Interns

There is an interesting article in the Moneyville section of the Toronto Star. As many of you may know I am adamantly opposed to unpaid internships especially those that seem to abound in theatre. And yes, I have heard all the rationalizations but the truth is that for many interns they are doing work that is a value add for the theatre company and they deserve to have that rewarded in a tangible financial manner. Even if they are not taking a job away from someone else usually the company touts their internship opportunities to the various levels of government to argue their case for more money because of their community outreach and yet that money does not flow to the interns.
Enough I say. If you can't afford it then don't do it.

Harry J. Lennix at ASU

Here is a pretty interesting clip of Harry Lennix and some of his thoughts on being a black actor. It is interesting, provocative and compelling because this is not the kind of conversation that we in Canada have. If you have thoughts on his thoughts then comment away. If you have lots of thoughts then send them to me and I will post them.


"Acting While Black" A Conversation with Harry J. Lennix. from ASU English on Vimeo.

The Future?

Ok, just go and read this from the Globe & Mail: Canadians are no longer giving to charities as they once did

and after that sit back and consider the future of your theatre company and all those nights that you have sat in a bar and dissed the blue rinse set.

Maybe we should stop and think about the future of theatre. Maybe we should consider that Rob Ford the new Toronto mayor suggest we look to the private sector for funding. Maybe we should consider that elephant grey is not the best colour for a living room.

Post Past

So I have heard of Post Modern and Post Modernism.
I have heard of Post-Realism and even of Post Racial .
But I have come to the conclusion that I am now Post Past. As in Post the Past. This came clearly into focus for me at the Prismatic conference where the split in thought was most clear. There are some people who still feel defined by what has gone on historically and there are some who have put that knowledge into a secondary or tertiary position and have other objectives as they move forward. I am really not one to deny folks what they need to do but for myself and Obsidian I am really trying to look forward instead of back.

Here is a very handy fellow. Used to be a god in fact.

So Janus for whom the month of January is named after is depicted both looking backward into the past and forward into the future at the same time. Kind of like the original "this door swings both ways" But I digress.
 
It seems to me that being focused in just one direction contains the seeds of problems just waiting to be born. Thus I am attempting to be Post Past where, while cognizant of the past, I am now directing my energies towards the future and spending more time on the creation of the art that I believe in as opposed to countless hours trying to un-stack the deck of the current funding modalities.

Until the reality of the changing demographics smack the Euro-based theatres square in the face nothing will change.

Until the councils move their funding models away from giving the lion's share of funding to the anchor / venue based organizations nothing will change. So be it.

I may not be able to effect that change but I can do the best of all work so that the quality of what we do is unquestioned.

Instead of trying to force our work into venues that don't understand it I am concentrating on our work in the sure and certain knowledge that what we do will be desirable, prepared and compelling in both its quality and scope.

I want history to colour my cloak but not my glasses.

Dear Don Rubin

Further to the last post regarding  Non-Traditional Casting and Criticism I have received permission from Tony Nardi to post this email.

Dear Don Rubin,

I just heard about your  event at Tarragon Theatre on Sunday, Nov. 21, to debate the subject of “Non-Traditional Casting and Criticism.”  I hope I can make it. I hope Rocco Galati (Constitutional lawyer and producer of the filmed version of "Two Letters... And Counting!") can make it, as well.
It's too bad I wasn't informed earlier about this panel. Given the subject of Letter Two, which specifically takes issue with cultural stereotyping by critics, directors, actors (even those from non-Anglo and non-Franco
backgrounds), and from a centuries-old infestation of colonial mindsetting, it would have been interesting to be a part of it.
I confess, I find "Non-Traditional Casting and Criticism" problematic. It presumes that there exists a normal, standard position, set by a casting God, and another standard that deviates form the norm, and, that there are
people who are "like this", 'this tight' with the casting God and could define normal for all the others. Is casting a white Canadian male as Treplev or Trigorin with a phony affected English accent considered traditional (normal) casting in Canada? The answer is ‘yes’. Has been ‘yes’ for many years.

Oh...That Old Thing

So I got this today:   Event: Non-Traditional Casting and Criticism, Canadian Theatre Critics Association



and I thought...How nice. Another discussion about the relative merits of the Spider Phaeton 

vs



the Cocking Cart 

Ad Hoc Assembly

 The Ad Hoc Assembly is a loose coalition of aboriginal and culturally diverse arts organizations that have come together to re-define the working arts landscape.

