There was a bit of a shambles the Wednesday before last in Greyfriars Kirk at the first performance of James MacMillan's new commission, entitled Since It Was The Day Of Preparation.
The issue was the timing of the show. All Greyfriars events were billed at a duration of "one hour approximately". On the train to Edinburgh that afternoon, I was phoned by the Festival office, alerting me to the fact that, after a dress rehearsal, the new piece had a running time of 80 minutes. My involuntary imprecation startled the old woman in front of me. The concert was starting at 5.45pm and I had an 8pm deadline.
But, settled in Greyfriars, as the performance progressed, I couldn't fail to sense the unease all around me as people shuffled restlessly, checking the time, giving each other long looks and packing up early. Some left before Part Three of the new work. Somebody in my vicinity seethed quietly: "This is supposed to last an hour."
In the event, with a slightly late start, it ran for 85 minutes, and the instant it finished there was a massive and noisy bale-out. "We'll have lost our bloody 7.15pm table booking," cursed one couple as I pelted out of the kirk. Others were haring off to get to 7.30pm shows at the Playhouse and Festival Theatre. I hope we all made it to our various destinations. (My own review copy landed at 8pm on the button, by which time my nerves were shot to pieces.)
The point is this: it should not have happened. If the MacMillan was not going to fit the Greyfriars chronological template, the Festival should have been aware of it long before the final run-through. Did they ask the composer or performers?
People should have been alerted earlier, though that wouldn't have helped those with all these other Festival commitments immediately after the Greyfriars show. An announcement at the beginning, pointing to the brief pause before Part Three as an escape hatch, might have obviated the panic so many experienced.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article