Sign in or 

| Started By | Thread Subject | Location | Replies | Last Post | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| JohnnyDonnelly | An apology | Missing the Point | 2 | Friday, 7:56 AM EST by JohnnyDonnelly | ||||
|
Thread started: Friday, 6:43 AM EST
Watch
"These are in the majority male concepts? No? War, violence, destruction, c0ck… they hit you in the face… I get it."
I wish to apologise for hitting anyone in the face with c0ck last Friday. Normally my wife provides some sort of restraining influence but it seems I'm guilty of harbouring a wayward member. In future I shall endeavour to keep him safely trousered. I certainly was not aware of this indiscretion nor was it deliberate. But if there is one thing this debate highlights it is that good intentions count for naught. I further wish to offer apology to anyone who was inadvertently struck by the ladypart which featured in last Friday's performance. I say 'struck' by a ladypart, although on consideration the violence of this term may be gender inappropriate. Perhaps 'stroked' is better. I intend this metaphorically of course – no ladypart was visible from my vantage point thanks to some judicious staging from Mr Hassell and his fine company of actors (I employ the term 'actor' advisedly in its modern cross-gender sense). I can assure you, had a ladypart been visible, I would have been cognisant of such. Being a man of considerable experience in this field, I have a nose for these things. Lest any confusion arise, the field to which I refer is theatre. And thank goodness I say, for where would we be if ladyparts were visible on the theatrical stage? Germany, no doubt. Or the Royal Court Theatre Upstairs which is much the same thing. This may of course change during this evening's performance. As has been noted, the Factory is a young company, and I believe it unwise to smother the fires of experimentation with the sterile safety blanket of propriety. I have endeavoured to keep this thread as on topic as possible by taking my lead from its title and 'missing the point' entirely. Yours, Mr J. Donnelly, BA (Hons)
out of
found this valuable.
Do you find this valuable?
Keyword tags:
new writing
sexism
women
Show Last Reply
|
||||||||
| JohnnyDonnelly | Friday and Saturday | HAMPSTEAD THEATRE 50/50 DARING PAIRINGS | 0 | Thursday, 10:47 AM EST by JohnnyDonnelly | ||||
|
Thread started: Thursday, 10:47 AM EST
Watch
Ladies and gents, men and women, boys and girls –
Sadly (for me) I won't have the pleasure of your company Friday and Saturday. I'm watching a relative get married in Nottingham. I hope the pieces go well and much is learned. I hope you all have fun. But not too much fun. Especially the actors. You've all got lines and that to remember. Have a great party too. x
out of
found this valuable.
Do you find this valuable?
Keyword tags:
HAMPSTEAD THEATRE
NEW WRITING
|
||||||||
| Federay | the mix | Missing the Point | 2 | Thursday, 8:47 AM EST by FayeThomas | ||||
|
Thread started: Thursday, 6:53 AM EST
Watch
Here is the first place in which positive discrimination was mentioned in this discussion (as far as I am aware). I wrote: "...this place, the Factory, is the place to have this conversation because we respond to challenges with honesty, energy and imagination. We also are not a company that looks for solutions and rules - we look for more questions, strategies to test, true angles on old problems rather than the inherited angles. So let’s have this conversation - because it is interesting and our responses, I think, will not be to trot down the only-vaguely-effective, familiar paths of positive discrimination, women-only initiatives and such… it will be something else. I think. I think it will be for real."
However IF the majority want the selection on a project such as this to incorporate quotas of particular groups then this should be discussed BEFORE selection - it cannot be applied retrospectively. Polly Stenham. Sarah Kane. Lucy Kirkwood. Three playwrights who fit and yet do not fit your characterization of young female playwrights' output. Personally I am not interested in the differences between men's and women's writing I am interested in each individual writer's writing. I think that is the only sensible approach. Look again at my blog. You have twisted my meaning. Define "young" please. How many jobs have we all not got for infuriating "it's about the mix" reasons. That is how it is. If the mix should have prioritized issues other than looking for pieces that suited the space, event and timing then let's agree on those. Calmly.
2
out of
3 found this valuable.
