John Linklater outlines the success achieved by Fifth Estate, a
company that may be attracted to director posts in two Scottish
theatres.
IF the team that runs Fifth Estate is to be tempted to either of the
available artistic director jobs at Perth Theatre or the Royal Lyceum,
Edinburgh, it will have to be on their own terms. Their remarkable
success story, in only the second year of their existence, has confirmed
a firm belief in their own way of going about things.
There is too much experience between the actor-directors Sandy Neilson
and Allan Sharpe, shared with production manager Sean Miller and
designer Paul Ambrose Wright, to be easily deflected from their aim of
demonstrating the hunger of Scottish audiences for plays of substance
and literary quality in productions which attest the solid values of
good acting and direction. Peculiarly, those values had been considered
unfashionable to a degree that allows Fifth Estate a radical stance in
re-asserting them.
They completed their first full year at the Netherbow Theatre,
Edinburgh, playing to audiences of 78%, winning several awards for their
Edinburgh Fringe production of George Rosie's Carluccio And The Queen Of
Hearts and touring that and other productions to Hampstead, Perth
Festival, Dundee Repertory and the Tron. This Edinburgh Festival sees
them splitting resources to present C. P. Taylor's The Ballachulish
Beat, on an Edinburgh Festival commission, and Robert Forrest's Kepler,
on a scholarship of excellence award from the Hamada Edinburgh Festival
Foundation.
All of this has been achieved by a company which is forced to operate
on a profit-share basis, having received only a single project fund of
#30,000 from the Scottish Arts Council to tour the first revival of
Donald Campbell's The Jesuit to Perth. It was one of eight productions
announced for this year by the company.
The only threat to the resolve of Fifth Estate, therefore, is a
success which has thrust full-time jobs upon the founding team of four,
yet rewards them with piecemeal wages. The comparative security of the
vacant posts at Perth and the Lyceum might begin to appear attractive,
but the team's firm position is that they will only consider them if
there is a guarantee that their work with Fifth Estate is allowed to
continue.
This is not an impossible condition. Fifth Estate were strong
front-runners for the Perth job before the board persuaded Joan Knight
to remain for a final season to give continuity to the company during a
phase when it was extending rehearsal periods and production runs.
When a short-leet of three candidates is drawn up in the next few
weeks for Knight's successor, it is likely that the Fifth Estate team
will again be prominent. In its previous interview the team stressed the
proviso that they would want to continue their work with Fifth Estate,
as another arm of the running of Perth, as a catalyst to themselves and
other Scottish theatres, and as a crucible for the development of new
writing and acting talents.
They also put forward a plan to re-open the studio space at Perth as
necessary to the long-term building of a new audience. This might have
seemed an impertinent suggestion to the board of a theatre boasting an
average 90% audience over the past few seasons, but they would be
foolish to ignore it. Perth might be approaching saturation audience
level at the moment, but the age profile of its current patrons cannot
allow the assumption that present box office levels could be maintained
indefinitely. The blunt analysis from Fifth Estate was that in 10 years
time that audience could be halved. In 10 years it could be dead.
Adding urgency to the Perth board's decision is the announcement of
Ian Wooldridge's departure from the Royal Lyceum. His job as artistic
director will be advertised after the Edinburgh Festival, and while
there is some wild speculation about luminaries like Brian Cox or Kenny
Ireland being tempted to apply, and some suggestions that Michael Boyd
of the Tron might be a target for the Lyceum board, there are many who
see the Fifth Estate team as natural candidates for the Lyceum.
They have all worked at the company, Sandy Neilson and Allan Sharpe as
actors, Sean Miller for seven years as a stage manager and production
manager, and Paul Ambrose Wright as a stage carpenter early in his
career. Neilson was on a short-leet of three for the job when Leslie
Lawton was appointed. They all have an insight into Edinburgh audiences,
particularly that sector that has deserted the Lyceum in recent years
and whose renewed support will be necessary if the company is to pick up
from the current level of 57%.
The BBC Scotland radio producer, Patrick Rayner, who came in as
assistant director for Kepler, says of the company: ''I think they are
one of the best things to happen in Scottish theatre in the past few
years, partly because of the texts they use -- the kind of plays I like.
And they encourage the kind of acting I like to come and see as well.
They go about their business with a kind of integrity that is not always
elsewhere.'' Rayner, an influential member of the Lyceum board, chair of
its artistic policy committee, hopes that Fifth Estate will not apply
for the job at the Lyceum because he believes the weight of its
administrative and financial problems (with an outstanding #1.2m debt
and a current #300,000 deficit) might sap their creative energies.
Sandy Neilson remains equivocal about the job. He says: ''The Lyceum
is the most important theatre in Scotland. There is no way we can remain
uninterested in that fact. We'd be very confident that we could take on
the Lyceum and do something with it under our own terms.
''But I fear the conditions under which the next artistic director
would be appointed might be very stringent indeed. It is a poisoned
chalice in many ways, and will remain so for the next four years or so.
It comes with a host of problems. We would only be interested in the
Lyceum if the terms were right and were not going to absorb all our
energies in having to run around to raise #1.5m in order to pay off
their debts. I'm not an accountant or a fund-raiser, I'm a theatre
director and an actor.''
Nevertheless, the very artistic success of Fifth Estate could be
regarded as a direct comment on what has too often been lacking at the
Lyceum, a strong and easily defined ethos, a commitment to a consistent
quality of writing and performance, that breeds confidence in audiences.
With each production Fifth Estate have minimised the risk in taking on
ambitious projects because their audiences have begun to trust their
judgment.
No exception will be Robert Forrest's Kepler, a bold and sweeping
examination of the life of the sixteenth-century German mathematician
and astronomer, Johannes Kepler, a challenging work which contrasts the
perfection that he sees in the harmony of orbits and spheres in the
heavens and the chaos that he suffers in a hell on earth of war, plague
and disruption.
It is also a familiar story for a Fifth Estate production, a play that
has unaccountably slipped through the nets of several theatres before
the team at The Netherbow rescued it from oblivion. Rayner produced a
highly acclaimed radio production of the play in 1987 and then worked
with Forrest on a stage version. For three years they offered it to
theatres without success. Three weeks after it was passed to Allan
Sharpe the response from Fifth Estate was that they would be doing it.
Sandy Neilson, who directs the production, explains why. He says: ''It
is a major piece of dramatic literature, not just in the style of the
writing and in Forrest's ability as a writer, but in the themes, the
scope of the themes that he is tackling, which are universal in the
truest sense of the word. In terms of Scottish theatre writing I think
this is a huge leap forward.''
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