The Indie Caucus held a "Tent Talk" at The Toronto Fringe Festival in July to discuss the challenges independent artists faced working with CAEA. Last week a new Festival Contract was announced by the association. (l-r) Aaron Willis, Franco Boni, Julie Tepperman, Margaret Evans
by Michael Wheeler
Overview
With little fanfare a significant shift occurred in the world of Canadian independent theatre last Friday. With the release of a new Festival Contract, CAEA addressed about 35% of the problems indie artists face working with and within the association. Sure there are a couple of things in this new document that will never be filed under “awesome”, but in general it is such a massive improvement on what we have been working with that response from indie artists has been overwhelmingly positive.
Sincere congratulations and thanks to CAEA Executive Director Arden Ryshpan for releasing this document indie artists have been desperate for.
The Good:
Simplicity
Anyone from an experienced member-creator to first-time fringe artist knows that filling out Equity paperwork is usually a confusing, time-sucking nightmare. The Festival Contract on the other hand could be filled out by a twelve-year-old. One page to fill out, put everyone’s name and Equity number on the form, and send it in with a cheque for the insurance. Amazing. Simplicity is possible!
Clarity on what projects the contract can be used for
Before this document there was this thing called the “Fringe Waiver”. Depending on who you talked to at Equity, what projects the waiver could be used for was an exceptionally vague. With the Festival Contract, the names of all the festivals it can be used for, and there are quite a few, are all listed at the top of page one, while the language leaves wiggle room to add more festivals where appropriate. The contract now clearly applies to many of the key venues artists use to get new works off the ground including, Summerworks, HATCH and the Annual International Anarchist Festival.
Understanding the importance of recordings to artistic development and marketing
Much of page one is full of official-type language surrounding how companies may record and document their performance. Although it all sounds quite intimidating, it’s actually great news that shows CAEA recognizes these recordings are necessary to both improve the work and have it produced outside of a festival. Now this may seem like a no-brainer, but when Praxis participated in HATCH this year, we requested from CAEA the paperwork to videotape our work-in-progress presentation of our Equity approved workshop (so we could remember what we did and evaluate our work). We received the following email in response: “Hi Michael, Thanks for the email. Unfortunately, Archival Taping is not permitted for workshops and readings under Article 57 of the ITA.” A flat refusal! To be allowed to record our own unfinished work! Exclamation mark! This won’t happen anymore under this contract.
The Bad
Lack of clarity on who can use the contract
Without a doubt the most disappointing element is the vague language surrounding 1 a) of this contract, which states it is for companies “not adhered to a professional agreement negotiated with Equity”. What this means is very much up in the air: Does it mean that any company who has ever used workshop, co-op, ITA or other agreements can’t use this contract? Or does it mean that PACT members can’t use this contract as they already have their own agreement with CAEA? Option A is quite unreasonable and option B is quite reasonable.
This is made all the more confusing by the fact that whether companies can move up and down the ladder to use different contracts depending on their resources, is right now a nebulous ad-hoc state of affairs that depends more on your relationship with your business rep than any coherent policy set out by CAEA. It would be GREAT to see some clarity on this topic. If not we fear that there will be one contract for those artists that tow the line and don’t cause trouble, and another contract for companies who take very public risks to keep producing models evolving to meet modern challenges. Will we have to fill out our Fringe application under the company name “Not Praxis Theatre” this November?
Profit sharing not mandatory
One of the core elements of the Artists’ Agreement that the Indie Caucus developed over four very well attended Town Hall public consultations at theatres across Toronto over three years, was a profit sharing model that ensures that artists are entitled to a share of the profits of the work they create. It’s straight-up weird that this contract doesn’t do that stating, “Equity members may receive payment of a small honorarium for their services or participate in a sharing of box office receipts.” So technically, if all you do is sign this agreement, and then your show sells out every performance, if whoever is listed as the producer gives you $20 at the end of the run – they have not violated this agreement. My advice to artists who sign this contract is to make your own additional contract, on the back of a napkin even, that declares how the profits will be divided at the end of the run.
