Women make up 50% of the population.
Women buy 70% of theatre tickets sold.
Women make up between 60-70% of audiences in theatres for every performance.
But male roles in the industry outnumber those for women on an average of two to one.
An unofficial survey concluded that women are placed in an average of 35% of all roles, and therefore stories focusing on men outnumber those of women by the same amount.
The absence of an adiquate number of HERstories in the theatre has got many a critical tongue wagging, especially over the summer of 2012 where a number of all-male or male dominated plays were aired in London's testosterone-fuelled West End.
The predominant culprits were said to be Mark Rylance's all male Twelfth Night, Propeller Theatre's touring productions of Henry V and Winter's Tale which concluded at the Hampstead theatre, and finally Chariots of Fire, Which with its cast of 18 men and only 3 women transfered to the Guilgud theatre for an extended run ending early next year.
Now, I would like to point out that I saw 3/4 of these productions, and they were excellent. Despite being a firm believer in sexual equality, I did not feel cheated in any way with the absence of an excessive number of actresses.
But I understand exactly why so many did.
One who made her opinions known on the subject was playwright Stella Duffy;
"Theatre, as we learn in Hamlet, is supposed to offer a window on society and yet women are treated as though they are a minority. If we don't tackle this, what hope is there for the female disabled actor, the black woman actor – they have been made a minority twice," she said. "We need, as women, to be more circumspect, to seek out plays with female roles – it is not easy, but it is worth doing."
Some may view this as a bit of an exaggeration, But how much do we aspiring actresses of the next generation need to worry? Well according to Lynda Rooke, the chair of the women's committee at Equity, a fair bit;
"If young women want to go into the arts and they are not seeing their gender reflected that is a problem – you can't be what you can't see." Yikes.
Well as of late I have been fortunate enough to SEE women being represented in the theatre, and with a strength and quality that arguably, no number of all male companies could deliver.
The first of these was Berenice at the Donmar Warehouse. Set in Palestine at the height of the Roman Empire, This is a play that independantly captures the agonies of love, both reciprocated and unrequited. The success of this production sits upon the dainty shoulders of Anne Marie Duff, who plays the title role with effortlace grace, entirely inhabiting the role to her fingertips.
The second production was Scenes from an Execution written by Howard Barker and is another piece that again presents a woman at the forefront of the action. Galactia- flawlessly played by the outstanding Fiona Shaw; is a passionate artist, and is commissioned by the state to paint the valiant "Battle of Lepanto". But in a persuit to remain true to herself and her morals, she instead creates a vast canvas of carnage and butchery, which leads to her facing incarceration.
Now, aside from the obvious, I realized these pieces have several things in common.
The first being that both Berenice and Galactia as characters demonstrate a weakness on the subject of love.
In Berenice, the title character is emotionally torn at the discovery that she can not be eternally bound to her lover, Titus, and that she must flee at the request of the people. Her suffering is so severe that at one stage she expresses a desire to take her own life.
Execution also explores the relationship between women and love. At first, it appears that Galactia is merely a sexual predator, using her lover Carpeta for purely a physical satisfaction. But as the plot unfolds it becomes clear that the artist is governed by the first real love of her life, confessing of a weakness in her self when her lover is not by her side.
Now, as both these plays were written by men; some of the more "Feminist" amongst you may argue that this is a potentially sexist presumption that has been made.
But stop right there! Because as well as being at a disadvantage from their love affairs, both of these characters remain strong, confident, charming and above all Femine, truly exhibiting the epitome of womanhood.
So, are we women soon to become a minority? Well, I can't answer that. But the evidence is there that women are more times than not being under represented in the theatrical industry. But,with a handful more productions such as the one's above (Including the all- Female production of Julius Ceasre at the Donmar Warehouse- Yes that's right!) we'll be sure to see the gender gap narrowing down. Well, a little bit anyway.
Wednesday, 21 November 2012
Monday, 22 October 2012
Two halves of the Brain: Two halves of Britain.
