SHELLEY SCOTT
2001 marked the 20th anniversary of the Edmonton Fringe Festival. The scope and success of the Festival—involving 153 theatre companies and selling 85,000 tickets to indoor productions, with an overall attendance of 500,000—invites a closer look at the theatre being done there and its place within the larger context of Canadian theatre. The most obvious influence of the Edmonton Fringe is that it has inspired more than twenty-five other Fringes across North America (Fringe Program 6). I would argue that the Fringe circuit in Canada has great potential to play an important role in new play development. It is already, to some extent, a source for new Canadian plays, but this role could be enhanced if the Fringe were promoted as a viable, low risk venue for exploratory productions of plays in some stage of dramaturgical development. It could also be a place to see lesser-known Canadian plays that have been published, but not remounted, bringing such plays to a much larger audience. In considering the example of the most recent Edmonton Fringe, however, there is one particular obstacle to this potential: the tendency of the local media to emphasize familiarity as the highest virtue. Valorization of familiarity as a sort of consumer guarantee tends to mitigate any process which could truly be called developmental.
One could certainly argue that the Fringe has evolved into a phenomenon of commerce and entertainment. The Edmonton media play a powerful role in perpetuating that ethos through their aggressive reviewing strategies and the nature of their coverage, which, while frequently amateurish, is nonetheless influential. The rhetoric of the Fringe organizers themselves, however, strongly implies a mandate to develop new work. According to the "Fringe Philosophy," the Fringe is "dedicated to the creation of theatre that challenges and celebrates the cultural fabric of our communities, with an emphasis on emerging artists" (Program 6). According to the Festival publicity package, 70% of the works presented are "world premieres," and over the past twenty years the festival has "nurtured the creation of more than 1,500 new plays." Some have been published and "new work presented at the festival is picked up to be presented all over North America. The Fringe remains the leading laboratory for and showcase of new work in Alberta" (Program 6). The emphases are mine, but it seems to me that phrases like "laboratory" and "showcase of new work" sound a lot like the kind of new play development being done across the country, from Alberta Theatre Projects' Platform Plays to Buddies in Bad Times' Rhubarb! Festival, and that the Fringe organizers see themselves as involved with this same kind of process. But is the Edmonton Fringe part of this network? Is it participating in the cultivation and development of new Canadian work as much as it could be?
There is no doubt that the Edmonton Fringe is a great resource for artists based in that city. One of the ways the Fringe generates new work is by offering the opportunity for Edmonton theatre artists, such as actors and designers, for example, to also try their hand at writing. Actor Adam Joe premiered his first play, Chicken Man, at the 2001 Fringe, motivated by the belief that "We need more Canadian playwrights ... It's sort of a mini-movement in the city, where there's more of a personal responsibility taken by younger artists ... to create work and not just rely on employment from other sources" (Matwychuk 10). Actors such as Beth Graham and Daniela Vlaskalic, who are all graduates of the University of Alberta, were heralded in the press as emerging Edmonton-based playwrights, joining Fringe veterans in developing a career and a following. Possibly the most prolific of these veterans is David Belke, who started out as a designer and has been writing new plays for the Fringe for twelve years; he and Stewart Lemoine are probably the Fringe's biggest success stories. At the 2001 Fringe, Belke presented a new work (Between Yourself and Me) and, for the first time, a remount of an older work. Blackpool and Parrish "premiered to sold out houses at the 1993 Fringe," won the Sterling Award for Outstanding New Fringe Work that year, and has been produced across Canada and internationally (Program). Writers like David Belke credit the Fringe with allowing them to be playwrights by providing a showcase and an opportunity for development within a supportive community.
Stewart Lemoine, who has been writing and directing for his company, Teatro La Quindicina, since the first Edmonton Fringe in 1982, also had a remount in this year's Fringe: Cocktails at Pam's. In fact, Cocktails at Pam's, which premiered at the 1986 Fringe, has been revived at five-year intervals ever since, and two of the cast members, Leona Brausen and Davina Stewart, have appeared in all four productions. The Edmonton Journal reviewer remarked, "Edmonton's most talented and accomplished actors are always involved, and there is a lineup [sic] to see the show for the fourth or even the first time" (Babiak C3). Similarly, Darrin Hagen's The Edmonton Queen: Not a River Boat Story is based on his best-selling book, which in turn was based on the 1996 Sterling Award-winning play (for Outstanding New Fringe Work) of the same name. It is a piece of Edmonton history, a personal account of the city's underground drag scene in the 1980s, written and performed by Hagen, who explains in the show, "None of the names have been changed, because there are no innocents ... but occasionally, the outfits I describe are nicer than what we were actually wearing."
