Evaluation Report

Phyllida Shaw, November 2007

2. An evaluation of the Novocastrian Philosophers’ Club

The evaluation was commissioned in August 2007. The brief was to look at four aspects of the project:

• the impact of the project on the Lit & Phil and the Mining Institute;
• the extent to which the project engaged the Northern Stage Performance Group in the process;
• the extent to which the project allowed artists to make new, exciting work in a new context;
• the audience response.

2.1. The impact of the project on the Lit & Phil and the Mining Institute

The project offered the Lit & Phil and the Mining Institute the opportunity to work together, on a creative project, delivered by a third party but in partnership with them. Their shared objectives were to:

• attract new visitors to their architecturally interesting and historically significant buildings
• open their collections to new users
• challenge preconceptions of the Lit & Phil and the Mining Institute, possibly leading to an increase in members;
• offer existing members a new perspective on familiar spaces;
• strengthen the relationship between the Boards, staff and members of the two organisations.

In addition, the Lit & Phil anticipated that by working with a professional production company over several months, it would deepen its experience of working with artists and increase its confidence in programming other arts-based events.
The company invested considerable time and effort in trying to ensure that the Trustees and staff of the two organisations understood what the project was about and how it would affect them and their members on a day to day basis, during the research, making and performance periods. It was particularly important to ensure that members did not feel displaced or otherwise inconvenienced. Both organisations had hosted artists and arts events before (including Neil Tennant talking at the Mining Institute about his score for Battleship Potemkin and small-scale performances and readings in the Lit & Phil) but neither had experienced anything like the process involved in making and performing The Novocastrian Philosophers’ Club.

Kay Easson and Richard Gray (see 1. Background, above) were instrumental in negotiating the use of the two buildings with the Trustees and staff and in explaining to members when and why a space would be unavailable to them. Apart from the regular visits by the production team (see 2.3. below), two scenes required particularly sensitive handling: the installation of a walk-through water feature (‘the waterfall’) in the short, first-floor passage between the buildings and the flying of a barn owl, back and forth across the library of the Mining Institute. While Trustees were initially rightly concerned, their fears were allayed when they learned in great detail what (in the case of the waterfall) the construction (and de-construction) process would involve and about how a trained barn owl, with two handlers, behaves in an enclosed space. These two scenes were among the most memorable cited by audience members.

For the two Presidents of the organisations, Stuart Porthouse and Brian Bennison, Kay Eason and Richard Gray, the Novocastrian Philosophers’ Club demonstrated how the two organisations could collaborate on a challenging project. All gave credit to the professionalism and sensitivity of the core members of the production team who never failed to communicate what they were planning to do, or currently doing. Staff at every level of the organisations were treated courteously and were as involved in the process as they wanted to be. There was keen sensitivity to the fact that some staff had been in post for many years and cared deeply about the buildings and the culture of their organisations, into which a theatre company was now intruding.

At the public forum on 17th October, chaired by Stella Hall, Creative Director of Newcastle-Gateshead’s Culture 10 Programme, a librarian spoke passionately about the fact that, for all the success of the production, ultimately it was the staff who made the Lit & Phil an accessible and welcoming place and their contribution should be recognised. ‘The atmosphere comes from the staff. We are very strongly tied to the building.’ A respondent suggested that ‘What goes on here [in the two buildings] was honoured by the piece.’

The Development Director’s analysis of the audience figures suggests that 41 of the 425 audience members were members of the Lit & Phil and two were members of the Mining Institute. This excludes those who came as guests on the opening night. Four of the five participants in the audience focus group on 11th October were members. It is not known how many members attended the public forum, but the overwhelming response was a positive one. The one exception was a member who said: ‘I felt my space was taken away by all the closures. The lesson for the Lit & Phil is take your members with you and do it early. But I did enjoy the show.’

Illustrative quotes

‘I have worked at the Lit & Phil and the Mining Institute for the past 23 years. I thoroughly enjoyed the performance of the Novocastrians. The acting was very professional and there was an awful lot of thought and work which had gone on. I certainly saw the two buildings in a different light and felt I had been at the Mad Hatter’s tea party. Well done.’ (Staff member)

---

‘The buildings are terrific - it makes you want to come and explore them and their role in the history of the region (and the world) further as this is a real gem. Few people know the quality that exists in these buildings - they really are exceptional. Many of the group had not been before so it was a very good way for them to get a taste of the buildings. Very memorable.’
(Lit & Phil and audience member)

---

‘The piece you've created made me feel like I'd never really taken time to stop and look closely at what lay within.’
(Lit & Phil and audience member)

---

‘This was my first visit to the Lit & Phil and I was totally amazed at what is hidden behind that insignificant and anonymous door and I would love to come back for a proper look around sometime in the future.’ (Audience member)

---

‘I had not been into the Lit & Phil or the Mining Institute before last Friday. I didn’t know what to expect from the performance, but I was delighted by everything and found it an intense and memorable experience.’ (Audience member)

---

‘…I have resolved that I must join the haunt of the Novocastrians as a permanent member so that I can relive this voyage of discovery in the deepest recesses of my mind.’ (Audience member)

---

The Lit & Phil and the Mining Institute agreed that the experience was a positive one; that they learned a great deal about how to ensure that such projects run smoothly; that it has raised their public and media profile; that it will influence their future programming; that (in the case of the Lit & Phil) membership numbers have increased; and that they feel in a stronger position to collaborate in future.

