Why keep the Redgrave Theatre?

A Seminar held at Brightwell Bowling Club, Farnham, on Friday 14 May 2004

The seminar was held in front of an exhibition displaying the Crest Nicholson plans, a history of the Redgrave Theatre and an outline of its possible future viability. The exhibition had been prepared by Anne and David Cooper.

The notes that follow are a record of what was said at the seminar.  Simultaneous typing rather than shorthand was used. For this reason these notes are an approximation of the actual words spoken and should not be regarded as a verbatim report. A sound recording was also made and this could be consulted where total accuracy is required.

The chairman, the Reverend Andrew Tuck, being delayed in traffic, the meeting was introduced by Anne Cooper, who is spearheading the move to obtain listed status for the Redgrave and who had arranged the seminar and exhibition.

Anne Cooper

resident of Farnham

The real impetus for this seminar and exhibition was the many occasions in town when I hear voices which say ‘I wish they would!’ as I pass. They then explain that they are referring to my badge, Open the Redgrave. That’s the reason why we’re here today.

I would like to record my thanks to the Bowling Club for generously allowing us to use their clubhouse.

We are recording the session on minidisk so that we can review what’s said and see which points we need to refer to the key bodies.

Susan James and James Bolam will be arriving later as they are supporters of the campaign. I have received a letter from Virginia Bottomley MP who says she’s sorry she can’t attend but sends us her best wishes.

I would now like to call upon Michael Holden to speak. Michael is theatre consultant for the Globe Theatre in Southwark and for the Redgrave.

Michael Holden

theatre consultant

I have 30 years experience as a theatre consultant and have run a few theatres too. In that time I have distilled some knowledge of the business.

Theatres are important to our communities. As well as being venues for plays they are places where people can meet and discuss. We live in increasingly cellular societies, with less access to a range of experiences and ages on which to draw.

We needs hearts to our towns. Farnham is about to have a new heart and if a theatre is included it will encourage cafes, hotels, restaurants and a whole range of activities.

No community thrives without its village hall. Way back in the past the Arts Council intended that every community of a given size should have a theatre, and every community of a given size above that should have a concert hall. That is a picture that was never realised, of course. But it illustrates that theatre provision reflects the buoyancy and ambitions of communities.

How do we fund theatres these days? Local government acts have never made theatres a mandatory thing for local authorities to fund, unlike libraries. Mens sana in corpore sano has been used to support all sorts of sports facilities but never the theatre. This illustrates central government’s views on the arts. And yet the staggering fact is that more people will attend a theatre in the course of a year than will attend a sports event. And if it we look at the statistics for being a participant rather than a spectator there is even more bias towards the arts than sports.

Theatre has been stigmatised as a middle class and middle aged activity, and in our times politicians can’t be seen to support such a constituency. The audience for theatre is essentially people who will extend their education beyond age of 19. They almost inevitably become middle class to some degree. This government wants 50% of young people to go to university – if this happens half the population will therefore be potential theatre goers.

If theatres are important why do we have to support them with grants? There is an assumption that theatres are automatically loss-making – this is not necessarily so. Many theatres are run without subsidy, using the resources of the community. But it is difficult to reinstate a subsidy where the local authority has lost the habit of it. It is always difficult for local authorities to respond to new funding ventures.

The Globe Theatre, of which I have a close working knowledge, has a fully professional classical company, and it plays to 90% capacity audiences. It also has 8,000 volunteer friends! This makes a huge difference to how far the budget stretches.

There are countless other examples of theatres managing without relying chiefly on subsidy: the Mill at Sonning (near Reading), a private venture, that promotes new writing; the new theatre in Derry, Northern Ireland which has lots of shops and a conference space to help its income; and amateur theatres throughout the country, for example Hampton Hill Playhouse, which is lucky enough to be able to make use of the technical team from London Weekend Television.

No theatre recoups its capital outlay. And, by the same token, if we ever lose a theatre it can rarely be replaced, because the start up costs are so high. If we lose the Redgrave we will have sold our heritage.

