The New Writing Policies of Clive Perry and Stephen MacDonald at the Royal Lyceum Theatre, Ian Brown

Transcription

1 The Writing Policie of Clive Perry and Stephen MacDonald at the Royal Lyceum Theatre, Ian Brown The preentation of uch play a Stewart Conn' The Burning (1971) and Bill Bryden' Willie Rough (1972) are remembered a landmark event. Their impact wa uch that, leaving aide the cae of a pecialit Writing theatre like the Travere, an impreion often exit that the main houe ource of Writing in the Scottih theatre in the eventie wa the Royal Lyceum under Clive Perry when Bill Bryden wa Aociate Director. 1 An initial ene of thi period' undoubted ignificance may be derived from the bald tatitic that, of the ix important play included in Bill Findlay' recent anthology, Scot Play of the Seventie, 2 half were premièred at Perry' Royal Lyceum when Bryden wa Aociate Director from 1970 until There i no quetion that, under Perry, the Royal Lyceum wa an important provider of theatrical Writing. Yet it wa only with time that the preentation of Writing became an important factor in it work: it approach to that proviion developed from 1966 until Meantime, in the eventie, another key main houe figure, Stephen MacDonald, wa in pot a Artitic Director from 1972 to 1976 of Dundee Rep, hi firt production being in January 1973, and from 1976 until 1979 of the Royal Lyceum. Hi eminal production include Hector MacMillan' The Riing (1973) and The Royal Viit (1974) and Stewart Conn' Play Donkey (1977). The firt of thee i alo included in Bill Findlay' anthology. A we hall ee, MacDonald' work both at Dundee and the Royal Lyceum wa alo crucial in developing the preentation of new work by main houe companie. Thi paper will evaluate the nature and impact of Perry and Macdonald' Writing policie on the development of contemporary Scottih theatre, omething that ha gone largely unanalyed or dicued. The analyi undertaken will begin, after a brief dicuion of the development of the Royal Lyceum Theatre Company, with a conideration of poible definition of Writing. Having propoed a number of definition and categorie, the paper will engage in a detailed analyi of the actual repertoire of the companie under dicuion. Thi methodology i baed on the premie that, whatever may be the claimed Writing policy of a theatre, the only true way to undertand what it Writing policy actually i i to analye the number and percentage of categorie of Writing production within it overall programme. In developing thi argument, benchmark will be provided from contemporaneou Englih theatre and the data will be analyed in a variety of perpective, making ue, a appropriate, of analytical table. Thi proce will conclude with a review of the actual achievement of the Writing policie of the Perry and MacDonald period at the Royal Lyceum in term of their long-term influence. By thee mean the claim of each to having ignificant new writing policie will be teted. It hould be noted for the purpoe of thi analyi that both theatre during the period under dicuion alo acted a hot for viiting dance and ometime opera companie. The focu of thi tudy, however, will be on home-baed drama production, with ome conideration given to the implication for the repertoire of touring drama. In the cae of the Royal Lyceum, detailed analyi will exclude the Fetival period when the theatre i in effect pre-empted by the Edinburgh International Fetival, except when the Royal Lyceum Company itelf wa involved in producing work during the Fetival in it own houe. The Gateway Theatre Company and the development of the Royal Lyceum

2 The Royal Lyceum Theatre Company wa founded in When it wa founded under the ponorhip of the then Edinburgh Corporation a it civic theatre, the exiting Edinburgh producing company, the Gateway Theatre Company wound itelf up rather than ee the funding, audience and, it may be deduced, the creative energy of Edinburgh theatre divided between two comparable companie. Moultrie Kelall, then a Gateway Board member, offer evidence of thi act of creative altruim that deerve to be more widely known: We had known that the foundation of a Civic Theatre wa being planned, but none of u had thought that it would materialie for at leat another year. Then one evening Tom Fleming came to ee me with the new that he had been invited by the Civic Theatre Trut to direct it, and that October 1965 wa uggeted a the opening month. I wa delighted that he hould have been choen, and urged him to accept, but it neceitated an immediate deciion by our Council a to the future of the Edinburgh Gateway Company. We had an aurance that if we decided to continue, the Art Council would maintain it grant to u, though that would reduce the grant available for the Civic Theatre. We hardly felt that we could expect the Town Council to upport two repertory companie, nor did we feel confident that the potential audience wa yet large enough to do o. It eemed to u that both companie would uffer to ome extent, however edulouly they tried to avoid clahe by offering complementary rather than competing programme. Our financial poition, though ound, wa not uch that we could take in our tride the probable lo of the Town Council grant and a drop in box-office receipt: cot would continue to rie, and a further Equity wage increae wa forecat. To launch out on another eaon, a a bold geture of confidence that more theatre would create more audience, had an undeniable attraction, but if we failed, the Civic Theatre, with it much greater reource, would be een to have killed u, which would urely be an unbecoming end for the old venture and an unfortunate tart for the new. We had maintained profeional repertory in Edinburgh through thick and thin for twelve eaon, in the hope that tronger hand than our would ultimately take over the reponibility, and that time had now come. Having completed our miion we hould tand aide. It hould be een that the new enterprie had prung from our loin, not our ahe that here wa growth, not murder. We had every confidence that under Tom Fleming' direction, and with two other member of our Council (Kemp and Miller) on the trut, the Civic Theatre would purue a policy imilar in eence to our: we would not be open to the charge that, by cloing, we had deprived our audience of the ort of theatrical nourihment they'd come to expect from u. Such were the conideration which decided u, after much heartearching and with many pang of notalgia, to accept the prophetic implication of "Journey' End". 3 Thi deciion i clearly the more explicable in that Tom Fleming, one of the three founding member of the Gateway Company and a Board member of longtanding, wa to be the Artitic Director of the new company and there wa ome continuity in Board memberhip. Further, many of the company member of the Royal Lyceum after 1965 were actor who had featured prominently in the Gateway Company including, for example, Martin Heller and Clare Richard. The Royal Lyceum wa in effect the lineal continuation of the Gateway Theatre Company, itelf founded in In 1966, after an unhappy year at the Royal Lyceum, Tom Fleming withdrew and Clive Perry became Artitic Director. There, with Richard Eyre and, later, Bill Bryden, Perry developed a lively company, with a trong record, ultimately, of upporting Scottih work which included the Première of a number of key modern Scot play including, of coure, a already noted, The Burning and Willie Rough.

