*Cazzy-Lou* wrote:
- Why doesn't the public want to watch new theatre?
I would definitely go for this one. New theatre is dead! Get your stats ready- and have you read Peter Brooks "Empty Space"? there's some great material in there about "deadly theatre"
I am ashamed to say I rarely go to "the theatre" now- I have wasted way too much money seeing way too much rubbish. I would cite poor training, poor material, poor venues, false expectations derived from the tourist driven west-end and commercial driven TV.
I would argue that mainstream "theatre" as we know it (the theatre supported by general public demand), is dying of star culture (big tv names, "known" shows, tried and tested blockbusters). I mean what the heck is going on when you go to see a theatre production of a successful film (say, "Dirty Dancing") and it gets judged by how well the actors recreate the film ?

That and the artsy backlash that is prohibitive to mainstream enjoment
Then I would go on to suggest that, actually, notions of "theatre" have changed- that public theatre has evolved beyond the sitty down tip up chairs and red velvet tabs of the 20th century. True theatre, living theatre is more an event. Now the best theatre to be found has actually become known as "the festival", music based, circus style, organised "happenings", with huge audience participation. Think Edinburgh Fringe, Camp Bestival, Creamfields...
New theatre, happenings/events/festivals are kind of getting back to the choral, participatory (and yes, religious and bacchic) roots of the Greek Dionysia. Lively stalls, multiple stages, audience in fancy dress, etc
For a successful new theatre, that is massively supported by the public, I'm thinking of new theatre as I think of a fully supported Creamfields in a huge open space, stalls, tents, stages, a mass audience (tens of thousands), a huge sound and light show (I think Artaud would have loved), a veritable bacchanalia.
Yes, I've changed my mind- new theatre is alive and well. It's old theatre that's dead
Steve