If a planning authority changes the land use of a theatre it needs to make sure it obtains from the new development the full replacement cost of that development in order that the community does not lose out.

It will require a community act of faith to reopen the Redgrave. It will require huge energy, a sympathetic local authority, a well-drawn business plan, and an operating plan that is responsive to local needs and opportunities. Above all it needs the community as patrons. Some of those conditions are being met here. The building occupies land that has high value. Potential development could generate enough capital to refurbish the theatre. And there is the option to widen to the audience for theatre by drawing people through the doors for other activities.

What sort of animal would it be? Cinemas married to it would be financially beneficial. A keep-fit centre would bring in huge revenue capital input from its operating company and would generate income. The experience of the people at this seminar today would be valuable to draw up business plan. Initially, perhaps, the theatre would be a ‘receiving house’ which would widen the audience for it later to become a ‘producing house’. It could offer meeting facilities to supplement those available at the local hotels, whose rooms are not large. It could mount displays of the visual arts.

Above all it needs a corps of volunteers. Such an operation could indeed be financially viable. It will create a supply of cafes, it will change the character of evening activity in the town. It will extend the trading hours of shops. It will add life and vibrancy. I recommend this scheme to the people of Farnham, to Waverley Borough Council and to Crest Nicholson.

(At this point the Rev Andrew Tuck arrived and took the chair.)

Peter Longman

Director of the Theatres Trust

I was involved in the early days of establishing the Redgrave when I worked for the Arts Council. Its creation was absolutely remarkable – a pioneering design, and a wonderful community project.

The Theatres Trust was set up by act of parliament to protect and improve theatre use and buildings. We are not a preservation body. We are a ‘statutory consultee’ – any planning application relating to a theatre building by law has to be referred to us and the local authority must listen to us. However, they don’t have to do what we say.

We look for the policies – local authority planning policies to protect and enhance community buildings. In referring any planning application to us (and there hasn’t been one yet for the Redgrave) the local authority must consider it in the light of its own planning policies.

This building occupies a very key site. If this site gets a change of use its value will go up. Naturally, the local authority wants to make the most of it. At one stage we contemplated converting the Maltings great hall into a theatre, but this is no longer on the agenda. Are there other locations that could be converted to theatre use? But wait - why do we need to look elsewhere? Brightwell is a listed building and cannot simply be demolished. The theatre is also listed as it is intrinsically part of the Brightwell building. It is referred to in the listing description. It is a very interesting building, a good mannered building. Legal and planning battles are by no means won or lost at this point in time.

I could list two or three dozen buildings which people were ready to write off and which were saved by local efforts (including London’s Lyceum, host to the Lion King). You can see on our website, http://www.theatrestrust.org.uk/contact.html,  what happened about the proposed demolition of the Royal Opera House in Scarborough. And you may have seen Griff Rhys Jones’s Restoration programme about the Hackney Empire.

We’re working with you and will support you. Our bottom line is to get the best deal for you and the people of Farnham. Remember, this week saw the publication of a report showing that Farnham is one of the happiest places in the country for people to live.

John Levitt

Chairman of Save London’s Theatres Campaign

The Save London’s Theatres Campaign was founded in 1972 and since then has saved many London theatres and some in the home counties too. We were asked in 1998 to support the campaign to save the Redgrave.

I have 55 years experience as professional actor. Much of my experience was in repertory theatres, what we now call regional theatres, around the country. I was able to act in a huge range of plays and I could only have got that experience in the repertory system. British repertory/regional theatre has given indispensable experience to all the various crafts that theatre, film and TV depend upon.

The Redgrave was paid for by public subscription. It was named in recognition of Sir Michael Redgrave and, as he insisted, all his family. It, and its predecessor the Castle Theatre, was incredibly successful under Ian Mullins’s inspired direction.

