Passing on ....
Mid-career theatre, dance and performance artists invited to apply
Residency artists get:
* On-going access to studio and theatre space
* Support from other resident solo artists and industry mentors
* Group studio sessions and immersive experiences
* A mid-year immersion experience that can include international workshops or period of development in a country of your choice with travel grant support from VU International (up to $4,000)
The residency provides a professional development framework to investigate your performance making process- usually with respect to creating a solo work.
First round applications must be received via email by Friday 27 November 2009
Web info here or email: perform@vu.edu.au
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Sunday, October 18, 2009
John Bailey explores the macho mainstage
A Dramatic Imbalance
by John Bailey | The Age | 18th October, 2009
The theatre world prides itself on its open-mindedness, but when it comes to the gender divide, it seems Australia's flagship companies are still way behind.
IN TERMS of blokiness, the theatre industry is rarely thought of in the same terms as the rugger-bugger world of sport, the macho model of corporate business or the old-boys' networks of academia. But recent weeks have seen those charges laid against the top figures of our peak performing arts bodies.
Last month, Sydney's Belvoir St Theatre announced its 2010 season. As each production was announced, its creators were invited to take to the stage. But as the numbers mounted something became glaringly obvious - amid the sea of what one Crikey tipster called ''male lookalike writers and directors'', only one woman was featured. On an ironic note, that director was Lee Lewis, who caused a storm several years ago when she called the theatre community to task for systematically ignoring non-white actors.
It wasn't long before the fury spread. The Melbourne Theatre Company's 2010 launch showed a similar skew, with one female director employed for the 12-show season. The Sydney Theatre Company offered another 12 shows: only three female directors... [Read More]
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Australian debate reaches UK: Cultural desert for female directors
Australian theatre should get real
by Chris Wilkinson | Guardian.co.uk | 14th October, 2009
Bloggers in Australia are cross about how few plays are being directed by women and debating whether naturalism is dead
G'day! And welcome to a Noises Off Australia special. Two major rows have blown up for Aussie theatre bloggers of late, and so this week I'm digging down under to find out what has got everyone so upset.
The first issue concerns the newly announced seasons from Sydney's Company B Belvoir and Melbourne's MTC. Between them, the companies will producing a total of 17 shows next year, of which only two (one from each theatre) will be directed by women. On hearing the news, Sydney-based playwright Joanna Erskine said her "heart sank" and "blood seemed to boil" at the apparent discrimination. She is not the only one who is angry. The blog of the Australian Women Directors Alliance says its chair, Lucy Freeman, has written to MTC to say: "If we could see signs that there were professional development pathways or schemes put in place to make entry of women directors into the fold a little easier then we might imagine that the situation will be better in five to 10 years. But the situation hasn't got any better, in fact it's got worse." [READ MORE]Thursday, October 8, 2009
Breaking down the boy’s club
By Richard Watts ArtsHub | Wednesday, October 07, 2009
(read the whole thing HERE)
Blogs have been ablaze with debate about the issue, and mainstream newspapers such as The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald have also weighed into the discussion.
Much of the debate has centered on the lack of opportunities for women directors, and to a lesser extent the opportunities for women playwrights; and both the Melbourne Theatre Company (MTC) and Sydney’s Company B Belvoir have been singled out for criticism, following the recent unveiling of their respective programs for 2010.
Of the seven mainstage productions at Company B next year, only one – That Face, by UK playwright Polly Stenham – is being directed by a woman, Lee Lewis.
In response to Company B’s program, Sydney playwright Joanna Erskine wrote on her blog [http://www.joannaerskine.com/cluster/?p=368]: “As I listened to the remainder of the 2010 line up announcements, however, my heart sank and my blood seemed to boil. For in the following 6 mainstage productions and 3 add-ons, there was no mention of female directors or playwrights … I struggle to understand how such a prominent and successful and LOVED company such as Company B Belvoir, has openly produced such a female-less season. I don’t mean actors, I mean females in integral creative roles – as playwright and director.”