Do you find this valuable?
Do you?
Keyword tags:
new writing
sexism
women
Show Last Reply
|
||||||||
| TimEvans | Thanks | Sarah Bedi - open letter of resignation | 0 | Wednesday, 10:17 PM EST by TimEvans | ||||
|
Thread started: Wednesday, 10:17 PM EST
Watch
Inasmuch as I believe Sarah's reasoning and conclusions are flawed, something I will address both privately and online, I would like to echo Liam's thanks right now for all the incredible help that she has given, and all of the work that that has entailed in keeping things running as smoothly possible.
Thanks Sarah. You've been a star. x |
||||||||
| Anonymous | Reply | Steven Bloomer's rather foolhardy attempt to look at the on-going 50/50 gender debate | 11 | Wednesday, 9:46 PM EST by TimEvans | ||||
|
|
Thread started: Oct 30 2009, 8:04 AM EDT
Watch
I think this is a very important discussion to have. For the most part it's either just a headline in the stage every time a Dame bemoans (rightly) the lack of parts written for 'older' women, and secondly in a symposium setting, not open to all. So, it's good to have it online.
'Positive Discrimination' is something I have struggled to understand for a while. Firstly, as a term it is a contradiction. There can be nothing positive about discrimination. I can't repeat that enough. If I was awarded a place on a course, or a production, to any factor other than having an amazing play, I'd feel totally undeserving, and taken advantage of. A good friend of mine always points out that because the divide is so great, it can only be a good thing to elevate those in the underdog position, offer a fighting chance and to ultimately raise the standards. A par t of me, of course, agrees. I guess, I always thought that if you wanted something, it was up to you to do it, and work hard. I've never been lucky enough for the 'Positive Discrimination' Fairy Godmother to come to my door. My friend criticises me because I am a white male, and I'm automatically in a position of benefit. But I'm not. That's exactly what I'm not in anymore because of positive discrimination. I'm being discriminated against because I'm male and white, and, well the fact I'm Irish can be another factor at play. I have a friend who submitted to one London's top new writing producing theatres under his given name, and never got a place on their writers course, that is, until he adopted his fathers name, which was 'ethnic' enough for them. He changed the ethnicity of the main characters and re-embraced his own, and got a place. What does this say. Do we need to change who we are to be accepted. Isn't this what were told we should never have to do? Trust yourself. Be yourself?
Show Last Reply
|
|||||||
| liamevansford | Sarah Bedi - a great loss. | Sarah Bedi - open letter of resignation | 0 | Wednesday, 3:22 PM EST by liamevansford | ||||
|
Thread started: Wednesday, 3:22 PM EST
Watch
Dear all,
I would like to say on behalf of the Factory how much it saddens us that Sarah has felt the need to resign. She has always been a hugely appreciated and valued member of the company and her skills, talent , energy and commitment will be greatly missed! We have and will continue to talk to Sarah in person about this. On a similar note I would like to point out that the views posted in reply to the discussion about the opportunities offered to Women within the company are not those held by 'The Factory Management' as a whole and not representative of company ethos. We have been very aware of this discussion and have been trying to listen to and understand what the thoughts of the company are before responding with a clear idea on our views and how best to move forward. This of course is not an absurd discussion but one that we are now very aware of and something we hope to deal better with in the future. We welcome the discussion on this, or any topic, as the only way we can improve/change or diversify is by open discussion. There will be more from us soon on this subject and do continue to discuss - it is the point of such a forum In the meantime can I again say how dismayed we are to loose Sarah and thank her for all the time and energy she has put towards the Factory cause. More than anyone Sarah has been a core company member and I can only hope that her decision is not as final as she says. We are truly sorry to have you made her feel this way! We encourage you all to discuss such matters with us and would like to make clear that we want to be as approachable and accountable as possible on any matters that are important to our company members. We were, and still are, in the process of arranging a company wide 'AGM' of sorts for the beginning of next month to discuss such points - among many others. We'll be sending out the information within the next few weeks. All our best - The Factory |
||||||||
| FayeThomas | SO MUCH FUN!!! | Fracture | 6 | Oct 27 2009, 9:15 PM EDT by AlanMorrissey | ||||
|
Thread started: Oct 20 2009, 1:28 PM EDT
Watch
Oh my, I love this... works brilliantly for monologues. Turned what was a melancholy poetry driven piece into something resembling of a bunch of schizophrenic time travelling demons tormenting someone with their total insanity and unpredictable behaviour. Brilliant. We should always use this machine.