3 During hi term of office, in the eaon, Perry opened a mall tudio theatre at the back of the Upper Circle. 4 In thi, becaue it held only about ixty people in cramped condition, only a few play were ever performed. (The pace itelf i now an electrical plant room.) After thi experiment, in 1975, Perry opened the Lyceum Studio Theatre on the ite in Cambridge Street of what i now the Travere Theatre. The building ued had been the office of the Edinburgh Fetival and, after thoe office moved to Market Street, the ite of uch famou experimental International Fetival production a Grotowki' Acropoli (1968) and André Gregory' Alice in Wonderland (1971). Perry alo had etablihed in 1972, under the initial leaderhip of Peter Farago, the Young Lyceum Company. Thi wa not dedicated, a it name might ugget, to Theatre for Young People: there had already been ince 1969 a Lyceum Theatre in Education company, initially led by Brian Stanyon and from 1971 by Sue Birtwhitle, which had met that need. 5 The Young Lyceum Company had a different focu. It compried a troupe of bright young actor including uch a Alec Heggie, Iain (later Kenny) Ireland, Mary McCuker, and Patrick Malahide. It repertoire, including work, for example, by Orton, Stoppard and, at Chritma, David Wood, wa meant to complement that of the main houe, although it wa occaionally preented in it, and to offer a howcae for young talent. It work wa preented for a time at the Netherbow Theatre and then in the Lyceum Studio. In taking over the Lyceum in 1966, Perry took over a company that had etablihed a recent hitory of preenting Scottih play within a mix of claic, international and modern work, marking it a not only lineal ucceor, but in many way the artitic continuation of the Gateway Company. Perry in time developed Writing within thi programme, omething MacDonald developed when he took over in Both men achieved a remarkable level of uch production, given that the Royal Lyceum wa not, like the Travere, a dedicated Writing theatre company. A we hall ee, however, MacDonald achieved a higher level even than Perry and, in thi, wa not initiating a new policy for him. Hi period at Dundee Rep, , alo involved coniderable upport for the production of Writing. Definition of ' Writing' Before carrying out the analyi which will upport thee propoition, however, it would be helpful to conider what the definition of ' Writing' may be. In one ene, the term i clear: ' Writing' in the upper cae i a term much ued in theatrical and Art Council policy document and may be undertood a the production of play newly written for the theatre, often, but not necearily, on commiion. Thi definition, however, leave certain grey area. One of thee area i that of adaptation. The quetion may be aked in what ene an adaptation i new, given that it i a verion of a pre-exiting work, whether novel, hort tory, play or film, the mot frequent ource for tage adaptation in recent year. Yet, it i the cae in a practical ene that Art Council Writing funding both north and outh of the Border ha been made available for adaptation regularly in the lat thirty year. Further, there are clear cae where adaptation ha been een a the creation of a new work with it own value and energy. Indeed, the two cae of Grotowki and Gregory' work referred to above illutrate the point. Further, two more recent example in Britih theatre of creative, and arguably original, adaptation are that by David Edgar of Charle Dicken' Nichola Nickleby (1980) and by Harry Gibon of Irvine Welh' Trainpotting (1994). It i no part of the intention of thi paper to debate whether adaptation repreent original creative work. For the purpoe of thi paper it i accepted that the act of adaptation i an act, if not of creation, then of re-creation. It i alo accepted that it i not an act of originality of the kind that obtain when a playwright conceive a new work ab initio. It i recognied, nonethele, that new adaptation are, within the general term of Art Council and theatre terminology and uage, een a Writing and, indeed, that they repreent the Première of a verion of the adapted text not een before. Thi paper will therefore include adaptation preented for the firt time a

