Variety: Breaking into the boys club
Female directors stake claim on British stages[/url]
Apr. 5, 2007
By DAVID BENEDICT
What links current or upcoming productions of "Dying for It," "Kiss of the Spider Woman," "Equus," "A Fine Balance," "A Matter of Life and Death," "Attempts on Her Life," "Mamma Mia!," "Leaves" and "The Jewish Wife"?
Not only are they all at major London addresses -- among them the Almeida, Donmar, National Theater, Royal Court and Young Vic -- they're all directed by British women.
In common with most traditionally male-dominated professions, when it comes to power positions, women in theater have suffered beneath the glass ceiling. They have reached senior administrative posts, and casting has long been a largely female preserve but, with notable exceptions, women rarely have been entrusted with artistic directorships. No woman has yet run the National , the Royal Shakespeare Company or the Royal Court.
As Twyla Tharp, one of few women Broadway helmers, may have said, the times they are a-changin'.
Three of RSC's mainstage productions this year were by women. One of those, the highly praised "Much Ado About Nothing," was helmed by Marianne Elliott who, on the strength of her NT debut, "Pillars of the Community," was promptly made one of a.d. Nicholas Hytner's associate directors.
Despite being the daughter of a director -- Michael Elliott, founder of Manchester's influential Royal Exchange Theater -- she initially found the profession daunting.
"It took me until I was 27 to realize it was possible to do it as a woman," says the director, now 40. "I think it's getting easier, but it will never reach full parity because the hours mean it's difficult to do with children. I don't want to generalize, but to a degree that's easier for men because there's a tradition of it. My father was a fantastic dad, but he really was away a lot of the time."
With nine NT productions this year helmed by seven women, including Melly Still's Broadway-bound "Coram Boy," it's easy to see why Elliott believes Hytner has made a conscious effort to create further opportunities for women. So is he implementing positive discrimination?
"Absolutely not," insists Hytner. "Ever since coming here in 2002, I've argued that running this building is about recognizing that this is a nationaltheater. The consequence of that has not been to be representative of every race, gender, sexuality, but to use that idea as a kind of creative spine. It's not about political necessity, but making exciting creative choices. If that means more women, great."
No one disagrees that beyond the safety net of subsidy, women face a distinctly colder climate in the commercial sector, putting them in a double-bind.
"In commercial theater the primary concern is safety: what will work to make the bucks," offers Elliott. "If women don't have the West End on their CV, they won't look safe."
The most recent figure to buck that trend is Thea Sharrock. Her first production, a revival of Caryl Churchill's "Top Girls," won the James Menzies-Kitchin Young Director award and made headlines by transferring into the Aldwych Theater in 2002. She was 25. Since then, she has helmed "Blithe Spirit," "Heroes," "A Voyage Round My Father" and now "Equus," all in the West End.
But in terms of hard cash, the trailblazer was Phyllida Lloyd. The 49-year-old helmer's resume spans award-winning work throughout the U.K.'s leading subsidized theaters, European opera houses and the West End, hitting paydirt with "Mamma Mia!" worldwide. (She's about to direct the film adaptation of the ABBA tuner, starring Meryl Streep and Pierce Brosnan.)
Lloyd is under no illusions about opportunities for women directors. "In the U.K., we still have -- just -- that crucial bedrock of state-subsidized theater, and women are given chances in those institutions," she says.
The commercial sector, she argues, is more of a boys' club. As she puts it, "I am the only British girl to have been let loose on a West End musical in recent years."
Even on that, Lloyd points to having found herself in a unique position. Her observation is distinctly double-edged: "I was lucky that my producer was a woman and my composers felt a female director might be more pleased to collaborate."
No other British female director can boast a production of that scale. But in terms of international arts reputation, Lloyd is matched by Deborah Warner, 47.
The latter's highly praised 2002 production of "Medea" on both sides of the Atlantic was merely the most visible commercial outing in a resume that has seen Warner helming in major theaters and opera houses for more than two decades. Her large-scale productions, most recently "Happy Days" at the National, regularly attract multiple co-production partners.
Alongside Lloyd is Katie Mitchell, 43, the NT's leading experimental director. "About three years ago, I made a conscious decision to put something back," says Mitchell, "so I do a lot of teaching of young directors." The gender split in the teaching groups is inspiring. "The ratio is normally 70% women to men."
But despite an accelerating breadth and depth of achievement, it would be naive to suggest the battles are over.
As successful freelancer Anna Mackmin, 42, points out, "It's still largely men who judge the work, and you're only taken seriously as a director when you direct classics written by dead old men. Women directors tend to be offered new plays by women."
Indhu Rubasingham, whose production of George Bernard Shaw's "Heartbreak House" just opened at Watford Palace, agrees. "There's still a long way to go in terms of the economic power given to women in big spaces and commercial theater," she observes. "From some of the dealings I've had, it's clear that the more supposedly masculine qualities you display -- directness, brashness, ruthlessness -- the more commercial producers are likely to trust you."
Their views are echoed by another successful freelancer, Paulette Randall, 46.
"I'm optimistic. If I weren't, I'd have given up long ago," she says. "But I'm a realist, too. It's tough because theater is still largely run by men and, most simply, they communicate with each other much more easily."
Randall also pinpoints the most problematic area alluded to by many women in the business.
"Some women in positions of power fall into the trap of employing lots of men in order to prove they're equal and not anti-men," she suggests. "That leaves us back where we started. I'm not angry, but it's good to know what it is you have to fight against."