Show Last Reply
|
||||||||
| sampeterjackson | Party on Thursday! | FactoryMember | 0 | Oct 25 2009, 7:08 PM EDT by sampeterjackson | ||||
|
Thread started: Oct 25 2009, 7:08 PM EDT
Watch
Hey guys,
you are all invited to "Big Kids Big Night Out" on Thursday night. at The Gate in Notting Hill. It's a Fundraiser for a young new theatre production company, which is producing my play. Here are the details... http://www.publicpropertytheplay.com/bigkids/flyer.html Hope to see you there! Sam x |
||||||||
| Madeleine_Hyland | Positive discrimination | Steven Bloomer's rather foolhardy attempt to look at the on-going 50/50 gender debate | 2 | Oct 25 2009, 3:12 PM EDT by Anonymous | ||||
|
Thread started: Oct 24 2009, 6:37 PM EDT
Watch
I suppose what I don't really get is a sort of wariness of positive discrimination that can be detected. I dont know if it's that being politically correct, or maybe politically balanced is a moreuseful phrase, is somehow seen as being uncool, or if there's a worry that the audience will read into it in a certain way.... Iguess all I'm saying is that I don't find it patronising when there is an attempt made to represent an equal range of male and female voices, any more than if I was a kid born into poverty I would feel patronised by being offered a scholarship to an awesome school with awesome teachers and rescources and opportunities. Or even if I did feel patronised, the payoff would be worth it, because I would get the learning. Not to mention the school might have to up their game too. At least it wouldn't just be the kids that were born into affording it getting the learning. I think it comes down to the work, how to make it better. I believe that Shakespeare was able to write what he did because of the multiplicity of persectives that he was forced to deal with, in a theatre where the audience were paupers to princes and you had to get the story fun for everyone without patronising anyone, and you could see them all. No other playwright has had to deal with the same level of diversity and unignorable visibilty, over their whole career. Just imagine what he would have had to pull out of the hat if half his acting company as well as half his audience were women. And if there had been women playwrights knocking around as well...or at least allowed into the same school....
Show Last Reply
|
||||||||
| Federay | fair and provocative | 50/50 from an actor's POV | 5 | Oct 22 2009, 2:48 PM EDT by JohnnyDonnelly | ||||
|
Thread started: Oct 8 2009, 3:37 PM EDT
Watch
yup.
It is about blurring certain edges and rewriting the relationship between actor and writer which in some ways over time in this part of the world anyway, has calcified into something distant and mutually mistrustful or perhaps (sometimes and worse) the opposite. I think you have summed up what I think is our still-evolving mission... to get the writer and actor into a complex tango, all arms and legs so maybe at some whirring point we are no longer able to work out who is who. That relinquishing of control which we have a not-very-straightforward collective dedication to. I also think the Factory Feedback Thingy is still far from ideal. it is a hard job but I KNOW there is a way in which we can offer the writer something very special in that task... it's ongoing... I have some thoughts we will try out on some sacrificial souls. Great Stuff - and...er... I am writing a responding blog... it will go up here somewhere soon-ish. x
Show Last Reply
|
||||||||
| FayeThomas | Philosophical Meanderings.. plus an idea! | Johnny Donnelly's Response | 3 | Oct 20 2009, 4:40 PM EDT by NAlderton | ||||
|
Thread started: Oct 20 2009, 11:01 AM EDT
Watch
I've just discovered all these brilliant threads.. (my alert thing was off, what an exciting surprise)... John's post has just triggered a thought which amuses me: suppose we do some sort of experiment... men vs women... for academic fun (no cage fighting)... we certainly have enough writers to play with... I've no idea how it would work... but I'm suddenly very intrigued to see what might be unearthed in studying some of the qualities which seem to be more prevalent and most different in male and female writing. There is something there. You can normally tell if a play was written by a man or a woman, no?
