Back
In this essay, Vijay Padaki examines what makes Theatre tick and the idea of the theatre as a social institution
Vijay Padaki, Academy of Theatre Arts Bangalore Little Theatre
E-mail: vpadaki.theatre@gmail.com Tel. +91-98447 27399
Another World Theatre Day is upon us! Supposedly the birthday of William Shakespeare. I suspect this is not yet known in New Delhi. When it does get to be known we may see the supposed birthday of Veda Vyasa introduced as the correct World Theatre Day. For now, we continue with March 27. It is the day on which I must reach inside and find good thoughts about the theatre. The truth: It is not easy. The theme adopted by International Theatre Institute (UNESCO) in 2022 was “Theatre and a Culture of Peace”. The past couple of years do not have much to show about peace in the world. On the contrary, things have got steadily worse in more and more parts of the world. It is good to confront truth on World Theatre Day.
If the origins of the theatre are in questioning beliefs, assumptions and the status quo, and getting people to wake up, and to seek the ever elusive truth it is not without society accepting the healthy purpose of questioning. What if societies insist on harming themselves? It is getting more and more difficult for the theatre artist. However …. We press on. Wasn’t one of Shakespeare’s greatest lines about being true to oneself?
I am asked to talk about what sort of toolkit has been useful to me as a theatre artist. The truth? I am really not much of an actor, or director, or playwright or designer. I am much more a theatre educator. A theatre organizer. I can speak more truthfully wearing that hat.
What makes an artist in the Theatre tick? I propose that the question cannot be separated from the larger question: What make the Theatre tick? It has been increasingly clear to me for over many years that the healthy and effective artist cannot be separated from the health and effectiveness of the Theatre. Does this need some elaboration? Let us give it a shot.
When BLT restructured and reorganized itself in 2008, preparing for its Diamond Jubilee in 2020-21, we took up an elaborate strategic planning exercise spread over a year. Since I had worn the Management hat over many years the group requested me to lead the StratPlan exercise. The late Shahid Siddiqui, a brilliant actor himself, as well as a senior manager in Bosch, joined me in carrying out the exercise.
We studied the paths taken by numerous theatre organizations all over India and elsewhere in the world. Our association with the Director of Education at the Royal National Theatre in London helped.
Coincidentally, I had an invitation at that time for a lecture-seminar tour of a dozen theatre centres in the US. So, it was an opportunity to study theatre organizations there too. All in all, it was a fairly extensive Strategic Planning exercise.
Many of the findings were educative – and eye openers. For instance, the country-wide survey conducted by the late Bansi Kaul revealed that over 95 percent of theatre groups in the country were amateur. For a variety of reasons peculiar to the Indian context it was not possible to run a truly professional theatre company, with all that the term professional entails. Second, the average life of an amateur theatre group was …. five years. There seemed to be reasons for that. We can return to this point a little later. Third, there were wide chasms and dichotomies that were being maintained – the city-rural divide; the English-vernacular divide; the traditional-contemporary divide. And so on. The long period of colonization certainly impacted both the content and performing context of the theatre. We were taught Shakespeare! These dichotomies might have had historical bases, but they were unhelpful for the larger institution of the Theatre. In fact, the idea of the theatre as a social institution, beyond the performing group, had not received the appreciation it deserved.
Another finding had its amusement value too. It was from theatre organizations in the metros. It was seen that the most successful theatre groups had leaders with two characteristics –
- They were couples – husband and wife leaders
- They were members of colonial legacy clubs
This was probably what made their productions social events, and successful events.
Over time, we saw two major consequences of the combined historical forces:
- The AUDIENCE for theatre arts separated from THE ARTIST
- LIVELIHOODS separated from PERFORMANCE
Not surprisingly, the student placement statistics of schools of drama – as few as they are – were pretty depressing – also noted in the StratPlan exercise.
The bottom line of all the analyses:
While theatre artists in India go to great lengths to enrich the content of a performance technically, we have not done enough to strengthen the social institution of the Theatre that must nurture the artist community. There is clearly a highly inadequate social investment in the theatre. The theatre is kept alive by its ardent practitioners mainly through a great deal of sponsorship support. There are, of course, notable exceptions: small islands of excellence. These are typically those more successful in securing funds. True success of a social institution can only be from sustained community participation and support.
In India, we still have, thankfully, gurukuls for music and dance, where children can be sent at a young age to learn the art and craft, one step at a time, through tried and tested courses of study. Theatre? Where does a child go? Where are the teachers? Do we see now what is meant by the term social investment? How do we get society to genuinely respect pursuit of the theatre?
What does all this mean for the theatre artist? And the theatre organization to which they belong? Very early in the life of Bangalore Little Theatre, one of the Founders, the legendary Scott Tod, shared a mantra with the members for the future of the organization. We had tasted success with four hugely successful early productions, and there was the natural appearance of hair on the upper lip – cat’s whiskers! Tod got us to see the reality of the artist-organization bind. The artist needs the organization, and the organization needs the artist. They must develop together. Too much emphasis on one at the expense of the other …. and both suffer. He should have known, coming from the Little Theatre movement in the UK that had successfully revived British theatre.
Scott Tod talked about some common poisons lurking in the theatre that can kill organizations. We had to be aware of them – and keep them away.
Poison # 1: Founder-centric organizations. Also seen as personality-dependent organizations. The theatre organization then serves that person’s needs, and not the needs of others.
Poison #2: Huge gaps between the competencies of the leaders and all the others. That decides, naturally, who does what in productions.
Poison #3: Star complexes. The group can have a so-called membership, but some members are more equal than others.
Poison # 4: Laxity in finance and accounts. Mismanagement of funds is a natural outcome. Over time the accounts become opaque. The membership does not know what monies came in and how they were spent.
Do we see now why amateur theatre groups have short lives? Bangalore Little Theatre had its highs and lows over the first 50 years. The StratPlan assessment showed that every time we had a low it was because one poison or the other had crept into the system. We had allowed it to happen.
People will see at once that these poisons are not about performance techniques or skills. They are about organization and management. To me, personally, these are directly connected to the task of building – and maintaining – a healthy and effective theatre organization. They lead to principles that are more often than not neglected. To me, personally, these are far more important than sponsorship success and huge budgets for elaborate set designs. It is the reason I have given so many years of my life to organization and management, and developing competencies within the theatre. In our programme for training directors we begin with a listing of skill sets needed in the director. One of them is …. Organization. Not too long ago, Akshara at Ninasam and I jointly organized a workshop for leaders of performing arts organizations to introduce them to the needs of organization and management. In my professional work, too, I have given a lot of emphasis to the needs of management development for Boards of non-profit organizations.
It is clear that a great deal more needs to be done in the Theatre on these lines.
