Theatre
Silbert, Roxana (6 of 8). The legacy of the English Stage Company.
- Add a note
Log in to add a note at the bottom of this page.
- All notes
- My notes
- Hide notes
- Add to playlist
Log in to add this item to one of your personal lists.
- Add to favourites
Log in to add and display this item in your personal list of favourites on the right hand side of this page.
The British Library Board acknowledges the intellectual property rights of those named as contributors to this recording and the rights of those not identified.
Legal and ethical usage »
Type
sound
Duration
01:36:04
Shelf mark
C1316/13
Recording date
2010-04-19, 2010-06-24, 2010-07-20, 2010-12-01, 2010-12-14, 2012-06-06, 2012-07-12
Interviewees
Silbert, Roxana, 1966- (speaker, female)
Interviewers
Devine, Harriet (speaker, female)
Abstract
Part 6: [Session five: 14 December 2010] RS Christmas plans – spending it with parents in Norwich, LS flying from USA. Well-defined routine described. Did not celebrate Christmas until RS went to school because father [MS] was Jewish. Decorations, not church. Often invite recently divorced or bereaved people. Anxiety that it’s too much for mother [YS], MS still having chemo, house very cold. Progress of cancer: MS diagnosed in August. Open discussion in the house. MS sorting out will. Uncle diagnosed in same week, but untreatable, died two weeks after diagnosis. MS devastated, lost fighting spirit. Account of phone call to bereaved aunt and cousins, un-selfconscious response. RS had to learn to restrain herself. YS brilliant in a crisis, well prepared, looks after MS, but dynamic in relationship changed. YS no idea how to cope alone, a bit lost and terrified he will go first, has never lived alone. [13:09]. RS’s start at the RCT. Literary Manager Robin Hooper. Joined year Stephen Daldry [SD] joined RCT, but employed by Max Stafford Clark [MSC]; interviewed by Lisa Makin, casting director, and Carl Miller; second interview by MSC. One memorable question: did RS think RCT should be looking for international writers. RS’s response – look within own community for stories of people from different places. Not sure why she got the job – had been shortlisted for Regional Theatres Young Directors Scheme, gave a stupid answer. Gratitude to MSC for appointment - theatre you train in marks you – RCT directing style was rigorous, detailed, unsentimental, political, highbrow. Stratford East more about comedy, more audience-friendly. RS loved the rigour and politics – always political, fascinated by detail of human interaction.[21:00] Assisted MSC on revival of Timberlake Wertenbaker [TW]’s “Two Birds Alighting on a Field”. Actioning is in RS’s brain. Theory of actioning: all that’s said must be acted, is never reflective; when looking at a line never look for subtext, just the action – “I VERB you” – must be active. MSC always did this, but it is too cerebral for some actors, can be deadening. For RS it’s a tool of analysis. Actioning a monologue – it’s what you want from the audience. Originates from Stanislavski, taken further by MSC. [26:10] RS’s lack of knowledge of play and writer [TW]. Started at RCT same week as Mary Peate, became best friends. Assisting MSC? Being his eyes and ears, befriend actors, sit beside MSC, do some actioning, do research on TW’s rewrites. MSC took educating his assistants very seriously. MSC very clever, very charming in rehearsal room, a bit spiky out of it. Actors thrived on MSC’s enjoyment – direct but always encouraging, positive, praising. RS did not feel he’d become a friend. Significant moment early on – RS in tiny shared office, opposite press officer, hearing all day to day business in all departments. Everyone doing all their own work, no assistants. MSC came in, was genuinely terrified about what he’d do next. Made RS realise there is no moment when you know “this is it”. Has kept in touch with MSC over the years. His changes since his stroke – becoming softer – was very energetic, but hasn’t changed in essence, still twinkly, naughty, ruthless. [37:09]. RS’s traineeship partly in literary department – a shedload of photocopying – literally cheap labour. Once complained about amount of photocopying – sometimes 8 hours a day. Prepped the meetings, read 4-5 plays a week, learned to talk about plays. Some very clever and experienced people, really formed her mind, more than university. RH very generous about letting RS into meetings – learned a lot by listening and watching. Started to develop projects for the YPT. How to read a play? Must read for potential for performance without a fixed production in your head. If easy to read, it’s because they work well on the page, not the stage, which has large visual element. Must read for what performance can bring or not bring – reading in 3-D, very hard and time-consuming – must read in real time. Meetings quite charged – arguing for a play you love or hate, no waffling. MSC would ask questions to check you had read play closely, could expose you for waffling, must make a good argument. But even experienced people made mistakes, put on plays that didn’t work on stage. Composition of script panel, changes of personnel, need for keeping numbers down. Difference of approach between MSC and SD plus Graham Whybrow [GW], who changed idea of bringing director in at the start – instead, commit to the play and find director later. Caused problems, challenged partnerships. [48:00] Relationship between MSC and SD. RS never assisted SD, but her time at RCT always under his tenure. SD’s ability to give you the feeling RCT was doing extraordinary work. His extraordinary confidence in his own ability – his attitude was, if you can make it happen, do it. Naughty, a rule-breaker, very young (early 30s) but insisted on keeping older women employed at RSC. Completely fearless, abolished hierarchy of production, put Jez Butterworth first