In October, the two organisations jointly advertised for a part-time education officer and a part-time fundraiser. This was not as a result of the production, but these appointments will increase the capacity of both organisations to build on what they have recently achieved.

2.2. The extent to which the project engaged the Performance Group in the process

The Northern Stage Performance Group was recommended to Cinzia Hardy by Andrew Rothwell, Team Manager, Arts and Culture at Newcastle City Council. The group, which has been running for nine years, is for anyone aged 16 or over. They meet once a month for a theatre skills workshop, run by a visiting artist and come together to work on productions, which are almost always devised pieces. A recent example was Home, a production made to celebrate the reopening of the theatre in 2006.

Cinzia Hardy initially met Jo Cundall to introduce the project and subsequently saw Home and met members of the Performance Group, together with director Alison Andrews. The extract from the Performance Group’s newsletter, overleaf, shows how the project was first described.

Fifteen members of the group made their first site visit to the Lit & Phil and the Mining Institute in March 2007. The Novocastrian Philosophers’ Club was to be a site-specific work, as Home had been and they needed to see the space at the earliest possible stage. Twelve members committed themselves to the project at that point and stayed with it throughout, 11 of them performing in the production and one taking a behind-the-scenes role.

The group included men and women of different ages and backgrounds; people with strong local connections and none; people with and without formal theatre training; some in paid employment, others not. For some the production provided an unexpected opportunity to explore the collections to find out more about their families or parts of Newcastle they knew well.

The commitment involved monthly sessions with members of the company, at the site or at Northern Stage; individual research activity to inform the content of the piece; and participation in 25 performances.

‘The standard of the acting was very high indeed. I would have been hard put to distinguish between the professionals and the amateurs.’ (Audience member)

The challenges faced by the Group included:

• the length of time it took to develop the piece and bring it to performance (the original May performance dates were pushed back to September while the outcome of funding applications was awaited);
• having to organise research and development activity around the availability of a team of paid, professional directors, performers and technicians with other commitments;
• accepting that, while being asked to spend time developing ideas, these may not find their way into the final production and that the director would have the final say
• the number of performances on consecutive dates, including multiple performances at the weekend.

The 12 members of the Northern Stage Performance Group who took part and their coordinator, Jo Cundall, were wholly engaged in the process. Jo Cundall has been praised by the director for her excellent administration and communication skills, ensuring that all the members of the group had to worry about was their creative contribution. The fact that all of those who made the initial commitment stayed the courses is an undeniable measure of the extent to which they were engaged in the process.

Interviewees suggest that it was the same qualities of trust and mutual respect apparent in the relationship between the company and the Lit & Phil and the Mining Institute that sustained the relationship between the professional production team and the members of the Performance Group. While there were inevitable tensions over roles and responsibilities, the quality of the performance day after day suggested that the group had cohered well.

Few of the Performance Group were able to see the entire performance, because of their roles elsewhere on the site. Since there was no script to read, this demanded a considerable degree of trust that the production was a good experience for the audience. Between the penultimate and final performance, one scene (‘the snake in the basement’) was re-enacted specifically for the benefit of those who had not seen it.

Members of the Performance Group took part in a 40-minute discussion, with the evaluator, in the Green Room on the day of the final performances. No member of the production team was present, so that they could talk freely. The response to both the process and the final product was overwhelmingly positive. In particular the group identified, as positive outcomes:

• a new way of creating a piece of theatre
  
• the difference each audience made to each performance
  
• the length of the project and the opportunity it provided to work with an unfamiliar creative team
  
• freedom from the rigidity of a tightly scripted performance
  
• the hands-on involvement in re-setting scenes
  
• the opportunity to contribute ideas from the outset
• the sense of security provided by Alison, Cinzia and Jo (the Performance Group’s coordinator). ‘We didn’t ever feel over-exposed.’

The only disappointment expressed by some members of the group was that much of their research and the ideas resulting from it had not been used.