AD HOC ASSEMBLY STATEMENT OF INTENT

            The Ad Hoc Assembly is comprised of Aboriginal and culturally diverse companies and artists and other organizations that support their work. This group has joined together to create a new artistic working relationship between performing artists and organizations.

            We are seeking a new model that will reflect the specific needs of the Aboriginal and culturally diverse artists and organizations; a new model that redefines the role of artists by empowering them with choices that reflect their own artistic desires.

World Theatre Day

A particularly stunning message for World Theatre Day by Lynn Nottage. I love where she says "I challenge all of us to sustain the complexity of our world" as this is a re-statement of what was said to her by a Rwandan refugee.

Oz & Gender

Whoa! Alison Croggon of Theatre Notes is on a lovely tear on gender equity issues down in OZ. First a great post about the kerfuffle during the Philip Parson's Memorial Lecture.

Next some thoughts on the design of the National Play Festival's posters.

It really does feel like certain issues are taking flight worldwide.

Kicking the diversity ball down the street

So there was so much diversity talk in the air today that I got positively heady.
Some I can talk about right now which is the session I wasn't at. Georgetown University held a forum on diversity and I have some round up links for your perusal. They are also on Facebook right here.

From Parabasis #'s 1, 2, 3, and 4.

And while all of that is exciting from an American point of view really the big news for me was the gathering today at Cahoots Theatre Projects where reps from diverse companies from around the country got together to talk about the state of the art/theatre/browning the stage. It was very cool to meet some smart and talented folks who had lots of insights to share. There will be more details coming out as we go along but needless to say the Ad Hawk Assembly is going forward and plan on being a big presence in the theatre scene.

Stop BC Arts Cuts

A quick bump for this website http://stopbcartscuts.wordpress.com/

Some great stuff on the goings on in B.C.

Judicial Review

From the Mirror up to Nature blog a post on the Judicial Theatre Review. Their first review is of The Overwhelming by J. T. Rogers. Directed by Shawn LaCount. Presented by Company One at the Boston Center for the Arts, Boston

Although as is mentioned in the comments this is may be just a slight twist on an idea that has been going around for awhile. The Critic-O-Meter or Rottentomatoes.com to mention two.

I seem to recall there was a Critique the Critic website that took a long look at Toronto critics and then it vanished over night. I always wondered what kind of chill got it pulled.

It is still an interesting idea though. Reviews can be so disparate that it really trips the "who you gonna believe button" Case in point would be the Yellowman reviews.
Case 1 Case 2 Case 3

Who you gonna believe? It would be nice to get a bit of dialog going to fully understand where things came from.

And on a final note regarding reviews and online news. What the heck is going on with these websites. I mean trying to get browser {Opera} compatibility with most of them is a lost cause. And even when that kind of works it is like trying to do the dance of the Minotaur to try and find anything. Heck if information on the Obsidian website was as hard to get at I would be inundated with phone calls. It is always a struggle to find a review and then never in a timely manner. You would think that making information easy to find might be the only thing left to save the media.

Ongoing Updates

I wanted to do a bit of a re-cap on what has happened since I posted the segregation blues post. You can find it 2 posts downstream. I sent a cover email and a link to the post to all of the PACT Region 5 membership and the Obsidian theatre officers at all the councils. The next day I sent the same information to the Ontario Stand Firm members since we are in the midst of planning a meeting along with the Stand Tall participants regarding the resignation of Native Earth Performing Arts and Cahoots Theatre Projects from PACT. I thought that the post might be a way to bring ideas to the table instead of the usual bitching.

To date I have heard back from one person. It's a bit disappointing but hey, one person at a time is probably the way to go. It may be the only way to go.

Sidebar: I have always wondered where the heck they came up with the names Stand Firm and Stand Tall for these programs. They didn't seem to relate to anything diverse that I could think of but when in doubt Google is your friend. Perhaps someone up there in Ottawa has a bit of a Bible Belt streak to them.
After reading those lyrics I am once again reminded how much I hate the idea of waiting for glory on that great getting up morning.

