AMATEUR OR NOT?

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 152, 24 December 1926, Page 13

AMATEUR OR NOT?

REPERTORY CRISIS

MELBOURNE, AND SYDNEY

SOCIETIES

J. N. TAIT-M'MAHON PROPOSAL.

1 In some respects the course of repertory societies is like the course of true love.- A proposal that Messrs. J. and N. Tait should take over and reorganiso tho Melbourne Repertory under Mr. Gregan M'Mahon's direction seems to have aroused in Melbourne rather mixed feelings.

"Professional Actor" writes in the "Argus" regarding the boast that the Melbourne1 Repertory has "received popular support," "tho fact is indisputable that all these so-called repertory societies play- to a very limited section of the public, their audiences mostly consisting of personal friends and a few people hungering for good plays, who will tolerate amateur performances rather than not sco the play at all. The big public, the public that keeps a pjay going for more than six nights, will never accept tho amateur with his crudities and his general unpreparedness. It is that public which should now be catered for. It is understood that Mr. M'Mahon's endeavour has always been to put the movement on a professional basis. The time seems to be ripe to do so. Mr. M'Mahon would be well advised to remove himself from any further association with tho amateur stage, and seek a more artistically satisfying field.

... Why should Mr. M'Mahon, one of our ablest producers, wasto his time in coaching inexperienced players? Why, again, should tho repertory play, with, its fine opportunities for acting, be left the close preserves of amateurs ? " DEPENDENCE ON SUBSCRIBERS. The other side —that is, opposition to the Tait-M'Mahon proposal—is championed by "Eepertoriau," who complains that tho M'Mahon producership would mean one-man rule. "Repertorian" also opposes "the main object of the proposed Change," which "is to amalgamate the Sydney and Melbourne repertory theatres under one control, that of Mr. Gregan M'Mahon, subject to tho direction of Messrs. J. and N. Tait. It is believed that the success of the Sydney Repertory Theatre has yet to be proved. It 3 critics urge .that it plays to a limited body of subscribers, and that it has failed to reach the general public. The Melbourne theatre is not dependent on its subscribers, and has received popular support. The performances of the Melbourne Repertory Theatre have more than paid expenses, and the hope had been entertained that, with increasing popularity and. assistance from representative men in tho community, a 'little theatre' was a possibility within the near future. It is perhaps unnecessary to emphasise tho difference between a 'little theatre,' if one. is erected, by a commercial management for the purpose of giving intimate productions of commercial comedies, including repertory plays, aud a 'little theatre,'such as the Repertory Society has in mind, for the purpose of presenting repertory plays under its own direction, which, at the same time, would afford facilities to all the musical and amateur dramatic societies of Melbourne for their performances." .'With regard to .Mr. M'Mahon's producership, f 'Repertorlan" writes: "As production means close attention to rehearsals from the beginning until the curtain risea on the performance, it is difficult to see how one man can givo the necessary attention to performances which will be given in two or three weeks of eiach other in citie3 so widely separated, as Melbourne and Sydney. The proposal is to give fivo seasons in each city during nine months of the year. Tie Melbourne theatro has in the past given six seasons annually. The opportunity for seeing repertory plays will, therefore, be reduced rather than increased. The prices of admittance charged in Sydney are higher than the Melbourne prices. The Melbourne Repertory Theatre, even with limited funds at its command, has already embarked on experiments in sceaery, having had a scene made from designs prepared by one of the repertory theatres in Anievioa." ' TJNLITERARY COMEDIES. THAT DRAW. The above missive caused "True Repertorian" to hit back, in the interest* of the Tait-M'Mahon proposal: — "It is humbug for 'Repertorian' to say that close attention is required to production for many weeks. The most successful of the last six plays have been cast and rehearsed in three to four weeks, and this under amateur producers. Given three weeks under a professional producer, with proper accessories, and the resources of a metropolitan theatre, and with proper discipline, much more can be accomplished. The seasons'of the Melbourne Repertory Society for .1927 are to be limited to four or fivd nights each, instead of the present six, so that we shall see less repertory plays under the prosent society than under Messrs. J. and N. Tait. Our public has not grown so wo havo wow reverted to seasons of four night 3 after several attempts at seasons of seven nights. This is due to our lack of facilities for publicity, etc. The Repertory theatre has not made money this year to date,, and we have had to put up with light comedy without literary interest in an endeavour to win back the public, such fine plays a3 'The Devil's Diseiplc' and 'He Who Gets Slapped' having failed to attract. Under Messrs. J. and N. Tait the monetary risk will be less, and plays of a good'type may be staged. A society founded by the generosity of a few is worthless beside the society founded on the support of a subscribing public. Messrs. J. and N. Tait's scheme will not come to fruition unless 500 to 700 subscribers are found. Under Mr. M'Mahon wo should havo a single controlling force supported by all ■ tho equipment of the professional theatro, . parts allotted to actors of ability, and more or less freedom from financial worry."

A fourth correspondent, "Member," makes the comparison look a little more favourable to Sydney. Ho writes that amalgamation of the twain under one control is not the main object. "The proposal for. the transfer arose from internal troubles, chief among which were dissatisfaction among the players with the present arrangements for productions, jealousies among tho producers, ono of whom resigned as a result of bickerings, and a parlous financial condition. This unsatisfactory state of affairs resulted in tho conference with Messrs. J. and N. Tait's representative. I£ affairs at present are as satisfactory as 'Bepcrtorian' states, why should tho executive of tho society unanimously, except for tho two producers, ever have entertained the suggestion for the transfer in tho first place and v.-hy is it that 'Kopertorian' finds it necessary to fight against it? Things were not right with "the Repertory Society, and those who had its interests at heart thought tho co-oporation with Messrs. J. and N. Tait desirable. It

is significant that at times tho membership in Sydney has exceeded 1000 and averages about 700. Melbourne has less than 300 members. Tho Sydney Repertory Theatro has reached the genera' public to a degree never attained here. 'The Dover Road' and Shaw's 'Getting Married' each ran for many weoks at the Palace Theatro, Sydney, to packed houses, a success the Melbourne Repertory has never been ablo to achivo."