By James Warwick
Tweet

Becoming An Actor: Too Expensive for the Fringe?

Date: 18 November 2011

“All money gives you is the security not to worry about money”, or so said Johnny Carson. I suppose he meant that money doesn’t buy happiness, but over the last few weeks I’ve been realising that it doesn’t necessarily buy quality either.

I briefly addressed the ever-sensitive issue of money a few months ago in relation to the Edinburgh Festival Fringe. But, last week, after a few theatre trips, I began noticing a similar problem, or set of circumstances, in London’s fringe theatres – that being, it can be expensive.

Forgive my lack of specificity over the next few paragraphs but I would hate to offend any of the people involved in the productions.

I’ll begin in West London. The first show in my Fringe binge (sorry for the tabloid rhyming) had the highest production values of the three I saw. It was a beautiful space that felt both intimate and grand, and seated probably somewhere near 300. The performance I went to see was near to being sold out despite the fact it cost me, as a student concession, just over £12. A lot of the cast were good, even if the play was rather long and unoriginal – though, perhaps I wasn’t the target audience.

My second show was by far the worst. I was sat on one of many old and eclectic chairs in the back room of a bar. The stage itself was tiny and held a chair, table and hat stand. The lighting was basic, the sound kept cutting out but I could hear quite clearly the conversations happening on stage… and in the bar. The play itself was a self-penned one-man show and, although interesting in places, it felt like a showcase rather than an attempt at creating interesting theatre (the actor in question had slipped in plenty of opportunities for Shakespeare monologues!). In central London this set me back £10.

Finally I was in South West London at a theatre, I’m a little ashamed to say, I hadn’t heard of before. It was well equipped, pushing the upper boundary of small. I was treated to the standard fringe practice of Shakespeare in suits that, although being patchily spoken, had quite an interesting concept behind it. My evening cost me, again, just over £12 – quite what that money had been spent on, I’m not sure, as the set was a table.

I write about the shows, not through any particular want to comment, but to illustrate the variety in venue, production value and performance that similar ticket prices offer. To me it felt vast, which is the problem with charging so much per ticket in fringe venues.

£10-£12 doesn’t seem like a huge amount of cash. Fairly reasonable when you consider top seats at Matilda the Musical (which I saw in Stratford last year and couldn’t recommend more!) cost about £60. But not so reasonable when you notice that for £12 you can see almost anything at the National; as a student you can get great seats for £12 at the Hampstead; and, the Royal Court does £10-all-seats Mondays. These shows, although similarly priced to my three fringe outings, very often have beautiful sets, exciting new writing, fine classics and solid performances.

The comparison, I’m sure, is one of the reasons that fringe theatre is not as flourishing as it could be. It’s asking for the same amount of money from its patrons but is giving back something that, although normally entertaining, makes you feel like you’re getting less than you paid for.

It all comes down to the fact that you’re taking a punt. Yes, some shows are completely worth the money, but some fringe shows inescapably won’t be. Rather than a negative, for me, that’s a truly exciting positive! But, ticket prices should be pitched to reflect that.

It goes without saying that people take pride in their work and that most people probably think their shows are worth the full asking price of a ticket. But if a show were to be priced slightly lower than it is now at, say, £7 with £5 concessions, it would be so much more accessible to patrons and would reflect the variety and hit-and-miss nature of fringe shows. The box office projections might not be quite as big, but I’d be happy to bet that, in actuality, as much, if not more, money would be made because bigger audiences would be garnered.

Fringe theatre also has to compete against drama school productions; my experience of these is that they very often have good budgets behind them, without the worry of having to make back money on the shows. RADA charges £10-£14, LAMDA is free, Guildhall £4-£8, Bristol Old Vic £7-£11; these shows are full, you would hope, of great acting and, very often, with great directors behind them - RADA has got the ex-artistic director of the Salisbury Playhouse working with them at the moment. Surely if fringe theatre has to compete with this strand of work, it should pitch itself at a more reasonable level?

It’s an interesting debate, and I’d love to hear your thoughts and solutions!

- by James Warwick

Any opinions expressed above do not represent the view of Whatsonstage.com nor any of its staff or contributors beyond the bylined author.

Related Content

Other Posts By James Warwick
	Becoming An Actor: Come Fight with Me - 23rd May 2012 blog
	Becoming An Actor: Well done British Drama Schools! - 8th May 2012 blog
	Becoming an Actor: A degree in pretending - 23rd Apr 2012 blog
	Becoming An Actor: Doing just that! - 9th Apr 2012 blog
	Becoming An Actor: Branching out - 9th Mar 2012 blog
	Becoming An Actor: Why bother training? - 17th Feb 2012 blog
	Becoming An Actor: Showy social media - 30th Jan 2012 blog
	Becoming An Actor: Actors Behaving Badly - 12th Jan 2012 blog
	Becoming An Actor: Dos & Don'ts of Duologue Showcases - 6th Jan 2012 blog
	Becoming An Actor: Becoming a Student (for a bit) - 23rd Dec 2011 blog
	More...