In Melbourne, similar reactions met the unveiling of the 2010 MTC program, which features 12 productions, of which only one is directed by a woman: Hannie Rayson’s The Swimming Club, directed by Kate Cherry.
Lucy Freeman is the Chair of the Australian Women Directors’ Alliance, which recently wrote to the MTC to express concerns about the company’s lack of support for female directors. She says she is concerned that the situation at the MTC shows no signs of improvement.
“If we could see signs that there were professional development pathways or schemes put in place to make entry of women directors into the fold a little easier then we might imagine that the situation will be better in five to ten years. But the situation hasn’t got any better, in fact it’s got worse,” she tells ArtsHub.
“And the other concern is a more cultural one. I worry about what happens to the cultural product when the authoritative figures, the creative decision makers, are all coming from one sector of the community in what is otherwise an obviously two gendered and quite multicultural environment in Melbourne and Victoria; that perhaps our state company isn’t, in its creative leadership position, necessarily representative of the society that makes up the audience.” (CONTINUED)
Read the whole thing HERE
Monday, October 5, 2009
A letter from Melbourne Workers Theatre
This is the full and original version of a letter written by the current ensemble of Melbourne Workers Theatre. A much shorter version appeared in last Saturday's copy of The Age. (Please note: this letter was written prior to the receipt of Derek Young's reply to Ms. Beddie, following a considerable amount of lapsed time from when the original letter was sent, with no reply received.)
Over the past fortnight Australian main-stage theatre companies have been unveiling their 2010 seasons to a barrage of complaints and criticism about the lack of opportunities for women in key creative roles, especially directing.
Last week the Melbourne Theatre Company followed suit by announcing that out of 12 productions only one is to be directed by a woman. A recent article in your paper cites a letter sent by director Melanie Beddie on behalf of the Australian Women Directors’ Alliance to the MTC questioning their commitment to their equal opportunity policies. We understand there has been no reply. Derek Young, the MTC’s chair, said that the company does not feel it should be held responsible for gender equality; rather that it is an issue for the entire theatrical industry. He pointed out that Beddie had made a similar complaint in 2003 and that nothing had changed.
We, the current ensemble of the Melbourne Workers Theatre, wish to offer our thanks and support to Melanie Beddie and the Directors’ Alliance for bringing this issue to light. We would like to say to the MTC that to admit that nothing has changed since 2003 is to admit that the company is stagnant and out of touch with what is happening in theatre beyond its doors.
The Women Directors’ Alliance comprises 60 members: a significant proportion of those members, Beddie included, have spent decades directing excellent, profound and mostly under-funded theatre in Melbourne and beyond. Our industry relies on these women’s efforts as mentors for cultivating writers, performers, designers and technicians, but in turn they are not rewarded with professional work that is commensurate with their experience and skills. If artistic director Simon Philips is suggesting that the MTC’s gender inequality is the result of a lack of experienced Victorian female directors then we would like to ask him: are you blind, or scared, or both? There is no shortage of female talent in Victoria, simply a lack of opportunity.
We understand that budgetary constraints limit the number of external directors that can be employed by the company. But, when the proportion of directors is always overwhelmingly male we are interested in finding out what your recruitment criteria are that so many experienced women continue to be overlooked. That said, if the cost of external directors is causing gender equality to remain grossly unbalanced then it would seem logical to include women in your salaried creative staff.
If the MTC is the flagship theatre company of this state then it, more than any other company, has a responsibility to set an example and act fairly when it comes to gender equality. To relinquish that responsibility and make excuses as to the current state of discrimination implies that the MTC does not hold this issue to be important and therefore does not intend to act to promote change. The Melbourne Workers Theatre would like to entreat all theatre-goers to take a stand and boycott main-stage plays that are directed by men until the imbalance is addressed. Theatre is nothing without an audience and an audience is almost nothing without women.
Dana Miltins, Maude Davey, Georgina Naidu, David Adamson, Jada Alberts, and Greg Ulfan.
Over the past fortnight Australian main-stage theatre companies have been unveiling their 2010 seasons to a barrage of complaints and criticism about the lack of opportunities for women in key creative roles, especially directing.