I'm not suggesting the anonymous writing thing.. as Steve said, that seems patronising and implies that we are compensating for weakness, and anyway it's already been done (See drywrite - http://www.drywrite.com established writers and unestablished submitting anonymous work)... which is not what we're getting at. I've always been very interested in male writers who write women well... they are notable and for some reason stick out to me more so than their equally brilliant peers... some abstract understanding of female character that hits a resounding note with me/us/women. Rattigan (Deep Blue Sea etc) and Hare (Plenty, Amy's View) are two examples off the top of my head... yes, entirely subjective.. However - I was chatting to my delightful housemate, Ms Pavli... we talked about the pieces that had been submitted, what we'd seen of them... and we both observed that there is a particular abstract quality that is more present in female writing than it is in male... I'm interested in this. A congruous feeling/voice/sense, that seems to be consistently evoked in female writing regardless of content.. I think I have a notion of what it is, but I'm curious if anyone else knows what I'm on about...? Men - Your thoughts? (Word Limit has got me now... more later!)
Show Last Reply
|
||||||||
| Anonymous | Bristol Jam | Discussion Forum | 1 | Oct 18 2009, 1:22 PM EDT by HannahDrake | ||||
|
|
Thread started: Oct 18 2009, 1:21 PM EDT
Watch
I have recently joined the site following seeing both Hamlet (twice) and The Seagull this weekend at the Bristol Jam, Bristol Old Vic. I simply don't have time enough to go to each of your profiles and 'compliment' you on what I saw, so this will have to do. I have spent 9 of the fastest, most entertaining, engaging and moving hours of my life watching your shows this weekend. Never did I think that death by rubik's cube could be so gut-wrenching, and how exciting to see our wooden buddha used to such effect. I am astounded by your imagination and trust in each other. Very exciting.
But enough gushing. Fancy setting up a Bristol branch?
out of
found this valuable.
Do you find this valuable?
Keyword tags:
Bristol Jam
Hamlet
The Seagull
Show Last Reply
|
|||||||
| JohnnyDonnelly | just so you know | Steven Bloomer's rather foolhardy attempt to look at the on-going 50/50 gender debate | 0 | Oct 16 2009, 11:38 AM EDT by JohnnyDonnelly | ||||
|
Thread started: Oct 16 2009, 11:38 AM EDT
Watch
"(And isn’t it interesting that the only men stupid enough/brave enough to comment on this have all got pieces in the final selection. Maybe a little guilt going on? A little self justification perhaps?)
Seeing as you ask, I don't feel guilty. But that might just be because I like nothing better than swaggering about the Internet occasionally stopping to admire my massive cyberc0ck in a chatroom mirror. So I wouldn't trust anything I say. |
||||||||
| SarahBedi | act of faith | Steven Bloomer's rather foolhardy attempt to look at the on-going 50/50 gender debate | 0 | Oct 16 2009, 3:19 AM EDT by SarahBedi | ||||
|
Thread started: Oct 16 2009, 3:19 AM EDT
Watch
of course there is an act of faith in every relationship, but in the last 5 Factory projects, women have not even been equal - not even equal! - to men, as either actors, directors or writers. how long are the women expected to have faith for?
of course i'm not suggesting that any of the people invovled in the difficult decision making process are purposely and conciously holding back the women, and maybe the problem is as deeply ingrained as John suggests. if this is the case, how does the factory go about addressing it? positive discrimination has been slapped down, so i guess we are back to trust. maybe we don't do anything. let the factory find it's feet, see what we have, and take it from there. i agree that the work comes first, however i do think that the work could still have come first and the factory invovled more women in it's last lot of projects. just saying 'the work should come first' could imply that female involvment might have brought the standard down. which i don't believe. but i'm a woman, so perhaps biased. i will write more anon, but i have to leave it short and sweet for now xx |
||||||||
| JohnnyDonnelly | 42-18 (5th post) | don’t imagine this is not your business. | 2 | Oct 15 2009, 7:51 PM EDT by JohnnyDonnelly | ||||
|
Thread started: Oct 15 2009, 5:46 AM EDT
Watch
Here’s another anecdote. I was recently commissioned by a theatre to write a play. I wrote the play. They liked the play, they accepted and optioned the play (this is the heavily abridged version, you understand?). They allocated a director. And pencilled in a slot in the theatre programme. This is good. It means someone is going to produce your play. It never means anything else. I was told this by other writers with names you would have heard of.