Everybody has a left brain and a right brain. Each side controls a different area of thought.
The Left side is the "logical" side, whereas the right supports our "creative" thoughts, and research shows that most people prefer one style of thinking over another.
Now, you may be sitting there staring at your screen thinking what on Earth is this girl on about? I thought she was some sort of theatre fanatic. Well never fear, I am. But I have always been interested in the opposition of the left and the right; whether its the brain, which hand you use (...steady on), which side of the road you drive on, or possibly most polific; political parties.
And never have I been more interested in the feud between the left and right wings of the big bird of Britain than when watching "This House" at the Cottersloe Theatre at the National this week.
Set in 1974, James Graham's play focuses on the practical realities and personal lives of those behind the scenes in the conservative and Labour party, and the formidable battle they face to stay in power and take charge of the Nation.
From the moment you enter the auditiorium the mood is immediately created, with both the stage and seating area dressed to replicate the House of Commons. So convincing is the set, that if you were in the foyer and glanced at the monitor displaying the auditorium, you would be assured to feel that you were looking at the real thing. So kudos to you, Rae Smith, for designing a masterpiece.
And the designs were just one part of the perfectly fitting jigsaw that made this piece so successful. The cast are to be praised endlessly. With the exception of a handful of actors, the every member of the company alternates characters with the blink of an eye, portraying 40+ characters with efortless charm. And with a cast of only 16, I feel that is an achievement that deserves a metophorical tip of the cap.
Of course, I wasn't around in those rusty, industrial days of political unrest. But I have often heard the tales of hardship from my parents. However these stories tend to transport your mind predominantly to a grubby picket line or blistering protest in the middle of a city. Whereas Graham's writing traps you in the very corridors and offices of westminster, allowing you to observe the battle from another angle, where the fighting was of an equal hostility. Although every audience member enters with their own political mindset and believing they know "which side they're on", as the storyline unfolds it becomes increasingly difficult to not become neutral. This is not down to a poetic tricky delivered through the medium of a debate, but instead down to Graham's ability to write a witty, seductively funny and truthful script, and not forgetting wonderfully human characters, whose spirits can be somewhat dictated at times by the political parties they belong to. But more often than not in the piece; you see these politicians not as public enemies, but simply as people.
Overall, "This House" is an extraordinary piece. Spotlighting on a spectrum of issues such as feminism and family life as well as the pivotal arguement of "who's way is best", Its no wonder that as of February 2013, it will be transfering to the Olivier auditorium for an extended run. And with a few 70s anthems thrown in, what is there not to like?
But there's more! I'd like to start off this second section with a fact;
The most powerful sexual organ in your body is your brain.
There you go. That doesn't really have that much to do with this part, but it does bring me back on the topic of the human brain, and how nothing else on the planet can really compare to it.
A piece that explores this idea intensively, is "Donny's Brain".
Written by Rona Munro and currently playing at the Hampstead Downstairs theatre, this is a piece on a much smaller, yet no less impressive scale.
Donny is involved in a car accident. The overall outlook is that he is ok, but he has suffered some damage to his brain tissue, and had to have a small section of it removed. This section is removed from the area that controls and inhabits his memory. With this section missing, Donny has forgotten the last 3 years of his life. In that time, he has left Emma, his partner of 8 years and her 16 year old daughter and remarried. Of these landmark moments, he has no recollection, and believes he is still in a blissful relationship with Emma.
This play is an emotional rollercoaster, as to be expected when discussing such a personal and intimate subject, and Munro's writing is sure to have you giggling one moment and sobbing your heart out the next.
The Hampstead downstairs theatre is a great venue; its petite seating area and narrow performamce space lends itself well to the privacy of this piece, and provokes the audience to stimulate their imaginations in regards to what they're watching and involve themselves, as opposed to just simply observing.
And with that, I shall leave you with a quotation;
The Left side is the "logical" side, whereas the right supports our "creative" thoughts, and research shows that most people prefer one style of thinking over another.