Analysis
As well received and appreciated this new contract is, it really addresses only 1/3 of the challenges facing member and non-member creators. If you are an artist who wants to have more than 3 hours of tech time to create your art, or control your own media and marketing strategies, or qualify for Dora awards (or any other awards as this is a national agreement), this contract changes absolutely nothing for you.
These really big questions, the kind that the Indie Caucus has been consulting with the community about for the past three years, have just recently been taken up by CAEA’s Independent Theatre Review Committee (ITRC). This committee is a direct result of the massive support amongst CAEA membership to Indie Caucus proposals to find a more flexible and reasonable solution to indie issues as evidenced by the 96-1 and 42-4 votes at consecutive AGMs and the largest ever turn out for an RAGM just to address this issue.
Will the Independent Theatre Review Committee consider the Artists’ Agreement contract that resulted from three years of feedback and Town Hall meetings with the theatre community – or will they ignore it?
As the committee begins its deliberations and consultations – whether or not they incorporate the very ideas that motivated the creation of their committee in the first place, will provide a clear sign as to whether it is a serious initiative to support the clearly expressed will of CAEA membership, or a smokescreen to obscure the lack of any meaningful change to how work is contracted at a professional level.
OCAD's lobby became the overflow room to the overflow room. Photo: Sarah Mulholland
by Michael Wheeler
The biggest benefit of last night’s Mayoral Arts Debate organized by ArtsVote is the massive interest there was in the event itself. The doors opened at 5pm. At 5:10pm the room was declared at capacity and attendees were directed to an overflow room at OCAD. Next the overflow room itself began to overflow before being declared at capacity at 5:40pm. Anyone after that occupied the OCAD lobby, which became the overflow room for the overflow room. An estimated 1750 streamed it live on their computers, while 540 others watched it since.
All told, this untelevised debate attracted an audience of over 3000 active and engaged citizens. This will matter much more a year from now when the elected members decide which election promises to keep and which will shatter on the altar of “hard economic times”. Clearly this is an issue that the populace is engaged in and is willing to organize around. In short, and this is the only thing that really matters around City Hall, there can be tangible political consequences to politicians who dismiss the arts as inconsequential.
James Di Fiore spoke at the AGO as a mayoral candidate with a mission to improve citizen engagement in civic politics by 18-35 year olds.
Praxis Theatre was tweeting the whole debate if you’re looking for a play by play of the he said, he said, and a video replay is streamable here, but post-debate chat unanimously agreed the candidates presented a series of lacklustre performances due to the absence of both substance to the discussion and charisma or a sense of leadership on anyone’s part. Ford said a couple of outrageous things that were by no means the craziest things he’s ever said, and the other contenders managed to snipe at one another in a way that no one looked like a hero.
A bright spot to the evening was James Di Fiore, the candidate invited to participate through an online poll on the ArtsVote website. Admitting he had no chance to become mayor, he addressed the fact that in the previous civic election 18% of eligible voters under 35 participated. His main thrust was that the problem is not apathy, but a belief amongst this cohort that political engagement is a waste of their time as the discourse does not address them or their issues. None of the other candidates addressed these concerns, which pretty much reinforced the notion that James was correct in his analysis.
With major arts policy announcements earlier in the day, both Rossi and Smitherman announced their arts and culture platforms, which they both refer to as their “Creative City” plans, referencing the city’s 2003 Creative City culture plan. Heavily influenced by the ideas of Martin Prosperity Institute Director Richard Florida, it suggests that arts and culture can improve a city’s economy by improving its “creativity index”. Separate from the highly suspect nature of the premises Florida uses to support these claims, last night it allowed these candidates to use broad platitudes about contributing to both the “soul” and the “economic engine” of the city without saying much of substance.