All of this took close to three years. And then they told me they couldn’t afford to do the play. And they were going to do a different play which came with some funding. So they didn’t do the play. The play I’d spent three years working on. The play they told me they liked. The play they told me they wanted to do. They play they’d given me money for the option to produce it. They did another one. And, you know who it was by? It was BY A GIRL!!! I wanted to kill them. But I was scared. Because they were men. And reader, that is why you find me here, in my theatre tower, with my mind-control rays, stopping women getting their plays on, crushing their hearts and their dreams. Revenge is dirty. But always sweet. Getting plays on is a messy affair. And when yours isn’t picked it feels horrible. It is horrible. It just is. And the people who pick someone else’s pay instead of yours are *********. And I know none of you who have posted so far think that the nice people at the Factory are horrible *********. But I would have. Because I’m not as nice as you. I would have mounted their image onto dartboards, branded them a pervert in influential web forums, made phone calls at three in the morning. “I will hurt you,” the familiar voice would whisper. “I will hurt you and those you love”. Click.
Show Last Reply
|
||||||||
| Federay | shirt sleeves | Johnny Donnelly's Response | 1 | Oct 15 2009, 7:45 PM EDT by JohnnyDonnelly | ||||
|
Thread started: Oct 15 2009, 3:20 PM EDT
Watch
patriarchal values infuse every aspect of Western culture so yes it cld be argued that what we expect from a play could well be "a bit boy". What can we do about it? Being curious is a good start. Being angry is a bit finite. Stats are interesting but in themselves a "bit boy" implying quality-judgement and quantifiability in a process which is ineffable at best.
What I want to say here and I am not going to say it again is that this project was and still is ALL ABOUT PROCESS; the platform change that we are arrived at here at Swiss Cottage is NOT marked "good plays get off here - the rest of you stay where you are" - and ironically I find it a"boy" reading to see it that way. The process and the learning and the fun continues - I don't think I or anyone has knowingly indicated or said differently. There was a very interesting study done in America which revealed that in playwrighting the lack of opportunities for women was significantly exacerbated in theatres in which a female literary manager/artistic director was incumbent. (I will post a url when I have it...) No I don't know what that means either but I am, I promise, examining my conscience and haven't found black and grain'd spots yet... or not more so than usual. Thanks John for pitching in.
Show Last Reply
|
||||||||
| JohnnyDonnelly | Sorry about the 6 posts being back to front | don’t imagine this is not your business. | 1 | Oct 15 2009, 2:56 PM EDT by Federay | ||||
|
Thread started: Oct 15 2009, 5:49 AM EDT
Watch
also about not signing in properly
I need a girl to help me always
Show Last Reply
|
||||||||
| JohnnyDonnelly | 42-18 (6th post) | don’t imagine this is not your business. | 4 | Oct 15 2009, 2:54 PM EDT by Federay | ||||
|
Thread started: Oct 15 2009, 5:46 AM EDT
Watch
When someone doesn’t pick my play it’s because they’re an idiot. A horrible idiot ******** who wouldn’t know good theatre if it shagged them in a meadow. And time and history will prove me right and so on, and so forth. Then after awhile I get over it and myself. Cause life’s a bit like that.
My only point is this. There are a million reasons why someone else’s play gets picked rather than our play. So it may be nothing to do with our gender that our play is or isn’t picked. After all, there are so many other possible reasons. But that doesn’t mean that sometimes that might be the reason. My guess is that no one ever sits down in a room and says ‘This year, we need to make sure we do more plays by boys than girls. That’s what we really need to do’. But then my guess is that George W Bush never sat down in a room with anyone and said, ‘You know what this country needs? Oil. So let’s attack a country we know for a fact poses us no threat, and take theirs’. I don’t think anyone ever said that. But just because no one says these things doesn’t mean they don’t happen. They do. On a practical note, ‘blind’ submissions sent under pseudonyms might be a good idea. The Bruntwood playwrighting award does this.