Now, you may be sitting there staring at your screen thinking what on Earth is this girl on about? I thought she was some sort of theatre fanatic. Well never fear, I am. But I have always been interested in the opposition of the left and the right; whether its the brain, which hand you use (...steady on), which side of the road you drive on, or possibly most polific; political parties.
And never have I been more interested in the feud between the left and right wings of the big bird of Britain than when watching "This House" at the Cottersloe Theatre at the National this week.
Set in 1974, James Graham's play focuses on the practical realities and personal lives of those behind the scenes in the conservative and Labour party, and the formidable battle they face to stay in power and take charge of the Nation.
From the moment you enter the auditiorium the mood is immediately created, with both the stage and seating area dressed to replicate the House of Commons. So convincing is the set, that if you were in the foyer and glanced at the monitor displaying the auditorium, you would be assured to feel that you were looking at the real thing. So kudos to you, Rae Smith, for designing a masterpiece.
And the designs were just one part of the perfectly fitting jigsaw that made this piece so successful. The cast are to be praised endlessly. With the exception of a handful of actors, the every member of the company alternates characters with the blink of an eye, portraying 40+ characters with efortless charm. And with a cast of only 16, I feel that is an achievement that deserves a metophorical tip of the cap.
Of course, I wasn't around in those rusty, industrial days of political unrest. But I have often heard the tales of hardship from my parents. However these stories tend to transport your mind predominantly to a grubby picket line or blistering protest in the middle of a city. Whereas Graham's writing traps you in the very corridors and offices of westminster, allowing you to observe the battle from another angle, where the fighting was of an equal hostility. Although every audience member enters with their own political mindset and believing they know "which side they're on", as the storyline unfolds it becomes increasingly difficult to not become neutral. This is not down to a poetic tricky delivered through the medium of a debate, but instead down to Graham's ability to write a witty, seductively funny and truthful script, and not forgetting wonderfully human characters, whose spirits can be somewhat dictated at times by the political parties they belong to. But more often than not in the piece; you see these politicians not as public enemies, but simply as people.
Overall, "This House" is an extraordinary piece. Spotlighting on a spectrum of issues such as feminism and family life as well as the pivotal arguement of "who's way is best", Its no wonder that as of February 2013, it will be transfering to the Olivier auditorium for an extended run. And with a few 70s anthems thrown in, what is there not to like?
But there's more! I'd like to start off this second section with a fact;
The most powerful sexual organ in your body is your brain.
There you go. That doesn't really have that much to do with this part, but it does bring me back on the topic of the human brain, and how nothing else on the planet can really compare to it.
A piece that explores this idea intensively, is "Donny's Brain".
Written by Rona Munro and currently playing at the Hampstead Downstairs theatre, this is a piece on a much smaller, yet no less impressive scale.
Donny is involved in a car accident. The overall outlook is that he is ok, but he has suffered some damage to his brain tissue, and had to have a small section of it removed. This section is removed from the area that controls and inhabits his memory. With this section missing, Donny has forgotten the last 3 years of his life. In that time, he has left Emma, his partner of 8 years and her 16 year old daughter and remarried. Of these landmark moments, he has no recollection, and believes he is still in a blissful relationship with Emma.
This play is an emotional rollercoaster, as to be expected when discussing such a personal and intimate subject, and Munro's writing is sure to have you giggling one moment and sobbing your heart out the next.
The Hampstead downstairs theatre is a great venue; its petite seating area and narrow performamce space lends itself well to the privacy of this piece, and provokes the audience to stimulate their imaginations in regards to what they're watching and involve themselves, as opposed to just simply observing.
And with that, I shall leave you with a quotation;
Tuesday, 2 October 2012
A sign of the Times?
‘I think we ought to read only books that bite and sting us. If the book we are reading doesn’t shake us awake like a blow on the skull, why bother reading it in the first place? A book must be the axe for the frozen sea within us.’ - Franz Kafka.