I thought that I was going to be able to report on a bit of success today but on further examination it looks like nothing has actually changed. In the latest issue of the Equity newsletter it stated that "Executive Editor’s note: Beginning mid-October, Equity will institute improvements to e-drive, our online subscription mailing list. In answer to Marcia’s comments on diversity, any theatre with an ethno-cultural mandate, or production to be cast with a specific ethno-cultural group, will now be able to identify these artistic decisions in their e-drive posting." {I would link but it is pw protected}. However the Equity website still says: Direct references to ethnicity, age and body type may be edited at Equity's sole discretion.
So we are still at the do-si-do stage of things.

Time be talking those segregation blues

I read a couple of things today and it wrapped up some things that I have been saying for a few weeks in a nice neat bundle. It was at the PACT Region 5 meeting where I broached the idea that integration in theatre was not working and perhaps we should give some serious thought to segregation. This, as to be expected, did not go over like a nice iced mocha. The idea of segregation seems to rip some liberal correctness buttons and for that I think we should expect that and then get over it.
When questioned about this idea I responded by saying that there are already any number of theatres that do complete seasons without a single non-white face of the stage. It may be their art but it is also de-facto artistic segregation. So why don't we just admit that and move on. Let the Euro-centric theatre produce what they feel comfortable in producing and lets work to build up the diverse theatres so that we can produce what we need to produce, in our own venues and without curatorial assessment by the rental venues.

The Mission Paradox blog is the entry point but the real money is:

Michael Kaiser, of the Kennedy Center, on diversity:

"I have been spending a great deal of time thinking about the issue of diversity in the arts, specifically, the drive to diversify the programming and constituents of all arts organizations.

The more I consider this thorny issue, the less I am convinced that the arts world has worked hard enough to dissect the true costs, benefits and implications of recent diversity efforts.



I love it when he talks about selecting the "low hanging fruit". The phrase always reminds me of Billie Holiday and:

Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie

A truly brilliant speech about perception. the single story and how it can shape our world view.

This is the best 18 minutes you can spend today.

The single story



h/t A. Payne

A shot of culture

From the Globe and Mail:


“Germany is experimenting with a revolutionary kind of preventive medicine: Doctors are prescribing culture for children,” Isabelle de Pommereau writes in a Christian Science Monitor blog. “In one region in the state North Rhine-Westphalia, every child ages seven through 15 who goes to the pediatrician for a checkup walks out with two free tickets to the theatre. The Culture Shot program aims at encouraging pediatricians to support children's ‘physical, emotional and intellectual health,' says Hermann-Josef Kahl, the Dusseldorf pediatrician who spearheaded the idea in his city. It rests on a simple idea: Culture fosters better health habits. ‘It's cultural primary prevention,' says Dr. Kahl. ‘We hope to establish an impulse that shows that opening the door to culture paves the way to better education level, and that better education fosters a healthier way of life.


h/t J. Knappen

Structural Theatre Part 2

So with an eye to de-constructing structural theatre the Canada Council created the Extended Project Grant Program

I think that this was a great idea that started to bring the art back to the forefront. Why did I say “was”? Well it has been put under review and applications won’t be accepted until 2010. So that is less than helpful. The program also has a total value of $24,000 to $75,000 over a three-year period.
At the very least this is a program that should go ahead.

I feel that the amounts are truly not high enough but then you would have to weigh the ability of the companies with a light administrative structure to be able to handle greater amounts with the level of fiscal responsibility that would be necessary.

Here in Toronto we have STAF that fills in the administrative gap for a number of smaller theatres.

Thus if you were an extended project client using STAF you would have to pay STAF out of your grant which, depending on your grant amount, may eat up too much of the necessaries so to speak.

So what if we looked at combining some of these functions?

#1: Increase the amounts in the EPG and have that money be directly earmarked for the artistic process.

#2: Using STAF as a kind of a template, have a number of administrative companies formed to handle that side of things. They would not be paid by the client company out of their grant but out of a separate amount that would come directly from the councils. Since, I believe, that any amounts over $20,000 need to be fully audited these admin companies would be fully responsible for the timely dissemination of money as well as all the tracking.

The OAC has been working on the creation of a new audit template as well as a chart of accounts that would allow for a common bookkeeping process.

So we could have smaller artistic alliances created, funded at a good level as well as achieving solid fiscal accountability. But the big gain would be in the freeing of the creation process in a new and dynamic way.

Artists could choose to build a mayfly company, invest fully into it and then leave with a body of work not with an outdated structure. This may be one way to start to ease the gridlock that is stifling the theatrical ecosystem as it now stands.