Last week the Melbourne Theatre Company followed suit by announcing that out of 12 productions only one is to be directed by a woman. A recent article in your paper cites a letter sent by director Melanie Beddie on behalf of the Australian Women Directors’ Alliance to the MTC questioning their commitment to their equal opportunity policies. We understand there has been no reply. Derek Young, the MTC’s chair, said that the company does not feel it should be held responsible for gender equality; rather that it is an issue for the entire theatrical industry. He pointed out that Beddie had made a similar complaint in 2003 and that nothing had changed.
We, the current ensemble of the Melbourne Workers Theatre, wish to offer our thanks and support to Melanie Beddie and the Directors’ Alliance for bringing this issue to light. We would like to say to the MTC that to admit that nothing has changed since 2003 is to admit that the company is stagnant and out of touch with what is happening in theatre beyond its doors.
The Women Directors’ Alliance comprises 60 members: a significant proportion of those members, Beddie included, have spent decades directing excellent, profound and mostly under-funded theatre in Melbourne and beyond. Our industry relies on these women’s efforts as mentors for cultivating writers, performers, designers and technicians, but in turn they are not rewarded with professional work that is commensurate with their experience and skills. If artistic director Simon Philips is suggesting that the MTC’s gender inequality is the result of a lack of experienced Victorian female directors then we would like to ask him: are you blind, or scared, or both? There is no shortage of female talent in Victoria, simply a lack of opportunity.
We understand that budgetary constraints limit the number of external directors that can be employed by the company. But, when the proportion of directors is always overwhelmingly male we are interested in finding out what your recruitment criteria are that so many experienced women continue to be overlooked. That said, if the cost of external directors is causing gender equality to remain grossly unbalanced then it would seem logical to include women in your salaried creative staff.
If the MTC is the flagship theatre company of this state then it, more than any other company, has a responsibility to set an example and act fairly when it comes to gender equality. To relinquish that responsibility and make excuses as to the current state of discrimination implies that the MTC does not hold this issue to be important and therefore does not intend to act to promote change. The Melbourne Workers Theatre would like to entreat all theatre-goers to take a stand and boycott main-stage plays that are directed by men until the imbalance is addressed. Theatre is nothing without an audience and an audience is almost nothing without women.
Dana Miltins, Maude Davey, Georgina Naidu, David Adamson, Jada Alberts, and Greg Ulfan.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Melbourne Theatre Company Responds to AWDA
Below is Melbourne Theatre Company's response to the letter sent by the Australian Women Directors Alliance on the 7th of August, 2009. To read our letter first, click HERE.
29 September, 2009
Dear Ms Beddie,
Thank you for your letter of 7 August 2009 concerning the employment of women directors by Melbourne Theatre Company, which was discussed at some length at our August board meeting. We were particularly interested to hear about the Australian Women Directors Alliance. ls it possible for you to send a list of your members to MTC? The Company generally obtains information about directors from seeing shows or recommendations from agents but may miss out on knowing about directors particularly if they don't have agents.
As you know, MTC presents 10-12 mainstage plays each year of which 1 or 2 are usually buy-ins from other companies. As Artistic Director, Simon Phillips usually directs 3 shows; our main Associate Director will also direct 3 shows; and in recent times, our Associate Director with a particular interest in literary development will direct 1 to 2 shows. This means that there is usually only an opportunity for 1 or 2 external directors to work with the Company on mainstage shows each year.
Through the Associate Director positions, we provide the opportunity for experienced directors to do more work but more importantly, we provide a training environment for them to learn about how a complex multi-million dollar industry works. Since 1995, MTC has employed 6 Associate Directors. Two of them were women who then moved on to become Artistic Directors of major theatre companies.
The Company's approach to the employment of creative personnel in its main season hasn't changed since the letter written to the MEAA to which you referred. The two main criteria are that the person engaged has an extensive artistic track-record; and that they have a passion and aptitude for the project at hand. ln other words, at MTC we employ seasoned creatives who have been working long enough for their artistic strengths to be clearly identifiable. Our position regarding employment of creatives is clear: it must be 'the best person for the job', man or woman. lt is the decision of the Company's Artistic Directorate who that person might be.