4 Writing, but in the analyi provide a ub-category of Writing,, which will be in contra-ditinction to the category, Première, ued excluively for the firt preentation of original play. A related grey area i that of tranlation. There i a large and complex literature on the topic of tranlation tudie and the quetion of the creativity of the tranlator i a vexed one. Depite thi, it i arguable that the act of tranlation, however creative, of one text into another and repreented a a tranlation of the original doe not contitute Writing. Indeed, in thi convention, a tranlator i often eeking to become in effect inviible, impoible a that may be, and render a 'faithful' tranlation. In uch cae, a tranlation cannot be conidered Writing in the context of Writing. In ome cae, however, a tranlation may conciouly and explicitly involve a proce of adaptation. Thi may even involve relocating a text to another culture a Robert Kemp doe in Let Wive Tak Tent, hi 1948 verion of Molière' École de femme. Here he et character and plot in a geographically explicit Edinburgh with Scot name for the character and a wealth of local detail, a device he take even further in The Laird o' Grippy (1955), baed on Molière' L'Avare. The variety of uch practice ha caued a recent doctoral thei upon the topic to include pecifically in it title the term, tranlation, verion and adaptation. 6 Given thi context, tranlation will not in thi paper be included a Writing, unle the tranlation i alo pecifically decribed a an adaptation. In uch a cae, it will be included under the category. (Such a cae i Tom Gallacher' verion of An Enemy of the People (1979) decribed a 'newly tranlated and adapted.') One final grey area to be conidered before carrying out the analye i that of econd production. Art Council have perceived a a problem the fact that very often, having achieved production, new play are allowed to fade from the tage, depite a potential for further production. Thi led the Scottih Art Council, on the advice of the then Drama Director, John Faulkner, to introduce a funding cheme to upport econd production in The Theatre Writer' Union ubequently raied the iue in England. A a reult of uch repreentation, the Art Council of Great Britain introduced in 1988, on the model of the eventie Scottih cheme, a pecifically targeted Production Scheme to provide incentive funding to encourage the econd production of new work in England. 8 In a trict ene, then, econd production have been included in both the dicoure and the funding practice of playwriting and funding bodie in the pectrum of Writing. Such production are, of their nature, often omitted from any analyi of Writing activity. Yet, it would eem at leat arguable that the upport of a Writing culture within a given theatre might reaonably extend to a policy of preenting econd production of recent new work. In the categorie employed in thi paper, therefore, Production will be included in the analye. Thi incluion recognie an argument that uch production reflect a commitment to a broader Writing culture than that defined imply in term of newly commiioned work. The reervation i entered, however, that further work would need to be carried out, perhap in a larger ample with more comparator, to etablih what poitive correlation in fact exit within production record that include both Première and Production and between thee and thoe which exclude Production. For preent purpoe, however, it will be accepted, following funding body and indutry practice, that Production are a category of Writing. writing policy at the Royal Lyceum under Clive Perry During the period , under the leaderhip of Clive Perry, the Royal Lyceum howed a developing commitment to Writing in it variou form in home-baed main houe production. Thi commitment, however, did not begin immediately. In , for example, there wa only one Première out of fourteen home production and, in the following year, while there were two, there were no Première. In , however, there wa a urge of Première activity with four new play, the highet figure een until the annu mirabili of ,

5 when five home-baed Première were preented a well a a Production. In general, though, in the initial three year, two new play a year on average were preented, occaionally accompanied by an or a Production. Table 1 demontrate the pattern of thee production. A will be een, the table alo provide an analyi of thi record in five perpective: Première,, Production, Première and and all three Writing form overall, preented a a percentage of all home-baed production in a given eaon. Table 1 The Royal Lyceum Theatre Company, Edinburgh: Writing in the home main houe repertoire -- eaon Première Production Total Première of all a %age play of (a) a %age of (b) Production a %age of (c) Première & a %age of (a+b) Writin g a %age of (a+b+c ) It i clear that, after a low tart, there wa a ignificant level of preentation of Writing at the Royal Lyceum in the Perry year. Only in the firt two year did the percentage of Writing preentation fall below 20%. After the udden urge to 31% in , there i a teady growth in the percentage from 20% in over the next two year until when the percentage rie to 60%, an atypically high figure fall away to a till very high figure of 43%, before in the lat two year, a return to the earlier norm of a percentage in the twentie. The role of Première rather than i ignificant in thi figure. After one appear in and none in , the econdary peak year of how a percentage of 31% for Première. Thereafter, a percentage in the twentie uually prevail, except in when the figure drop to 15% offet by an, and in the peak year of when it urge to 50%. It can been een from thi analyi that the primary mean of providing Writing in the decade wa that of

6 providing Première. In ten year, Perry' Royal Lyceum preented twenty-three Première, four and two Production. The cloe identification of Writing and Première in thee year i evident. To contextualie the level of performance achieved by Perry, a comparator may be found in contemporary practice in England. The Cork Report 9 produced an influential repertoire analyi of Englih theatre from , a et of tatitic ubequently kept up to date within the Drama Department of the Art Council of Great Britain (from 1994, of England). Table 2 draw on Cork to how the percentage of Writing in the ACGB funded building-baed repertoire a follow: Table 2 Writing* in the Repertoire at Art Council of Great Britain Funded Building Baed Theatre Companie Première 15% 13% 13% 7% 8% 12% 13% 14% 12% 5% 6% 7% 6% 5% 5% 6% 4% 5% Total 20% 19% 20% 13% 13% 17% 19% 18% 17% *It hould be noted that the Cork analyi doe not include Production a a category and doe not differentiate new from exiting o that a direct comparion between it reult and thoe produced for thi article cannot be made. They are included becaue they offer a direct comparion with regard to Première and an indicative comparion with regard to. In order to allow for variation between year which might mak overall trend and kew the general picture, the Cork team aggregated repertoire trend analye into four year period. Thi produced the following reult: Table 3 Cork Writing Percentage by quadrennia Work 12% 13% 6% 5% Total 18% 18% Dicounting Perry' firt year a arguably an introductory year, the following reult arie from adopting a imilar proce for the Writing repertoire of the Royal Lyceum in the period Arithmetic logic, however, dictate that a more appropriate aggregation of year in thi cae i into triennia rather than the Cork quadrennia: Table 4 The Royal Lyceum Theatre Company, Edinburgh Writing in home main houe repertoire in triennia, Première Production Total Première of all a %age play of (a) a %age of (b) Production a %age of (c) Première & a %age of Writin g a %age of

7 (a+b) (a+b+c ) From thi table it can be een that both in the categorie of Première and Perry in the period achieved far higher figure than were prevalent in England in the parallel period The table further throw into high relief a ignificant difference between the firt triennium and the latter two. In the firt triennium, Writing overall contitute only 21% of the repertoire, and within that only 15% comprie Première, the remainder being (although both thee figure are higher than thoe achieved in Englih theatre in the nearet comparable period for which figure are available, ). In the econd triennium, , by contrat, over a third, 34% of the repertoire, i made up of Writing, and within that over a quarter, 26%, i made up of Première. Although there i ome falling away in the third triennium to 29%, thi i till approaching a third of the programme and within that Première carcely fall away at all, achieving 25% againt the 26% of the econd triennium, a tatitically inignificant variation. An intereting feature of the third triennium, however, i that there are no preented in that period, although there i a teady level of Production, much the ame level of Production a in the econd triennium. What may trike the reader i that the Royal Lyceum triennia accord very cloely with the period of currency of different leading aociate, under different title, to Clive Perry. In the firt period, Richard Eyre i dominant, leaving in 1971, in the econd Bill Bryden who arrived in 1970 i dominant, he leaving in 1974, and in the final period Peter Farago i Perry' leading aociate. It i tempting to ugget that uch a correlation of Writing repertoire content and leading aociate i a reult of more than random chance. An analyi of the main houe and home-baed Fetival repertoire in the firt triennium throw up a further conideration. The Première preented are by Ann Jellicoe, Thoma Kilroy, Keith Waterhoue and Willi Hall, Henry Cecil, Richard Harri and Stanley Eveling. In hort, only the lat i a Scottih writer. Not only i there a ubtantial increae in the preentation of Writing in the period when Bryden take over from Eyre, but the contitution of the programme of Première i different. The Première in the econd triennium include new play by John McGrath, Robert Hawdon, Stewart Conn, Bill Bryden, Ronald Miller, Wolf Mankowitz, Ronald Mavor, Roddy McMillan, Ian Brown and Stewart Conn (again). In thi cae, even out of ten play are by Scottih writer (ix out of ten if McGrath, who wa then baed in England and een a an Englih writer, i conidered depite hi later adoption of Scotland and a Scottih bae a an Englih writer). In the final triennium, thi pattern continue with new play by Ian Brown, 10 Bill Bryden, Sean McCarthy, Anthony Shaffer, John Morri and Jimmy Logan, where Scottih writer write five out of ix. It i not imply, therefore, that in the firt triennium fewer Première are preented, but that fewer Première by Scottih playwright are preented. Indeed, it i only at the very end of the firt triennium that the firt play by a writer baed in Scotland, Stanley Eveling, i preented. Clearly a ea-change took place with the invitation of Clive Perry to Bill Bryden to work at the Royal Lyceum. Thi etablihed a pattern that wa utained, the ole difference when Bryden left being that appear to have gone out of favour.

8 It i clear therefore that the reputation of the Perry-Bryden year at the Royal Lyceum a being particularly fruitful for Writing and epecially the firt performance of new Scottih play i a jutified one. Thoe year mark a clear hift in repertoire content and emphai of work premièred from the Perry-Eyre triennium. Further their influence can be een to continue to cat a trong hadow over the third, Perry-Farago, triennium. Stephen MacDonald and Writing policy at Dundee Rep, Stephen MacDonald became Artitic Director of Dundee Rep at the beginning of After an initial half-year eaon, he tayed for three year, before becoming Artitic Director of the Royal Lyceum in 1976 a ucceor to Clive Perry. Table 5 follow the format of table 1 and 4 in analying the nature of hi Writing home repertoire in MacDonald' period at Dundee Rep. Table 5 Dundee Repertory Theatre Writing in home repertoire, Première Production Tota l of all play Première a %age a %age of of (a) (b) Production a %age of (c) Première & a %age of (a+b) Spring Trienniu m Writin g a %age of (a+b+c ) Rather a wa the cae with Perry in hi firt year at the Royal Lyceum, MacDonald' firt half-eaon include relatively little Writing a compared with hi later work. It i in the next three year that he etablihed the pattern of hi Writing policy and repertoire. Nonethele, in that half eaon he achieved at once level of overall proviion which match thoe of Perry' third triennium (28% againt Perry' 29%) although MacDonald' eaon comprie 14% Première and 14% Production. (The 14% of Première compare favourably with the 12% for thi category in the Cork figure for the relevant quadrennium.) Further, he matche in year one the highet annual percentage of Production ever achieved by Perry at the Royal Lyceum. In fact, there are only two Production in that period at the Royal Lyceum, one in and another in From thi, it may be deduced that MacDonald appeared to place greater emphai on Production within the context of hi Writing repertoire. That thi i o may be een in the next year, In that year, indeed, Première at 14% are exceeded by Production at 23%. Such a figure far exceeded the highet level of 14% for Production found at the Royal Lyceum between 1967 and The eaon from 1973 to 1976 at Dundee Rep are clearly focued on developing and preenting Writing in a variety of form.