The space worked brilliantly both for audiences and actors. The changes of policy and direction in the late ‘80s and the 1990s seem to have brought us to we are today. When it opened its main function was to produce year-round plays. We believe that there is a still a hunger for ‘producing theatre’ in this community. There is a great and healthy interest in keeping theatre alive in this community.

New thinking will bring about the right way to revive it. It will need a variety of programming, involving an in-house company, local groups, children and young people, visiting productions. Nowadays, politicians seem only interested in people aged 16 to 35. In this area you have large numbers of people much older than this!

Many theatres now are open 7 days a week. They supplement their theatre income and grants with ancillary activities of a wide variety and this of course increases the amount of community involvement in the building.

There must be a policy. There must be a small core staff. And an artistic director.

It’s been quite a long campaign, now. We’ve sadly just seen the loss of the Westminster Theatre and arts centre after an 8 year battle. A rejuvenated Redgrave would not be run in competition with the Maltings. It never was in the past. They could and should compliment each other. Morally, the Redgrave belongs to the local people. It was built on a shoe string compared with the millions that go into new theatres today.

The excellence of the design, front of house, stage and backstage, are considered second to none. Sir Harold Hobson considered it to be an ideal small playhouse. The local authority should be rallying around the Redgrave, not seeking to destroy it. It would be an act of shameless vandalism to destroy it. It should not be beyond imagination to include it in the plans for the East Street redevelopment. I shall be here on 12 July. The people of Waverley should not be denied their opportunity to see the best of plays.

Nil desperandum – never give up.

Ellis Nicholls

local amateur actor and director

First let me say that the opinions I express are my own, not those of the groups I act in.

I came to Farnham as a latecomer – I arrived here in 1997 when the Redgrave was in its death throes. My wife and I saw one production there. It was dreadful, absolutely dreadful, and we wondered how this could be. A few weeks later it closed.

Many, many different people have told me of the quality the Redgrave used to have. I know that theatre in this country is deeply embedded in our history. We can trace it in this country back to the 13th century at least, and before that to the Ancient Greek period.

At present the Redgrave is a lost opportunity, as far as local amateur groups go (though I prefer to call them non-paid rather than amateur!). I am a member of three local groups. Their venues are super but fantastically limited by their limited lighting capability, size of auditorium, size of performing space, highly restricted wings space, and absence of fly space. What I want is a theatre that will give me some of that, a theatre that will enable us to undertake some of the plays that are more challenging to stage. When I was choosing a play to direct in the Bourne Hall, nearby, my choice of plays was severely restricted by the building’s limitations.

We have a model – the Electric Theatre in Guildford. It has all the facilities that I want to see and it is open every night of the week for one activity or another. Is it any surprise that there are now some groups from West Surrey, for example the Churt group, who are now going there to put on their shows? If the Redgrave were open I’m absolutely sure they’d come here instead.

How do amateurs and professionals mix together? If the Redgrave is going to be viable the amateurs must have a place in it. If it is to have the support of the vibrant theatre groups in Farnham then they must feel that they have a voice that is as strong as that of the professional users, and not just get left with the barren slots in July and September. If we can share the venue then we can enrich both its amateur and professional activities. Ian Mullins has demonstrated a workable model for involving amateur and professional actors in the same casts.

There is no other venue in Waverley that potentially offers the benefits and possibilities that the Redgrave offers. The Maltings – not suitable for theatre. New Victoria, Woking - too big and impersonal. The Yvonne Arnaud – intimate but concentrates on its well-established relationship with the West End tours. In the Redgrave both actors and audience have a uniquely intimate experience – no seat in the house is more than 40 ft from stage.

Rev Andrew Tuck

Seminar Chairman

Ptolemy Dean, whom we have seen in the BBC’s Restoration and who is the architect of St Andrews Parish Church, feels very strongly and passionately about what an important town we have here, artistically, architecturally and culturally. He was invited to speak today but unfortunately was unable to do so owing to his commitments.

