Minutes: 23rd November 2009

STaG Board Meeting

23^rd November 2009

In attendance: H. Sloan, A. Blundell, R. Jones, S. Gregson, P. Mannion, M. J. O’Neill, J. Dyer, K. Nesbitt, T. MacKay F. Andrew, A. Ralston, L. Fenwick, T. Eaton.

Agenda

1. Proposals for EUTC New Writing Festival
2. STaG Nights Post-mortem/Reflection
3. NSDF
4. QMU Pantomime
5. Present Laughter
6. Social
7. Christmas Dinner
8. AOB

1. Proposals for the EUTC New Writing Festival

There were three proposals for the Edinburgh New Writing Festival:

• Ciaran McHale – No Wasted Education
• Flora Bird – Method Acting A La Blogger
• Joe Waterfield and Ben Watson – Colour Me Stupid

After much deliberation, the Board agreed upon producing Ciaran McHale’s No Wasted Education, for the Festival. Within the discussion, a point arose that should be noted here: when deciding on the reworking of an already-produced play, the issue of casting the same actors can become a point of contestation. Additionally, shows that are a one-actor-vehicles should be discussed thoroughly to ensure that is the right decision and does not appear elitist/exclusive.

2. STaG Nights Post-mortem/Reflection

S. Gregson announced that STaG Nights made a profit at £890, and this mainly came from the bar and the selling of programmes. There were many points and issues discussed surrounding the festival and are as follows:

• There was disagreement over the sorting out of the tech/dress schedule for production week. There was no correct way of scheduling, but it was suggested that maybe it could be worked out with directors and stage managers at a Director’s Meeting, for example. The schedule can only really work if directors keep in touch, which was a problem this year.
• It was discussed that there needs to be more bureaucracy in place, and there needs to be more guidelines and rigid structure surrounding the festival and conduct with communication etc.
• It needs to be strongly suggested to the next STaG Nights VP that organisation is key, to ensure that there is not any unnecessary stress that can be avoided.
• The stage plan needs to be sent out to directors well in advance, to avoid any unnecessary shocks.
• If STaG Nights is going to include devised slots around the building, these need to be checked in advance, and not in production week.
• The STaG Nights committee needs to be better structured next year, with roles defined early on, and make sure they are governed properly and used in the right way. Everyone needs to be aware of what their responsibilities are. It is good to have many people involved but there needs to be purpose. Committees need to have tangible tasks to do, rather than thinking about a theme: ckear direction and structure is required.
• The technical manager felt that they were doing many jobs that were not part of their responsibilities, and felt like they were left to organise many things by themselves. They felt if they didn’t do these things that they wouldn’t be done.
• It was felt that the STaG Nights Director should not be involved in any of the productions as this compromises their position as Director of the Festival.
• There was a little interest from directors, as many of the proposals were ‘just writers’. We need to generate more ‘buzz’ in the future about the opportunities at STaG Nights.
• It was suggested that taking on a separate designer to lighten the load of the STaG Nights production team and help to realise the Festival Director’s vision.
• It was felt that the technical manager was not consulted on the decisions of the production team, and this should be a collaborative process.
• It was noted that people should be aware of the tasks of the Production Team throughout the whole day during production week.
• When we are involving other societies in the festival, we need to look professional. The space for the band should have been sorted out earlier and not when they were there; we need to appear as professional as possible. This highlights the point for the STaG Nights VP needing to be organised – we need to stress that for next year.
• Even though we have inherited the ‘problems’ of last year’s board’s scheduling, we need to ensure that we are organised. This year, however, suffered due to STaG’s calendar of events ‘running into one another’ and casts/crews/production members becoming fatigued and exhausted.
• We need to remember to promote the opportunities of new writing and proposing for STaG Nights, and how interesting it is to do STaG Nights.
• It was felt that the STaG Nights this year, was overprogrammed and it would be good to give people more time – like the bands, for example. STaG should never compromise on quality for quantity. Next year, it could be suggested to scale the festival down, if the proposals are not of the highest quality.
• The New Talent Nights have set a low standard for STaG this year, and we need to build up the reputation that rehearsals are productive. We need to make the process of involvement is a STaG play is not just ‘two rehearsals’ but a creative process. The New Talent Nights really was a disservice for STaG this year, it was felt.
• It was suggested strongly that reports should be written after every STaG production to ensure that comments are passed on to future members, so we can learn from mistakes.
• STaG needs to be aware of the failings of structure within the G12 and it would be best practice to speak to all the managers (FOH, Tech and General) to ensure that they are all agreed to different concepts/ideas for every production.
• If people are unresponsive to email communication, it was suggested that they should be ‘threatened’ with their play being cancelled, or whatever is applicable. We are a student company, but we would like to be professional.
• There were many problems with the programme of the festival. M. J. O’Neill had hoped to create a festival brochure, but with the lack of information from the directors, this was impossible. There were mistakes and the technical team were missed; it should be noted that this should not be forgotten in the future.

3. NSDF

H. Sloan has looked into us applying to enter the NSDF competition. If the next studio slot is applicable then the Board will discuss the situation. It costs £95 and this includes a feedback session with the selector.

4. Pantomime

There was one interested party in running the QMU Pantomime. T. Eaton is going to chase them for a definitive response.

5. Present Laughter

A. Blundell said that everything was progressing smoothly. Brett Myers has seen the space, and the posters and flyers are being designed. The budget for the poster is £5. It was discussed that Brett which to paint a table white and this was disagreed.

6. Social

Present Laughter is holding a Pub Quiz Fundraiser in the STaG Room on Thursday 26^th November, 7.30pm. P. Mannion and F. Andrew are going to stock the bar for it. The Monday night Chillout Social was arranged. F. Andrew strongly urged STaG Board Members to be at the Social next week; the Social needs to grow and the Board at the moment is not setting a good example.

7. Christmas Dinner

The STaG Christmas Dinner will be on 6^th December 2009 at 3/3 109 Great Western Road, Glasgow, G4 9AH i.e. the flat of K. Nesbitt, A. Ralston and T. MacKay. Secret Santa has also been arranged and the budget is £5. It is a Pot luck dinner and everyone has been assigned a category.

• Mains: F. Andrew, T. MacKay, K. Nesbitt, T. Eaton, E. Burckhardt
• Sides: M. J. O’Neill, S. Gregson
• Desserts: A. Ralston, P. Mannion, H. Sloan, J. Dyer
• Starters: R. Jones, A. Blundell, L. Fenwick

8. AOB

F. Andrew – checked that A. Blundell is finding judges for the New Writing Festival; this is happening

F. Andrew – asked whether we were looking into the Summer Steele situation. H. Sloan stated that it was time to draw a line under it and move on.