Of course, there may be bias at this level. lf it is accepted by the industry that there are equal numbers of men and women directors, of equal professional standing and equal suitability to a Company like MTC; and if, over time, there is a marked gender bias in their employment, then discrimination, conscious or structural may have been detected. A quick look at employment aggregates doesn't necessarily reveal bias but rather could show the reality of suitable personnel available in a particular area such as direction.
A number of activities in which MTC currently engages have a development aspect to them - most notably the Education and Literary Development programs - and we do try to provide opportunities for directors who haven't worked with the Company before. Not all directors are interested in Education work and not all directors are suited to it. However, for your information, the directors of Exploration Education shows over the last 5 years have been;
Year Female Male
2005....3.......0
2006....3.......0
2007....3.......0
2008....2.......1
2009....2.......1
On the development front, in 2009 we have a project with 6 young and emerging artists, 3 writers and 3 directors - of which 3 are women and 3 are men.
MTC is a company that wants to achieve gender balance but as we said in 2OO4 and the comment still stands, gender equity is a problem that starts long before people are employed as directors on our main stage shows or as Associate Directors. Gender equity is a still a problem shared across a range of institutions in the theatre industry. From initial training at colleges like NlDA, VCAM and WAPPA; through first jobs with fringe or non-mainstream companies; to eventually work with state theatres, each link in the employment chain is vital to the development of the skilled professional creative. Each link plays a part in addressing the issue of gender equity. It is unreasonable to expect one level of the industry to compensate for the shortcomings of another.
The theatre industry’s problem is real and exacerbated by the downsizing of the small-to-medium sized theatre sector that has traditionally provided most of the employment opportunities for emerging creatives of all kinds. lt is neither fair nor reasonable to expect a state theatre to take up the functions of an alternative, non mainstream company because this sector is in government-induced crisis.
MTC is proactive in the area of gender equity in programs which have a development aspect to them. However, its core business is main stage work. Directors have to have the skill to create a work that will sell 15,OOO to 30,OOO tickets and there are currently only a handful of such directors in Australia. The final line in the University of Melbourne's Equal Opportunity Policy that was quoted in the letter to the MEAA applies: The policy is designed to support the principle that staff are selected or promoted according to merit.
Merit in terms of the quality of direction required by MTC is not to be found through an advertising and interview process. lt is to found through viewing productions. To this end, senior MTC artistic staff attend shows in small and large venues, in capital cities and regional venues. ln order to take on the responsibility of directing a main stage show at MTC, a director will need to have demonstrated advanced skill on the stages of Griffin or Belvoir or La Boite or Malthouse. Without that experience, it's very difficult to determine whether they have the skills that we need.
Should any of your members' work be represented in these, or similar venues, please keep our casting department informed and we'll make sure we get along to see it.
Yours sincerely,
Derek Young
MTC Board Chairperson
29 September, 2009
Dear Ms Beddie,
Thank you for your letter of 7 August 2009 concerning the employment of women directors by Melbourne Theatre Company, which was discussed at some length at our August board meeting. We were particularly interested to hear about the Australian Women Directors Alliance. ls it possible for you to send a list of your members to MTC? The Company generally obtains information about directors from seeing shows or recommendations from agents but may miss out on knowing about directors particularly if they don't have agents.
As you know, MTC presents 10-12 mainstage plays each year of which 1 or 2 are usually buy-ins from other companies. As Artistic Director, Simon Phillips usually directs 3 shows; our main Associate Director will also direct 3 shows; and in recent times, our Associate Director with a particular interest in literary development will direct 1 to 2 shows. This means that there is usually only an opportunity for 1 or 2 external directors to work with the Company on mainstage shows each year.
Through the Associate Director positions, we provide the opportunity for experienced directors to do more work but more importantly, we provide a training environment for them to learn about how a complex multi-million dollar industry works. Since 1995, MTC has employed 6 Associate Directors. Two of them were women who then moved on to become Artistic Directors of major theatre companies.
