|
|
|
BOOK REVIEW
| Glenn D'Cruz (ed.), Class Act: Melbourne Workers Theatre 1987–2007, Vulgar Press, Melbourne, 2007. pp. v + 230. $39.95 paper.
|
| Class Act: Melbourne Workers Theatre 1987–2007 captures the birth of a small, resilient theatre company and its journey across twenty years of change in industrial relations and the Australian cultural and political landscape. |
1
|
|
This is a collection of writings that needs to be seen as a whole in order to understand why Melbourne Workers Theatre (MWT) was established and why it continues to endure. A great strength of this book is its representation of the many voices of those who began, worked with, defended, and believed in this theatre company which aims to create art that reflects the values and issues of working-class people. Established at the Jolimont Railway Yards in 1987, MWT was a reaction to the type of theatre produced by flagship and mainstream theatre companies (many of whom were the recipients of major Arts Board funding, which the publication reminds us of at several points). Early works by the company were performed at the railway yards themselves with the workers as both audience and sometime collaborative partners. Long-time artistic collaborator, Irene Vela, recalled: 'We wore the same blue met rail overalls and hard shoes as the railway workers as a symbolic gesture of our identification with being part of the proletariat ... [W]e did not shy away from conflict, and I think, still don't' (p. 106). |
2
|
|
Politics is never absent in this book. Interviews of the early years clearly capture the tensions between art and politics – both internally and externally – and between art and the workplace, particularly in reference to the very first MWT production, State of Defence. Further, the Kennett Government, while initially praised for its funding of 'experimental' theatre, is staunchly criticised for its inability to then accept theatre that was critical of its policies and decisions, and for creating an atmosphere of fear in regard to ongoing funding should actors and artists speak out in their work. MWT was not bowed by this. Even when it eventually received Government funding and was able to establish a small but important infrastructure, its work still maintained the same imperative: to raise 'a number of vital issues concerning the social and political status of people marginalised and dispossessed by ... the free market'; and to challenge 'our understanding of concepts such as class, and indeed our notion of what constitutes "political theatre" today' (p. 156). |
3
|
|
Class Acts raised two key questions for me: what is political theatre and why do we need a company devoted to the creation and performance of this theatrical genre? The opinions of contributors to this publication and the survival of the Company over a 20 year period all tend to suggest that answering these questions is an ongoing, ever-evolving process, and must respond to the local, national and international landscape. Perhaps Glen D'Cruz answers these questions most successfully: 'It is no longer possible to assume that the term [political theatre] refers to a homogenous aesthetic style or a unified political agenda, if it ever did' (p. 157). D'Cruz points out that the 'emergence of "identity politics" and "difference politics" with their multi-focus on issues of ethnicity, gender and sexuality among other things, has almost pushed class off the agenda' (p. 157). The issue for MWT is to remain relevant. |
4
|
|
Therefore, it is gratifying to read how MWT has responded to such shifts in 'politics' across its 20 years. It has re-shaped its political mission and artistic vision to create theatrical works that reflect Australia's cultural diversity, indigenous community, the voices of generations of refugees, and issues of gender. 'This, apart from being consistent with the MWT's ideological position, is totally logical given the considerable number of non-Anglo/Celts in the Australian working class as a whole' (p. 93). A flip through the last few pages of the book that outline the nearly 40 theatre pieces produced over the period of the Company's existence clearly demonstrates MWT's commitment to remaining relevant and its ability to respond to change. |
5
|
|
This publication is a celebration of endeavour that brims with the personal, political and artistic, and proudly claims that they are not mutually exclusive. These writers continue to argue for the importance of politics and art – politics in its many forms and guises – and indeed the need for politics in art. They do so with passion and great integrity. |
6
|
| | | | |
| Malthouse Theatre, Melbourne |
MEG UPTON | |
|
Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.
|