Menopause the Musical by Jeanie Linders. Director Gary Young, musical director Paul Keelan, choreographer Andrew Hallsworth. Presented by G4 Productions at The Playhouse, Tue & Thu-Fri 8pm, Wed 1pm & 8pm, Sat 2pm & 8pm, Sun 2pm, February 19 – March 2. Bookings 6275 2700.
A woman friend wondered why a man “was sent” to review this high energy “hilarious celebration of women and The Change”. I wasn’t sent. I chose to go, and when I discovered that the director of the Australian production, and the musical director, and the choreographer are all men, I certainly didn’t feel out of place. Having passed, vicariously, through menopause myself, I thoroughly enjoyed the celebration, though not with quite the same sense of identity experienced by many in the audience who clapped, cheered and whistled throughout the show.
The four performers in the Canberra season, Caroline Gillmer (The Power Woman), Carolyn Waddell (The Earth Mother), Donna Lee (The Dubbo Housewife) and Vivien Davies (The Soap Star) are a well-bonded team, all highly skilled singers, dancers and comedians. On opening night I found myself watching the Dubbo Housewife the most, maybe because this character has the most change to go through, from inhibited mouse to shaking all over, but also because Lee communicated so directly with the audience in every scene. Gillmer, I thought, was the most versatile singer. Her Fever was imbued with deeply felt hot flushes. It was great comedy, yet sung with a strength reminiscent of the original Peggy Lee.
Being of a certain age myself, audio quality can be an issue. Volume was no problem. Perhaps there was more than strictly necessary in the relatively small Playhouse. But I find the use of face-microphones a bit disconcerting, because the sound comes down from somewhere on high instead of from the mouths of the actors. These mics have become the norm, but I think a well-mixed array of directed shotgun mics, especially with such good singers in this theatre, can produce realistic stereo and make the sound warmer.
I also think the show lacks a strong story-line, making it basically a song-and-dance show rather than a traditional musical. After the celebration, worthy though that is, and the excellent comic performances, I’m left feeling a bit distant without a gutsy story to remember and reflect on. But maybe, that’s entertainment, and the show should certainly go on.
©Frank McKone, Canberra
Tuesday, 19 February 2008
Friday, 15 February 2008
2008: Face Value by Australian Theatre of the Deaf
Face Value by Australian Theatre of the Deaf. National Multicultural Festival at The Street Theatre, February 15 and 16.
Face Value is an engaging humorous theatre-in-education show about prejudice, focussing on relationships between “hearies” and “deafies”.
Members of the audience participate, being invited to turn around signs such as “Stereotype” or “Archetype”. On the reverse of the stereotypes are situations like driving, on the internet, in class, diving, in a nightclub, ignorance at high school. The three performers act out two scenes for each heading, one as hearies and one as deafies. Archetypes have names of successful deaf people on the reverse. An audience member is invited on stage to take the podium as if being filmed and reads an information sheet about heroic people.
The show begins with a set of pictures:
Which is the blind person? Which is the Muslim person? And finally, which is the deaf person? The fact that deaf people are not obvious is the source of much of the difficulty they face with hearing people, demonstrated in the acted out scenes. Sample scenes are performed first, showing the frustrations and aggressiveness of hearies. At the end, after the message has been presented in the stereotype scenes, the same sample scenes are shown with sensible hearies who understand that being deaf does not mean being stupid or deliberately obstructive.
The young performers, Bowyn, Michael and Bethany, were expert in mime and communicating with the audience. A sense of fun combined with neatly designed set and props makes an hour seem short, and the message comes through clearly.
I would recommend AToD very highly for schools or perhaps teenage clubs. Details:
Years: 7—12
Duration: 50 minutes + Q & A
Cost: $5.00 per student
Minimum Cost: $600.00 per show (Fees for non school shows by negotiation).
Max. Audience: 300
Teachers’ Kit: Comprehensive kit with activities, information about deaf issues and the issue of prejudice behind the title Face Value.
Requirements: Area 6m x 6m, power outlet, 45 minute set up time
http://www.ozdeaftheatre.com/school/highschool.htm
©Frank McKone, Canberra
Face Value is an engaging humorous theatre-in-education show about prejudice, focussing on relationships between “hearies” and “deafies”.