The Company's approach to the employment of creative personnel in its main season hasn't changed since the letter written to the MEAA to which you referred. The two main criteria are that the person engaged has an extensive artistic track-record; and that they have a passion and aptitude for the project at hand. ln other words, at MTC we employ seasoned creatives who have been working long enough for their artistic strengths to be clearly identifiable. Our position regarding employment of creatives is clear: it must be 'the best person for the job', man or woman. lt is the decision of the Company's Artistic Directorate who that person might be.
Of course, there may be bias at this level. lf it is accepted by the industry that there are equal numbers of men and women directors, of equal professional standing and equal suitability to a Company like MTC; and if, over time, there is a marked gender bias in their employment, then discrimination, conscious or structural may have been detected. A quick look at employment aggregates doesn't necessarily reveal bias but rather could show the reality of suitable personnel available in a particular area such as direction.
A number of activities in which MTC currently engages have a development aspect to them - most notably the Education and Literary Development programs - and we do try to provide opportunities for directors who haven't worked with the Company before. Not all directors are interested in Education work and not all directors are suited to it. However, for your information, the directors of Exploration Education shows over the last 5 years have been;
Year Female Male
2005....3.......0
2006....3.......0
2007....3.......0
2008....2.......1
2009....2.......1
On the development front, in 2009 we have a project with 6 young and emerging artists, 3 writers and 3 directors - of which 3 are women and 3 are men.
MTC is a company that wants to achieve gender balance but as we said in 2OO4 and the comment still stands, gender equity is a problem that starts long before people are employed as directors on our main stage shows or as Associate Directors. Gender equity is a still a problem shared across a range of institutions in the theatre industry. From initial training at colleges like NlDA, VCAM and WAPPA; through first jobs with fringe or non-mainstream companies; to eventually work with state theatres, each link in the employment chain is vital to the development of the skilled professional creative. Each link plays a part in addressing the issue of gender equity. It is unreasonable to expect one level of the industry to compensate for the shortcomings of another.
The theatre industry’s problem is real and exacerbated by the downsizing of the small-to-medium sized theatre sector that has traditionally provided most of the employment opportunities for emerging creatives of all kinds. lt is neither fair nor reasonable to expect a state theatre to take up the functions of an alternative, non mainstream company because this sector is in government-induced crisis.
MTC is proactive in the area of gender equity in programs which have a development aspect to them. However, its core business is main stage work. Directors have to have the skill to create a work that will sell 15,OOO to 30,OOO tickets and there are currently only a handful of such directors in Australia. The final line in the University of Melbourne's Equal Opportunity Policy that was quoted in the letter to the MEAA applies: The policy is designed to support the principle that staff are selected or promoted according to merit.
Merit in terms of the quality of direction required by MTC is not to be found through an advertising and interview process. lt is to found through viewing productions. To this end, senior MTC artistic staff attend shows in small and large venues, in capital cities and regional venues. ln order to take on the responsibility of directing a main stage show at MTC, a director will need to have demonstrated advanced skill on the stages of Griffin or Belvoir or La Boite or Malthouse. Without that experience, it's very difficult to determine whether they have the skills that we need.
Should any of your members' work be represented in these, or similar venues, please keep our casting department informed and we'll make sure we get along to see it.
Yours sincerely,
Derek Young
MTC Board Chairperson
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Someone else's words
On Alison Croggon's blog, Theatre Notes, a commenter titled simply, "Eileen" has put a very particular (and I believe, important) line of discourse regarding this issue, much (not all, but much) of which I agree with - to the extent that I felt it pertinent to re-post here. I don't think that this is a dilution of the issue at hand, so much as an important take on it, and one that must be read, quoted, articulated, and even disagreed with clearly because, of course, as artists, our politics are never only about the power/equity dichotomy, but also practice, aesthetic, and how we must live.
Eileen said...
One thing strikes me in all of this: increasing the presence of women playwrights and directors in flagship companies doesn’t guarantee a blossoming of feminist discourse in the work, nor the development of feminist performance languages . At best it increases the chances of such. It seems to me this is a good fight but a very limited one. If the debate doesn’t include questions of representation and aesthetics in the work itself it runs the risk of being a campaign about supporting the careers of a small group of women with the promise that this will pay off for all women and that is a very familiar but false promise.
