If this is amateur theatre it needs to get real. There is much self-preening and self-congratulation. It would be interesting to ask, for example, how many of the Board have performed in – starred in? – productions over the last number of years. Amateur theatre can be a wonderful resource, but amateur theatres can’t be run for sefl-aggrandising purposes. And it has to be run fairly, with due regard for what is fit and proper according to real theatre practice.Report comment

I think it speaks volumes that the Maddermarket won’t be hiring a new Artistic Director – it seems that they took Genevieve on in a spirit of injecting a shot of professionalism into their productions but have been unable to reconcile this new input with their longstanding ‘ways’. It sounds like Genevieve met with something of a brick wall! It’s strange that the Maddermarket don’t seem to have anything to say for themselves about this.

I don’t think a distinction should be drawn any more than is necessary between the running of an amateur and a professional theatre, and certainly not in the creative aspects. If an amateur theatre is lucky enough to be able to employ a professional Artistic Director in these difficult economic times, it should do everything possible to learn from his or her insight and expertise. At the end of it all, the goal is the same in the industry and in amateur theatre: to put on a good show!Report comment

In the early part of this year, Genevieve Raghu appointed a professional director to direct the August production for the Maddermarket Theatre. This director, who was not from the Norwich area agreed to give his services freely and to relocate to Norwich for the whole rehearsal period. He approached a professional set designer who was prepared to undertake the commission.

The Board found the director’s choice of set designer unacceptable and in opposition to the advice of Miss Raghu, appointed one of their own choosing. This led to Miss Raghu’s choice and selection of director withdrawing from the project.

Following this, the Board, against the further advice of Miss Raghu, appointed a replacement director who presided over, probably the most disastrous production in the recent history of the Maddermarket. This appalling piece of theatre, which was bad enough to give a junior school production a bad name, was a graphic example of what can be expected when a Board becomes actively and inappropriately involved with artistic decisions within the theatre.

I am not suggesting that the dismissal of Miss Raghu was designed as a smokescreen for the enormous blunder the Board made by imposing an inappropriate director however it certainly appears to have had that effect as no repercussions have followed in the shape of resignations.

The Maddermarket General Manager, Mr. Hoare, in his statements to the press about the dismissal of Miss Raghu, has hidden behind the cloak of confidentiality to avoid embarrassment to the Board but it can be safely assumed, if there were any shortcomings in Miss Raghu’s performance (and with three critically acclaimed productions under her Maddermarket belt during her short time there it is difficult to see what these might have been) they surely must pall into insignificance when placed beside the debacle which was the August production.

It must be particularly galling for Miss Raghu to hear and read of the Maddermarket championing from the rooftops their exciting new season, one that she herself put so much effort and commitment into assembling.Report comment

I’m pleased that the theatre is not looking to appoint another artistic director, at least another keen and talented professional is not going to have to endure this sort of treatment. For, however well intentioned their efforts at working with members of the profession, the current board has repeatedly revealed itself as meddling, complacent and narrow-minded. Such a shame as the desire to appoint a professional at the helm to focus full time on taking the company forwards is a great one, but Miss Raghu, after only eight months and what sounds like no confidence or support from the board that hired her, has not been given the opportunity to allow this desire to bear fruit.Report comment

Since I posted my comment earlier in the day, in response to DRASTICGIRL’s kneejerk reaction, I’ve been struck by how many people have posted in the interests of fair play and good practice. The Maddermarket – which I do not know close up, I hasten to add – really needs to think about the weight of opinion that is being expressed here. And perhaps do something about it.Report comment

I suspect getreal that most of the commentators on this article are in fact Miss Raghu’s mates. I could be wrong of course.

A small point, but an important one, perhaps the Trust made the decision to not tell the truth because the truth would harm Miss Raghu’s career?

I’m sure most people would not want their former employers to do such a thing.Report comment

(in the voice of Noel Coward…)

This will the second time I’ve read a version of this story in the press and in neither instance did the report indicate what action Miss Raghu intended to take. If she feels that she has a legitimate grievance with her previous employer then she must pursue this matter via legal avenues rather than, it appears, use her media contacts to promulgate a version of this story about which the Maddermarket, as indicated by Mr Hoare’s statement, is in no position to respond to.

It could be interpreted that, as Miss Raghu has not thus far taken legal action, there is more than purely artistic differences or concerns as to the quality of her productions at the root and cause of her dismissal. Indeed it could be misconstrued that Miss Raghu, having no legal recourse to pursue the Maddermarket on the grounds of unfair dismissal, is instead intent on smearing the theatre and presenting them as ‘yokels’ in order to deflect attention from the very fact of her dismissal.

In any event I suggest that this story smacks of hubris, and is not befitting someone who wishes to work in the professional sphere. In the long run this brief chapter of her fledgling career would be more easily forgotten if it had not ended up as an article in The Stage.