play on main stage. Great importance placed on design, making plays theatrical and extraordinary. Brilliant with people, could motivate you for a year in just a few minutes. Utterly charming. Also rethought how you used budgets – was a breath of fresh air – brought in a sound designer, gave him a department. Changed the way people thought about production. Some of his important productions. Didn’t love new plays, but was brilliant at spotting wonderful writing and directing talent – didn’t do his best work on new plays, better on revivals (e.g. “The Kitchen”). Made Upstairs incredibly exciting place, though never quite cracked programming downstairs. MSC left RCT very well off, SD left RCT quite badly off. MSC and SD probably dreaded changeover, but they became very good friends, and MSC stayed on as associate. Some people in production department adapted, some didn’t, looked elsewhere. SD never speaks ill of people, always surprisingly kind though didn’t suffer fools gladly, very loyal to those who’d helped him up. His work went on to a different stratosphere, so little contact with RS – but in Edinburgh Festival show 2009, SD came to see RS’s Traverse show. [1:02:00]. RH leaving, procedure of hiring another literary manager – GW jumped in at recall stage – had been reading for SD – had no theatrical experience at all, became friends with SD through GW going to plays at the Gate. GW’s chequered career – very very clever, acted as outside eye for SD. A brilliant appointment, changed what literary managers were. GW more like a creative producer, spotted gaps in the market (e.g. “East is East”), changed, (with SD), way people thought about working with writers. Passionate about writer and voice in theatre. Broke down hierarchy – you just had to write a great play – found plays through unsolicited scripts, something never ever done before – drove wedge through director/writer relationship – took on role of working with writer on script before it went to the director. Cut umbilical cord between director and writer. Created simple policy of producing plays with newness of subject or form. Made RCT more ruthless in rejecting plays by established, or second-play, writers. Fundamental effect on way RCT worked and was programmed. [1:11:54] How GW worked with writers on their plays. Would read plays very closely, then set up meeting with writer – would ask a lot of questions, get writer to talk, listen intently, make notes, never throw notes away. At the end try to resume what he thought writer was trying to do – but on very profound emotional level. Taking writing very seriously, researching what play was about, why form had been chosen, how it was best explored. Affording respect to young writers as if senior writers. Also programmed play texts, first ever time, via a deal with publisher who would print the text cheaply, sell it as programme. Made texts very readily available, so people could buy it there and then, and it got into libraries and bookshops very quickly. First time it had been done and was done with every play text – one, “Cockroach Who”, publishers wouldn’t do it as too many rude words, so GW did it himself on his computer. Realised some people might never write enough for a whole volume, and was one reason why plays went international – suddenly playwrights started to make a lot of money through international productions. GW had seen a lot of theatre, had read entire backlist of RCT plays, all script reports, all biographies of everyone involved. Likes to immerse self in a new medium, get to know it really well – had done law, journalism, publishing, art. New work not doing well at the time, Upstairs had been closed for 6 months – GW and SD made new plays fashionable. Part of Cool Britannia moment. [1:21:38]. Period of “in-yer-face” theatre – young writers, mostly male apart from Sarah Kane [SK]. MSC had done a lot for women writers, female sensibility had entered mainstream – but SD’s vision was for total theatre, not just words – dance, physical, mask theatres. Failed abysmally – RCT space not friendly to total theatre. Energy was in young men, who had disappeared during feminist period – new generation, brought up by feminist mothers – that’s where focus went. World of plays is vey brutal, but always characters searching for love in brutal world. Young people now find it very old-fashioned – they are plays about love. Not way it’s normally perceived, because much that’s shocking, but evolution of in-yer-face theatre is that language is more sophisticated, less raw, but people are much colder. RS judges by whether she can connect with the people – now people do bad things and are horrible people – outside may be glossier and more polite, inside much nastier. “Penetrator” by Anthony Neilson, first of the genre? Invited in from Finborough Theatre to RCT. Boom boxes under the seats, very loud, made you shake. Big knives, a mad nutter soldier. RS saw at Finborough, found incredibly exciting. Rawness absolutely thrilling, and did incredibly well. SD and GW did what young people are interested in – sex and violence – Tarantino for theatre – a cultural moment, recognised by RCT, allowed to speak on stage. No sense of this as a movement, given academic label later. Mark Ravenhill’s “Shopping and Fucking”, an MSC Out of Joint production, came into RCT, was the turning-point production. Incredibly shocking, anal rape onstage with a knife, caused public hoo ha, marked out a generation. Doesn’t seem shocking now, but was so then. Also allied capitalism and sexuality, very political, a critique of what capitalism does to human beings. People think plays are glorifying violence but in fact a critique of culture that allows these things to happen. SK’s play [“Blasted”] is the same – war makes people do bad things.
Description
Life story interview with Roxana Silbert, artistic director.
Metadata record: