After a long and gruelling rehearsal period, tech day had arrived. The company as a whole were anxious about how successful our tech would be. The week leading up to our tech rehearsal had consisted of long rehearsals, where we re-directed a vast amount of the show, painting the flats and pushing the promotion of the show.

Figure 1: promoting the show in Lincoln city

Figure 2 : Set Painting (Moran, 2017)

Due to our intricate set and props the company was unable to have a full tech rehearsal, instead we had to opt for a que to que run instead. Due to this the company’s nerves grew further, with many of the company questioning how successful our show would be. Reflecting back on our tech day, there would have been time for a full run if each member of the company helped set up the flats, set and props. The tech day was one of the most stressful days of this journey for me, due to my role, I spent a lot of my time behind the scenes emailing, filling out the documentation and working on the budget, so assisting in building the set was a challenge for myself. After the tech day, the group made the joint decision to up our rehearsals during the week before our show, as we wanted our debut performance to be a success.

Figure 4: Set

Before I knew it show day had arrived.  The company arrived at 9am for the initial set up. Myself, Paige, Kim, Amy and Jack were hoping for a fast set up, however the whole company did not contribute to the set up, which slowed down the process. Panic stuck as several items had been forgotten but fortunately between my self and Paige we were able to drive and collect the missing items, though again this had a negative effect on our set up process. As a producer, I expected my role to be calmer during the show day. I had already arranged for a photographer, Rebecca Nobble, to photograph our dress run and been promoting the show. But being one of two non acting members, I was asked to assist back stage with the costume changes and became the makeup artist for the cast. This meant I was unable to watch the runs from an audience perceptive and comment on changes needing to happen.

Reflecting back on this process now I would have vetoed the two full on runs the director requested before the show, as Mo, who played the character Alex, had a bad case of tonsillitis and had slowly been loosing her voice. Also, majority of the cast did not want to do two full on dress runs, as this left little time for every member to make any finishing touches to their costume or makeup and left us with a mere thirty minuet break after a long, hot and stressful day.

Despite the challenges the company faced, our production had been a success with the audience, receiving some brilliant reviews on social media. We were relived that the audience found the performance comical. However, I feel as a company we did not always work as one unit.

Figure 6: Reaction to the show on social media.

As a producer,  I would I have liked to have worked closely with the whole company but due to the size of our company and the various roles this was not possible. ‘As the production manager will have worked closely with the director, the designers, and the performers’ (Dean, 2002, 8) yet I found it was the marketing team, set designer, writer and stage manager who I worked with the most due to us requesting each others assistance or for a second opinion. It was not until the last few weeks of the process that I started engaging more with the director and actors after it became clear a fresh set of eyes was needed during the rehearsals and re-directing process.

If I were to re-do this whole process, I would work within a smaller company, I found from this journey that working in a theatre company of ten members often led to clashes of personalities and opinions. I believe this company would have worked successfully with five production members, with the actors auditioning for the show if and when we tour the production.

Figure 5: Company before the dress run

Works Cited:

Dean, P. (2002) Production Management: Making Shows Happen. Wiltshire: The Crowood Press Ltd.

Figure 1: Kick a Pigeon Theatre (2017) Record ’97. [image] Lincoln Performing Arts Centre: Kick a Pigeon Theatre.

Figure 2: Kick a Pigeon Theatre (2017) Record ’97. [image] Lincoln Performing Arts Centre: Kick a Pigeon Theatre.

Figure 3: Kick a Pigeon Theatre (2017) Record ’97. [image] Lincoln Performing Arts Centre: Kick a Pigeon Theatre.

Figure 4: Kick a Pigeon Theatre (2017) Record ’97. [image] Lincoln Performing Arts Centre: Kick a Pigeon Theatre.

Figure 5: Kick a Pigeon Theatre (2017) Record ’97. [image] Lincoln Performing Arts Centre: Kick a Pigeon Theatre.

Figure 6:  Bailey, N (2017) Reaction on Social Media. [image] Lincoln Performing Arts Centre: Natasha Bailey.

As producer, it was my responsibility to manage the company’s financial expenses, ensuring the budget remained in a positive figure.

As the show was primarily funded by the donations of the public through our Kickstarter project, it was imperative I created a budget sheet which was both understandable and accessible for the public to view via our website. Especially due to “the current financial climate, it is important to show that public funds invested in art and culture deliver public benefit and value and that our funded organisations manage themselves well and are prepared for all eventualities” (Artscouncil.org.uk, 2017).

