the curriculum - but we did had shows and theatre trips. Music was part of the curriculum - but we didn't have a school band or choir.

I developed a massive love of theatre and music without it being part of my formal education. I certainly didn't get anything from the half-arsed TIE stuff that would be trotted out to make us aware of 'issues'.

I don't believe that formal arts education is absolutely necessary in schools. The best experiences for me came from having teachers who are passionate about theatre or music and who then inspire through extra curricular activities. Also having parents who had a love of theatre and literature is where the groundwork was laid.

I don't believe you can teach 'culture' - but you can foster a love of it. Let schools return to being allowed to arrange theatre trips that parents can pay for. Yes, that might exclude some on the grounds of costs - but then schools should be able to access 'access funds'. Expecting schools to fund all trips directly is why far few opportunities to go to see theatre exist.

[foxa]

I went to a state school which had excellent drama and music academic and extra-curricular provision, as well as a few English teachers who would take us on theatre outings.

I know my husband went to a state school which didn't have a drama department but had keen teachers who would put on plays and operettas, etc. arrange theatre trips (in ways that probably wouldn't be allowed anymore - one teacher taking a few students in his car down to Stratford, for example) and he greatly benefited from that.

BUT I think things have changed. With the huge paperwork/target-setting, etc. workload on teachers in state schools, it is very rare to find anyone but a designated drama and/or music teacher who will direct a school production (I'm not saying there aren't exceptions, but anecdotally I would say this is becoming increasingly rare.) So I think some parents/schools think, it's okay if there isn't a drama department as long as there are school productions and trips - but what they discover is that it's hard to get anyone to do those, as they aren't part of their job descriptions. In private schools, where there can be smaller class/fewer behaviour issues/less admin, there may be more of an ethos of different staff members chipping in to put on school shows, etc. (some private schools even hire in external directors, choreographers and designers.) Thus the gap will grow between state and private provision.

[oxfordsimon]

We aren't seeing any shortage of people wanting to enter the theatre profession. So any changes to the arts provision isn't impacting on the desire of young people to try their hand at acting/singing/dancing for a living.

From my anecdotal experience, there doesn't appear to be a shortage of school productions. My niece was cast in the school production of Hairspray last year, my housemate directs the annual school panto (as well as being involved in the House drama, dance and music competitions) and another friend is assistant directing the school production of Aladdin at the moment. All of these are state schools in very different areas - and both teachers are from the maths department!

I think a lot comes from the home environment. If your family took you to see the local village panto or shared a love of books, then you are almost inevitably more likely to grow up sharing those passions and enthusiasms. In my case, I took those and ran with them big style.

[Snciole]

I work for an examination board that does Drama exams and we have 2 state schools that regular ly do these exams compared to the dozens of independent schools that do them. This excludes drama clubs but the truth is whilst drama is very important I think the validation/moderation of it has become less of a priority, especially if you factor in that at GCSE/A Level there is a focus on the academic rather than the practical.

Personally I feel going to see plays, a written understanding of text and other non practical aspects are important for arts exams but the EBacc has made it less of a financial priority for schools to have a drama department let alone offer the chance to validate what they learn, many teachers are doing these exams without their heads knowing.

[foxa]

I''m very impressed with your Maths teacher Drama enthusiasts - part of my job involves working with a number of Drama teachers and I have never heard of a Maths teacher pitching in on, let alone leading, a production. That's great that they do that. In the schools where I worked, we felt very lucky if they turned up to see it.

I don't think you will see a shortage of people entering the theatre profession. You may just see fewer from some backgrounds.

Also, I wouldn't say that the only purpose of drama is to turn people into actors, etc. - any more than the purpose of English is to turn people in to professional writers. There are many other benefits to studying it.

When I would take students on trips to the theatre, it was not unusual for that to be their first theatre trip (or their first except for a panto.) I think (maybe idealistically) schools should try to offer cultural experiences that children may not get from their own homes.

[Deleted]

My school (up to GCSE anyway, I changed for 6th Form) never offered any kind of drama trip, nor did the school do any kind of production. Drama was on the curriculm, and I did it for GCSE, but it was I assume from memory fairly under-resourced, I remember the lessons being an undisciplined nightmare/chance for kids to mess around etc. Same with music- I in fact only had music lessons until Year 8, and there were no additional music tuition on offer (of the paid kind like Violin, guitar etc). The school was in a what I'd generously describe as 'not well off area' so I doubt many parents had the spare money to do a lot of cultural things off their own backs.