John Levitt then read out a letter from Corin Redgrave (click here to read the letter).

John Levitt: I’ve been dealing directly with Anne Cooper and her husband David. David designed this wonderful exhibition here – a brilliant job. Anne is one of those indomitable ladies and we shouldn’t forget that we’re here today because of Anne.

Rev. Andrew Tuck: I would like also to personally thank Ian Mullins because he has kept professional theatre going in Farnham for all these years.

Rev Andrew Tuck

Corin Redgrave

David and Anne Cooper

Speakers from the floor

whose points were also captured on a flip chart.

Ian Mullins – thank you to John Levitt for your inspiring words. I would like to read you two paragraphs of an incredible and quite remarkable article. Three months after NFRC was formed Waverley Borough Council held its first public relations exercise with a display of its preliminary ideas for East Street. A little miracle happened that day, 12 March 1999: in the Daily Telegraph appeared the same day an article entitled Rediscovering the joys of company, written by Charles Spencer, the paper’s drama critic. It centred on Trevor Nunn and Sir Peter Hall’s boundless enthusiasm for ensemble repertory theatre.

“When I was a cub reporter on the Surrey Advertiser,” wrote Charles Spencer, “my favourite assignment was the Redgrave, in Farnham, now sadly defunct. The same actors would appear in a series of productions … there was a real feeling of ensemble…

“A couple of the regulars, Richard Cordery and Ian Bartholomew, often crop up in London or RSC productions and I always watch their performances with almost paternal interest, though they are probably a great deal older than I am. The great thing about ensembles is that they breed affection and loyalty among audiences.”

It is that loyalty that will recreate the Redgrave theatre. We are on the way to restoring an ensemble repertory theatre which will make the Redgrave Theatre great again.

Ian Mullins

Hannah Williams

Sheila Collings

Pat Larke

George Howd, a resident for 40 years - Brightwell has been allowed to fall into rack and ruin. We must call our councillors to book about this. (Peter Longman commented - No scheme of this size could go through on the local authority’s decision alone: central government will have to be involved. We’ll be on hand to support you.)

Hannah Williams, Redgrave Action Group – I am very encouraged by the distinguished speakers this afternoon. We have, I confess, become battle weary and today has been a shot in the arm. I feel invigorated to go on. But I would feel more encouraged if I’d seen 57 borough councillors here. However, we have 8, which is great. I spoke to the developer yesterday. He said the brief is still the same: the Redgrave must come down. The plot is needed for a so-called anchor store.

Brian Sell - 10 years ago I was involved with others in calling for a rejuvenation of this part of town. We never envisaged anything on the scale that has been proposed in the masterplan.

Eric Boyle, East St. Action. - I have been with Chris Biddlestone and the architect this afternoon. The only way ahead, they indicate, is if the Redgrave is listed. (Comment from the panel – it is listed, through its association with Brightwell House.) In which case, can the fact that it is already listed be made public in an official way? The architect doesn’t appear to know it’s listed!

Sheila Collings, secretary to the Save London’s Theatres campaign and former Redgrave actor - When I walked through today and saw that building I felt sick - sick and angry at the state it’s in. What we need is a bit of anger – get annoyed, get furious. It really is a building worth getting passionate about. For an actor it is a place where you can really communicate with your audience. The setting of the theatre is lovely. Brightwell used to be lovely.

Victor Scrivens, councillor for Farnham Moor Park - I am speaking in a private capacity. We’ve got to find some way of demonstrating that it is economically viable. The wish for repertory is in itself not enough. Incidentally, I recommend a march through the town on 12 June.

Michael Holden, theatre consultant – It’s not about stopping the development but persuading the developer how much the Redgrave will enhance their scheme. One of Crest Nicholson’s directors is also a director of the Globe.

Gordon Harris, Chairman of the Farnham Society - It is a matter of great regret that the development brief we see was not drawn up in response to the public consultations – it was already in print before they were held. Also, Waverley has not actually signed up to the demolition of the Redgrave in any of its committees. When the consultation questionnaire drops through your letter box, if there isn’t a space asking about the Redgrave write your views on the form in any case.

