APPENDIX 31
Memorandum submitted by Mr John Maples
MP
ROYAL SHAKESPEARE COMPANY
Your Committee has recently taken evidence from
the RSC as part of its current inquiry into major arts redevelopment
projects. I am the MP for Stratford-on-Avon where the RSC is based
and I should be grateful if you would treat this letter as a written
submission to your Committee.
The RSC is one of our two major national drama
companies and the only one based outside London. It attracts visitors
from all over the United Kingdom and from around the world. It
is an important part of the region's (and the nation's) tourist
industry, which employs a great many people. It is the only company
dedicated to performing Shakespeare and is an internationally
renowned centre for theatrical excellence. It has helped to train
many of our leading actors and will continue to do so. The RSC
performs in London and tours the country with regular performances
in provincial cities. Any grant to the RSC benefits the whole
country and not just the Stratford area.
The RSC's physical facilities are inadequate
and unless they are redeveloped soon the company will have great
difficulty maintaining its reputation and in continuing to attract
audiences. The main theatre is unsatisfactory for actors and audiences
alike. It was built in the 1930s and substantially resembles cinemas
of the period. As a result the stage and backstage areas are inadequate
and many of the seats are too far from the stage with poor sightlines.
The space is also inflexible. The RSC will have given you details,
but the company clearly needs a new main theatre.
The RSC has been studying its options in depth
and at length for a long time and has come to the conclusion that
the right place for its new theatre is on the site of the present
main theatre. The plans also include the improvement of the backstage
facilities at the beautiful Swan theatre, which will be fully
preserved, and the rebuilding of The Other Place as a much larger
theatre.
The current theatre has three listed features,
all in the lobby area and all of which could if necessary be reconstructed
elsewhere. While there is some understandable nostalgia for the
building, I do not believe there is any architectural reason for
preserving it and its listed status should not be allowed to stand
in the way of redevelopment.
I believe that the RSC's proposals should be
encouraged by your Committee. They are not just in the interests
of Stratford, but are of national importance in maintaining in
Britain one of the world's leading theatrical companies with all
the benefits to our economic and cultural life that flow from
that. Without the proposed redevelopment, those benefits will
be in danger from better equipped competitors and it would not
just be Stratford or even the West Midlands that suffer, but the
whole country.
The substantial lottery grant will have to be
matched by other fundraising. This is exactly the sort of project
which the lottery was intended to fund, and if dramatic arts are
to receive public money then the RSC must surely be at the top
of the list.
I hope that your Committee will give its wholehearted
support and encouragement to the RSC, as I have done, in its imaginative
and necessary redevelopment plans. Indeed, if the RSC had no such
plans then I believe the Committee would be wholly justified in
criticising them in the strongest terms for forsaking their role
and condemning themselves to decline. They have met the challenges
that face them in an appropriately ambitious and practical manner
and deserve the support of all of us who are dedicated to the
future of high quality drama in Britain.
10 January 2002
| 