The point being I do think schools have a role/responsibility to offer at least a taster of 'culture' in any way possible. The PE department ran trips to athletics tournaments and various sporting matches, I see no issue with balancing that out with cultural activities. Especially for kids who come from backgrounds where their parents might not be engaged with the arts also (mine certainly weren't).

And it's this kind of 'culture gap' that will see fewer and fewer people from less privileged backgrounds not only entering the profession (s) in the arts but also engaging with it.

[oxfordsimon]

I think a far bigger barrier to entry into the professions is the cost of attending drama school - that is where lack of money really kicks in. Yes, there are some institutions where the courses fall within regular university funding but that is far from universal (and I am not sure we should use public money to provide unlimited drama training - given the nature of the profession)

When it costs c£100 plus travel costs to audition for many drama schools and then you have to find the fees/living costs - that is why access to professional training is frequently restricted to certain groups.

Schools should be providing rounded education - and that does include balancing funding for sports, drama, music etc.

[Deleted]

A lot of useful points here. I have a lot of first hand experience of this and I can tell you that the change is recent and rapid. This also doesn’t matter miss out the independent sector. Teachers are not being replaced, being asked to go part time etc. and these are in stronger schools. Go further down the educational food chain and it gets worse. This was obvious when the EBacc was introduced. Fewer taking the subjects (the figures are widely available from, for example, The Stage, who have been great in highlighting the issue), fewer teachers, fewer specialist teachers, fewer taking the subjects then it disappears.

Simon, we had this conversation on a previous thread but you talk about a model whereby the arts are to consume not create, That is not a credible educational model anymore and arts teaching is not there to create artists, any more than history is to create historians or mathematics, mathematicians.

Regarding Drama schools, you (and others) are correct, there is a massive class divide now and it will only grow without targetted funding. Sadly, if the average response of this board is anything to go by, addressing disadvantage through gender, race, sexuality etc. is rightly unquestioned whereas access for the economically disadvantaged is, at best, dismissed as too difficult and, at worst, as unimportant. I’d like to, at least, see it taken seriously as an issue.

[oxfordsimon]

There will always be a problem when it comes to employment rates for those in the theatrical profession. The line most often quoted is that 90% of actors are out of work at any one time. I don't know how accurate that is - but working on the assumption that it is true, it does mean that those of independent means (or wealthy parents) are going to be able to afford to pursue their dreams post-training because they have the financial support for the down times. I don't know how you can reform the theatre sector to prevent that.

Do we take all drama schools into the university sector and then significantly reduce the number of places available so as to better reflect the needs of the industry? It has always struck me as unfair that people invest so much into training for a profession where the chances of recouping the costs of that investment are so relatively slim. You never want to stamp on the dreams of the hopeful, and you never want to turn away a future star in the making. But it is a very difficult balance to get right.

Talent should be nurtured and having good scholarship schemes for those from more disadvantaged backgrounds is clearly a necessary element to the picture.

In terms of the consume/create divide, I think it would be fair to say that most people are consumers of the arts rather than creators. Nurturing future audiences is what will allow the creators to have the opportunity for their work to be seen and enjoyed.

[Jan]

Apr 7, 2018 11:27:09 GMT oxfordsimon said:

When I was at school, theatre trips were paid for by parents. That is part of how I discovered a love of theatre.

When it was decided that schools needed to pay for such trips, it was inevitable that far fewer trips would take place.

I was lucky to have been taught how to read music at primary school - the headteacher did that himself every year. I was the wrong year to do the school production of Joseph - it was only done every other year. I did do all the nativity plays - progressing from myrrh through to gold in three successive years.

Once at upper school, there was one teacher in the English department who decided to do a school play - and decided on Our Town for the first effort and then Waiting for Godot the following year.

Drama wasn't part of the curriculum - but we did had shows and theatre trips. Music was part of the curriculum - but we didn't have a school band or choir.

I developed a massive love of theatre and music without it being part of my formal education. I certainly didn't get anything from the half-arsed TIE stuff that would be trotted out to make us aware of 'issues'.