Oh and Director2012, my dear boy, before you start babbling on about poor communication, do try to employ adequate spelling, well structured sentences and some semblance of punctuation in your post; there’s a good chap.Report comment

I am sorry that Norwich’s reputation as an up and coming city has been halted through the arts. The spirit of theatre is such that it is collaborative, exciting, and rewarding both to those involved and the audience. It is the job of the people who make theatre to be constantly reaching out to not only stalwart theatregoers but also to those who perhaps find theatre intimidating (or boring and stale). As such when Genevieve was appointed I was thrilled he Maddermarket was taking such a positive and fresh step.
Having performed at the Maddermarket myself before I went to drama school, and having since worked in the profession, I can say without hesitation what that theatre was crying out for was a kick up the arse. The show I was involved in was constantly cited as ‘the youngest cast they’ve ever had’-average age being I’d say mid thirties. Having a yearly programme that MUST include at least 1 Agatha Christie is hardly ‘ambitious’, and while it certainly is ‘distincive’ is so for all the wrong reasons.
So sad to see that the Maddermarket have indeed forged themselves a reputation at a ‘local, regional and national level’- as outdated and curmudgeonly. Genevieve: you had a lucky escape.Report comment

As a matter of interest why exactly have TWO comments by Hamlet123 now been removed? They were both slightly critical of Miss Raghu – the second less so than the first, but not much more than a couple of others on here – and I hope, in the interests of fairness and balance (even, dare I say it – TRUTH?) that they haven’t failed because they are not – like many on here – blindly sycophantic.Report comment

Professor, one can only hope to develop the upmost of highbrow language and correct use of syntax and grammer. I’ve asked for it for Christmas… but until then… I think I’d rather be compassionate. Thank you for the advice though. Surely the context of ths comment stream is to question the above article..? In the meantime like I sad in my last post. I’m not prepared to enter into a bitchy, tit for tat comment stream to the effect of your last paragraph. That was exactly the same tone I recieved from the board themselves. The readers and loyal audience of that lovely theatre can make up their own minds…Report comment

I have been following the comments provoked by this article over the last few days with great interest.

I should be grateful if the journalist for this article, Nicola Merrifield, would please clarify whether Miss Raghu chased for this article to be written in The Stage or whether it was The Stage, itself, who made contact with her. If it is the latter, then I feel it is deeply unfair for ProfessorMarcoMariaMalipiero to make such sweeping remarks that Miss Raghu must be trying to ‘promulgate a version of this story’ through using her ‘media contacts’. It is a really rather inflammatory and I am surprised that this was actually published on the comments page. It shocks me that ‘ProfessorMarcoMariaMalipiero’ should be so accusatory.

Also, I suspect if Miss Raghu is contemplating legal action, then, this must be a somewhat sensitive issue for which there could well be many reasons why she would not wish to share this with the press at this stage. Who knows? It all sounds very unpleasant.

Miss Raghu’s passion for the Maddermarket is clear. After a quick google to see how else this situation had been presented by the media I noticed this article in the Eastern Daily Press http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/former_artistic_director_saddened_by_departure_from_maddermarket_theatre_1_1710871
in which Miss Raghu’s final comments are:

“The Maddermarket Theatre is a gem, a beautiful theatre with an intimacy which makes for the best type of storytelling.”

“I hope, with all my heart, that the theatre’s future is long, that change and development is embraced, that its audiences grow, that productions are bold and that the theatre offers the public opportunities, experiences and the possibilities that I know it is capable of.”

“I am sad that I will not be able to fulfil my intended commitment to Norfolk and the Maddermarket and to take it on this journey myself.”

Smearing the theatre? It doesn’t look like that to me.

I felt disappointed reading how her journey with the Maddermarket was cut short so quickly before she had really had the opportunity to show them – they didn’t seem to give her much of a chance to prove herself at all. I’m sure Miss. Raghu is devastated. It sounds as if she had the greatest of intentions and it is my feeling that once in the position she was not offered the support and encouragement that any employee would require in a new job, especially one with such responsibility.

Mr. Hoare’s comment that the Madddermarket “would not be replacing Raghu with a new artistic director for at least the next year, following a decision by the board to review the organisation’s structure” in The Stage’s article above, strongly implies to me that the fault was with the organisational structure of the Maddermarket, itself, and that Miss Raghu walked into something that was damned from the word go. Perhaps, I may quote back to ‘ProfessorMarcoMariaMalipiero’ with a variation on some Oscar Wilde… ‘To lose one Artistic Director, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness.’

I cannot understand how the Maddermarket as a producing house (albeit amateur) can now contemplate running without an Artistic Director. Surely this is the most key role of the building? Without an AD the theatre will be like a ship without a captain! Or perhaps this was the problem – perhaps the role of ‘Artistic Director’ was not perceived as such by the Board of Trustees? I would be curious to know if, like most producing houses, the AD was higher up in the management structure than the General Manager.

Maybe it looks like I am coming down in favour of Miss. Raghu, but actually that is the side of this argument which my conscience tells me I must be on. She seems to be a young woman with clearly a lot of passion. Her comments are sensible, articulate and visionary and she obviously had a lot of ideas about the future of this theatre.

I’m sure I read in a previous article that she managed to secure Patrick Hawes as some sort of Patron. The Highgrove Suite he wrote for Prince Charles’ 60th birthday was sublime – I’ve listened to that so many times now and really think Mr. Hawes is a serene and beautiful composer. How amazing that she managed to get him involved! What has happened to him within all this??

The picture I am beginning to receive of the Maddermarket from what I have read / researched is that it is a rather disorganised and back biting sort of place. It seems to me that the central problem that this theatre keeps facing actually lies with its Board of Trustees. I have no idea how this Board is formed but it seems that the members, whoever they are, are perhaps too active and emotionally involved with this theatre to be clear headed about its future. I really hope that the person (Get Real) who made the comment about the members of the Board themselves actually performing and being involved with the productions is wrong. If it is true, then, it really is a recipe for disaster! How can this Board ever hold any objectivity if the members are actively involved in this way? I can’t even begin to imagine the strain this would have brought upon any artistic director’s relationship with them. This is all hypothesis, of course, but my instinct tells me that there may be some truth in it.

I wish Miss Raghu the best for the future and hope she is snapped up soon by a professional theatre. This can’t be easy for her at the moment. I would also like to echo her comments about the Maddermarket – that its future is long and that change and development are, one day, embraced.Report comment