Abstract
Gateshead International Festival of Theatre (GIFT) is an annual festival of contemporary performance in Gateshead, in the North East of England. It was founded in 2011 to provide a platform for contemporary performance in the region and as a creative response to Gateshead town centre’s redevelopment. It includes performances, workshops, discussions, and other informal ways for artists and audiences to come together.
Keywords::
So, what is GIFT? How long has it been happening? What is its focus?
GIFT stands for Gateshead International Festival of Theatre. I started the festival in 2011 as a platform for contemporary performance in the region and as a creative response to Gateshead town centre’s redevelopment. Gateshead is in the North East of England, in a region that’s recognised for its industrial heritage, and where culture has played a significant role in the area’s regeneration. GIFT is an annual festival that takes place over three days in May and includes performances, workshops, discussions, and other informal ways for artists and audiences to come together. Events take place in different locations around Gateshead, connecting the culturally regenerated Gateshead quayside with the commercially re-developed town centre. We don’t use one specific venue for GIFT, but we work with lots of different spaces, including BALTIC Centre for Contemporary Art, Gateshead Library, the Heritage Centre – which is a converted church – and then more unusual spaces, like the local metro station, empty shops units, pubs, parks, and the local high street. GIFT works with artists at various stages of their career and creates an environment to come together and share new ideas. I always encourage artists to push at the parameters of their practice, whatever that might be.
In 2020, GIFT was scheduled to take place in early May. As it became clear in March that COVID-19 was going to cause major disruption, what were the immediate issues for the festival?
The immediate issue was that there was no clarity around how long this coronavirus was going to be around, so planning became impossible. At that point, venues were initially closing for two weeks, but we knew even if it was just two weeks, we couldn’t do the preparation in time. Other festivals were cancelling, and we didn’t want to do that. We had secured the funding to make GIFT happen and wanted to do something that would honour the artists we were committed to. Postponing or cancelling didn’t feel like the right thing for us to do.
No postponing or cancelling then – what did you do – and why?
We took the decision to try to take the festival online. We were supported by colleagues at Arts Council England to do this, as they knew we’d delivered an online version of GIFT before and that my background as a theatre maker had involved a lot of online working. I had been experimenting with Skype as a tool for creating performances when I was co-director [alongside Lynnette Moran] of mouth to mouth – a globally dispersed performance collective, which aimed to bring people together from around the world into a shared event. And we’d already tested what an online GIFT could look like in 2015. That year we did an un-curated version called #TheGIFTGathering. Artists opened up their Vimeo accounts, shared work on Facebook and Twitter, facilitated workshops over Skype. So, working with artists and audiences online had been part of my creative practice for about 15 years prior to reaching that pivotal moment in 2020 of making the decision to take GIFT online.
Why do you think the artists agreed to do it?
We acknowledged that for everyone involved it was a huge experiment. I’ve always presented GIFT as an opportunity to experiment and a space for artists to test ideas, so I think framing it this way was helpful for artists in the process. I’d also been in conversation with the artists for a long time, had built up trust, so they felt confident we could do this. There was a strong sense we were figuring it out together. I also think that when I explained my background working creatively online, there was more willingness to go with the process.
And you went ahead and it happened! Tell me about GIFT 2020 - what did you manage to do?
GIFT 2020 took place over 3 days – online – in real time, and events were ticketed on a Pay What You Decide basis. We used various platforms to re-create the experience of GIFT and worked hard to create a sense of community in the way we would if we were in Gateshead. The artists re-imagined their works, and for each artist, this process was quite different, which led to a varied programme. Some artists re-staged their studio theatre shows and performed over Zoom from their homes; others created audio works. There were durational and one-on-one performances, talks, panel conversations, and more. We also included two pre-recorded performances, which were framed by wrap-around opportunities for audiences to participate.
What kinds of audience experience do you think were enabled in that particular moment?
The process of making the festival happen online began with us reflecting on what was at the core of GIFT. Normally when it happens in Gateshead, it is about bringing people together, enabling conversations to happen and people to connect ().
Image 1. We Used to Wait by Massive Owl. GIFT 2013. Photo by Richard Kenworthy.
Quite often that’s also about feeling a connection to a location – which is Gateshead – but it’s also very much about allowing conversations to emerge between artists and audiences. So, it was key for us that this remained ().
Image 2. GIFT Lunchtime Conversation. GIFT 2017. Photo by Richard Kenworthy.
