Lloyd Evans
The National Theatre deserves to have its budget cut
The arts cuts have arrived. The biggest loser is English National Opera whose annual award of £12.6 million will be replaced by a grant of £17 million, over three years, to cover the costs of a move from London to a regional centre, probably Manchester. ENO boss Stuart Murphy has complained that it’s unfair to confiscate money from a company that admits under-21s for free. But while it’s kind of him to give unsold seats to youngsters, it probably doesn’t justify an annual award of millions.
In theatreland the prestigious Donmar Warehouse has lost every penny of its subsidy. And the National Theatre is to forfeit £850,000 but retains the bulk of its annual budget which stood at £17 million in 2020-21.
These reductions are being spun as a ‘levelling up’ measure that will shift cash from pampered London to the poor and neglected provinces. Critics would argue that the NT’s haircut is long overdue and deserves to be more drastic. The NT has a sugar-daddy mentality and it wastes cash because it knows the Treasury will cover its debts rather than the paying customers. It could easily find corporate sponsors to match the subsidies it currently sucks from the wallets of modest earners. But it never has to try.
Other simple reforms would help to balance the books. Rehearsal periods of six weeks are common at the NT but commercial theatres make do with two or three weeks. A canny impresario would release the potential of the building’s upper balconies which have cafes and wine bars that overlook the Thames but which are seldom full. Some of these bars appear to be unstaffed a lot of the time. Why squander that potential income?
And a commercial producer would take a look at Sunday evenings at the National. Theatre owners hate to leave their venues dark and they use Sundays to raise funds and to stage one-off-gala events. The NT could follow suit and use the proceeds to shore up its in-house budget. Actors, let’s remember, hate not working and they would relish the chance to display their gifts to an admiring audience on any night of the week. This is a vast human resource which is being poured down the drain because the indolent NT has no reason to change its ways.
Other obvious sources of funds are being neglected. Hollywood is replete with British stars who often complain that the subsidised theatres where they learned their craft are short of cash. So there’s the answer. These lucky celebs can repay the institutions that launched their careers by helping to underwrite the next generation of talent. It’s not just about money. Soft power counts as well. The NT could establish a ‘celebrity fellowship or ‘club of ambassadors’ to lead their fund-raising campaigns, to firm up contacts with corporate sponsors and to promote the theatre’s profile overseas.
But the current management at the NT is entirely devoid of swagger or self-confidence. The place is run like a crummy arts centre in a rural backwater rather than the foremost playhouse in the homeland of Shakespeare. A recent production of Arthur Miller’s The Crucible gave the lead role of John Proctor (one of the greatest parts in the American theatrical canon) to a jobbing Australian thesp who did well enough but who lacked Proctor’s good looks and sexual charisma. The role should have been offered to an A-lister from the states. Can we not bring Matt Damon to London, or Matthew McConaughey or Robert Downey Jr? These names were probably never considered by the timid souls in charge of the NT. What about David Schwimmer who loves the theatre and is often seen at the National? He’d have leapt at the chance to play Proctor.
The subsidised funding model is seriously restricting the NT’s horizons. Freed from its tax addiction, it can overcome its inferiority complex and assume its rightful place as a global player.