Officials at the National Arts Council should be overjoyed. In spite of competition from the World Cup and the economic downturn, this year‘s Singapore Arts Festival was a hugh success - 80.2% of tickets for its core programmes were snapped up, an increase of 5 percentage points over the previous year. Besides, audience for its non-core and free programmes also saw a 50% surge.
What‘s more, reviewers had also given the overall programming and publicity efforts the thumbs-up. The seven overseas productions by master artists also received more praise than criticism. If there is any major disappointment, it is that local works paled in comparison with international productions.
Over the years, local arts and artists have made a deeper impression in the international arenas and gained rapid recognition. Unfortunately, the confidence that we have developed gradually in our arts often suffers serious setbacks in the annual Arts Festival.
An assessment of performances by local theatre over the last three to four years will make one realise this strange phenomenon： arts houses which have usually done fairly well will go haywire when they perform during the Arts Festivals. And this happens frequently even to larger and much more experienced setups.
A few years back, director Ong Keng Sen‘cross-cultural experiment Lear was not invited to the Arts Festival. Yet it won critical acclaim when it was staged here. Many felt aggrieved for Ong and rapped the Arts Festival for not recognising a gem of a performance. Two years after the event, Ong’s second cross-cultural work Desdemona was made the curtain-raiser of the Arts Festival. But it was severely criticised.
Last year, a collaboration entitled One Hundred Years In Waiting by The Necessary Stage and Theatre Practice, both big names in arts circles here, was a letdown. Imagine Forest, a joint effort by Arts Fission Company and the T‘a(chǎn)ng Quartet, showed clearly that the preparations were inadequate.
Except for the two national orchestras, namely, Singapore Symphony Orchestra and the Singapore Chinese Orchestra, few arts groups here can maintain their standards during the Arts Festivals.
There are of course many reasons why some local arts groups have not been able to keep up their good performance during the Arts Festival. I believe the attitude of treating the Arts Festival as a “special event” is one of the reasons why some groups just cannot get their act together.
The Singapore Arts Festival is the premier arts event here. Any group that has been invited to be part of it will be able to get a higher-than-usual sponsorship and will endeavour to do its best. The irony is that in order to impress with the highest standards of local arts at the festival, artists will do everything possible to innovate, for instance, collaboration of different arts forms, multi-media, new themes, unprecedented ways of creation and untried methods. In other words, local arts groups often engage in artistic pursuits that they are not used to during the Arts Festivals.
To take this further, the phenomenon is probably intertwined with the eagerness of some artists for quick success and instant benefits, the demands of the audience, and the guiding principles of the Arts Festival.
A few years ago, the Arts Festival announced a new emphasis on cutting-edge works. It also affirmed its mission of promoting the arts here. Should the two objectives be in any disharmony with each other, I think there is no need to put them together and ask all local arts houses performing at the Arts Festival to attempt to be “bold and innovative”。
Local productions in the Arts Festivals should provide the audience with what they are best at. Yes, creativity in the arts should be encouraged. But artists should not expect overnight success. The National Arts Council and artists themselves should both have a reasonable understanding of what is achievable. Setting ambitious plans without the ability to execute them will only result in performances that are unsatisfactory.