9 That thi i o i made clear by the evidence of the eaon. There for the firt time we find MacDonald including in hi repertoire with 7% of the eaon, a figure matching that of the reduced Production alo 7%, and now exceeded greatly by Première running at 29%, producing an overall figure of 43%. Thi mean that, in hi econd full year, MacDonald had already achieved figure for Première and Writing overall which exceeded by a ignificant amount anything een at the Royal Lyceum under Perry until the annu mirabili of and after that only matched by the following year Indeed, the Royal Lyceum, , and Dundee Rep, , match exactly on percentage for Première (29%) and Writing overall (43%). Clearly, what Perry achieved wa quite remarkable. The extent of MacDonald' achievement, therefore, i the more clearly een, benchmarked againt Perry' high level of achievement, and even more clearly een againt the Cork quadrennial figure for , 12% and 18% repectively. That thi wa not chance i borne out by Dundee Rep figure for Here, MacDonald actually raie marginally the percentage of new work in every category, reaching 31% Première, 8% each and Production and 43% Writing overall. From thi, it i evident that he wa committed to an even more thoroughgoing and varied Writing repertoire than that of the Royal Lyceum in the early eventie. Thi i made mot evident by conideration of the figure for the triennium, , at Dundee. While the Première figure (25%) matche the Royal Lyceum in both the triennia, and , and (5%) matche the Royal Lyceum triennium, the percentage of Production at 13% far exceed the 3% or 4% found at the Royal Lyceum in the relevant triennia. MacDonald, in hort, matche the Royal Lyceum repertoire in the preentation of entirely new play and of, but ignificantly exceed it in the preentation of Production of new play. Thi i a clear policy difference and one which achieve overall higher figure of preentation of new work at Dundee in the period under review. The Première preented at Dundee Rep in the triennium included play by Hector MacMillan, Stephen MacDonald, Hector MacMillan (again), John McGrath, Calum Mill, Victor Carin, David Milne, W Gordon Smith, John Cairney, Tom Gallacher, Andrew Cruikhank, Tom Fleming, David Milne (again), John McGrath (again), and Billy Connolly. Here, out of fifteen Première, all are by Scottih writer. Thi compare with figure et out above for the Royal Lyceum a follow: out of out of out of 6. A already noted there wa an increaingly high proportion of Scottih writer among thoe whoe work wa premièred at the Perry Royal Lyceum between 1967 and Nonethele, the MacDonald triennium at Dundee Rep achieved a level of 100% Première by Scottih writer, a well a a higher number of Première than any triennium at the Royal Lyceum between 1967 and Writing policy at the Royal Lyceum under Stephen MacDonald It i againt the background both of the three triennia at the Perry Royal Lyceum between 1967 and 1976 and hi own triennium at Dundee Rep, that Stephen MacDonald' Writing policie when he became Artitic Director of the Royal Lyceum may be judged. Before drawing any concluion, however, againt that background, it i neceary to conider MacDonald' performance with regard to Writing during the period of hi directorhip of the Royal Lyceum. Table 6 et out that performance with regard to hi home repertoire.

10 Table 6 The Royal Lyceum Theatre Company, Edinburgh Writing in home repertoire, Première Tota Production l of all play Première a %age a %age of of (a) (b) Production a %age of (c) Première & a %age of (a+b) Trienniu m Writin g a %age of (a+b+c ) In reviewing thi table it i important to bear in mind certain key hift in the ue of hi main houe and tudio that MacDonald introduced. Perry had allowed the Lyceum Studio to be in effect the home bae of the Young Lyceum Company, which operated a eparate eaon from the main houe, except when occaionally it wa invited to preent a main houe production. MacDonald, by contrat, integrated the tudio work of the Lyceum into the mainhoue operation, renaming the Lyceum Studio the Little Lyceum. He explain the reaon for thi: I alway wanted the two theatre on an equal footing. I made it a condition of accepting the job [of Artitic Director of the Royal Lyceum]. They told me about the 1977 big theatre cloure after I'd been in itu for a few day. 11 Thi lat reference i to the fact that when he arrived to take up pot in the ummer of 1976, he wa informed that the main houe would have to cloe for at leat ix month for renovation and refurbihment. Thi it did for the firt part of 1977, leaving only the former Studio in which the Royal Lyceum Company could perform. The main houe reopened in September 1977 and throughout hi three year, MacDonald programmed the ame company acro both venue. He ued the Little Lyceum a an artitic alternative to the main houe for pecific play and gave play produced in the Little Lyceum a much priority a thoe in the main houe. From Table 6, it i evident that MacDonald at the Royal Lyceum continued the wide-ranging policy that he had developed at Dundee. He preented a level of Première that matched within three percentage point thoe of the previou two triennia at the Royal Lyceum. Not only did he do thi, however, but, after hi firt year, he matched and then trebled the number of while introducing Production a an important trand in hi programming of new work. A a reult, he not only maintained in hi firt two year a ubtantial level of Première. He alo achieved overall Writing figure which match or are higher than any but the two highet year of the earlier directorate, 31% and 37% againt peak of 43% ( ) and 60% ( ). In hi final year, indeed, MacDonald goe even beyond thee level. Then, he achieved a figure for hi final eaon of 39% Première, complemented by 17% and 6% Production. Thi reulted in a ingle year Première and figure of 56% and an overall Writing figure of 62%, both higher than anything achieved before at the Royal Lyceum. By comparion, the figure

