Why we need a national theatre based in Canberra

Black Watch, National Theatre of Scotland: Is this a model for Australia?

What steps can be taken to strengthen Australia’s com­mitment to its national drama? My argument would be to establish a national theatre along the lines of the National Theatre of Scotland (NTS), one that is non-building-based and focused on the commissioning, development and production of new stage work through the existing theatre company network.

For those unfamiliar with the NTS model it can be briefly sketched. It was founded in 2006, after Scotland devolved from England and established its own Parliament. The new nationally-conscious government was firmly focused on Scottish culture, both as a symbol of political change and an important contributor to the country’s economy. Vicky Featherstone was selected as the inaugural artistic director. A one-time literary associate at the Bush Theatre and ex-artistic director of Paines Plough, Featherstone had made a significant con­tribution to contemporary drama through her support of writers such as Mark Ravenhill, Sarah Kane, David Greig, Gregory Burke and Linda McLean. She had also worked in television and had a strong commitment to an inclusive, diverse, collaborative creative culture.

This was not a vision in which the playwright was suddenly back in charge. It was a harnessing of talents in a balanced approach that allowed multiple practices to thrive, across a range of different art forms. Nor was Featherstone a born-again nationalist. The NTS, she said, ‘was not, nor should ever be, a jingoistic, reductive stab at defining a nation’s identity through theatre. It should not, in fact, be an attempt to define anything. Instead it is the chance to throw open the doors of possi­bility, to encourage boldness and for audiences to benefit from where that can take us.’ The first show, Home, was a series of thematically-linked, co-productions that opened at different Scottish towns on the same night. Its best-known work is Gregory Burke’s Black Watch, another co-production, and it has also been active in education and children’s theatre.

The NTS is an example of a national theatre that isn’t a cultural edifice but a strategic operating device, one that seeks to enhance the existing theatre sector rather than supplant it. Though our state companies were founded as expressions of the same idea of theatre (British repertory), each has acquired a distinct regional identity and programming sensibility. This is even truer of second-tier companies. Calls for their wholesale reform or replacement ignore the degree to which they are hard-wired into our theatrical consciousness. A National Theatre of Australia (NTA) would add capac­ity while leaving this organisational capital intact. It would collaborate with existing companies to identify shared goals and better achieve them. It would produce locally but think nationally, using its position to act as a super-hub for program development across the industry. What would distinguish it is the self-consciousness of its political and artistic mission: its awareness of a need to make an effort on Australia’s behalf to achieve the creative autonomy our status as a nation and our history as a people demand.

An NTA could base itself in Canberra and be feder­ally funded, thereby avoiding the perception of Sydney/ Melbourne bias and the fractious politicking that comes with variable state support. It would unite three specialisms represented by three kinds of organisation. It would be partly a playwright development agency, like PlayWriting Australia or Playworks. It would be partly a producing entity, like the state theatres and second-tier companies. And it would be partly a tour­ing intelligence, like Performing Lines and Playing Australia. Again it would not supplant these bodies but add capacity as a partner organisation drawing on their separate spheres of operation.

An NTA has been a long time coming. Despite the challenges the size of Australia presents, and the tricky issue of establishment costs and resourcing—though it could be partly based on an endowment model and operate on an investment basis as well as a subsidy one—a national theatre is the logical way of enabling Australian theatre’s enhanced existence. It is not a magic bullet but a new line of attack, one that is flexible, non-threatening and effective. Its artistic brief, like all artistic briefs, would change over time. But right now its priorities should be the development and production of Australian playwrights, especially younger ones, and the revival and reinterpretation of Australian classic drama. These are the two sins of omission of our current theatre scene, and they well suit the scope of an NTA.

This is an extract from Julian Meyrick’s Platform Paper, The Retreat of our National Drama, published by Currency House and launched today in Adelaide.

 Julian Meyrick is Professor of Creative Arts at Flinders University, Artistic Counsel for the State Theatre Company of South Australia and an Honorary Associate at La Trobe University. From 1989 to 1998 he was Artistic Director of kickhouse theatre and from 2002 to 2007 Associate Director and Literary Advisor at Melbourne Theatre Company.