I don't believe that formal arts education is absolutely necessary in schools. The best experiences for me came from having teachers who are passionate about theatre or music and who then inspire through extra curricular activities. Also having parents who had a love of theatre and literature is where the groundwork was laid.

I don't believe you can teach 'culture' - but you can foster a love of it. Let schools return to being allowed to arrange theatre trips that parents can pay for. Yes, that might exclude some on the grounds of costs - but then schools should be able to access 'access funds'. Expecting schools to fund all trips directly is why far few opportunities to go to see theatre exist.

Uh ? Schools ARE allowed to have parents pay for school theatre trips, I’ve paid for three in the last 6 months, the school (state school) only pays for those who can’t afford it.

Studying English at Oxbridge would appear to be a better option than drama anyway if you want a top directing job.

[Deleted]

Apr 7, 2018 17:52:41 GMT oxfordsimon said:

There will always be a problem when it comes to employment rates for those in the theatrical profession. The line most often quoted is that 90% of actors are out of work at any one time. I don't know how accurate that is - but working on the assumption that it is true, it does mean that those of independent means (or wealthy parents) are going to be able to afford to pursue their dreams post-training because they have the financial support for the down times. I don't know how you can reform the theatre sector to prevent that.

Do we take all drama schools into the university sector and then significantly reduce the number of places available so as to better reflect the needs of the industry? It has always struck me as unfair that people invest so much into training for a profession where the chances of recouping the costs of that investment are so relatively slim. You never want to stamp on the dreams of the hopeful, and you never want to turn away a future star in the making. But it is a very difficult balance to get right.

Talent should be nurtured and having good scholarship schemes for those from more disadvantaged backgrounds is clearly a necessary element to the picture.

In terms of the consume/create divide, I think it would be fair to say that most people are consumers of the arts rather than creators. Nurturing future audiences is what will allow the creators to have the opportunity for their work to be seen and enjoyed.

Taking Drama Schools into the university system would help. I’ve always made sure that any of my own students with a desire to go into performance only focus on establishments with a name as there are a number of places where you aren’t helping your future chances at all.

i absolutely believe that education isn’t about the consumer side, any of it. Given how much young people now have access to a means of creating and widely distributing their own creativity now, I think it’s important to give them the tools at school level. Things have changed so much even in the last decade on that score. Give students the tools by 14/16/18, don’t wait to send them off to get an expensive and/or useless degree when they would be better just trying their hand at it on leaving school instead.

[oxfordsimon]

If we don't start nurturing future audiences through school years, then when and how? Surely an all-round education means exposure to a broad range of cultural 'products' - whether than is your first pantomime, hearing a local choir perform, attending a local museum - yes, there will be some who won't engage with any or all of those opportunities - just as there will be plenty who aren't engaged by any of the PE lessons they were forced to endure. (OK that last bit is very much my experience - but I know I am not alone!)

I don't think giving school children the opportunity to experience what it is to be a consumer of the arts is in any way a bad thing. It is what the vast majority of people will be through their lives. Surely part of an arts education is learning how to appreciate the work of others.

[Deleted]

Appreciation of theatre, yes, although its real benefit is to spur others to do their own thing, building on what exists. Some will prefer to just watch and let others create but that’s a useful by product.

[tmesis]

It takes a really bad production of Macbeth to bore the pants off you but this one did. Awful set (if you can call it that) zero atmosphere and tension. I've seen most of Rory Kinear's efforts in Shakespeare and the more I see, the more overrated I think he is. He delivers all his lines in a flat monotone like a pompous Geography teacher reprimanding a recalcitrant class.

[Deleted]

Does it though? I've seen more Macbeths than I care to at this point, and I can only think of two, *maybe* three, that didn't bore me at all. The others weren't (all) necessarily bad, but they did cause me to drift and long for a quicker pace or shorter running time.

[tmesis]

Apr 14, 2018 22:07:04 GMT @baemax said:

Does it though? I've seen more Macbeths than I care to at this point, and I can only think of two, *maybe* three, that didn't bore me at all. The others weren't (all) necessarily bad, but they did cause me to drift and long for a quicker pace or shorter running time.

I'm not saying other productions haven't bored me a tad but this was the full, pants-off experience. Given its relatively short running time this should have zipped along.