11 for England for the relevant Cork quadrennium, , are for Première, 13%, and for Première and, 18%. The contrat in the Englih comparion i tark. The Writing policie of Clive Perry and Stephen MacDonald A comparion of thi performance acro the triennia under review will allow for the kewing effect of peak year and may bet be een from Table 7. Table 7 Writing in home repertoire by triennia RLT RLT RLT D Rep RLT Première a %age a of (a) (b) Production a (c) Première & a (a+b) Writing a %age of (a+b+c) From thi it i clear that in term of Première, after 1970, both the Royal Lyceum and Dundee Rep were howing a conitent average of 25% of repertoire until MacDonald' arrival at the Royal Lyceum when the figure roe for the triennium to 28%. Again, with the exception of the period at the Royal Lyceum, there i a conitency acro the triennia regarding, in thi cae on 5%, until MacDonald' period at the Royal Lyceum when again there i an increae, now to 8%. After 1970, Première and figure are produced of around 30%, with a dip to 25% for the Royal Lyceum in the period , but a major urge to 36% at the Royal Lyceum under MacDonald. We ee, however, variation within a generally etablihed policy of upporting Writing through Première and. The major difference between the two regime, and one that i clearly correlated with MacDonald' own Writing practice, i the difference in Production. The highet percentage achieved at the Royal Lyceum before 1976 i 4% in the period In the ame period MacDonald achieved 3% at Dundee, followed by 9% for hi period at the Royal Lyceum. The effect of thi on Writing preentation i triking. The Royal Lyceum achieve the figure of 21% in , high in comparion with the Cork data, and the ignificantly higher figure of 34% and 29% in the next two triennia. Yet, MacDonald achieve a rate almot fifty per cent higher, 43% at Dundee Rep in and 45% at the Royal Lyceum in

12 It i clear that the broader Production policy adopted by MacDonald of work premièred by other theatre companie widened and deepened the range of upport for Writing he could offer. Two further point arie here worthy of conideration. One i that, a noted earlier, the reaon the Scottih Art Council launched it Production cheme in 1973 wa a perception that there wa an obeion with Première. Thi wa een to lead to a failure by director to exploit the good work created by other in favour of their 'own' commiioned work. Of coure, not every play that i preented i worthy of econd performance: Writing i by it nature experimental and experiment may fail. Nonethele, there i a perceived reluctance of director to follow up new work unle it be een a a afe popular hit, uch a, in recent year in Scotland, both The Steamie (1987) and Mary Queen of Scot got her head chopped off (1987). Thi may mean that work that i teted and tried may not achieve the further expoure it deerve. Thi additionally mean that theatre are miing the box office opportunity of building on a partially known quantity, o that the failure may be economic a well a artitic. ly, Production often involve an element of rewriting and development growing out of the experience of the Première production. Thi mean that often the play preented a a Production i a trengthened verion of the firt production. Certainly, Stewart Conn' The Aquarium premièred at the Royal Lyceum in May 1973 and then produced a econd time at Dundee Rep in September 1973 i a good example of thi proce: the play wa ubtantially revied between it firt and econd production. Other example include Dundee' production of Victor Carin' adaptation of von Kleit, The Chippit Chantie, in May 1974 following a Première at the Royal Lyceum in Augut 1968 and Hector MacMillan' The Gay Gorbal, preented in May 1976 after it Travere Theatre Première in February In hort, the attractivene to an audience of a Production may lie in the fact that a play already developed and, to an extent, known i likely to be trengthened for it econd production. The effect of viiting production on Writing policie So far, thi article ha focued on home production. It may be argued, however, that in the artitic policy of the two theatre under review, there wa a wider artitic viion expreed through the election of touring product. Thi formed a mall but ignificant part of the programme of the theatre in the period being dicued, although much le at the Royal Lyceum under MacDonald, preumably becaue of the change at the theatre following refurbihment and the changed ue of the Studio/Little Lyceum. Table 8 et out the drama repertoire for the eaon under review broken down with Première identified, and a noted previouly both dance and opera excluded: Table 8 Viiting repertoire RLT Première Total D Rep Première Total What i triking about thi table i the high level of Première included in viiting production at Dundee Rep under MacDonald. Again thi appear to be a trategic policy deciion related to a commitment to a poitive Writing policy. Indeed, the one viiting production at the Royal Lyceum under MacDonald i alo a Première. Perry ha clearly a teady interet in viiting work, but there i no clear correlation between viiting production and Première. Table 9 et out the reult achieved when viiting drama i included in the analyi of Writing repertoire on the Royal

13 Lyceum (for comparative purpoe the figure for home Première percentage and overall home Writing percentage from table 1 are included.) Table 9 Viiting Première' effect on Perry' Royal Lyceum programme in relevant year Premièr e Adaptati on Producti on Tot al Premièr e a (a) Home Premièr e a Adaptati on a (b) Producti on a (c) Première & Adaptati on a (a+b) Writin g a %age of (a+b+ c) Home Writin g a %age of It can be een from thi that the effect of including viiting work in the relevant four year i, in three of thoe year, to increae ignificantly both Première and overall Writing percentage. A if to demontrate the point already made, however, that no overall viiting production policy eemed to exit at Perry' Royal Lyceum, the effect of thee viiting production in already referred to a the annu mirabili, i to reduce the percentage in both categorie. In the cae of Writing overall, the reduction i ubtantial, from 60% to 49%, till a very high figure, of coure, for a ingle year. At Dundee Rep, however, where a policy of bringing in viiting work to complement a Writing policy i evident, a contrating picture emerge in table 10: Table 10 Viiting Première: effect on Dundee Rep repertoire Premièr e Adaptati on Producti on Tot al Premièr e a (a) Home Premièr e a Adaptati on a (b) Producti on a (c) Première & Adaptati on a (a+b) Writin g a %age of (a+b+ c) Home Writin g a %age of