We knew as well, in that moment, when we had five weeks between deciding to go online and GIFT 2020 happening, that we weren’t going to get everything right. We knew we needed to frame it in a way for audiences that they would be forgiving if things went wrong, that it was very personal and accessible. It was lo-fi in terms of its delivery; we were using the same tech that everybody was finding themselves encountering at speed – because everyone was being thrown into working digitally. We gave audiences experiences of coming together at a moment when people were looking for opportunities to connect. It’s hard to even fully remember now what that felt like, but it was definitely a moment in the pandemic when that sense of isolation was very real. It was a very scary time. We were trying to give people a space to come together.
It is hard to remember now how unfamiliar the platforms were for the majority of people participating at that point. They were providing a space of novelty, but also – at times – generating frustration. Which aspects of the festival were most problematic for audiences, do you think?
Something we tried to address for audiences was their confidence with the online platforms, by running drop-in technical rehearsals for audience members the day before the festival, to be shown around the platforms we were using. The over-riding problematic thing was probably, on reflection, that audiences remained on their own watching things through a screen, and there was something missing about the aftercare – holding space after events – which we hadn’t fully planned for. What happens when someone is watching a work on their own in isolation that is triggering, and there’s nobody there to support or hold that in the way you would when together in person?
Also, the act of watching work online, largely alone in that moment, emphasized our sense of isolation. Also, at that point, there was a set of expectations about what digital theatre looked like. I think for lots of people, their only reference point at that stage was the National Theatre’s NT Live, so we imagined audiences might expect high production values, which was different from what we were doing. GIFT offered other ways of thinking about what digital theatre could be. We were playing with the technology as we were using it, building the festival as we were going. It was all quite hairy! But we were so lucky in that moment that people were open and excited and willing to throw themselves in.
What did you discover about the audience for GIFT as a result of shifting online in 2020?
Normally at GIFT in Gateshead our audience is very local: a combination of people who are interested in engaging in the festival, students, theatre makers, artists, and interested audiences, alongside a wider, more general public who encounter the sited works around Gateshead ().
Image 3. Seven Falls by Teresa Brayshaw and Karen Christopher at GIFT 2012. Photo by Richard Kenworthy.
Then for GIFT 2020, we suddenly realised there was a wider audience out there who wanted to engage in the festival and who were suddenly able to do so. I’ll always remember that first moment of GIFT 2020, introducing the festival over Zoom Webinar from my front room, being interrupted by my son – who was at home with the schools closed – and seeing people typing in the chat where they were joining us from. The first few were from people saying hi from places down the road, locally, and then the locations started to get further and further away – hi from London; hi from Germany; hi from Taiwan; hi from New Zealand, and so on, and I remember that feeling of just standing there, fronting it, feeling like the whole world is watching in a way. That was an extraordinary moment ().
So that the shift online really changed GIFT’s positioning as an international festival in terms of audiences as well as practitioners. But how did it change its relationship to local audiences in Gateshead?
This is probably my biggest conundrum. We gained so much by going online in terms of international reach, but the thing that I felt was missing most was the sense of Gateshead and how we communicated Gateshead in that online space. I know other festival colleagues who run place-based festivals and went online have described a similar sense of loss. I have however also had wonderful conversations with audience members who live in Gateshead who engaged with GIFT 2020 and loved the fact they were able to download the audio works and walk around the streets of Gateshead, listening, where the festival was supposed to be experienced. But I do feel like the sense of ‘place’ got very much lost, and that’s something we tried to address for GIFT in 2021, and it’s something that has informed my thinking of how I want GIFT to manifest in the future.
What shape did GIFT take in 2021?
In 2021, it became clear we weren’t going to be able to get back to GIFT as normal. The ambition had been to bring the 2020 artists to Gateshead in 2021, so they could present their work in-person. I realised that this wasn’t going to happen. I also knew that in that moment it didn’t feel there was the appetite for the same level of online engagement with digital performance. It was also a moment when the country was opening up again, and there were lots of critical conversations that artists wanted to have around issues that had emerged through the pandemic. It was important that GIFT offered a space for artists to have this type of dialogue, so we called GIFT 2021 The GIFT Exchange, which was a three-day online event for artists to run workshops, discussions on key questions, and themes around some core ideas emerging from their experiences and practice. Importantly, it also offered a platform for local artists. I was trying to address the fact that the Gateshead element of GIFT was lost online the year before, so we worked closely with other initiatives, by local independent artists and theatre companies in the North East of England, giving local artists and companies a platform to shape the festival. There was a strong sense of a local presence at The GIFT Exchange, but there was a wonderful mix of local artists and audiences being in dialogue with, say, someone in Norway or South Africa. This kind of exchange felt very natural to GIFT by this stage. We’d really built our international conversations over 2020.
What do you think you’ll always do differently now, as a curator, as a result of your experiences across 2020 and 2021?