Most candidates agreed to increase cultural funding from $17 to $25 per capita, which is exactly what councillors have solemnly resolved to do for quite some time while not actually doing it, so this was hardly earth shattering territory. Rossi tried to distinguish himself in this regard by committing to making the increase in his first year as mayor and have it up to $33 by the end of his (highly theoretical at this point) mandate.
The most memorable moment of the evening occurred when Rob Ford suggested holding fundraising dinners as a substitute for arts funding. Until that point the audience had been fairly civil and respectful to a candidate that had aggressively attacked the arts as a councillor at City Hall, but the crowd couldn’t resist responding with a pretty solid “Boo” from all corners of the room to this remark. Praxis Artistic Producer Aislinn Rose later noted: “It was like suggesting to an aspiring actor to consider getting a job at Stratford.” We had thought of that one a little while ago.
Skip ahead to 4:40 to see Praxis Board Member Bridget Macintosh explain the Praxis Gourmet Dinner fundraising events we’ve been holding since 2004. Complete with slides!
This will be remembered as the debate that no one could get into it was such a hot ticket. Blog TO reports that even some media were initially being turned away as the debate began due to capacity issues, and accounts from the overflow room suggest a boisterous crowd responding vocally to each performance. As the numbers attest, this was AN EVENT.
The whole evening was possible due to some impressive work by ArtsVote, a volunteer advocacy group that has already been influential in civic politics as a force that contributed to Barbara Hall’s successful run for mayor. The focus and media attention this debate brought to the cultural community and the issues of arts funding this election solidify ArtsVote as a major player in Toronto elections by forcing politicians to explain their cultural positions in a high profile venue under a bright media spotlight.
Seen outside the opening night of Fernando Krapp Sent Me This Letter, the first show directed for Canadian Stage by Artistic Director Matthew Jocelyn in the first season he has curated
“This city is envy of the world and we’re acting like it’s falling apart.”
Filmmaker Atom Egoyan speaking as an observer at the launch of the non-partisan One Toronto movement to reduce the prevailing negativity of the mayoral campaign, and to encourage those Torontonians who support inclusive values to become engaged and involved.
The broad-based support for this campaign impacted me more than the rhetoric for cameras at the One Toronto media launch. Certainly all the right things were said: There was a call for thoughtful non-partisan dialogue, respect for inclusive values, and a Toronto where anyone can succeed. This was expected. What was unexpected is how varied the groups backing this initiative are.
Look let’s be honest here: Luminato is more of a centrist Ontario Undergraduate Student Association (OUSA) kind of organization than a natural CFS ally – and the CFS has more of a Fringe Festival vibe than a Luminato one. Yet this is not the time for what become trivialities in the face of an almost unthinkable municipal administration that would decimate both culture and students with little regard for these distinctions.
Clearly it is time to make some new friends and work together. The distinct possibility of political apocalypse makes for strange bedfellows and a strikingly broad base of support that cuts across traditional fault lines in civil society.
One Toronto organizers are proposing Torontonians ask candidates what they would do specifically (no platitiudes) about three core issues that SHOULD be dominating the debate, but are being lost in sea of angry populist disaster porn: 1) Climate Change, 2) Inclusiveness and Equality, 3) Services and Programs. This is pretty wide ranging stuff you would think is a no-brainer, but is getting absolutely no play in the race right now.
This election will be decided by a ballot question that has not yet been set. Currently the question is: “Do you want Rob Ford to dismantle City Hall?” If that remains the question, he almost certainly will win. If the question becomes something else, something positive that addresses all of the ways municipal government can engage with and improve our lives as Torontonians, his chances of winning decrease significantly.
As we have seen from the discussion still going on in the comments to Monday’s post, strategy and picking a single mayoral candidate will play a big role in how this all plays out. Just as important as WHO people vote for is WHY they vote for someone though. This is an area we have a lot to work on in a short period of time. Fortunately a week is a lifetime in politics, which means we have five lifetimes to change the tone and topics of this debate.
