I COULD never muster much enthusiasm for the title of the Thundering Hooves report of 2006, which metaphorically sought to represent the threat of other festivals catching up with Edinburgh and usurping its role as the UK’s major arts event. Both a bit macho and slightly camp (never mutually exclusive categories), there was also a defensive and insular lets-put-the-wagons-in-a-circle suggestion in there as well. But it was undoubtedly effective in focusing attention, particularly through the creation of the Scottish Government’s Expo Fund as a separate funding stream for the creation of new work.
There may be questions about the political accountability and targeting of that money, which has now extended its reach beyond the Festival city, but it has assuredly under-written projects that would probably not have happened otherwise.
It was the biennial Manchester International Festival, which began in 2007 and was directed by an ex-Edinburgh hand, Alex Poots, that was the catalyst for the anxiety in the capital, and particularly its founding policy of presenting only first performances of new work.
Originating new productions is the most expensive and precarious part of any festival, but it is the yardstick by which they are usually measured. New works, or new approaches to classic works, are what bring critics to events as well as making a festival a destination for cultural tourism.
Manchester’s experience illustrates the danger of adopting such an exclusive policy. For example, Damon Albarn of Blur may be a more inventive musician that either of the Gallagher Brothers in his one-time rivals Oasis, but his Manchester-born musical theatre extravaganzas have not exactly found a place in repertory or on the international festival circuit.
This year’s Edinburgh International Festival, however, stands at the other extreme, which is perhaps why there have been so few critics from outside of Scotland around, even if there seem to be have been no shortage of cultural tourists in the city. Very little in this year’s EIF programme is new and the vast bulk of it is tried and tested and has been seen elsewhere.
In the dance programme Akram Khan’s Xenos and Wayne McGregor’s Autobiography were both seen in London before coming to Edinburgh, and the works by international visitors LEV Dance and Kiss & Cry Collective were performed in Europe last year. All three staged operas at the Festival and King’s Theatres this year were acclaimed productions that had already toured internationally. One was from Paris’s Bouffes du Nord, which is in residence in Edinburgh this year, but – almost by definition – is presenting work that at least Paris has already seen.
Even on the concert stage, where an overlap with the programmes touring orchestras are presenting at the BBC Proms is London is usually the only matter of real concern, there have been many repeat performances this year, beginning with the opening event, Five Telegrams, first happening at the Royal Albert Hall three weeks previously.
The Scottish Chamber Orchestra had played all of the Brahms Symphonies in its season concerts prior to recording them, and the Bernstein concerts the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra and Marin Alsop are playing this weekend were heard earlier this year, with Scots violinist Nicola Benedetti, on their home turf. The latest instalment of Wagner’s Ring, Siegfried, saw the Halle and Sir Mark Elder repeat a concert they had given in Manchester in their own cycle, and Edinburgh’s own Dunedin Consort first performed John Butt’s version of Handel’s Samson at the Easter early music festival in Krakow of which he was guest artistic director this year.
If the concerts and productions are of the high standard of all of the above, does it matter that Edinburgh is seeing fewer premieres, with all the risk that entails? Perhaps the realistic answer is that a sensible balance has to be struck, but it is undeniable that this year’s EIF programme perhaps erred too far on the safe side.
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 here