I first came across this quotation in my AS English Literature class, and it has since then stuck with me. However, I would argue that this does not only apply to books, but to all art forms.
But should it apply to the dramatic arts? Well I would argue that it does. Indefinitely.
But whenever I think about this, there is always a little voice reminding me of the work and ethic of the lovely Bertolt Brecht.
Nowadays, when people think of dear Bertolt, all they may see is an old photograph of a man that would today be classed as a hipster, what with his thick-rimmed glasses and his top button done up.
But in his day, Brecht was causing quite a revolution in the world of acting and theatre practise.
One writer who does this particularly well is David Hare. Narrowing his focus on chracter relationships and standard, familiar settings such as the family home; Hare writes in a way that makes the audience feel as though they fit comfortably within the world of the play. However along with the security provided by this familial sense, Hare manages to also address serious societal issues. One piece which does this particularly well is "The Judas Kiss". Although based on two pivotal moments in the life of Oscar Wilde, and set over a century ago, Hare manages to entwine the brutally truthful human relationships between the characters, and the prejudice societal opinions on homosexuality, many of which can still be identified today.
So which theory is the more effective? The risky one or the safe one? Well, it is difficult to draw the one conclusion. But one thing remains certain, if an audience member approaches the piece with a ready interest and a open mind, it is nearly impossible for them to leave without being effected, whether on an emotional or politcal level. So maybe your performance really will change someone's life.
Or perhaps not.
Bertolt Brecht
Do you see what I mean?
Hipster
I first came across this quotation in my AS English Literature class, and it has since then stuck with me. However, I would argue that this does not only apply to books, but to all art forms.
But should it apply to the dramatic arts? Well I would argue that it does. Indefinitely.
But whenever I think about this, there is always a little voice reminding me of the work and ethic of the lovely Bertolt Brecht.
Nowadays, when people think of dear Bertolt, all they may see is an old photograph of a man that would today be classed as a hipster, what with his thick-rimmed glasses and his top button done up.
But in his day, Brecht was causing quite a revolution in the world of acting and theatre practise.
Rivaling Stanislavski's blistering naturalism, Brecht developed the concept of "Epic Theatre", and devoutly believed in using the theatre as "a forum for political ideas". The theory behind "Epic Theatre" was that a play should not cause an audience to engage with the plot or characters on an emotional level, but instead provoke "rational self-reflection and a critical view of what's happening on stage". From here, the Marxist within him hoped that this alienation would result in audience members leaving the theatre and trying to make a difference within society.
From this basis came all the zaney elements known as "Brechtian Theatre" such as breaking the fourth wall, the use of Explanatary cards in performance and the use of song.
I am currently working on a production of "Caucasian Chalk Circle" (One of his earlier, less experimental plays) and one thing I will say about working on a Brechtian project, is that it undoubtedly allows a lot more freedom for everyone involved, revealing a new creative process which is an invaluable experience for any performer.
However, I wonder in if in this era of kitchen sink dramas and relentless soap operas, if this approach seems somewhat less successful in making a connection with audiences today.
We are a nation obsessed with truthful representations of the world we live in. Whether its an episode of Emmerdale or a novel based on the true story of someone's troublesome life that tugs at your heartstrings, it appears that what we now favour is art that we can all relate to, something with which we personally can connect or empathise with, or even lay ownership to.
Over recent years, playwrites have diregarded Brecht's practises and favoured their focuses instead on every day characters and scenarios.From this basis came all the zaney elements known as "Brechtian Theatre" such as breaking the fourth wall, the use of Explanatary cards in performance and the use of song.
I am currently working on a production of "Caucasian Chalk Circle" (One of his earlier, less experimental plays) and one thing I will say about working on a Brechtian project, is that it undoubtedly allows a lot more freedom for everyone involved, revealing a new creative process which is an invaluable experience for any performer.
However, I wonder in if in this era of kitchen sink dramas and relentless soap operas, if this approach seems somewhat less successful in making a connection with audiences today.