Structural Theatre Part 1

At the start of this latest economic downturn I began to hear the words “structural deficit” a lot. Wikipedia defines it as: The structural deficit is the deficit that remains across the business cycle.

What that means is that if you build in a structural deficit then no matter the economic state that expense will always stay on your books. Through good times and bad what you have put in place remains.

For some reason that phrase stuck in my head. I gradually understood why as I began to apply the notion of a structural deficit into the idea of a structural theatre. And further to that the idea of a structural theatrical ecosystem that no matter the creative impetus behind a project one has to create an ongoing theatre. An ongoing theatre that in good or bad times has to be there. Without that kind of structural theatre then one cannot access the higher levels of funding or gain the “respectability” that is currently mandated by ecosystem. It’s all a bit “evolution in progress” with the continuing goal that growth is the hallmark and only true measure of success.

We see this in how many shows have to be produced before applying for the base level of operating funding. We see it in how project funding has such a low cap. We see it in the multitudes of forums about funding, corporate pitches, succession planning, branding, marketing and capital campaigns. We see it in the constant push to create a structural theatre regardless of the artistic goal. Yes there have been some theatres/artists who have understood the concept of life span but they are few and far between.


The first chains of structure are the provisions of the Canada Revenue Agency’s Charitable Status.

And thus mandates, mission statements, vision statements, boards, administrative structures and accounting practices have to be implemented. And by time you have gone down that road far enough then there is too much invested in the structure to give it up easily.

Now none of this is particularly new. But what I would like to do is to posit a few ideas as jump off points for a potential re-assessing of how things are currently being done.

Mostly this is all about money. Money to create in a way that is unique and visionary while at the same time not destroying the artistic staff but maintaining fiscal responsibility.

First off let’s start by agreeing that the road to structure is a totally artificial one and one that is not necessary for the creation of outstanding art.

{More in Part 2}

Duck!

The thing is with boomerangs is that when you throw them they travel in a circle. So I read this article today in the Globe & Mail featuring Kelly Thornton and Monica Esteves from Nightwood Theatre.

{Full disclosure: Obsidian is co-producing with Nightwood this season}

I liked what they were saying and the passion with which they said it. I have only one issue and that is the conflating of gender equity with culturally diverse equity. Like the aforementioned boomerang this conflation eventually comes round the corner and has to ask "and how many were non white?" I mean it is important to talk of how many women are getting productions and directing opportunities but then you have to address the diversity as well. It's outstanding to be showcasing women directors but from this corner it seems a shame that the ratio was not a bit more balanced.

Full Disclosure #2

Here are the Obsidian stats since I have been artistic director. In the Director category the male director in all cases is myself.



Actors further breakdown to 12.9% white, 87.1% non-white
In all other categories the artists were all non-white.

Now what?

So the Equity and PACT negotiations ended with a stunning affirmation of the status quo. Nothing changes for Year 1 and then a pay increase of 1% in Year 2 and 2% in Year 3. Nothing else changes.
How could this happen? With a host of issues that are all hanging fire nothing was resolved.

At the heart of all this is a profound difference of opinion on the way this industry should look going forward.

Now being on both sides I get the buzz from both directions and it’s always a treat to see how things are viewed differently.
I think that both sides feel that they can gain the advantage by waiting for the next negotiating round. But I do not believe that with the limited amount time available there will be room for any substantive change. Nobody is working on negotiations full time. Yes, both sides get input from their members and compile a wish list but the actual talking between the sides doesn’t happen until the last 6 months.

Obsidian abstained from ratification at the PACT AGM and I am abstaining from the Equity vote because I think that the agreement should be rejected and that negotiations should continue until there is a meeting of minds. This, however, will probably not happen with the prevailing mindsets in place.

I am reminded of a story that said that forest fires are so bad now because they have been so assiduously fought that the deadfalls and underbrush were allowed to grow without check. So now the amount of deadwood pushes the fires out of control in a nonce. The only way to get back to a healthy forest is either by ongoing controlled cutting or to let it burn.

The current approaches are not working. We need to change the way we are looking at this industry and find better ways of safeguarding the creators as well as being open to current realities.
This is not a perpetual growth industry. Ticket prices have stalled for the majority of theatres, the audience is aging and grants by and large are plateau-ing.

There will be a winnowing that’s for sure. What we have to do is find the courage to imagine and create a new vision for the future.