（The writer is Lianhe Zaobao‘s art journalist. Translated by Yap Gee Poh.）
國家藝術理事會該喜上眉梢了。因為,在世界杯熱潮和經(jīng)濟不景的雙重陰影下,今年藝術節(jié)逆流而上,亮出漂亮的票房成績。核心節(jié)目票房80.2％,比去年高5個百分點；非核心和免費節(jié)目的觀眾,更一舉提高超過50％。
不僅如此,今年的節(jié)目策劃,節(jié)日宣傳,還得到評論界普遍肯定。從國外請來七項大師作品,也讓人是贊多于彈。如果說有什么很大遺憾,就是本地節(jié)目在國際作品中,相形見絀。
近年來,本地藝術在國際上的表現(xiàn)日益精進,知名度也迅速提高。可是,我們對新加坡藝術培養(yǎng)起來的信心,常常又在一年一度的藝術節(jié)里,遭到重創(chuàng)。
總結這三四年來本地節(jié)目的表現(xiàn),你會發(fā)現(xiàn)一個怪現(xiàn)象：平時演出水平不錯的團體,一參加藝術節(jié),水平就走樣。即使是經(jīng)驗老道的大團,也常出現(xiàn)這種情況。
幾年前,王景生導演的跨文化《李爾》,沒有被邀請參加藝術節(jié),該作品后來在本地上演,觀眾一片喝采聲,大家憤憤不平地替王景生不值,抨擊藝術節(jié)“走寶”。兩年后,王景生的第二個跨文化作品 《苔絲德蒙娜》,榮列藝術開幕節(jié)目。不料,演出飽受炮轟。
同樣的,實踐劇場和必要劇場,兩者都是本地響當當?shù)恼信?去年它們聯(lián)手演出話劇《百年的等待》,令人大失所望。去年,唐四重奏和化生藝術團合作跨界舞臺《想像的森林》,也明顯準備不足。
至今,除了新加坡交響樂團和華樂團兩大國家樂團外,能避開“遇節(jié)走樣”規(guī)律的藝術團,并不太多。
本地團體表現(xiàn)不如平時,原因肯定不只一個。但我相信,藝術家面對藝術節(jié)時的“不平?！毙膽B(tài),應該是“遇節(jié)走樣”的原因之一。
藝術節(jié)是新加坡最重要藝術盛會,無論哪個團體受邀參加,都是全力以赴,能爭取到的贊助也比平常高。諷刺的是,因為是藝術節(jié)演出,因為要展示本地的水平,所以大家絞盡腦汁設計創(chuàng)新的法門：跨界合作,多媒體,新題材,前所未有的創(chuàng)作方式,從未試過的方法。藝術節(jié)期間,本地團體往往做些他們不習慣做的事。
深究下去,這個現(xiàn)象和藝術家本身急功近利的思想,和觀眾對藝術節(jié)的要求,還有藝術節(jié)的方針都有關系。
幾年前,藝術節(jié)宣布大膽創(chuàng)新的新方針,同時確認了推動本地制作的使命。如果這兩個目標出現(xiàn)某種不協(xié)調(diào)性時,我想不必勉強把兩個目標相加,要求所有參加藝術節(jié)的本地團體,一律“大膽創(chuàng)新”。
藝術節(jié)的本地節(jié)目,應該展現(xiàn)它們原來面貌中的一面。藝術創(chuàng)作鼓勵創(chuàng)新,但藝術家不能有一蹴而就的速成心態(tài)。這點上,藝理會和藝術家本身,都應該合理估計實力。眼高手低的結果,只能是不倫不類的演出。
。作者是《聯(lián)合早報》文化藝術記者
What‘s more, reviewers had also given the overall programming and publicity efforts the thumbs-up. The seven overseas productions by master artists also received more praise than criticism. If there is any major disappointment, it is that local works paled in comparison with international productions.
Over the years, local arts and artists have made a deeper impression in the international arenas and gained rapid recognition. Unfortunately, the confidence that we have developed gradually in our arts often suffers serious setbacks in the annual Arts Festival.
An assessment of performances by local theatre over the last three to four years will make one realise this strange phenomenon： arts houses which have usually done fairly well will go haywire when they perform during the Arts Festivals. And this happens frequently even to larger and much more experienced setups.
A few years back, director Ong Keng Sen‘cross-cultural experiment Lear was not invited to the Arts Festival. Yet it won critical acclaim when it was staged here. Many felt aggrieved for Ong and rapped the Arts Festival for not recognising a gem of a performance. Two years after the event, Ong’s second cross-cultural work Desdemona was made the curtain-raiser of the Arts Festival. But it was severely criticised.
Last year, a collaboration entitled One Hundred Years In Waiting by The Necessary Stage and Theatre Practice, both big names in arts circles here, was a letdown. Imagine Forest, a joint effort by Arts Fission Company and the T‘a(chǎn)ng Quartet, showed clearly that the preparations were inadequate.
Except for the two national orchestras, namely, Singapore Symphony Orchestra and the Singapore Chinese Orchestra, few arts groups here can maintain their standards during the Arts Festivals.
There are of course many reasons why some local arts groups have not been able to keep up their good performance during the Arts Festival. I believe the attitude of treating the Arts Festival as a “special event” is one of the reasons why some groups just cannot get their act together.
The Singapore Arts Festival is the premier arts event here. Any group that has been invited to be part of it will be able to get a higher-than-usual sponsorship and will endeavour to do its best. The irony is that in order to impress with the highest standards of local arts at the festival, artists will do everything possible to innovate, for instance, collaboration of different arts forms, multi-media, new themes, unprecedented ways of creation and untried methods. In other words, local arts groups often engage in artistic pursuits that they are not used to during the Arts Festivals.