Pat Larke – I’ve spoken to architect. They have not been asked by Waverley to put the Redgrave on the plans. (Anne Cooper added that Crest Nicholson have indicated to her that they would certainly keep it if they were asked to by Waverley.)

John Ainslie, representing Equity, the actors’ union - Equity is fully behind the move to restore and reopen the Redgrave. I too would love to see ensemble rep here. We need to proceed by degrees though. Let’s find out why Waverley isn’t putting it on the development brief.

Simon Cordon, prospective parliamentary candidate for the Lib Dems - I would very much like repeated the words said earlier about the capability of the Redgrave for multi-use. Corin Redgrave’s final two paragraphs are the breaking point for moving things on – a practical use for the theatre.

Gavin Stride, artistic director of the Maltings - Running a multi-use building is a tough job. At the Maltings we only just about stay above water. We need a single strategy for the whole town. These buildings (Redgrave and Maltings) must have a purpose, which is to tell our story. I also think the amateur model has merit. People have more and more spare time to spend on the arts. I’d encourage you in your ambitions.

Patrick Haveron, councillor for Godalming – I would be happy to put the case of the theatre to the Council and fight the cause as long as we have a good case. I’d like to see the business plan enhanced. It’s got to be self-funding. It’s disingenuous to compare the Globe’s financial plan with that of the Redgrave. I’m in the entertainment business myself, presenting comedy nights at the Electric theatre. The Yvonne Arnaud is struggling quite a lot; the Electric has a lot of Guildford funding. Cinemas are a worry because the real profit comes not from the film but sales of pop corn etc. Multi-use is the way ahead. The Lib Dems do want to listen, whatever’s been your experience in the past.

Mr Leishman – Poor old Farnham. We’re under serious threat from a number of things. One is the Blackwater Valley. The second is the way the economy has been boosted by credit card spending – if that’s on the way out, which it may well be, we may see shops in Farnham failing. SIAD is about to open a gallery that will display internationally respected works of art. Also, we should do more with Cobbett’s name. We need to develop Farnham’s cultural life - and for that we need a theatre.

Byron Grainger-Jones, councillor for Godalming Charterhouse - I am an executive member of Waverley Borough Council for culture and leisure. Our position is that there is no commitment to demolish the theatre. In the original contract there has always been scope for modification but the masterplan dates back some time now.

The Redgrave is an issue. What is the advantage of the Redgrave? - its position. But its position is also a disadvantage, for the theatre. The NOP consultation exercise that is about to start will give people an opportunity to express their views. I think it’s a good thing that we are not about to see the masterplan imposed on Farnham. There will have to be a re-drawing of it, following on from the NOP consultation. The consultation exercise is the only way to influence what happens. My feeling is that the developers are keen to get started – any further delays and I think they’ll just pull out. Some would say it’s the Waverley Borough Council that’s kept the redevelopment waiting, but we had to do that because consultation was being pressed upon us. If the Redgrave is to be retained it has to be presented as a multi-purpose building. (You have to understand that Waverley Borough Council has been used to very large deficits associated with the Redgrave – that is the anxiety in the council.) It also has to work hand in hand with the Maltings.

Mike Band, councillor for Shamley Green – I grew to love Farnham when I was the millennial mayor. Farnham is well blessed with its arts in having SIAD and the Maltings. If theatre is so essential to the people of Farnham will the people of Farnham be responsible for any losses it made, because it is the other towns in Waverley who will pay the bill.

Janet Martin – a huge number of schools are within walking distance of the theatre.

The chairman ended by thanking the speakers and Anne and David Cooper.

David Wylde

John Ainslie

Seminar speakers and attenders outside the boarded-up Brightwell House

James Bolam and Sue Jameson who were among the distinguished guests at the Brightwell Seminar.