14 From thi it i clear that the viiting production at Dundee Rep conitently increae the percentage relating to Première and Writing overall. The mallet increae in both categorie are in (6% and 4%); otherwie the increae are in the range 8% to 12%, by any meaure a ubtantial increae. Table 11 include viiting production by triennia to provide an extenion of Table 7: Table 11 Writing in Home and Viiting Repertoire by triennia Première Total Première a (a) a (b) Production a (c) Première & a (a+b) RLT RLT RLT D Rep RLT Writing a (a+b+c) From thi analyi it i clear that Clive Perry' programming policy at the Royal Lyceum foregrounded Writing very trongly particularly in the period, It i alo clear that not only did Stephen MacDonald' Dundee policy parallel the achievement of Perry, but that when he took over the Royal Lyceum, MacDonald' achievement exceeded even Perry'. It i alo clear that, although Perry came firmly to upport new Scottih writing, MacDonald focued from the beginning excluively on Writing by Scottih writer. What i alo triking about MacDonald' programming i the conitency with which he developed a programme policy for Dundee Rep that he carried over into the Royal Lyceum. In thi move, he varied hi programming only to the extent that, a he increaed the number of home-baed Writing production at the Royal Lyceum, he left no room for viiting production, whether Première or not. Thi coherent and varied policy caue hi achievement to differ from, and effectively exceed, that of Perry. The long-term importance of Perry and MacDonald' Writing policie It may be quetioned, given the analyi undertaken already, whether the Writing policie dicued had any long-term effect on Scottih theatre. It i, of coure, entirely poible that a Writing policy of the kind both of thee director developed might involve playwright whoe work had no lating ignificance and who were themelve quickly forgotten. The nature of their achievement in upport of Scottih dramatic writing, therefore, require analyi from thi further perpective, conideration alo being given to the extent to which they premièred the ame playwright. In Perry' Royal Lyceum, play by Scottih playwright that were premièred were by Ian Brown, Bill Bryden, Stewart Conn, Stanley Eveling, Jimmy Logan, Sean McCarthy, John McGrath, Roddy MacMillan, Ronald Mavor and John Morri. At Dundee, MacDonald premièred play by John Cairney, Victor Carin, Billy Connolly, Andrew Cruikhank, Tom Fleming, Tom Gallacher, Stephen MacDonald, Hector MacMillan, Calum Mill, David Milne and W Gordon Smith. At the Royal Lyceum,

15 MacDonald premièred play by Ian Brown, Iain Cuthberton, Stewart Conn, Tom Gallacher, Atholl Hay, John Haggerty, Stephen MacDonald, John McGrath, Howard Purdie and John Sutherland. Certain playwright were premièred by both director: thee were Ian Brown, Stewart Conn and (including viiting Première) John McGrath. For only three out of a of twenty-ix to be in common may ugget remarkably little overlap between the playwright elected within the Writing policie of Perry and MacDonald. It i further intereting to note that of the nineteen playwright whoe work wa premièred by MacDonald, only two, Tom Gallacher and MacDonald himelf, had new play premièred at both theatre. Conn, however, had two Production (I Didn t Alway Live Here and The Aquarium) at Dundee and a Première (Play Donkey) and a Production (The Burning) at the Royal Lyceum, while Hector MacMillan had two Première (The Riing and The Royal Viit) and a Production (The Gay Gorbal) at Dundee and a Production (The Royal Viit) at the Royal Lyceum. One of the reaon for thee reult may be that Perry and Bryden had certain company playwright, including Bryden himelf, but alo Brown, Conn, McCarthy and Morri, of whom MacDonald worked with only Brown and Conn, while having hi own company writer in Gallacher, MacMillan and MacDonald himelf. A further contributor to the lack of overlap between the lit of playwright may be argued to be that fact that, while both Perry and MacDonald encouraged appropriate actor to write, Perry did o in a retricted manner. Perry premièred work by Jimmy Logan and Roddy MacMillan, who, it hould be remembered, at the time of the development of The Beveller had had only one play, All in Good Faith (1954), preented, then een a a youthful piece, and wa predominantly known a a fine actor. MacDonald, on the other hand, preented work by ix writer predominantly known a actor or actor/director, John Cairney, Andrew Cruikhank, Iain Cuthberton, Tom Fleming, Calum Mill and Stephen MacDonald himelf. It may be that hi own artitic development from actor/director to add playwriting to hi craft may have made him ympathetic to other actor whoe talent tended in a imilar direction. It i often difficult to ae the ignificance in a longer perpective of uch Première in the difficult area of theatrical reputation, influence and importance. In order to offer ome evaluation of the importance of the writer developed and preented by thee two director, a tentative analyi of the long term importance of their work ha been undertaken by a verion of citation analyi. Three important text of contemporary Scottih theatre hitory have been identified. Thee are Volume Four of the Aberdeen Hitory of Scottih Literature 13 (H), Scottih Theatre ince the Seventie 14 (S) and A Hitory of Scottih Theatre 15 (X). The indice of all three have been earched for reference to Scottih playwright premièred by Perry (P) and MacDonald (M) in the period under review with the following reult: Reference in Indice of Three Key Critical/Hitorical Text Ian Brown P/M H S - Bill Bryden P H S X John Cairney M - - X Victor Carin M - S - Stewart Conn P/M H S X Billy Connolly M H S X Andrew Cruikhank M Iain Cuthberton M - S X Stanley Eveling P H S X (a actor) (a director)