We are a nation obsessed with truthful representations of the world we live in. Whether its an episode of Emmerdale or a novel based on the true story of someone's troublesome life that tugs at your heartstrings, it appears that what we now favour is art that we can all relate to, something with which we personally can connect or empathise with, or even lay ownership to.
One writer who does this particularly well is David Hare. Narrowing his focus on chracter relationships and standard, familiar settings such as the family home; Hare writes in a way that makes the audience feel as though they fit comfortably within the world of the play. However along with the security provided by this familial sense, Hare manages to also address serious societal issues. One piece which does this particularly well is "The Judas Kiss". Although based on two pivotal moments in the life of Oscar Wilde, and set over a century ago, Hare manages to entwine the brutally truthful human relationships between the characters, and the prejudice societal opinions on homosexuality, many of which can still be identified today.
So which theory is the more effective? The risky one or the safe one? Well, it is difficult to draw the one conclusion. But one thing remains certain, if an audience member approaches the piece with a ready interest and a open mind, it is nearly impossible for them to leave without being effected, whether on an emotional or politcal level. So maybe your performance really will change someone's life.
Or perhaps not.
Bertolt BrechtDo you see what I mean?
Hipster
Thursday, 27 September 2012
Hanged, Drawn and Quartered by Class.
I want you to think of your favourite actor or actress.
No seriously, go on. There is a point, I promise.
Got them?
Now I want you to think about what it is you enjoy so much about their performance. Is it their ability to capture the attention of an audience ranging from an auditorium of 100 to millions of viewers at home through a TV Set. Or is it the fact that they bring truth, modesty and a blistering humanity to every character they play?
Well whatever it is, I highly doubt it is due to their upbringing or the social class they belong to you.
Throughout history, theatre has always been available to the masses. From the very beginning in Ancient Greece when theatre was first explored as a religious ritual; to Shakespeare's time where yards were used to communicate news and historical herritage to the groundlings (who paid 1d- the equivalent of a penny!)
But as of late, the theatre has started to make the transition into becoming an increasingly unjust affair.
This was brought to my attention recently when I was reading an interview with my acting hero, Julie Walters.
Ms Walters is acutely proud of her working class upbrining, and was offered the chance to train at Mancheter Metropolitan University due to economic assistance through government grants.
However, as she explains, this is no longer the case, and in the near future “working class” actors will be almost non-existent because they will not be able to afford to train.
I can see exactly where Ms Walters is coming from, and it breaks my heart.
With a large number of upcoming performers graduating from "posh schools", such as Carey Mulligan (Woldingham school for girls), and Eddie Redmayne (Eton and Trinity College) it is easy to see why a working class girl who aspires for such a career can feel out of her depth.
Even ticket prices reflect the prejudice influence of the middle class, with top band seats for West End shows reaching just under £100. The industry is buzzing with news that audience numbers are dropping and blaming it on a lack of interest in the theatre. Exscuse my french- but that's bull shit. Lower your seat prices and I promise you'll be playing to full houses. Simple.
So, what can we all do?
Well we can cross our fingers and sit tight, as earlier, a quote from Ed Milliband caught my eye;
No seriously, go on. There is a point, I promise.
Got them?
Now I want you to think about what it is you enjoy so much about their performance. Is it their ability to capture the attention of an audience ranging from an auditorium of 100 to millions of viewers at home through a TV Set. Or is it the fact that they bring truth, modesty and a blistering humanity to every character they play?
Well whatever it is, I highly doubt it is due to their upbringing or the social class they belong to you.
Throughout history, theatre has always been available to the masses. From the very beginning in Ancient Greece when theatre was first explored as a religious ritual; to Shakespeare's time where yards were used to communicate news and historical herritage to the groundlings (who paid 1d- the equivalent of a penny!)
But as of late, the theatre has started to make the transition into becoming an increasingly unjust affair.
This was brought to my attention recently when I was reading an interview with my acting hero, Julie Walters.