One Toronto has called an upbeat, completely positive, Emergency Community Meeting for Monday September 27thfrom 7:30pm to 9:30pm at The Church of The Holy Trinity (Behind the Eaton Centre).
Jonathon Young and Laura Mennell on film with Scott Bellis and Dawn Petten on stage
by Michael Wheeler
I wonder if this is what embedded journalists feel like?
After two trips to Vancouver to participate in both the filmed and theatrical execution of this project, it is impossible to provide anything approaching an unsentimental analysis of it. I really like the show, the people who made it, and I sincerely hope it comes to Ontario someday so I can show it to people.
I’m sure it will inspire a number of conversations about performance and form: Is it a movie? Is it a play? If it is a hybrid of both, what do you call it? I think it is something else entirely however:
I think Tear The Curtain! is an ode.
The production begins with a film clip of theatre critic Alex Braithwaite being driven to review a performance by his secretary Mavis:
MAVIS
You know what your trouble is?
Dawn Petten as Mavis and Jonathon Young as Alex Braithwaite
ALEX
I’m a hack writer living in a hick town.
MAVIS
No.
ALEX
A hick border town where we’re raised on foreign ideas and foreign stories which we imitate, pretending they’re our own… I should have left when I was twenty and gone where the action is.
MAVIS
You just don’t know what you want Alex. I’m sure we may be hicks compared with other places, but don’t deny yourself the privilege that gives you.
ALEX
What privilege?
MAVIS
The freedom to create our own future.
Theatrically, Tear The Curtain goes on to embody this conversation by becoming a piece of theatre that lives within the constraints of this debate by doing something new and exciting, while acknowledging the cultural constraints of living in a city fifty clicks from the United States. Recognizing and integrating the generations of storytellers and shifts in technology that have come before them, the production sets out to be a performance that uses new forms and tools to re-imagine Vancouver within an archetypically American film noir aesthetic.
This is why I think Tear The Curtain an ode. It is not just film noir gangsters, dames, and crazy film integration within a vacuum. It is an ode to the City of Vancouver. It is attached to a particular perspective about what it means to make art in this place, in this era, and everything that generations of artists have gone through to arrive at where they are today.
My part in one of the film clips is so incidental that there are no stills of me with my eyes open. (If you listen very carefully however, you can hear me chuckle at one of Alex Braithwaite's jokes.)
Like the rest of this process, tech at The Stanley Theatre was a whirlwind of activity. What distinguished this week-long period where actors and designers finally integrate their offerings from most, was the extra factors that had to be set in tandem with all the regular ones a director would consider. Each moment is precious in the time you have from when you move into the theatre to to opening night.
Because many of the filmed segments had audio scored directly for the image on the video, but the audio cues for the live action were being set as we established actor blocking, there was a lot to think about in terms of what audio was coming, at what level, and was it attached to the film or called live. Often when audio was activated was related to the fly system for the show, which incorporates three different curtains, a scrim, and a very large wall that are continually emerging from, or disappearing into, the air above the stage
Even the simplest video elements in a performance piece can devour precious tech time, but the scale and resolution of the images captured by the Red camera posed particular challenges for Video Wrangler Michael Sider:
My favourite thing about this scene is that the projected image actually exists legitimately within the given circumstances of the story.
To get the largest, richest image to fill the entire scrim, two identical projectors are broadcasting simultaneously, mounted parallel to one another. These images are also broadcast on different surfaces that are varying distances away from the projectors, so each surface has to have its own focus where the images from the two projectors overlaps correctly.
Separate from projector concerns, once we moved into the theatre, many video sequences needed to have small adjustments made on the fly. A number of factors including small text changes, the timing of scored audio, and blocking adjustments, meant many scenes needed to be shortened or lengthened, or faded in slower or faster, than how we had been working with them back at Progress Lab.