16 Tom Fleming M H S X Tom Gallacher M H S X Atholl Hay M John Haggerty M Jimmy Logan P H S - Sean McCarthy P John McGrath P/M H S X Stephen MacDonald M - S X Hector MacMillan M H S X Roddy MacMillan P H S X Ronald Mavor P H S - Calum Mill M David Milne M John Morri P Howard Purdie M W Gordon Smith M - S - John Sutherland M (a actor) (a director) From thi analyi it can be een that, of the ten playwright premièred by Perry, eight are cited (even a playwright) in key hitorical text and, of the nineteen premièred by MacDonald, twelve are cited (nine a playwright). There are, of coure, no clear norm for judging what i a 'good' reult in thi area. It i, nonethele, clear that both director developed through their Writing policie new writing by playwright whoe ignificance ha been een in later authoritative text a remaining ignificant in the development of Scottih theatre. Thi analyi, one hope, may have allowed for a more robut undertanding of the achievement of both director and of their theatre in the development of new writing in the modern Scottih theatre. Iue of Writing definition and policy Thi tudy ha raied a number of other important iue, not only for the analyi of the performance of the Royal Lyceum with regard to Writing production in the year under analyi, but for any tudy of Writing policy. Firtly, it i evident that a clear definition and undertanding i required of what the nature of Writing i. ly, it i clear that it i not enough to ay that a theatre company upport Writing, but that uch a tatement require deeper analyi: a Writing policy i ometime een a imply a matter of preenting Première. Thi i omething neither Perry nor MacDonald topped at, rather varying the form of homeproduced Writing proviion they programmed. The effect of the mix of varietie of Writing within any programming policy, therefore, mut be addreed. Thirdly, even beyond thi, the role of viiting production and their effect on the overall programming of the home theatre mut be conidered. Finally, it i clearly an iue of policy a to how the mix and balance of Writing form i programmed. It i alo, conequently, clear that within the overall rubric of a Writing programming policy, difference of pecific policy may have a ignificant effect on the overall impact of a given theatre' actual Writing proviion. In the cae of thi tudy, the quetion ha not imply related to Première or new ; it ha related to the role of Production within the home programme and viiting production on the overall programme.

17 In exploring important iue of Writing policy and it analyi, then, thi article ha conidered the nature of Writing, it upport and proviion. It ha primarily, however, demontrated on a clear evidential bai the very great achievement in term of ignificant Writing development of the Perry decade at the Royal Lyceum Theatre, particularly in it lat ix year. It ha gone further and recognied the ometime neglected contribution of Stephen MacDonald a Artitic Director, firt at Dundee Rep and then at the Royal Lyceum. It i clear that MacDonald wa an innovative and challenging main houe producer of Writing with a lating influence on the haping of modern Scottih theatre. Queen Margaret Univerity College, Edinburgh Endnote. 1 Randall Stevenon, for example, refer to the importance alongide the work of 7:84 Theatre Company (Scotland) and the Travere Theatre Company of 'Bill Bryden' work with a Scottih company and Scottih dramatit at the Royal Lyceum in the early year of the eventie', in 'Snake and Ladder, Snake and Owl: Charting Scottih Theatre' in Randall Stevenon and Gavin Wallace (ed), Scottih Theatre ince the Seventie (Edinburgh: Edinburgh Univerity Pre, 1996), p.6; and Donald Campbell, A Brighter Sunhine: A Hundred Year of the Edinburgh Royal Lyceum Theatre (Edinburgh: Polygon, 1983) alo refer to the work of thi period. 2 Bill Findlay (ed), Scot Play of the Seventie, (Dalkeith: Scottih Cultural Pre, 2001). The play referred to are: Stewart Conn, The Burning (1971), Bill Bryden, Willie Rough (1972), and Roddy McMillan, The Beveller (1973). 3 Moultrie R. Kelall, 'The Lat Five', in Edinburgh Gateway Company, The Twelve Seaon of the Edinburgh Gateway Company (Edinburgh: St Gile Pre, 1965) pp I am grateful to Paul Ile, Edinburgh, for upplying and confirming the date regarding the hitory of the Royal Lyceum Theatre Company included in thi paragraph. 5 Thi company continued until the etablihment of Lothian Region a part of local government reorganiation in 1974 when the regional education authority took over the role of providing TIE in Edinburgh and it environ. 6 William (Bill) Findlay, Motivation and Method in Scot Tranlation, Verion and of Play from the Hitoric Repertoire of Continental European Drama, 2 vol. (Unpublihed thei: Queen Margaret Univerity College, Edinburgh, 2000). 7 Confirmed by John Faulkner, interview, 12 December Confirmed by Charle Hart, Writing Officer, Art Council of England, interview, 12 December Theatre IS for All: the Report of the Enquiry into Profeional Theatre in England under the Chairmanhip of Sir Kenneth Cork (London: Art Council of Great Britain, 1986).