Morning:
8°c
Threatened theatre comes up Roses with £1.8m rescue plan
Louise Jury24 Dec 2008
The Rose Theatre in Kingston was today celebrating an 11th-hour escape from closure after a £1.8million rescue package was agreed.
The theatre, which only opened in January, can continue trading after borough councillors voted to provide funding.
They agreed last night by the tightest of margins - 20 to 19 - to back a three-year rescue package of £600,000 annually.
It puts the venue on a stable financial footing for the first time and means Stephen Unwin, the artistic director, can now press ahead with a programme for next year.
Councillors backed away from abandoning the venue. The Tory opposition had raised fears that providing subsidy could have "a detrimental effect on funding for other front-line services".
But supporters argued the venue can be a beacon for the revival of night-time Kingston, a first-class theatre venue like north London's Almeida and a community arts centre.
Mr Unwin said: "Theatres like this don't exist without public funding. I'm proud of what we achieved in the last year but the nightmare of the last year is we've stumbled along.
"We've got to move forward now. The potential of the place is absolutely marvellous."
The 900-seat theatre opened in a blaze of publicity and good reviews for the debut production of Chekhov's Uncle Vanya which was directed by Sir Peter Hall.
Built on the model of the Elizabethan original, the venue was first suggested by councillors and residents in 1986. The shell was provided as part of a property development deal.
But it took another £11 million to fit it out. Original plans failed to address how exactly the theatre, which is 95 per cent owned by Kingston council, would be funded.
By this autumn, it had become clear to trustees that public funding was needed by the end of the year to stay open.
They offered a "new deal" whereby the theatre offered services such as free space for education programmes and libraries' outreach work in return for a subsidy.
Derek Osbourne, the Liberal Democrat council leader, backed the theatre as an "important lynchpin in what Kingston offered to its residents, the business sector and visitors".
Local businesses say the theatre has made a significant contribution.
It was also stressed that the council would have incurred costs such as insurance and loss of car parking revenue.
Funding drama with a happy ending
Chris Blackhurst
To say that last night's council decision came as a relief to those of us involved in the Rose Theatre is an understatement.
Make no mistake, if the money had not been forthcoming, the stunning new venue would have closed.
The cash from the council, together with a smaller amount from Kingston University, the other major stakeholder, guarantees its future. As a director and trustee, I joined when the building was a shell. It was impossible not to be swept away by the ambition and vision of the creators.
I'd lived in Kingston since 1986 and had grown to adore the place, but something was missing from its centre. Mention the town to outsiders and they would raise two things: the fine shopping and the convoluted one-way system.
The arts and culture were never referred to. With reason — residents were used to finding their intellectual fix in Richmond or the West End.
Nevertheless, the scale of the theatre was incredible.
It wasn't to be any old theatre, it was to be a faithful adaptation of Shakespeare's original Rose, with a pit for those who couldn't pay seat prices or wished to be closer to the actors.
The auditorium holds nearly 1,000 people yet its vertical design offers an intimacy not found at similar-sized venues.
The plan was that we would be totally privately funded. No other UK theatre of that size in Britain is financed entirely by companies, foundations and individuals.
We had to raise the money to fit out the building and find the funds for the artistic team. It's this last which proved a step too far. Persuading private donors to cough up in the absence of public operational funding was too much. We pressed on and the Rose is coming to the end of a triumphant first year.
But without the council and university backing, there would be no second or third years. Now there will be.
This is one story about the performing arts that has a genuinely happy ending.
Reader views (1)
What is wrong with Arts Funders in this country? They will stump up millions for a hideous pile of bricks, but mention "operational expenses", ie artists, and they think they are being taken for a ride and hoard their "hard-earned" cash. Let them watch shopping channel repeats until their faces fall off.
- Bloke, London, 29/12/2008 01:26
Report abuse