Ms Walters is acutely proud of her working class upbrining, and was offered the chance to train at Mancheter Metropolitan University due to economic assistance through government grants.
However, as she explains, this is no longer the case, and in the near future “working class” actors will be almost non-existent because they will not be able to afford to train.
I can see exactly where Ms Walters is coming from, and it breaks my heart.
With a large number of upcoming performers graduating from "posh schools", such as Carey Mulligan (Woldingham school for girls), and Eddie Redmayne (Eton and Trinity College) it is easy to see why a working class girl who aspires for such a career can feel out of her depth.
Even ticket prices reflect the prejudice influence of the middle class, with top band seats for West End shows reaching just under £100. The industry is buzzing with news that audience numbers are dropping and blaming it on a lack of interest in the theatre. Exscuse my french- but that's bull shit. Lower your seat prices and I promise you'll be playing to full houses. Simple.
So, what can we all do?
Well we can cross our fingers and sit tight, as earlier, a quote from Ed Milliband caught my eye;
Wednesday, 26 September 2012
In The Beginning....
Hi.
I hope you're well.
This is my first blog post. And as this is the first, I feel I should introduce what it is i'm trying to do here.
I am an aspiring actress. A young girl currently on a gap year before hopefully making a more brutal attempt at moving forward in the industry and trying to crack the drama school code.
Don't worry- I'm not going to ask you to make any donations or Sponsor me. You're safe.
However, One thing I have noticed about the "industry", is that the work of actor's, director's and general Theatre-type people is very rarely discussed.Of course, this area has its fair share of coverage; what with articles and reviews in the papers and all over the net. But these are very rarely two-sided arguements. Usually, this just gives theatre trolls the chance to clamber out from unerneath their bridge and brashly slag off the hard work of many truly talented people due to unadulterated jealousy or various other enigmas.
If someone has a positive opinion, that positivity is enough for the individual. If someone has a negative opinion; everyone has to know. Bad news travels at a greater speed than the good.
What these poisonous old queens tend to neglect, is the choices involved with the piece;
Why did the director choose that piece? Why now? and more importantly, What does the piece say?
Well this, (fingers crossed...) is hopefully what I am going to explore through the enchanted and magical medium of this blog.
You may not like it. Infact you may hate it. Feel free to hate away. Just make sure you roll back under your bridge or into your cave to do it.
So yes, here it goes. A blog discussing the politics, ethics and of course majesty of "The Business".
God Help me....
Oh, p.s. My name's Lou. What's your's?
I hope you're well.
This is my first blog post. And as this is the first, I feel I should introduce what it is i'm trying to do here.
I am an aspiring actress. A young girl currently on a gap year before hopefully making a more brutal attempt at moving forward in the industry and trying to crack the drama school code.
Don't worry- I'm not going to ask you to make any donations or Sponsor me. You're safe.
However, One thing I have noticed about the "industry", is that the work of actor's, director's and general Theatre-type people is very rarely discussed.Of course, this area has its fair share of coverage; what with articles and reviews in the papers and all over the net. But these are very rarely two-sided arguements. Usually, this just gives theatre trolls the chance to clamber out from unerneath their bridge and brashly slag off the hard work of many truly talented people due to unadulterated jealousy or various other enigmas.
If someone has a positive opinion, that positivity is enough for the individual. If someone has a negative opinion; everyone has to know. Bad news travels at a greater speed than the good.
What these poisonous old queens tend to neglect, is the choices involved with the piece;
Why did the director choose that piece? Why now? and more importantly, What does the piece say?
Well this, (fingers crossed...) is hopefully what I am going to explore through the enchanted and magical medium of this blog.
You may not like it. Infact you may hate it. Feel free to hate away. Just make sure you roll back under your bridge or into your cave to do it.
So yes, here it goes. A blog discussing the politics, ethics and of course majesty of "The Business".
God Help me....
Oh, p.s. My name's Lou. What's your's?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)