The thing I want to change is the notion I could ever bring an international company to Gateshead, where they come for three days and then leave again, without any sense of having developed a relationship prior to their arrival with local audiences. I feel even more committed to developing longer-term relationships with artists, meaning they might develop a piece of work through support from GIFT over two or three years, and as part of that, they will spend time here in residencies, interacting and developing relationships with people who live here – both online and in person. That’s been a significant change for how I think about GIFT, driven by a question of what GIFT can do locally to develop meaningful conversations internationally ().
It’s really quite a different way of thinking about durational work. The duration isn’t 6, 12, 24 hours. We’re talking about weeks, months, years even.
Yes, that’s what we’re trying to do for GIFT in 2022 and 2023, working in that way, so projects have more longevity and feel more rooted and connected to audiences here. We have been trialling this way of working with international artists, using the idea of online, remote residencies to enable international collaborations and conversations between artists and audiences. I’ve been working online with artists based in Calgary in Canada since August 2020, who have developed and sustained some extraordinary relationships with local participants in Gateshead, even though they haven’t met in person. The thinking here is that when those artists come to work on the ground, they’ll be welcomed by a community of people who know them. That feels like an extraordinary thing. I’m excited to see what happens in the next few years with these projects.
Yes, I can see the potential this approach has to transform the relationship between practitioners and participants or audience members.
Yeah, for me it’s about really trying to blur the distinction between practitioners and participants even more. Blend it rather than blur it perhaps.
And I can see how developing that relationship over a longer period – at a distance – may mean that when you do finally gather and meet each other in person, it’s weighted with significance in an entirely different way to the old model, in which the beginning of the relationship would usually be the moment of first experiencing the work.
Image 4. GIFT 2020 artist welcome ‘where are we now?’ Credit audience member screenshot.
Image 5. Bruno Humberto, Residency Artist at GIFT 2012. Photo by Richard Kenworthy.
Yes, it’s increasingly about embedding these relationships over a longer period of time, allowing them to grow and develop, to see how new work emerges through this approach.
Clearly, this approach was already intrinsic to GIFT – as a large part of the local audience is made up of people who have returned over many years and look forward to gathering again, annually, to encounter the work and each other. But you’re saying that the GIFT community can be more than local – it can be global as well. What do you think the legacy of the pandemic is going to be for festivals? What do you expect to endure?
Festivals have been through a real process of re-evaluation over the last two years. One thing that’s strongly emerged is how festivals can offer more accessible ways for audiences and artists to engage – whether that’s about a commitment to maintaining a digital programme long term – or being more considered about how access is properly embedded in festival contexts. I think questions about how we care for audiences, and how we care for artists, are core concerns that have emerged from the pandemic. This feels important because actually, historically, festival environments can be frenetic and intense. I’m not sure that the desire for that exists in the same way. All the festivals who I have been in an extended dialogue with during this time have been thinking about ways to work differently: how they can work slower; or how they can continue to work internationally while reassessing what working locally looks like. There’s been a strong sense of re-considering that duality, of the local and the international, which has been really impactful.
What are you hoping is going to be possible for GIFT 2022, and beyond?
GIFT is project funded, and 2022 is funding pending, so I don’t know what I’ll be able to achieve yet, but the plan is to bring a group of artists to Gateshead for residencies prior to the festival itself, and for them to connect with local artists and participants. Some will be working on new shows for GIFT in 2023.
I’m programming a series of dispersed and online events for 2022. I’m also programming artist pairs – so artists who work in creative collaborations, in a creative duo – which I think is an interesting thing for us to be considering now, in terms of how creative relationships have sustained through a pandemic.
Then moving beyond that, we just don’t really know.
If you could go back and talk to yourself in that moment in March 2020 when we were all realising that COVID was going to disrupt everything, and you were deciding what to do about GIFT, what would you say to yourself?
Go for it. I know it’s hard. Yeah. Yeah, go for it.
Helen Freshwater is the author of Theatre & Audience (2009). Recent publications include chapters titled ‘Histories of Audiencing: On Evidence, Myth, Nostalgia’ and ‘Audiences: Ownership, Interaction, Agency’, both due for publication in 2022 by Routledge and CUP. Between 2017 and 2020, she was Co-I on ‘Understanding Audiences for the Contemporary Arts’, an AHRC-funded project.
Kate Craddock is the Founder and Festival Director of GIFT: Gateshead International Festival of Theatre. Kate recently published a chapter about GIFT 2020 in Performance in a Pandemic, Routledge (2021). Kate combines working across academic and cultural sector contexts and in 2018/19 was recipient of the Theatre Fellowship with the Clore Cultural Leadership Programme. www.giftfestival.co.uk