2.3. The extent to which the project allowed artists to make new, exciting work in a new context

Some members of the professional production team had worked together, on a site-specific performance (If the Dead Could Go Shopping, What Would They Buy?), co- produced by Cinzia Hardy and Tony Fegan, at the 1999 Dublin Fringe Festival. The new production used a similar process of research and development, with company members visiting the Lit & Phil and the Mining Institute for two days at a time, over a period of five months. Their aim was to examine the buildings minutely, to familiarise themselves with their dimensions and textures, to discover the best viewing points, to talk to staff and to members and to begin to develop the story and its telling. Gradually, members of the Performance Group were included in the meetings and asked to share their ideas.

The two main ‘editors’ of the material were Alison Andrews and Maurice O’Connell, who come from different artistic disciplines and have complementary approaches to combining words and space, in performance. Sandra Johnston documented the process and also worked with a member of the Performance Group, Alwyn Gornall to film interviews with staff and users of the two buildings. The resulting DVDs became part of the set.

The Lit & Phil and the Mining Institute were more ‘controllable’ spaces than the shops used in If the Dead Could Go Shopping... and the audiences were smaller. Every performance differed, as the players responded to the audience’s reactions. Those reactions (see 2.4. below) expressed both in writing and verbally confirmed that the artists did, without question, succeed in making ‘new, exciting work in a new context’.

Illustrative quotes

‘The performance was a delightful, enlightening, sequential odyssey. It was enhanced by being propelled forward with perfect timing adding to this extraordinary experience. The attention to detail was stunning.’ (Audience member)

---

‘I felt, near the beginning, that some of us were getting access to bits of information that others were missing – I heard all about the book covers, for example, but wasn’t among the small number who were told about the chess player – but in retrospect this only increased the intimacy and ensured that the experience of each member of the audience was unique.’ (Audience member)

---

‘Well done. Had tears for the song, laughter for the mechanicals, sighed at the girls packing, passion for the love between Beatrice and Deasy, resentment at not winning roulette, gasped at the owl and once again, in awe of the magic a group of artists can weave when glorious space is animated through performance.’ (Audience member)

---

‘…my biggest complaint is that I wasn’t able to go round a second time. I have a suspicion that each visit could have resulted in a substantially different experience!’ (Audience member)

---

2.4. The audience response

Of the 425 audience members, 41 were members of the Lit & Phil and two were members of the Mining Institute. The opening night, to which VIPs were invited, included six guests from the Mining Institute and three from the Lit & Phil.

Audience members were invited to complete a feedback card before they left. Those who took them away had the option to return them by hand or by post to the Lit & Phil or to email a Novocastrian Philosophers’ Club email address set up especially for the purpose. Cards were completed by 80 individuals (19% of the total audience) and a further 16 (4%) wrote emails. Five respondents took part in a discussion with the evaluator on 11th October and at least 50 people attended the public forum on 17th October, two thirds of whom had seen the show.

The illustrative quotes already used in this report are drawn mainly from the feedback cards and emails. While people who enjoyed an experience tend to be more motivated to take part in surveys than those who were indifferent to it, the lack of negative critical feedback to the production is striking. The detail of many of the written responses is also unusual and merit close reading. (Please see Appendix 1. where two or more responses used identical wording, only one has been included.)

Respondents were asked whether they had been to the Lit & Phil or the Mining Institute before; whether they would come again; what had surprised them about the performance; and whether they would like to see more work of this kind. (They were also asked if they would take part in an informal discussion with other audience members.) Nearly 90 per cent of the audience had not been to the Lit & Phil or the Mining Institute before and knew little about the organisations that inhabited them. The production was repeatedly described as bizarre, surreal, thought-provoking and moving. It left some who experienced it with a feeling of ‘puzzlement’. They described themselves as being ‘intrigued’ and ‘mystified’. Those who wrote after the event were ‘still pondering’ on what they had experienced. The public forum on 17th October reinforced this impression that the production had been highly unusual and that there was an appetite for more site-specific work.

Many audience members commented on (and thanked the company for) the book, in the guise of a box, that they were given as they left the building. They seemed genuinely to regard this as a gift, rather than as part of a theatrical event. Those who opened them were enchanted to find, inside, the object they had chosen at the beginning of the performance (a coin, a button, a shell) together with the food of their choice (sweet or savoury) and the whole tied with a ribbon of their favourite colour.

The fact that every audience member spent the hour and 20 minutes of the performance with 14 other audience members with whom they moved around the building, led by the guides, watching the performers, picking up visual and aural clues and incapable of predicting what might happen next, increased the intimacy of the experience and probably heightened audience reactions.

As the verbatim audience responses indicate, the Novocastrian Philosophers’ Club was an unusual and memorable event. Between them, the Lit & Phil, the Mining Institute, the Northern Stage Performance Group and the production company (the European Players) enabled a significant number of audience members to see performance and the site where this performance took place, in a different light.

top of page