NIDA Neither

The recent saga with the National Institute of Dramatic Arts (NIDA) had inevitably put the drama school back on to the radar for all the wrong reasons.

The public debacle was triggered by a soon to be published article from a former boarder member, Chris Puplick . In his paper he criticised the current director and board chairman Lynne Williams and Malcom Long without a single dose of hesitation. These include Lynne William’s qualification to lead the prestigious drama school and the new direction for the school. NIDA, lead by Malcom Long then hit back criticising Chris as disaffected. Both sides have no signs of backing down and both sides are ready to pounce. 

As a person who worked there and had partly studied there (as part of my Theatrical Studies course at UNSW), it is sad to see that it had come down to this.  I personally do not know Lynne Williams or Malcom Long. However, judging from what I noticed in recent NIDA productions, I do have some issues with the current direction of the curriculum. First most, the importance of voice work had been diminished in the curriculum. With the departure of some of the best voice teachers in the country at the school, there is a reduction in the importance of voice work in the curriculum. The result? Some pretty bad voices on the stage – there was a performance I went to late last year and I was third road from the stage but I couldn’t hear a clear word from the actors up stage. This how bad some of the voices have become. I don’t know whether it is Lynne William’s CV’s issue or she really does not like people having a voice, that the voice component of the training was so marginalised.

The other thing that I personally dislike is the slicing and dicing of the library space at the Institution. As an educational institution, and being a tertiary education librarian for so many years, the dismissive attitude of the current NIDA management to the library is appalling. More real estate were allocated to building study rooms and because of that the collection was sacrificed. The attitude of modernising the library by providing more computers for online resources and ignore the fact that a lot of materials, especially Australian materials, are not online or even published, NIDA as the leading drama school of the country does have the responsibility to keep a good archive of materials for their students. The attitude of “if any materials has low circulation, it is not worth getting or keeping” is totally against the principle of higher education librarianship that has the duty of “maintain records and archives of materials that helped shaped the society and culture”. And this role is particularly important when it comes to the NIDA library; that can be specialised for this function. Further really, not everything is on Google. Google is a search engine that serves its purpose as an entry to knowledge but Google has no obligation to provide inspiring documents, videos and scripts that help the Australian theatre landscape to further develop.

The current public saga with NIDA certainly did not paint a good image for the drama school. But the core here is whether NIDA still aims to be a drama school that provides great training for actors and prepare them for the rough road ahead; or is NIDA just going to be a soap opera actor factory that produces actors with bad voices and pretty face? If so, apart from a legacy that was created by previous teachers such as Tony Knight, Kevin Jackson, Bill Pepper, Julia Cotton, Jane Harders, Ken Healey etc. etc. and the likes of talented graduates such as Cate Blanchett, Mel Gibson, Judy Davis, Colin Friels, Hugo Weaving, and Richard Roxburgh, what is going to distinguish the modern NIDA from just any other “acting school” in the streets? That is something whoever is serious about acting should think about.

I am sure Lynne Williams and Malcom Long will have things “in control” and will be in all out damage control for the school for this is what is needed for both them and the school.  No doubt no outsider can have a say on how the school uses its resources and budget, including that at one stage Lynne Williams used the school’s money to hire private detectives to investigate staff about a “potential life threat” against her in the school, which turned out to be just a prank played on her by someone. However, if dramas continue to unfold, it will no doubt cast shadows on the reputation and credibility of the once respectable drama school. Whether it would become a “War of the Roses” style ending with undesirable collateral damage is yet to be seen, but certainly no body wants to see that the students who went there to study ended up being the collateral damage from the politics above. 

Uncle Vanya

Without a doubt Sydney Theatre Company’s “Uncle Vanya” is one of the most anticipated productions of the year. With a stellar cast such as Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving, Richard Roxburgh, John Bell and Jacki Weaver, it has a lot to live up to.

Sydney Theatre Company’s production of “Uncle Vanya” is a standard Chekov play with a non-standard touch. All the things you can expect from a Chekov play such as the condemnation of the landlords, the mocking of the intelligentsia, the disapproval of industrialisation, and the life of living in the middle of nothing were all echoing around the walls of the theatre in the 2.5 hour production. However, you no longer see the actors dressed in white standard “Chekov costumes” and walking around in certain posts. Gyoryi Szakacs, the costume designer had injected a heavy dose of naturalism into the costumes – they were worn out and sometimes unsophisticated yet they cry the parts out loudly. This twist of costume design fits in nicely with the superb class that delivered one of the most natural performances you saw on stage this year.

John Bell plays the returned “Celebrity Professor” Serebryakov who, as with some modern celebrities just created hell after hell for the rest of the people in the house. He completely upset the balance of time and habits of everyone and took his young second wife Yelena (Cate Blanchett) for granted. Richard Roxburgh plays the title role of Vanya who wasted most of his adult life for a mere return of profit for his hard work and had to endure a mother (Sandy Gore) who completely ignored his contributions but looked up to Serebryakov. The play opened with Jacki Weaver as the Nanny and Hugo Weaving as the battered doctor Astrov. The opening scene immediately delivered to the audience what a cast of top notch actors can do. The restlessness Hugo Weaving displayed was a sharp contrast to the reminiscing calmness that Jacki Weaver was delivering and yet they just melted together into one strong daily conversation. Cate Blanchett as the unsatisfied trophy wife was an obvious misfit to the rural setting. The immaculate locks on her hair and her tailored fit wardrobe distinguished her from the plain looking daughter Sonya (Hayley McElhinney) and paved way for future disruptions to this quiet and extremely boring country household. She became the drop of water that triggered a series of ripple effects for the pool. There were several scenes between Cate and individual cast members that were just a pleasure to watch. Richard Roxbourgh told the sad story of the title role with great precision and his break down scene in the second half was just a showcase of what a great actor can do when he is in a company of other great actors with a great script. Hayley McElhinney was a good choice for Sonya as she did exhibit the helpless plainness Chekov described in the play. However, sometimes her words lack the unbearable lightness of life that one would expect and this was particularly obvious in her closing monologue. Also at times I found the over deployment of head movements during conversation quite distracting.

Andrew Upton’s adaptation had modernised the language to make the material more approachable, although at times it is less poetic as it should be. However, given the setting is in a rural household (and most characters are supposed to be uneducated), this was not a serious problem. The set by Zsolt Khell was smart and made great use of the stage space. It first opens up to display an extensive space but then as the story progresses, it closes in further and further and created a suffocating space for all the characters – which directly reflects the stifling of these people because of the arrival of Serebryakov. However, also because of this sophistication in the set design, the audience needs to be prepared for some longish idle time when the set is changed on stage.

On the whole, “Uncle Vanya” represents a fine night of theatre for those who love classic text and great performances. If you are not a fan of Chekov you will still find the material angry and at times too tooth-aching. However, just having a chance to see a group of great actors working together is pure enjoyment that you will relish for the rest of the night.