To take this further, the phenomenon is probably intertwined with the eagerness of some artists for quick success and instant benefits, the demands of the audience, and the guiding principles of the Arts Festival.
A few years ago, the Arts Festival announced a new emphasis on cutting-edge works. It also affirmed its mission of promoting the arts here. Should the two objectives be in any disharmony with each other, I think there is no need to put them together and ask all local arts houses performing at the Arts Festival to attempt to be “bold and innovative”。
Local productions in the Arts Festivals should provide the audience with what they are best at. Yes, creativity in the arts should be encouraged. But artists should not expect overnight success. The National Arts Council and artists themselves should both have a reasonable understanding of what is achievable. Setting ambitious plans without the ability to execute them will only result in performances that are unsatisfactory.
（The writer is Lianhe Zaobao‘s art journalist. Translated by Yap Gee Poh.）
國家藝術理事會該喜上眉梢了。因為,在世界杯熱潮和經(jīng)濟不景的雙重陰影下,今年藝術節(jié)逆流而上,亮出漂亮的票房成績。核心節(jié)目票房80.2％,比去年高5個百分點；非核心和免費節(jié)目的觀眾,更一舉提高超過50％。
不僅如此,今年的節(jié)目策劃,節(jié)日宣傳,還得到評論界普遍肯定。從國外請來七項大師作品,也讓人是贊多于彈。如果說有什么很大遺憾,就是本地節(jié)目在國際作品中,相形見絀。
近年來,本地藝術在國際上的表現(xiàn)日益精進,知名度也迅速提高。可是,我們對新加坡藝術培養(yǎng)起來的信心,常常又在一年一度的藝術節(jié)里,遭到重創(chuàng)。
總結這三四年來本地節(jié)目的表現(xiàn),你會發(fā)現(xiàn)一個怪現(xiàn)象：平時演出水平不錯的團體,一參加藝術節(jié),水平就走樣。即使是經(jīng)驗老道的大團,也常出現(xiàn)這種情況。
幾年前,王景生導演的跨文化《李爾》,沒有被邀請參加藝術節(jié),該作品后來在本地上演,觀眾一片喝采聲,大家憤憤不平地替王景生不值,抨擊藝術節(jié)“走寶”。兩年后,王景生的第二個跨文化作品 《苔絲德蒙娜》,榮列藝術開幕節(jié)目。不料,演出飽受炮轟。
同樣的,實踐劇場和必要劇場,兩者都是本地響當當?shù)恼信?去年它們聯(lián)手演出話劇《百年的等待》,令人大失所望。去年,唐四重奏和化生藝術團合作跨界舞臺《想像的森林》,也明顯準備不足。
至今,除了新加坡交響樂團和華樂團兩大國家樂團外,能避開“遇節(jié)走樣”規(guī)律的藝術團,并不太多。
本地團體表現(xiàn)不如平時,原因肯定不只一個。但我相信,藝術家面對藝術節(jié)時的“不平?！毙膽B(tài),應該是“遇節(jié)走樣”的原因之一。
藝術節(jié)是新加坡最重要藝術盛會,無論哪個團體受邀參加,都是全力以赴,能爭取到的贊助也比平常高。諷刺的是,因為是藝術節(jié)演出,因為要展示本地的水平,所以大家絞盡腦汁設計創(chuàng)新的法門：跨界合作,多媒體,新題材,前所未有的創(chuàng)作方式,從未試過的方法。藝術節(jié)期間,本地團體往往做些他們不習慣做的事。
深究下去,這個現(xiàn)象和藝術家本身急功近利的思想,和觀眾對藝術節(jié)的要求,還有藝術節(jié)的方針都有關系。
幾年前,藝術節(jié)宣布大膽創(chuàng)新的新方針,同時確認了推動本地制作的使命。如果這兩個目標出現(xiàn)某種不協(xié)調(diào)性時,我想不必勉強把兩個目標相加,要求所有參加藝術節(jié)的本地團體,一律“大膽創(chuàng)新”。
藝術節(jié)的本地節(jié)目,應該展現(xiàn)它們原來面貌中的一面。藝術創(chuàng)作鼓勵創(chuàng)新,但藝術家不能有一蹴而就的速成心態(tài)。這點上,藝理會和藝術家本身,都應該合理估計實力。眼高手低的結果,只能是不倫不類的演出。
。作者是《聯(lián)合早報》文化藝術記者