The totalising effects of global capitalism have delivered a defeat for feminism in general (even liberal feminism of the “we have a female deputy prime minister” variety has made only marginal gains), not least because it’s been appropriated by it. It seems to me this is why theatre at the level under scrutiny appears to have shored up its strength as a male bastion and women are still relegated to handmaidens and managers (where we get to really show our mettle) and, as makers, to the occasional theatre version of the “chick-flick”. Exceptions? yes I know they exist.
If I was to try to articulate one possible way forward it would be to the laboratory. Explorations of language, semiotics, acting approaches, spatial relations, design and so on organized around what we know of the nature of women’s oppression in late and seemingly totalising capitalism. And to use the tools of the most developed feminist theoretical discourses around. Some women theatre artists are doing this. The women whose work is regularly critiqued on these pages who are innovators in seeking a synthesis of theatre practice and feminist discourse-Caryl Churchill and Ariane Mnouchkine are two obvious examples-didn’t begin their projects in a vacuum or because they adhered to some essentialist category of “woman”, or because they wanted to be employed by Sydney Theatre Co. It’s pertinent that the social processes involved in their work challenge those reflected in mainstage theatre, attempting to make a break with patriarchal power relations inherent in the General manager/Director/Writer paradigm and the”great man” ideology that goes with it. Feminist artists haven’t gravitated towards collaborative theatre practice because they’re inherently soft and mushy but because of a belief that their liberation is bound to discovering horizontal and pluralist social relations in the making of their art. And the results are often big and speccy. Whether the processes used can be incorporated into mainstage institutions is another question-theoretically it’s not impossible, but it would seem there’s a mammoth struggle ahead.
Big topic, said enough.
Eileen said...
One thing strikes me in all of this: increasing the presence of women playwrights and directors in flagship companies doesn’t guarantee a blossoming of feminist discourse in the work, nor the development of feminist performance languages . At best it increases the chances of such. It seems to me this is a good fight but a very limited one. If the debate doesn’t include questions of representation and aesthetics in the work itself it runs the risk of being a campaign about supporting the careers of a small group of women with the promise that this will pay off for all women and that is a very familiar but false promise.
The totalising effects of global capitalism have delivered a defeat for feminism in general (even liberal feminism of the “we have a female deputy prime minister” variety has made only marginal gains), not least because it’s been appropriated by it. It seems to me this is why theatre at the level under scrutiny appears to have shored up its strength as a male bastion and women are still relegated to handmaidens and managers (where we get to really show our mettle) and, as makers, to the occasional theatre version of the “chick-flick”. Exceptions? yes I know they exist.
If I was to try to articulate one possible way forward it would be to the laboratory. Explorations of language, semiotics, acting approaches, spatial relations, design and so on organized around what we know of the nature of women’s oppression in late and seemingly totalising capitalism. And to use the tools of the most developed feminist theoretical discourses around. Some women theatre artists are doing this. The women whose work is regularly critiqued on these pages who are innovators in seeking a synthesis of theatre practice and feminist discourse-Caryl Churchill and Ariane Mnouchkine are two obvious examples-didn’t begin their projects in a vacuum or because they adhered to some essentialist category of “woman”, or because they wanted to be employed by Sydney Theatre Co. It’s pertinent that the social processes involved in their work challenge those reflected in mainstage theatre, attempting to make a break with patriarchal power relations inherent in the General manager/Director/Writer paradigm and the”great man” ideology that goes with it. Feminist artists haven’t gravitated towards collaborative theatre practice because they’re inherently soft and mushy but because of a belief that their liberation is bound to discovering horizontal and pluralist social relations in the making of their art. And the results are often big and speccy. Whether the processes used can be incorporated into mainstage institutions is another question-theoretically it’s not impossible, but it would seem there’s a mammoth struggle ahead.
Big topic, said enough.
More in The Age.