Lighting Designer Alan Brodie faced his own particular challenges working with mixed mediums: The lighting hang used the maximum amount of dimmers available for lighting equipment in The Stanley Theatre. The show requires this many lights because a number of the focuses occur though the light that is video, through or around a scrim, on or within a three-dimensional two-story set, in the house, or any combination of those factors.
Additionally he was charged with using all of this light to maintain a dark, cold, and smoky film noir aesthetic already captured by cinematographer Brian Johnson in the filmed sequences. This had been planned at length in meetings with Director Kim Collier as the three of them established together the visual qualities of the world they would create before either the film or play had been made.
All of these elements are called by Stage Manager Jan Hodgson, who had been practising activating and integrating these elements verbally in the rehearsal hall. Tech involved incorporating new elements and timing as well as actually working with the real things. Most importantly, it was the time to gain an understanding of the rhythm of the show.
There is music to how all these components are related and need to be called. In many ways the art of this production relies on the way the stage manager understands the music the director is playing in all these cues, as much as it does performances on the stage. Although depends a lot on those too. As I put the finishing touches on this piece on a crisp Toronto morning – two days separated from The Electric Company, my thoughts turn to all of the performers in the show:
Today is opening night day! I think the opportunity to be on a stage like doing this show, at this place and time, has a lot to do with why performers gravitate to the theatre, and this is ultimately why Tear The Curtain is a piece of theatre (in the form of an ode). You will never get that feeling on a film set; you have to be there alive in that room with the other people who have chosen to be there, to know what it is. Wish I could be there to share it with them.
Merde!
James Fagan Tait and Dawn Petten form a single potent image
The rehearsal studio at Progress Lab 1422 has three story ceilings and comes with its own grid, kitchen, conference room and private bathrooms
by Michael Wheeler
I am a little flummoxed about how to communicate what has transpired in Tear The Curtain! rehearsals over the past few weeks. It has been hectic, inspiring, and I can’t wait for audiences to see this thing once all the pieces have been put together. Like lead character and theatre critic Alex Braithwaite, all my thoughts are in fragments and there may not be a clear connection between them:
This is the most technically demanding show I have ever worked on: It has multiple flies including a wall of the two-story set that flies in and out, as many lighting instruments as The Stanley Theatre can handle, an original score written by a composer who usually writes for feature films (separate from the regular audio cues), and cinema quality video that appears on multiple surfaces.
Boca Del Lupo, Electric Company Theatre, Neworld Theatre and Rumble Productions all have offices here and divide up access to the rehearsal space
I can’t imagine this type of work being built in a regular rehearsal hall. Because The Electric Company is one of the creators and co-tenants of Progress Lab 1422 in East Vancouver, they have the ability to work with many of these technical elements well before “tech” in their own rehearsal hall. This may seem like a no-brainer, but it is a circumstance very few indie companies ever find themselves in when building a show.*
Good news for me: There’s been enough for me to do on this show that I have been given an official title that will appear in the credits and everything: “Assistant to the Director”, not to be confused with “Assistant Director” which in this instance would likely refer to a specific person who worked on the film shoot last winter, which I wrote about here.
The best laid plans: Although the idea was to have a “locked” script by this point in the rehearsal process, the first major challenge I was thrown into was a significant restructuring of the first act based on what we learned from the first full run through with live acting and video together. I find this a little reassuring: no matter how much sense a script makes on paper, the nature of theatre means it will be something different from literature when it is actualized. There’s no getting around having a clear and unsentimental head in these moments.
Directing a performance that essentially works with two distinct mediums is twice as much work for the director. Doing a 10 – 6 rehearsal day with actors means you have most pre-dinner hours figuring out the live part of the show, and then you have until you fall asleep to figure out the other 60%.
There are some excellent, affordable, and healthy options for lunch on Commercial Dr.