I collated all incomings, outgoings and in-kind expense into an excel spreadsheet and set up the formulas needed so I could manage the changing expense with ease. Initially, I distributed a set percentage of our funding to each area of our production, i.e. Set, props. However, as the module and our show developed, I soon realised that some areas would need a bigger budget where as others would need less. For example, less money was spent out of the set budget than originally expected, due to the in-kind donations we received, meaning the left over money could help fund other areas, for example marketing.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

The only area which financially, would not be considered successful. The Quiz did not turn over a profit or earn the same amount of money spent on the event, this is the only area on the spreadsheet which spent more than it’s entitled budget. If our money had been granted by an organisation such as the Arts Council England, then this may have led to them cutting our funding, as it may suggest the funding is not being spent wisely. But as previously mentioned, this event was a success for the marketing and publicity of the theatre company and the show. The company also sold many raffle tickets at the quiz, however this is not reflected in the budget due to the reflective categories.

This process has been a great learning curve in financing, budgeting and funding a company and performance, as from this journey I have learned the great and the not so great funding methods. To fund Kick a Pigeon Theatre and Record ‘97 in the future I would create a Kickstarter project again, as this proved to be a massive success for us, raising the core amount of our budget and our followers. However, I will also look at other means of funding, for example, I would consider spending more time in the streets with my company talking to the public about the show and our vision. This has proven to be successful for many theatres companies for example Full Frontal Theatre, whom in their starting year did exactly this. I’ve found that funding methods and events work best when they also marketing and promoting your latest performance and allowing the company to build a relationship with the public.

Applying for funding via Arts Council England is a method which may be the company’s strongest means of funding. However, I am fully aware this funding is not easy to obtain, due to the cuts that the Arts face, and both the company and show would have to ‘give back’ to the public in return of the money received.

“Funding is provided on the basis that each organisation makes a contribution to the delivery of our goals, using mutually agreed special, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-based (SMART) objectives that are embedded in organisations’ business (or programme), equality action and audience development plans” (Artscouncil.org.uk 2017).

To meet these requirements and to contribute to their goals and the community, Kick a Pigeon’s plans to tour sixth forms, colleges and universities holding workshops around the basis of ‘finding yourself’ and the tricky years of early adulthood. For example, the friendship between Sebastian and David explores both sexuality, acceptance and rejection, issues that many young people now face. As according to the 2015 Kinsey scale “43% [of young people] place themselves in the non-binary area” (Dahlgreen et al., 2017) of bisexuality.

Figure 9

Therefore, these workshops would fit the Arts Council England’s plans the company will be contributing to society via educational workshops, whilst widening our target audience.

Works Cited: 

Artscouncil.org.uk. (2017). Arts Council England |. [online] Available at: http://www.artscouncil.org.uk [Accessed 14 May 2017].

Dahlgreen, W., Shakespeare, A., Dahlgreen, W. and Shakespeare, A. (2017). YouGov | 1 in 2 young people say they are not 100% heterosexual. [online] YouGov: What the world thinks. Available at: https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/08/16/half-young-not-heterosexual/ [Accessed 30 May 2017].

Figure 1: Bailey, N. (2017) Kick a Pigeon Budget 2017. Lincoln: University of Lincoln.

Figure 2: Bailey, N. (2017) Kick a Pigeon Budget 2017. Lincoln: University of Lincoln.

Figure 3: Bailey, N. (2017) Kick a Pigeon Budget 2017. Lincoln: University of Lincoln.

Figure 4: Bailey, N. (2017) Kick a Pigeon Budget 2017. Lincoln: University of Lincoln.

Figure 5: Bailey, N. (2017) Kick a Pigeon Budget 2017. Lincoln: University of Lincoln.

Figure 6: Bailey, N. (2017) Kick a Pigeon Budget 2017. Lincoln: University of Lincoln.

Figure 7: Bailey, N. (2017) Kick a Pigeon Budget 2017. Lincoln: University of Lincoln.

Figure 8: Bailey, N. (2017) Kick a Pigeon Budget 2017. Lincoln: University of Lincoln.

Figure 9:  Dahlgreen, W., Shakespeare, A., Dahlgreen, W. and Shakespeare, A. (2017). YouGov | 1 in 2 young people say they are not 100% heterosexual. [online] YouGov: What the world thinks. Available at: https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/08/16/half-young-not-heterosexual/ [Accessed 30 May 2017].