Creating a healthy artistic climate for circus in the UK
At the Circus Symposium two years ago, I advocated the setting up of a national flagship company that would have the size and resources to inspire young performers and raise the profile of new UK circus. I now think this is a bad idea for two reasons; firstly because a healthy artistic climate needs to value and build on the diversity of the current new circus culture and secondly because it is unhealthy to set up a monolithic, dominating company that soaks up all available funding resources.
What makes a healthy artistic climate ? At Circomedia we believe in a holistic development, that's to say the development of the mind and heart as well as the body. Similarly on a national dimension the industry needs its thinkers and poets if it is to produce more than effects and light entertainment. We must create the conditions in which good practitioners are able to develop artistically - that is to say that they have the places and time to research, experiment and develop an understanding of the whole enterprise (- how to research, devise, construct etc) and how to produce. Like visual artists they are autonomous in terms of creation and are able to market their work themselves or through agents. As we know these small acts have proliferated over the last ten years after the demise of the larger new circuses. They may be good or bad depending on the capabilities of the individuals and how they deal with the commercial pressures but the important thing about them is that the activities are widespread geographically and diverse artistically. They provide the grassroots of a circus culture; they introduce new people to the skills through a whole variety of routes and they provide a wealth of experimentation suited to their particular local context. At our SW New Circus meeting in February it was clear that what young performers need is small amounts of funding and regular, well set up showcases that act as a meeting place for sharing new ideas as much as for self-promotion. I believe in Australia there is a funding system that enables individuals to make circus pieces for showcases.
This diversity is extremely important because experimentation and cross-fertilisation can occur. It is not everyone's cup of tea but I have great respect or the Gandini Juggling Project for breaking new ground and resisting commercial pressures. It is also good that Performance Art companies such as IOU have used circus skills as a medium. It was, after all, the work of the performance art pioneers in the sixties that led on to absurd juxtapositions that made Monty Python so successful.
At Circomedia we value and encourage diversity - many different sorts of people come to train there, not only from very different parts of the world but also with quite different aims and tastes; they may not choose to work together but they rub shoulders and learn to appreciate others work. This opens them to new possibilities. If you ask, as we do, the creative theatre students with low skill levels to make a juggling act they will often come up with a highly original approach to juggling that can be appreciated and even used by the more technically competent. This communication or artistic transference breathes fresh air into circus. As we know what tends to happen in modern culture, especially in big cities, is a self-imposed ghetto-isation, so that circus people only mix with other circus people of the same sort and very quickly the atmosphere becomes stale and introverted; it lacks any perspective on itself and can becomes self-important. This has been one of the downfalls of traditional circus.
A national flagship company will discourage diversity by soaking up funds and also by its predominance causing a climate of imitation. We have already seen the influence of Cirque du Soleil in Britain - it has provided a new image of circus and because of its commercial success we have seen many traditional circuses moving in this direction. Much has been made of the fact that millions of people will see the Dome show and that this will expose them to new circus - all well and good but afterwards they will say "Lets have some more of that", they won¹t be saying "Lets go down the local arts centre and see the Gandinis".
My second point is about the process of setting up a company. There are two ways to do this - top down or bottom up. The first is quick and commercially efficient - the producer who has money or access to money engages a team - a director, a choreographer, a designer, a writer, composer etc and these in turn engage the performers. There is a clear hierarchy with the performers near the bottom.
The other method maintains the performers as central to the creative process. To create a true ensemble company everyone must have an understanding of the whole enterprise and contribute artistically, this requires a certain maturity in the performers, but it increases the pool of ideas and develops a sense of ownership of the work that is crucial for maintaining the performers engagement over long runs. Although this kind of ensemble is harder in larger companies it is easier within a circus format because it is more multi-faceted. The French companies such as Baroque are particularly successful in developing this kind of ensemble.
Clearly the latter is preferable being artist- led it is more resistant to commercial pressures and more likely to do artistic research and take risks. The producer led method, because it is often a larger and more commercial operation will tend to apply a winning formula, often by cherry picking ideas from artist-led companies. The difference between the two systems can most clearly be seen in the contrast between the French circuses and the Cirque De Soleil which, with its shareholders looking to maximise its profits must produce a product for the American mass market.
So what is the solution? I suggest that what we need is a whole range of companies, any future funding should be spread between four or five companies so that a whole range of styles are being developed and we don¹t fall into the trap of creating another set of cliché images for circus. It has been hard enough to extricate ourselves from the clichés of traditional circus. Circomedia has been lucky enough to secure a small amount of Arts Council funding for a co-production with the Bristol Old Vic that will be touring. This funding was the first circusey project for almost ten years to come via the Drama department, so perhaps there are encouraging signs of more openness.
We also need an effective national circus organisation. The Circus Forum that was set up a few years ago seems to have disappeared. I¹d be interested to know from anyone what happened to that. The quality of management skills within the New Circus sector has been patchy to say the least so we need to ensure that this organisation is effective and remains committed to the advancement of the whole industry nation wide and does not become used as a means of advancement of a few organisations. Self-interest and opportunism seems to permeate the circus industry which is why I believe so little has been achieved, everyone is suspicious of the motives of other organisations. This is not the case in other artforms. I was involved in steering the Mime Action Group about ten years ago and this seems a good model for a new organisation. I believe this should be a priority for any new funding.
Bim Mason