Kevin Kerr and Jonathon Young restructure the first act in a late night dramaturgy session
Ever since our Fringe production of The Master and Margarita in 2006 I have been keen to re-workshop and essentially re-create our original adaptation. Working on Tear The Curtain has given me great clarity on how Praxis should go about this. Magical realist stories on the stage could be the big winners of these new developments in technology.
No ego – no problems: Kim Collier, Kevin Kerr, and Jonathon Young have been working together for more than a decade. Everyone knows everyone’s role on the project, everyone gives notes where appropriate, everyone trusts that the other person is very good at their job. When something is this complicated there can be no drama with your drama.
In the winter of 2009 I attended a theatre history lecture at Toronto Free Gallery by Alex Fallis on The Progressive Arts Club and the theatre created by artists who were opposed to many of the anti-civil rights policies enacted by Prime Minister Bennett in the 1930s. These people proved to be so fascinating that I elected to create with Praxis Theatre a show about them, Tim Buck 2, which played at The Tranzac Club as part of the 2009 Toronto Fringe Festival.
This led to our Harbourfront Centre HATCH workshop Section 98, which expanded the scope of our work to some other instances when civil rights proved to be a contentious issue for Canadians: namely the FLQ crisis, the Air India bombing, Omar Khadr, and the treatment of Afghan detainees captured by Canadian soldiers. Both the Fringe show and our HATCH workshop were extremely useful in terms of exploring who these people were, what they were concerned about, and the complexity of balancing our country’s commitment to civil rights and concerns of national security.
Unfortunately, neither of these initial explorations did an awesome job of storytelling. So this spring and summer we went back to the drawing board with this project and thought about how to move beyond ‘staged dramaturgy’ and into narrative-based work informed by these themes.
The most consistent positive feedback from our open source creative process revolved around curiosity and fascination with Eugenia “Jim” Watts.
There were also quite a few normal conversations, in person, with live human beings who had seen the show(s).
The first conclusion was that the core personality we had explored that generated a unique resonance with both audiences and ourselves was Eugenia “Jim” Watts, played in both productions by Margaret Evans. A core political organizer and theatre director in 1930s Toronto, she co-directed the legendary civil rights play banned by Bennett, Eight Men Speak, and later went on to be one of two women serving with the Mackenzie Papineau Brigade in the Spanish Civil War where she was an ambulance driver. She was also involved with a number of other projects; she was very busy, and interesting, and worth being the impetus for a work of art.
Margaret Evans playing Jim Watts in Section 98 as part of HATCH at Harbourfront Centre
The second conclusion was that this piece required a playwright, and a good one. This playwright would preferably be an artist who had experience creating theatre about historical events for a contemporary audience (we talked a lot about avoiding a ‘bio pic’) and a passion for social justice.
So it is with much pleasure and excitement we announce Dora-winning playwright Tara Beagan has joined Praxis Theatre in continuing our work on this latest iteration, . Tara and I worked together for two years on Crate Productions’ TheFort at York, and she also acted as an outside eye for Praxis on our Toronto Fringe 07 co-pro, Dyad, but Jesus Chrysler is her first official work with Praxis Theatre and we are thrilled to welcome her.
Jesus Chrysler will be presented at The Factory Theatre as part of Lab Cab on Saturday September 18 and Sunday September 19 at 5pm.The entire festival is free with all manner of art and experiences presented by over 50 artists throughout every nook and cranny of The Factory from noon to 6pm each day. We invite you to come check out the whole festival and save your 5pm – 5:20pm slot for us. This being a Praxis show, we’ll definitely welcome your feedback online or in person, with a particular emphasis on your thoughts about our transition to a script based work about a single individual.
Hope to see you there!
Where’s Praxis? Can you find Tara, Margaret and Michael in the Lab Cab poster? Click to enlarge
“After the years and years of weaker and waterier imitations, we now find ourselves rejecting the very notion of a holy stage. It is not the fault of the holy that it has become a middle-class weapon to keep the children good.”
Recent Comments