Theatre company is failing women directors
ROBIN USHER
October 2, 2009
Melanie Beddie has highlighted the dearth of opportunities at the Melbourne Theatre Company for women directors.
IT CAN be argued the Melbourne Theatre Company is the most successful state company in the country. This is not due to its size — its 2008 revenue of $10 million was well below the $25 million recorded by the Sydney Theatre Company. But the MTC's subscribers number 19,600, which is more than 2500 above the much bigger STC.
This success is due to the genius of the MTC's artistic director, Simon Phillips, in putting together programs that appeal to the broadest range of theatregoers. His associates over the past decade have included two notable women, Robyn Nevin and Kate Cherry, who both still occasionally work with the company....
find the rest hereAlison Croggon's Comments on the issue
Meanwhile, the big talk is women in theatre. After the Belvoir PR disaster, and Neil Armfield's patently inadequate defence, Melanie Beddie has moved the debate south by complaining to the MTC about their lack of the XX chromosone. Blogs and commentaries are catching fire up and down this wide brown land.
What do I think? A lot of things, actually. I have never stepped back from calling myself a feminist, but I hate that thinking feminist ends up imprisoning me in my gender. And I think it's quite right to regard the fact that women are so poorly represented in powerful mainstream artistic positions as a scandal. And I'm also thinking about the essentialist problem (women, being communicative mammals, make a certain kind of collaborative theatre, that is itself marginalised) and the quota problem (it is a step forward for women to be counted on the mainstream stages, even if in aesthetic/ideological terms they do as much for women in general as Margaret Thatcher did for miners).
The rest can be read here http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com/2009/10/sex-and-stuff.html
What do I think? A lot of things, actually. I have never stepped back from calling myself a feminist, but I hate that thinking feminist ends up imprisoning me in my gender. And I think it's quite right to regard the fact that women are so poorly represented in powerful mainstream artistic positions as a scandal. And I'm also thinking about the essentialist problem (women, being communicative mammals, make a certain kind of collaborative theatre, that is itself marginalised) and the quota problem (it is a step forward for women to be counted on the mainstream stages, even if in aesthetic/ideological terms they do as much for women in general as Margaret Thatcher did for miners).
The rest can be read here http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com/2009/10/sex-and-stuff.html
Friday, October 2, 2009
Houston we have a problem...
I think we ought to be very careful about making statements about gender discrimination as a broad-based issue. My work history, plus participation on Green Room panels tells me that women are very well represented in education/fringe/small theatre sector. The big FAT glaring GAP is at the top - AD's & directors of significant/flagship companies. Funding bodies have to some extent been complicit in this too.
Whilst I've been on the GRA panels precious few women have directed company shows, let alone been nominated for their work. Marion Potts and Gayle Edwards come to mind most recently. Red Stitch doesn't employ a lot of women directors either - yet on average still more than MTC & Malthouse. But Belvoir, Malthouse, STC, etc all have pretty similar & dismal track records when it comes to women directors.
Neil Armfield's & MTC's recent responses to media questions/enquiries lack integrity, maturity and logic. It wouldn't take much to pick apart these absurd, evasive and patronising responses line by line. Maybe we should actually do that? I think it's best to focus on the Top of the Pyramid (up near the glass ceiling) because that's also where many (not all) women want to work but just cannot get an opportunity/chance. It's also where the companies expose themselves in idiotic ways; akas 'well...ummm... when you direct a mainstage show let us know and we'll come & see it & if we think it's good enough we may offer you a mainstage show'. I think that's a Monty Pythonesque absurdity and we ought to point that out very loudly. The MTC's education-line also holds no water; many extraordinary women artists have worked in this area for years with no breakthroughs (or only minor ones) to the main stage level. These spurious 'look over there' distraction tactics should be met by us for the nonsense they are.