Show Last Reply
|
||||||||
| JohnnyDonnelly | 42-18 (4th post) | don’t imagine this is not your business. | 0 | Oct 15 2009, 5:45 AM EDT by JohnnyDonnelly | ||||
|
Thread started: Oct 15 2009, 5:45 AM EDT
Watch
Possibly it’s worth having the same kind of conversation about we think is ‘good’ writing as that which seems to happen a lot about ‘good’ acting around the Factory. You all seem to have come up with quite a lot of answers about how to do ‘good’ acting at the Factory.
I watched my ten minute piece being rehearsed yesterday and found the commitment and sensitivity of those in the room to the process of acting rather stunning. You have a developing language of performance, one that is hard to articulate but that works. ‘Works’ in the sense of being active, of striving towards something, not necessarily in the sense of always functioning correctly. Obviously all your answers about how to do ‘good acting’ are wrong, but the answers on a particularly day seem to be less wrong than those which preceded them. And so on. I wonder if the Factory (or indeed the theatre) has that same ability to describe ‘good writing’. Not that we can ever pin down what makes ‘good writing’ any more than we can ‘good acting’, but hopefully we can be a bit less wrong than the previous occasion. And I wonder if that endeavour might help us towards understanding why there are more boy plays than girl plays. One final point. I didn’t sense this at all in any of the posts on this topic, but I would like to warn against the idea that boys have it easier. Maybe we do. But it doesn’t feel easier. I imagine it’s as dispiriting. It’s really hard to get a play on. If we look at the 42-18 then that would seem to make it 2-1 in favour of the chaps but there are a lot of plays out there so perhaps the odds are actually more even. |
||||||||
| JohnnyDonnelly | 42-18 (3rd post) | don’t imagine this is not your business. | 0 | Oct 15 2009, 5:45 AM EDT by JohnnyDonnelly | ||||
|
Thread started: Oct 15 2009, 5:45 AM EDT
Watch
Or are the criteria by which we judge ‘good’ writing skewed towards a boy’s way of thinking? I run a playwrighting MA and the basis or most of what we think of as Western writing is Aristotle (boy). Also Mamet’s a pretty big influence on ‘how to write’ (he’s about as ‘boy’ as you can get) and we owe a big debt to Pinter (pretty sure he’s a boy). Much writing theory focuses on the tactics by which we attempt to overcome the obstacles to our desires. Which is a pretty good place to start with writing as it goes but I do wonder if it’s a bit ‘boy’ in its conception of drama as a kind of sport. This is a question really. Is the way we think about plays a bit ‘boy’? I think you know what I mean by ‘boy’. It’s not the same as male or female.
Or maybe boys are just better at writing than girls? I’m tempted to suggest this is the case just for the perverse thrill of starting a big fight, but I just don’t believe it myself. Plus I’m a bit scared of the girls. I’m joking. Well, I’m not, but I am. By joking I don’t mean to imply it’s not an important thing to talk about. It is. As if lower pay and workplaces geared towards men aren’t enough. Pshaw! 42 to 18 is a big difference. Maybe it actually is fair, but it certainly doesn’t look fair, and that’s worth thinking about. It can be hard though, because if (as I’m suggesting might be the case) ‘boy’ thinking is ingrained into theatre culture, then how do we even know if we’re doing it? And even if we do suspect we might be programmed to praise ‘boy’ more than ‘girl’ then how do we stop? If I like a play I like a play I like a play. If I like play A more than play B because it has ‘boy’ qualities that through cultural indoctrination I’ve come to assume are ‘good’ qualities, and the level at which I make that assumption is so deep I’m not even aware I’m doing it, what am I supposed to do about it? Pretend I like play B because I think it’s the right thing to do? |
||||||||