Annex 1
Letter dated 12 November 2001, to Mr Donald
James from Mr Chris Foy, Managing Director, Royal Shakespeare
Company
Your letter of 28 October 2002 has been passed
on to me for reply by the office of HRH The Prince of Wales, and
I thank you for your comments about the RSC's plans for the redevelopment
of its Stratford home as a theatre village for the 21st century.
For the past five years and culminating in our
Feasibility Study, we have been steadily working towards the announcement
of our Redevelopment proposals. Our recommendation is to create
a new waterfront "theatre village", and build a new
landmark Shakespeare playhouse on the riverside site of the current
Royal Shakespeare Theatre. The rebuilt flagship RST will be the
most significant new theatre building of the new century, with
the ambition to be one of the best playhouses for Shakespeare
in the world. We intend the "theatre village" with its
three theatres and RSC Academy, to be a catalyst for superb performance,
for the future development of artists, and for the widest range
of lively interactions with theatre and the RSC all day long.
The decision to replace the existing 1932 building
is a highly complex matter and not a decision we have made lightly—it
has emerged from thorough investigation and wide consultation
over the past six years of preliminary planning and the last nine
months of Feasibility Study. The RSC has taken advice from a team
of specialists comprising, among others, some of the world's finest
directors, actors, architects, theatre designers, architectural
conservationists, engineers, town planners and acousticians. The
RSC has rigorously explored numerous possible options—some
29 scenarios and 15 possible site locations in all—for the
Redevelopment, including the possibilities for imaginative adaptation
of the existing Royal Shakespeare Theatre. The final proposals
represent the best possible combination of ideas, given the multiplicity
of factors and practical constraints that have to be balanced.
During the past nine months we have also been
asking our audiences, local people, artists and critics what they
think of the site. As part of the Feasibility Study, the RSC commissioned
a programme of public consultation, which included surveys and
discussions with our audiences, local residents, tourists and
business people. This process confirmed that it is widely recognised
that the current building simply doesn't work as a theatre. Most
of the audience members, local residents and representatives of
conservation organisations we have taken backstage to look at
the cramped facilities have been surprised and appalled by the
working conditions and inadequacy of the facilities. The Stratford
Society, for example, has described conditions as "an obstacle
course" and "beyond belief".
A number of priorities emerged from all the
groups we consulted. Whether they were teachers, local business
people or core members of the RSC audience, the thing that united
everyone was that the RSC needed a building that worked as a theatre
and mixed use (ie not just for theatregoers, but day-long activity
for everyone), a diverse range of performance spaces, and an integration
with the town, especially in traffic and other transport issues.
But the consultation does not stop here. We will carry on throughout
the process of the Redevelopment talking to people and integrating
their views.
Since it was built in 1932, the existing Royal
Shakespeare Theatre has been regarded as fundamentally flawed:
a two-room theatre which separates the actors and audience, rather
than the one-room space for which Shakespeare wrote. The eminent
theatre historian John Earl has conducted an independent review
which describes the 1932 RST auditorium as: "to all appearances,
a cinema, but less visually exciting, less alive, than any contemporary
picture house by almost any contemporary hack designer."
Leading theatre consultant Iain Mackintosh, meanwhile, has memorably
described it as: "a turkey which put back the cause of Shakespeare
at Stratford for a generation". The current proscenium stage
and auditorium have been much altered in numerous attempts to
bring the audience and actors closer together, but fundamental
problems have never been satisfactorily resolved. For example,
much of the "innovative" theatre technology that first-time
theatre architect Elisabeth Scott introduced was seldom used past
the first season. It remains in the bowels of the theatre—inoperable
but listed—obstructing the work of contemporary directors
and designers.
The UK's Twentieth Century Society, quite understandably
keen to preserve the building given their raison d'etre, concluded
after a recent night in the balcony that an evening in this theatre
is an uncomfortable experience with poor sight-lines. Of course
some theatre critics report their memories of great performances
in the RST—yet they are mostly memories from the best seats
in the house. Unfortunately, the experience for many of the young
people who come to Stratford for the first time, or for those
who cannot afford the most expensive seats, is altogether different.
It is the kind of experience that could easily put someone off
theatre for life.
There is one thing I would particularly like
to stress in these plans. The RSC will continue to perform plays
in Stratford throughout the Redevelopment period. We cannot afford
to stop performing—and neither can the local economy afford
it—so this is an imperative part of the strategy. We will
continue performing Shakespeare and we will continue performing
new and other plays. We can already see our way to maintaining
at least 1,082 seats in performance in two theatres throughout
the transition—but we are continuing to explore whether
we can achieve even more.
There are many changes going on at the moment
at the RSC, but together they make up a very carefully considered
and vital programme of modernisation. We are passionate to ensure
that the RSC has a successful and artistically vibrant future.
That is precisely the reason why the RSC is embarking on such
ambitious change to its activity and theatre spaces. The RSC must
continue to be a leader and a pioneer in the artistic community.
|