The salient point here is that there is no career path/trajectory for women (emerging or otherwise). What is also evident is that young and precocious male directors often make the huge leap from 'wunderkind' of the moment, to director, to AD fairly easily, with work experience laid on by male and female mentors alike. Show me a woman or two (apart from Kate Cherry) who has been given that opportunity and who is still working and/or in a position of artistic leadership. Most women who do well in theatre mainly do so as administrators, teachers or bureaucrats. To my knowledge Robyn Nevin did not mentor a single woman director and Cate Blanchett shows no signs of doing so either. Arts conversations in relation to gender equality and racial diversity are regularly silenced by the spectre of 'excellence' as if excellence and the former were somehow mutually exclusive. I think it would be useful to put forward a model, such as Melanie's and to request a response from MTC, STC, Malthouse, etc. Melanie's notion of a career ladder where a woman director is taken on board as an assistant director in year one, directs a show in a smaller main stage venue in year two and is finally given the chance to direct a large work in year three - makes sense, as well as suggesting responsible planning and excellent mentorship practice.
Katerina
Whilst I've been on the GRA panels precious few women have directed company shows, let alone been nominated for their work. Marion Potts and Gayle Edwards come to mind most recently. Red Stitch doesn't employ a lot of women directors either - yet on average still more than MTC & Malthouse. But Belvoir, Malthouse, STC, etc all have pretty similar & dismal track records when it comes to women directors.
Neil Armfield's & MTC's recent responses to media questions/enquiries lack integrity, maturity and logic. It wouldn't take much to pick apart these absurd, evasive and patronising responses line by line. Maybe we should actually do that? I think it's best to focus on the Top of the Pyramid (up near the glass ceiling) because that's also where many (not all) women want to work but just cannot get an opportunity/chance. It's also where the companies expose themselves in idiotic ways; akas 'well...ummm... when you direct a mainstage show let us know and we'll come & see it & if we think it's good enough we may offer you a mainstage show'. I think that's a Monty Pythonesque absurdity and we ought to point that out very loudly. The MTC's education-line also holds no water; many extraordinary women artists have worked in this area for years with no breakthroughs (or only minor ones) to the main stage level. These spurious 'look over there' distraction tactics should be met by us for the nonsense they are.
The salient point here is that there is no career path/trajectory for women (emerging or otherwise). What is also evident is that young and precocious male directors often make the huge leap from 'wunderkind' of the moment, to director, to AD fairly easily, with work experience laid on by male and female mentors alike. Show me a woman or two (apart from Kate Cherry) who has been given that opportunity and who is still working and/or in a position of artistic leadership. Most women who do well in theatre mainly do so as administrators, teachers or bureaucrats. To my knowledge Robyn Nevin did not mentor a single woman director and Cate Blanchett shows no signs of doing so either. Arts conversations in relation to gender equality and racial diversity are regularly silenced by the spectre of 'excellence' as if excellence and the former were somehow mutually exclusive. I think it would be useful to put forward a model, such as Melanie's and to request a response from MTC, STC, Malthouse, etc. Melanie's notion of a career ladder where a woman director is taken on board as an assistant director in year one, directs a show in a smaller main stage venue in year two and is finally given the chance to direct a large work in year three - makes sense, as well as suggesting responsible planning and excellent mentorship practice.
Katerina
The Age: Theatre company is failing women directors
IT CAN be argued the Melbourne Theatre Company is the most successful state company in the country. This is not due to its size — its 2008 revenue of $10 million was well below the $25 million recorded by the Sydney Theatre Company. But the MTC's subscribers number 19,600, which is more than 2500 above the much bigger STC.This success is due to the genius of the MTC's artistic director, Simon Phillips, in putting together programs that appeal to the broadest range of theatregoers. His associates over the past decade have included two notable women, Robyn Nevin and Kate Cherry, who both still occasionally work with the company.
Nevin went on to run the Sydney Theatre Company until two years ago, while Cherry is director of Perth's Black Swan company. This only makes it all the more puzzling that the MTC is putting its head in the sand when it comes to recent criticisms about the low number of jobs given to women directors in recent years — two out of 12 this year, slumping to only one in 2010.
Despite the damage such criticism does to its image, it seems the MTC is not interested in taking a leadership role on such a crucial issue. Melanie Beddie, a convener with the Australian Women Directors Alliance, wrote a letter to the MTC board criticising the few opportunities for Victorian women theatre directors in recent years... (continued)
READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
