Exit Stage Left
It has been a long time coming - at least publicly - but Colin Moody, one of the most admired members of the Sydney Theatre Company's Actors' Company ensemble has (as it will no doubt be described in the inevitable spin) "spat the dummy". He's resigned from the ensemble and, as reported in the Sydney Morning Herald (Saturday, October27), had a good old spray upon departing.
The irony is that Moody has been one among the group whose performances have been consistently well received, both critically and popularly. Even in productions which otherwise were afforded the polite quibbles which have masqueraded as critiques from commentators either too gutless, star-struck or bewildered to say otherwise - in public.
The truth for Moody is, however, that pats on the head cannot make up for being disillusioned, disgusted and finally, dissed from within. Moody is a quixotic and charismatic actor onstage and, off it, is not good at playing the game or pretending things are fine when in his view they are not. It was ever thus: a colleague from NIDA days said yesterday, "He was always a true shooter; the real deal."
According to the report in the SMH Moody has said that in his view, "an Oscar for acting is not a suitable recommendation to run the biggest theatre company in the country." He was talking about co-artistic director-in-waiting Cate Blanchett and it's difficult to argue otherwise. By all accounts Blanchett is delightful, decent and much liked by her friends. She's demonstrably one of the most brilliant actors of her generation and this suggests a special kind of intelligence; she's clearly ambitious and probably not content to stay in front of the cameras and at the beck and call of directors all her working life.
At the same time, she can probably drive a car reasonably well and has flown around the world more often than most. But neither qualifies her to drive a bus or a Formula 1 racer nor pilot a A380 airbus. So how come it's okay to stroll in off the street and take over the country's most prestigious theatre company? This is what is irking and bewildering people, even if they are too scared to say so.
STC general manager Rob Brookman defends against Moody by saying in a prepared statement to the SMH that "he has complete confidence in Upton and Blanchett. Cate and Andrew will do a wonderful job. They will also be supported, as Robyn has been, by a highly experienced management team and board."
Yes, well, he would say that wouldn't he - as Christine Keeler once so sagely observed. She was talking about corruption, sycophancy and core rot in the higher places of the British social and political establishment, of course, not Sydney.
So what does this mean? Not a lot. Moody will be painted as a malcontent in public and as a hero in corners where he will be surreptitiously patted on the back. Meanwhile, his former colleagues who are enjoying the rare experience of a steady job and decent salary will toe the line and work their arses off as they have been for the past couple of years.
What are they getting out of it - aside from the regular income? From the reports of what Moody has said, my own previously expressed concern seems true enough: that the actors are - in the main - on a treadmill to nowhere in particular in a series of plays that - in the main - are distinguished only by their large cast requirements. John Gaden was quoted in the SMH as saying that "performing with the ensemble was a dream job." Uh huh. That "I have never been so extended in my entire life." Occasionally perhaps, but from the auditorium the view is different: more often than not he and many of the others have merely played themselves as usual - and this becomes painfully apparent when they are so often seen, over and over. Gaden also said: "That doesn't mean the road hasn't been rocky, but that's wonderful. That there have been people who have been made unhappy by that is really sad." Yup.
Moody's other major beef - and one expressed by many in the theatre industry - is the bizarre and brazenly unfair doling out of job opportunities at the STC. He criticised the "office politics" and "hypocrisy". He is not happy that the untried, the untrained and the unqualified have been given legs up at cost of those who are well qualified, well trained and tried to the point of huge acclaim elsewhere.
One beneficiary of the Actors Company in terms of a genuine stretching of the wings is actress Pamela Rabe, who long ago expressed a desire to direct. Instead of taking herself off as have many others to - say - the NIDA one year director's course, however, she has paid some kind of dues by plodding faithfully through two years of the Actors Company grind. She makes her directorial debut in 2007 and in response to Moody's assertions says she understands his concerns. "It's a valid debate ... but it should be tested and judged when you see the work it produces."
Yes, well, she would say that, wouldn't she.
What really ails the Actors Company, aside from the almost total failure to do anything out of the ordinary - okay, regular salaries are extremely out of the ordinary - is its skewiff moral compass which can be seen in two key aspects of its operation. Sydney is a multi-ethnic city in a mutli-ethnic nation. You would never guess it from the entirely white ensemble. To begin with there was one Aboriginal actor: Deborah Mailman. She left to have her baby and was replaced not only by a white actor, but by the artistic director's daughter, Emily Russell.
The unfortunate thing for Russell is that although her considerable talent as an actor is not in question, the fact is, she should never have been offered the gig. Not, that is, if there were any concern whatsoever for the ethical underpinnings of an enterprise that, in much of what it does, seeks to highlight society's moral dilemmas and ethical quandaries. It is probably a symptom of the wider effects of eleven years of Howard lies and deceit that not only was the appointment made but also that not a murmur was heard - publicly - against it.
The same now applies to the work of co-artistic director and playwright Andrew Upton. In most other contexts, conflict of interest concerns would mean his work would routinely be offered to other companies but would not get a look in at STC. On principle. Even if he were turning out works of transcendent genius, the company would not be seen to scratch his back in such a way. It's possibly an irony then, that the works so far have been anything but, so the STC is lumbered with them.
In a recent review of Upton's Riflemind I expressed concern about the self interest, sycophancy and starstruck silliness now surrounding the STC and its new artistic leaders. Who is going to tell the playwright when he's prancing around starkers? Who will dare tell Cate that she looks fantastic in Armani but having Giorgio "dress" a production is a dodgy way of enticing theatre-lovers into an auditorium. That you might get your corporate sponsors' youngbloods tearing themselves away from edgy bars and edgy apartments for an evening, but will they return? Will it translate into theatre-literate audiences? Will it halt the dribble-away of subscribers?
Colin Moody's walk seems to be a symptom of a deeper malaise that does not begin with Blanchett-Upton but is now inevitably focused on them. The coming 2008 season is likely to be peculiar: awash with celebrity, gawkers, some good theatre and yet more whispering and knife-sharpening. What happens after that, when they actually do take over the company, is anyone's guess. For their sake and for the sake of the company and theatre in Australia you have to hope they turn out to be as smart and savvy as friends say they are.
Meanwhile, Moody's current job: performing in the independent co-op Frogbattleship's venture of 2000 Feet Away (opening next week at Downstairs Belvoir under the B Sharp banner) has achieved, by accident and serendipitous timing, the kind of pre-publicity and interest most tiny companies can only dream about. Front page of the Herald and unplanned notoriety to boot. Christine Keeler would know all about that.
