In an attempt to consolidate the online presence that I have haphazardly scattered across the nets and tubes since last I had a website, I'm going to republish a few things from time to time.  The following is an article I wrote for Dundee University's Review of The Arts (DURA) in the wake of the closure of the Byre Theatre of St. Andrews.  In the time since, the theatre's fate lies in the hands of St. Andrews University, which I will no doubt return to in another post. 

CLOSING THE BYRE THEATRE
1st February 2013

The dust is setting around The Byre Theatre after its sudden liquidation last month, and a passionate and dedicated community in St Andrews can, at the very least, congratulate themselves on bringing the battle for its future to national attention.

With The Byre about to enter its 80th year, the livelihoods of its tireless workforce had seemed largely secure: a move to join Fife Cultural Trust  (FCT), which would align The Byre’s endeavours with those of other Fife cultural venues, promised a future for a venue which had suffered in the recent and significant cutbacks by Creative Scotland and by Fife Council. However, once the extent of The Byre’s swelling debts became apparent, FCT backed down from the agreement because of the fear that taking on such debt might spell disaster for the Trust itself.

Whilst the worth of the theatre was apparent to Fife Council, they apparently felt unable to maintain the level of funding afforded to The Byre given the recent years of recession and financial restraints Nevertheless, their support had indicated their appreciation for the venue’s ability to host international events, most notably the poetry festival, “StAnza”, and to present the facets of St Andrews culture that exist beyond golf.

Significant changes to Arts sector funding by Creative Scotland provoked wide-spread condemnation of the organisation’s shoddy treatment to so many  of Scotland’s promising talents. The removal of flexible two-year funding, which The Byre Theatre had previously enjoyed, to be replaced by single-project based funding, meant a shift from “modest security to complete insecurity“ for many organisations, thereby thwarting the ability of companies to consider long-term strategies. The anger over the harm done to Scottish Arts eventually led to the resignation of Andrew Dixon and Venu Dhupa, two senior members of the funding body.

The renewed interest being shown by Creative Scotland, in helping salvage the theatre from its closure, has sparked anger and disillusionment amongst former employees of The Byre, as the previous relationship between the organisations is seemingly ‘swept under the carpet’. As the theatre’s situation is pushed to the forefront of a very political argument, it must be remembered that The Byre is but one of the many victims of the funding shake-up, and that while St Andrews dreams of seeing its phoenix rise, this renewed collaboration must only be a forward move.

The Byre Theatre

There's no right or wrong way to 'get' art of any sort, sure.  Sometimes though, someone will explain their reaction to a particular piece, and I wish that I could have even a hint of the intensity of what they felt.  It's always intriguing, if nothing else, but there are occasions where I'll struggle to feel excitement in the way so many around me seem to experience. I wonder how integral the environment we enjoy it in affects that work. Radio and music, and television to some degree, need to expect a versatility in where it's going to be received. To see something live, whether in a gallery or the dark room of the cinema or auditorium, that is an inherent quality of the respective art form.

After hearing a friend discuss Guthrie's 'A Highland Funeral', a painting which provoked a gut-wrenching sorrow and an near-phobic reaction, I was stunned.  Fascintated and touched, I was nonetheless disappointed that I have yet to experience a static piece of art that could incur such a visceral reaction.

A Highland Funeral, James Guthrie 1882

It's been about twenty minutes of staring at this picture, and though it's interesting to speculate what history this might have stirred in my pal, I don't think I have a relating personal experience to bring to the table.



I'm reminded of a discussion with Mark Brown, theatre critic for the Sunday Herald and above all, a champion of Howard Barker.  I was fortunate to pick his brains several times while studying at Dundee, and I'll admit that I found his solid opinionating entirely infectious.  Sometimes my stubborness surprises even myself.  I rallied the point that theatre was a force for social catharsis, and the experience as an audience member was a unifying one, that despite our unique standpoints, a story will connect with us through themes that are universally recogniseable. The elements that individuate us is a mimetic reaction - learning through the performance of example - which I believe is unachievable without striving to show how that somebody on stage could be, well, anybody.

It's not necessarily the best idea to take sides with Aristotle when you're with a Barker enthusiast; for an example, you will want to read his twenty-one asides on theatre criticism.  My favourites being:

1. The demand that the “critic reflect the collective view of the audience” nauseates.
2. When he asserts the “equal value” of all genres, the critic slits his own throat with a pen.

The concept of individual experience, particularly in contemporary art, troubles me greatly.  With a distinct bias for the auditorium, and a thrill for a well-directed site-specific experience, I very often feel lost and abandoned by the bright expanse of the art gallery.  I want to be taken by the hand, to understand how to experience the exhibit to its fullest... Yet the gallery's intention is to be defiantly individuating.

However, I am prone to appreciating a guiding path, and I have unfortunately found myself effectively queuing my way through an exhibit, ticking each bit off as I go.  I crave a narrative; I am thrilled by abstract narratives that, somehow, unconciously drive me through the experience.  When art forces me to make up my own mind, I am inevitably locked into uncertainty.  Typing this, I am struck by my own insecurity, that perhaps if I simply assume I empathise with the absent artist entirely, I might respond more completely.

Killing Time, Graham Eatough/ Graham Fagan, DCA 2006

Does this insinuate that I'm 'getting' it wrong?  It's certainly my loss that I don't make an emotional connection, but that's not to say that I won't.  Ultimately, I'm misunderstanding two things.  Firstly, there are significantly fewer examples to experience out there, and in a space that forces unique connections, I perhaps just haven't explored fine or contemporary art far enough. Secondly though, I am looking at it the wrong way; specifically, I want these installations to be a set design, and I'm waiting for something to happen.  I'm frankly disturbed by the static, unsure of how long I should 'appreciate' something before the reaction is complete.  I wish I had seen Fagan & Eatough's Killing Time at Dundee Contemporary Arts - that might have been an experience that cruelly tapped into my misconception, leaving me to wait and see like a character in my own personal Waiting for Godot. That would provoke a phobic reaction...

I'm very glad that I have either successfully coerced or cunningly misled you here, like the fly to the honey trap.  I crave the affirmation and relish the debate, and so it's good that you are here to provide that - right?  At the very least, I need someone to keep track of this thread when the inevitable tangle of consciousness unravels, or I'm likely to repeat myself myself.

The plan is this: an intriguing lack of cohesion and lingering confusion will capture your puzzled attention while I enthusiastically rant about either my own projects or the wonderful things I enjoy to procrastinate through the former.

Right, good, solid.  I do love a first post; so much promise and (relative) direction!  Empowerment!

I'm thinking I'll be talking about theatre, gaming, and radio most frequently, and have all the best intentions of talking about oor wee arts sector in general, but it's almost a certainty that Game of Thrones and Doctor Who will creep in steadily too.  It's all part of a personal project to cultivate creativity from those elements I enjoy so much, but too often passively so; bear with me, ken?

Don't get me wrong, I've spent my career so far working in and around theatre, and have experienced some fascinating events in Scottish theatre, both exciting and depressing (certainly, I doubt I'd be so interested if I hadn't).  Perhaps I would have been satisfied leaving these conversations with my colleagues and friends (and jings, we do go on sometimes).  However, a year ago I had the blissful opportunity to dive deep into studying that whole shebang, and discovered I had more capacity for investment than I'd realised.  That, and an apparent arrogance that my opinion is worth your time, clearly. 

I can feel the urge to make an obscure Doctor Who reference, and sign off as David Agnew, but I'll hold back for now.  Here's Peter Capaldi explaining surrealism.