Members of the audience participate, being invited to turn around signs such as “Stereotype” or “Archetype”. On the reverse of the stereotypes are situations like driving, on the internet, in class, diving, in a nightclub, ignorance at high school. The three performers act out two scenes for each heading, one as hearies and one as deafies. Archetypes have names of successful deaf people on the reverse. An audience member is invited on stage to take the podium as if being filmed and reads an information sheet about heroic people.
The show begins with a set of pictures:
Which is the blind person? Which is the Muslim person? And finally, which is the deaf person? The fact that deaf people are not obvious is the source of much of the difficulty they face with hearing people, demonstrated in the acted out scenes. Sample scenes are performed first, showing the frustrations and aggressiveness of hearies. At the end, after the message has been presented in the stereotype scenes, the same sample scenes are shown with sensible hearies who understand that being deaf does not mean being stupid or deliberately obstructive.
The young performers, Bowyn, Michael and Bethany, were expert in mime and communicating with the audience. A sense of fun combined with neatly designed set and props makes an hour seem short, and the message comes through clearly.
I would recommend AToD very highly for schools or perhaps teenage clubs. Details:
Years: 7—12
Duration: 50 minutes + Q & A
Cost: $5.00 per student
Minimum Cost: $600.00 per show (Fees for non school shows by negotiation).
Max. Audience: 300
Teachers’ Kit: Comprehensive kit with activities, information about deaf issues and the issue of prejudice behind the title Face Value.
Requirements: Area 6m x 6m, power outlet, 45 minute set up time
http://www.ozdeaftheatre.com/school/highschool.htm
©Frank McKone, Canberra
Wednesday, 13 February 2008
2008: We Don’t Need Another Euro by Shortis & Simpson
We Don’t Need Another Euro by Shortis & Simpson at Teatro Vivaldi. Wednesday February 13, Friday 15 and Saturday 16 at 7pm for 3 course dinner and show; Saturday February 16 at 2pm for show and high tea. Bookings 6257 2718.
John Shortis and Moya Simpson are icons of Canberra culture, and ditto for dinner at Teatro Vivaldi. This is an enjoyable night out aurally, visually, multiculturally and degustationally. That’s French for wine tasting (ask for the shiraz from Young), but my dictionary says “wine tasting etc”. Vivaldi’s Pacific nouveau cuisine was a lot more than etc and ought not to be missed. High tea on Saturday could be your high point of the week.
Talking of high points, I have to say Moya couldn’t quite match the piercing quality of Cilla Black, which was probably just as well in a small venue. But she captured Judith Durham in The Carnival is Over just right. If you are wondering what happened to the Shortis & Simpson political commentary, just relax. We Don’t Need Another Euro is a whimsical humorous history of European songs which became popular worldwide. You will be surprised, very surprised, at the origin of the Muppets singing Mahna Mahna, which you will enjoy singing yourself while watching Moya recreate a scene from an Italian film set in a Swedish sauna.
Two other high points are the inclusion in the show of special guests. Canbelto a cappella singers joined in for a wonderfully rhythmic and harmonic rendition of the eastern Mediterranean song which became the Australian surfing anthem Bombora. Louise Page, singing the original 17th Century Plaisir d’Amour, was just stunning, and what a beautiful contrast to Simpson’s Elvis Presley singing Can’t Help Falling in Love.
Simpson’s voice seems to me to range more widely as the years go on. Shortis’s research required her to sing in so many languages she became a feature of the Multicultural Festival in her own right. Her comic timing was just right, yet I think a highlight for me, immediately after a frantic New Yorker translating from the original French, was a genuinely affecting performance of Autumn Leaves, in Johnny Mercer’s English and the French of Jacques Prévert.
There’s far more I could tell you, but it would be better to see the show, and enjoy the meal, for yourself.
©Frank McKone, Canberra
John Shortis and Moya Simpson are icons of Canberra culture, and ditto for dinner at Teatro Vivaldi. This is an enjoyable night out aurally, visually, multiculturally and degustationally. That’s French for wine tasting (ask for the shiraz from Young), but my dictionary says “wine tasting etc”. Vivaldi’s Pacific nouveau cuisine was a lot more than etc and ought not to be missed. High tea on Saturday could be your high point of the week.
Talking of high points, I have to say Moya couldn’t quite match the piercing quality of Cilla Black, which was probably just as well in a small venue. But she captured Judith Durham in The Carnival is Over just right. If you are wondering what happened to the Shortis & Simpson political commentary, just relax. We Don’t Need Another Euro is a whimsical humorous history of European songs which became popular worldwide. You will be surprised, very surprised, at the origin of the Muppets singing Mahna Mahna, which you will enjoy singing yourself while watching Moya recreate a scene from an Italian film set in a Swedish sauna.
Two other high points are the inclusion in the show of special guests. Canbelto a cappella singers joined in for a wonderfully rhythmic and harmonic rendition of the eastern Mediterranean song which became the Australian surfing anthem Bombora. Louise Page, singing the original 17th Century Plaisir d’Amour, was just stunning, and what a beautiful contrast to Simpson’s Elvis Presley singing Can’t Help Falling in Love.
Simpson’s voice seems to me to range more widely as the years go on. Shortis’s research required her to sing in so many languages she became a feature of the Multicultural Festival in her own right. Her comic timing was just right, yet I think a highlight for me, immediately after a frantic New Yorker translating from the original French, was a genuinely affecting performance of Autumn Leaves, in Johnny Mercer’s English and the French of Jacques Prévert.
There’s far more I could tell you, but it would be better to see the show, and enjoy the meal, for yourself.
©Frank McKone, Canberra
Tuesday, 12 February 2008
2008: The Curse of the Dying Swan by Erika Schneider and Cristine de Mello
The Curse of the Dying Swan. Cristina de Mello Dance Co in the National Multicultural Festival. Written, choreographed and performed by Erika Schneider and Cristine de Mello. Courtyard Theatre, February 12 and 13.
This is a 40 minute piece of apparently naïf dance/narrative, but quite poignant.
It seems to be autobiographical, with a story of the dancers having given up their training 11 years ago. Yet we are left then having to decide if the nice but not perfect ballet work is really the result of 1. not having performed for so long, or 2. because they gave up training when they realised that they were never going to get up to the standard required to dance the dying swan (and haven’t), or 3. because the whole thing is a fiction in which these characters have never become the dancers they once hoped to be.
Reasons 1. and 2. would be really naïve, but brave. And rather sad. How would you feel if you had trained for something like dance from the age of five, come to love doing it, but at fifteen knew that you would never make it to the top. It is risky to tell the story and show it through dance, and we in the audience can sympathise with the dancers’ feelings.
Reason 3. makes the story and the dance work seem disingenuous. We get the idea, but the sense of failure and the feeling of sadness and loss is weakened. This is because when they speak, using their own names and seeming to tell their own stories, we can’t be sure of our ground. In this case how do we know that Cristina and Erika are top-class dancers performing “Cristina” and “Erika” who are less than top-class dancers, when they don’t display top-class technique?
I’m going to plump for Reasons 1. and 2. because I preferred to feel sympathetic and a bit sorry for them, rather than worry about whether I had been cleverly fooled. Perhaps I’m rather naïve, but I feel happier this way.
©Frank McKone, Canberra
This is a 40 minute piece of apparently naïf dance/narrative, but quite poignant.
It seems to be autobiographical, with a story of the dancers having given up their training 11 years ago. Yet we are left then having to decide if the nice but not perfect ballet work is really the result of 1. not having performed for so long, or 2. because they gave up training when they realised that they were never going to get up to the standard required to dance the dying swan (and haven’t), or 3. because the whole thing is a fiction in which these characters have never become the dancers they once hoped to be.
Reasons 1. and 2. would be really naïve, but brave. And rather sad. How would you feel if you had trained for something like dance from the age of five, come to love doing it, but at fifteen knew that you would never make it to the top. It is risky to tell the story and show it through dance, and we in the audience can sympathise with the dancers’ feelings.
Reason 3. makes the story and the dance work seem disingenuous. We get the idea, but the sense of failure and the feeling of sadness and loss is weakened. This is because when they speak, using their own names and seeming to tell their own stories, we can’t be sure of our ground. In this case how do we know that Cristina and Erika are top-class dancers performing “Cristina” and “Erika” who are less than top-class dancers, when they don’t display top-class technique?
I’m going to plump for Reasons 1. and 2. because I preferred to feel sympathetic and a bit sorry for them, rather than worry about whether I had been cleverly fooled. Perhaps I’m rather naïve, but I feel happier this way.
©Frank McKone, Canberra
Saturday, 9 February 2008
2008: A Sustainable Arts Sector: What will it take? by Cathy Hunt and Phyllida Shaw. Platform Papers No 15 - Feature article.
How to Make the Arts Sector Sustainable. Public Forum and launch of Platform Papers No 15: A Sustainable Arts Sector: What will it take? by Cathy Hunt and Phyllida Shaw. Presented by Currency House at Belvoir Street Theatre, Sydney, Saturday February 9 2008.
Chaired by the well-known commentator David Marr, some 100 people from arts policy and arts management took part in a lively and informative forum on Saturday February 9 titled How to Make the Arts Sector Sustainable. The key speakers, at Belvoir Street Theatre, Sydney, were the authors of Currency House Platform Papers No 15: A Sustainable Arts Sector: What will it take?, Cathy Hunt and Phyllida Shaw, followed by John Baylis, chair of the Australia Council Theatre Board.
Hunt and Shaw have spoken at forums in Brisbane and Cairns, and will go on to Melbourne and Perth, raising issues of arts policy and funding mechanisms in Australia in the light of the developments in Britain in recent years.
Shaw, associate lecturer in Arts and Cultural Management at University of Sussex and research associate at the Cities Institute, London Metropolitan University, described the evocatively-titled British sustainability programs Advancement, Stabilisation and Thrive!. The word “sustainability”, she said, should be used in the same sense as environmental sustainability.
Hunt, a founding director of the Brisbane strategic arts consultancy Positive Solutions and a consultant for the post-Thatcher Arts Council of England’s first Stabilisation Program in the early 1990s, was concerned that some politicians take sustainability to mean “viability”. In other words, government support for the arts might not mean ensuring the healthy survival of the species, but feeding just enough until it can be left to hopefully survive on its own.
The use of language became an important issue in the discussion phase of the forum. David Marr in his introduction had talked of politicians “putting their hands into the pockets of the nation” but then giving too little, wrongly spent. Quoting playwright Nick Enright, he complained that arts people spend all their time talking about money in the “ dog-eat-dog world of light opera.”
John Baylis seemed to agree that communication has long been a problem within the Australia Council, that “we gather information, but we do not know how to feed back information to the arts sector”, and explaining that applications from individual organisations are expertly assessed with a high degree of integrity, but “we are not good at seeing how to make connections”. In later discussion, various speakers saw the problem as arts people talking arts-talk, without being willing to learn politician-talk, while few politicians understand arts-talk.
This gave rise to argument. If politicians see everything, including the arts, only in economic terms, should arts advocates submit? Katharine Brisbane, co-founder of the Currency Press, dedicated to publishing Australian performing arts, said artists have allowed themselves to become submissive because of the structure of the funding, while another speaker said her research showed that artists are afraid to be honestly self-critical for fear of losing funding.
The conclusion was that artists should stand up confidently and say that sustainability of the arts is, as Hunt said, “about much more than money”. Shaw’s words were that the arts “make people’s lives richer”. Marr said “art gives people the opportunity to transform their lives”. Others said we should not be negative and depressed about the state of the arts because quality and diversity has in fact improved dramatically since the 1970s in Australia. The arts have an essential social value in their own right, and should therefore be supported by government.
Hunt and Shaw had raised practical issues in their speeches. In Britain the arts is given a small percentage of funds from the National Lottery, but this came about by chance and could not be done in Australia, according to some speakers, when the dependence of governments on gambling revenue is under severe criticism (and even the Sydney Opera House cannot get new lottery money for its refurbishment). In Britain, even small to medium organisations can find funding sources of many kinds including from continental Europe. One group in Brighton had 18 grants and sponsorships, for example. Such a range of sources is not available in Australia, and small to medium organisations especially, and individual artists, are struggling.
The big ticket solution suggested by Shaw is for the Federal government to establish a Future Fund for the Arts as an endowment. This would be a permanent source of arts funding, at arms length from day-to-day political pressure. A good model to begin is the British 2007 McMaster Review: Assessing Excellence in the Arts by Sir Brian McMaster, former Director of the Edinburgh International Festival. The approach should be to invest in innovation for its social and cultural value in its own right, across the range of individual artists, small, medium and large organisations, while profitable work could be expected to return some income to the Future Fund for the Arts.
The forum ended with the announcement, to a standing ovation, of a Lifetime Achievement Award by the Sydney Critics’ Circle to Katharine Brisbane for 40 years’ contribution to the performing arts.
