The Daily Times FORUM

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26542, 18 August 1947, Page 4

The Daily Times FORUM

A NATIONAL THEATRE In the second of its surveys of public opinion on matters of current interest, the Daily Times this week presents some of the answers given to the question, “What do you think of the idea of a National Theatre? ” That there is a wide range of opinion soon became clear, and keen enthusiasm rubbed shoulders with disapproval and indifference alike. A Local Producer was completely in favour of setting • up a National Theatre as soon as possible. “How are we going to learn, if we don't see any really good professional shows?” she asked. “Without new ideas we can’t expect to progress,, and most of the visiting companies we see are not of a very high gjmdard." She felt that the National Theatre shoyld. start with a nucleus of overseas professionals, augmented, from time to time, by graduates from schools of dramatic art, which would be vital adjuncts, to any National Theatre - here in New Zealand. A Local Trade Union Secretary was equally enthusiastic. He thought that if the State could assist in promoting musical and dramatic talent, and could at the same time uplift the community culturally, then every trade unionist should be behind the movement. In his opinion, the pursuit of solely materialistic aims had a warping effect on the mind, and in the past many workers had had forced on them the idea that culture was only for the monied class. This, of course, was totally untrue, he concluded, and it •was to be hoped that the establishment of a National Theatre would bring opportunities to all classes to take part in its activities. A City Lawyer, while of the opinion that the formation of a National Theatre was somewhat premature, thought that an academy of dramdtic art would be a step in the right direction. In the meantime, the professional theatre in Auckland, under the management of Mr Kerridge, with Mr Ronald Foort, of England, as producer, should •be givers a fair chance, particularly as this company would probably tour the Dominion. Questioned as to copywright restrictions, he said that a national theatre would enjoy precisely the same privileges as any other professional company. A Farmer, the next to be questioned, said, “No, I don’t think I like the idea much. You see. it’s a • long way to come just to look at a play. I used to like the old vaudeville, though; something bright about that. I suppose farmers would have to help pay for it all. too. The National Orchestra is all right. You can listen , in, if you re not too tired, but a stage play wouldn’t be much good over the air. I don't know what the wife thinks about it, but, no, I don’t think much of. the idea.” Librarian felt that, while the setting up of a .national theatre might meet with opposition from vested interests, particularly in the shape of .theatre difficulties, such a step was, however, preferable to the present position, where we are dependent solely on overseas productions. Further, he said, “I don’t see any hope for an indigenous theatre without a State subsidy. Although in very large places like London or New York a few companies were able to run under their own Steam, nevertheless, I understand that in Britain the only good art comes from subsidised theatres, such as Sadler’s Wells.” He felt that a national theatre should have at least four companies touring the Dominion, and, whereas the purpose of repertory was to discover talent it was the place of a national theatre to use that talent In presenting worthwhile plays. A Business Man with amateur acting experience said: “ It’s a jolly good idea, if an experienced overseas producer is engaged, but I don’t think it is in qufee the same position as the National Orchestra. Most of ; the members of the. orchestra ' havfe ‘ made music their life-work, and Tn the orchestra they are continuing with it. While there are dozens who would be capable of acting in a national theatre, there are few, if any, professional actors or actresses in New Zealand. I doubt whether any business man would give up his job for one that might, or might not, be permanent.” “ Oh, dear,” said Mother of Three when asked about it, “ I saw the headlines, and meant to read the rest, but didn’t have time. I’m afraid I wouldn’t have time to bother about a national theatre, either: it’s so hard to find any- • one to mind the children at night, and. if I do go out, it’s Cubs, or a school concert, or something like that.” A Member of the National Party thought, to begin with, that such a project was a long way down the scale of necessary things in order of their importance, but, apai* from this, the question of a national theatre was not as all as simple as it looked. Fear of its being used as a mouthpiece for political propaganda, whatever _ the carty in power, was the final basis of his objection to any Government-spon-sored theatre. He felt, however, that high-class professional shows ought to be encouraged. These, of course, would be quite distinct from any Government scheme. If, in the future, some sort of national theatre became possible without Government patronage, then, any such plan would do well to avoid centralisation in an already overloaded Wellington, and provision should be made for at least four theatre, one in each of the main centres. As a parting shot he suggested that the broadcasting of Parliament might be enough like a national theatre, without any other.