REVIEWS: EVENTS & STORIES

25th October 2001 was the 25th anniversary of the official opening of the National Theatre on the South Bank and to celebrate the three directors, who have led the company in Denys Lasdun’s landark building, came together at the Olivier Theatre to discuss the achievements of a dramatic first quarter of a century.

In a discussion chaired by Sue MacGregor, Peter Hall (Director 1976 – 1988), Richard Eyre (Director 1988 – 1997) and Trevor Nunn (Director 1997 – present) all gave their opinions of why the National is such a great institution.

Peter Hall was most articulate. He started off by saying that nobody had wanted a National Theatre, not the theatrical society, not the government, no one except ‘the public’. But of course bureaucrats were not much interested in what the public wanted!! In fact, Hall said that it was the great Laurence Olivier who persisted and worked hard for a National theatre and as he was ‘god’ in the theatrical world, he was eventually successful in persuading the powers that be. Hall, also said that originally the board did not want the Cottesloe theatre, saying that London has the Royal Court and fringe theatre providing small spaces for plays. However, the designer Denys Lasdun told Hall that there was a small hollow gap in the foundations under the Olivier. He said they couldn’t do anything about it because it is part of the foundation. So the Cottesloe was there when they eventually needed it!!

Richard Eyre told us that, although the National does not have an ensemble, about a third of the actors at the National at any one time have preformed there many times before, mentioning Michael Bryant, Judi Dench and Michael Gambon amongst others. Eyre also said that all seat prices at the National should be £10. He says that the National’s grant has remained the same for 5 years so in real terms the company are getting less and less money because the price of everything else is increasing. So the only way for the National to raise money is by putting up the seat prices and putting on musicals that transfer to the West End to make the National some cash. He also said the venue should not have been given the "Royal" tag, saying, "I find Royal National Theatre an oxymoron and I regret it." He revealed how Labour peers Lord Rayne and Lord Mishcon - theatre board members at the time - had insisted on the "Royal" after the theatre put on Alan Bennett's A Question of Attribution in 1988. Lord Rayne in particular thought the "Royal" would help counter criticism against the theatre in its early years, he added.

Trevor Nunn, explained why he is turning the Lyttelton theatre into two theatres for a season. With one seating approx. 100. This is so that young directors, writers etc can be bolder and more importantly give more young people the opportunity of getting their work performed. Nunn also took the opportunity to answer his critics about staging big musicals. He said that since he has been director there have been 88 productions of which only 5 have been musicals!!

At the end there were questions from the audience. One asked why so many audience members of the National were older patrons and what the National was doing to attract younger audiences. Peter Hall said the reason there are older people is because the young cannot afford the ticket prices! Richard Eyre did not believe the National audience is mainly old, saying it is mixed. The show ended with one irritated gentlemen from the audience asking how, after 25 years, the National have not been able to find a decent director?(or at least I think this is what he asked?). Another asked why there were so few woman directors at the National?

There were many stories that made for a truly wonderful experience and seeing three great men of the National Theatre on stage at the same time was a joy.

(Darren Dalglish)