Further information: arts management www.positive-solutions.com.au ; Platform Papers info@currencyhouse.org.au ; McMaster Review http://www.culture.gov.uk/what_we_do/Arts/mcmaster_review.htm
©Frank McKone, Canberra
Chaired by the well-known commentator David Marr, some 100 people from arts policy and arts management took part in a lively and informative forum on Saturday February 9 titled How to Make the Arts Sector Sustainable. The key speakers, at Belvoir Street Theatre, Sydney, were the authors of Currency House Platform Papers No 15: A Sustainable Arts Sector: What will it take?, Cathy Hunt and Phyllida Shaw, followed by John Baylis, chair of the Australia Council Theatre Board.
Hunt and Shaw have spoken at forums in Brisbane and Cairns, and will go on to Melbourne and Perth, raising issues of arts policy and funding mechanisms in Australia in the light of the developments in Britain in recent years.
Shaw, associate lecturer in Arts and Cultural Management at University of Sussex and research associate at the Cities Institute, London Metropolitan University, described the evocatively-titled British sustainability programs Advancement, Stabilisation and Thrive!. The word “sustainability”, she said, should be used in the same sense as environmental sustainability.
Hunt, a founding director of the Brisbane strategic arts consultancy Positive Solutions and a consultant for the post-Thatcher Arts Council of England’s first Stabilisation Program in the early 1990s, was concerned that some politicians take sustainability to mean “viability”. In other words, government support for the arts might not mean ensuring the healthy survival of the species, but feeding just enough until it can be left to hopefully survive on its own.
The use of language became an important issue in the discussion phase of the forum. David Marr in his introduction had talked of politicians “putting their hands into the pockets of the nation” but then giving too little, wrongly spent. Quoting playwright Nick Enright, he complained that arts people spend all their time talking about money in the “ dog-eat-dog world of light opera.”
John Baylis seemed to agree that communication has long been a problem within the Australia Council, that “we gather information, but we do not know how to feed back information to the arts sector”, and explaining that applications from individual organisations are expertly assessed with a high degree of integrity, but “we are not good at seeing how to make connections”. In later discussion, various speakers saw the problem as arts people talking arts-talk, without being willing to learn politician-talk, while few politicians understand arts-talk.
This gave rise to argument. If politicians see everything, including the arts, only in economic terms, should arts advocates submit? Katharine Brisbane, co-founder of the Currency Press, dedicated to publishing Australian performing arts, said artists have allowed themselves to become submissive because of the structure of the funding, while another speaker said her research showed that artists are afraid to be honestly self-critical for fear of losing funding.
The conclusion was that artists should stand up confidently and say that sustainability of the arts is, as Hunt said, “about much more than money”. Shaw’s words were that the arts “make people’s lives richer”. Marr said “art gives people the opportunity to transform their lives”. Others said we should not be negative and depressed about the state of the arts because quality and diversity has in fact improved dramatically since the 1970s in Australia. The arts have an essential social value in their own right, and should therefore be supported by government.
Hunt and Shaw had raised practical issues in their speeches. In Britain the arts is given a small percentage of funds from the National Lottery, but this came about by chance and could not be done in Australia, according to some speakers, when the dependence of governments on gambling revenue is under severe criticism (and even the Sydney Opera House cannot get new lottery money for its refurbishment). In Britain, even small to medium organisations can find funding sources of many kinds including from continental Europe. One group in Brighton had 18 grants and sponsorships, for example. Such a range of sources is not available in Australia, and small to medium organisations especially, and individual artists, are struggling.
The big ticket solution suggested by Shaw is for the Federal government to establish a Future Fund for the Arts as an endowment. This would be a permanent source of arts funding, at arms length from day-to-day political pressure. A good model to begin is the British 2007 McMaster Review: Assessing Excellence in the Arts by Sir Brian McMaster, former Director of the Edinburgh International Festival. The approach should be to invest in innovation for its social and cultural value in its own right, across the range of individual artists, small, medium and large organisations, while profitable work could be expected to return some income to the Future Fund for the Arts.
The forum ended with the announcement, to a standing ovation, of a Lifetime Achievement Award by the Sydney Critics’ Circle to Katharine Brisbane for 40 years’ contribution to the performing arts.
Further information: arts management www.positive-solutions.com.au ; Platform Papers info@currencyhouse.org.au ; McMaster Review http://www.culture.gov.uk/what_we_do/Arts/mcmaster_review.htm
©Frank McKone, Canberra
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)