Beyond the remounts of its "own shows," however, the 2001 Fringe featured only a very few by published Canadian playwrights: The Terrible But Incomplete Journals of John D. by Guillermo Verdecchia; Seeds by Gordon Pengilly; and DeadBox by Ron Chambers. It is often the unfortunate fate of Canadian plays to have a successful run and then disappear from our stages. Even after publication, rave reviews, and awards, many plays do not receive subsequent productions. The Fringe, then, might be a suitable place to mount previously published plays and introduce them to new audiences. One might even assume that the desire for a hit would lead companies to present plays with a proven track record. Instead, the Fringe relied heavily on a roster of wellknown Edmonton "names." As one local newspaper put it, "Even a quick perusal of the festival guide underlines the crush of familiar names associated with productions—Trevor Schmidt, Darrin Hagen, Chris Craddock and Marty Chan—on top of a few creators who are almost synonymous with this event" (Bouchard 6). Based on this "crush" of familiarity, one might suspect the festival has become something of a closed circle, difficult to break into from outside the city.
It quickly becomes evident that the most important criteria for success at the Fringe are a certain amount of familiarity and promotion by the local media, and that these two are closely linked. Some of the shows are on tour and rely heavily on positive reviews from previous stops in their Fringe publicity, but the best guarantee of popularity is a rave review from the Edmonton media; once a show has been granted the status of a "must see," audiences dutifully line up. I would argue that Edmonton reviewers suffer from an affinity for the previously known, the familiar name, the actor or author who has already been declared "worth watching". This makes it increasingly difficult for newcomers to get much (positive) notice, and it makes the choice of play that much more crucial. This is not a new situation. Reviewing the Fringe in 1988, Anne Nothof observed, "Whether because of immediate identification and recognition factors, or because of loyalty to the locals, the audience response to [an Edmonton comedy troupe] was more enthusiastic," and "The sell-out shows, for which loyal fans were willing to hold the line for two hours or more, were the unusual offerings of Edmonton groups who have attracted a kind of cult following" (88). I do not think this is a problem exclusive to the Edmonton Fringe; I have heard actors say similar things about other Fringes, that shows by known companies from the host city fare the best, and that audiences seem reluctant to see a show that has not already been declared a hit. One can justify supporting local talent to a certain degree, but the second part of this equation —the pressure to have the work deemed a popular hit—is simply limiting.
Remounts of previous Fringe hits are one symptom of this pressure. There is also the unique genre of the Fringe sequel. For example, DeadRats on Arrival in 2001 was a sequel to a 2000 Fringe show introducing the band The DeadRats, which in turn is made up of a number of familiar Fringe performers (Dave Clarke, Paul Morgan Donald, Peter Moller, and Vladimir Sobolewski). The Fringe Program description for Roommates 2.0 by Wes Borg and Shauna Perry explains that "Version 1.0 of Roommates was a sell-out hit at the 1993 Fringe" (32). Die-Nasty: The Live Improvised Soap Opera has been playing at every Fringe for years; the Fringe Program calls it "legendary" (30). Jeff Haslam, a very popular Edmonton actor who has been part of fifteen Fringes and also appears as the Fringe mascot, created an entire play for his Die-Nasty character. Citizen Plate, which premiered at the 2001 Fringe, continues the trend of actors beginning to write, but also demonstrates that part of the popularity and audience enjoyment for this kind of show comes from the recognition factor. Some performers, such as Zandra Bell, come back every year with a variation on their one-person show. Playwright and actor Chris Craddock is described in the Program as a "Fringe Fave," and his new show Moving Along... is described as being "like his previous hits" (41). These shows were all counting on audience recognition and familiarity to guarantee large and enthusiastic crowds, and all succeeded. According to the Fringe's own publicity materials, only 8% of the Fringe audience is made up of out-oftown patrons, making it very much an Edmonton event (A Twenty-Year Legacy). The Edmonton audience member, and the repeat-Fringer, are rewarded; when Fringe-goers recommend shows to one another, it is often by mentioning what the creators did at previous Fringes: "[Y]ou should see this one, because their show last year was good."
There are other, related aspects of this "previously known" quality. There are productions of relatively well-established non-Canadian plays which are most often British. For example, in 2001, there were two productions of Pinter plays, Betrayal and The Lover, and one of Closer by Patrick Marber. Although the members of English Suitcase Theatre, which did Betrayal, are based in Winnipeg and Vancouver, they have been at the Edmonton Fringe consistently since 1987. Their well-received shows have made them another kind of "known quantity," so much so that England's Stark Naked Theatre, which presented Closer, billed themselves as including "three former English Suitcase members" and "Fringe veterans" (Fringe Program 62).
The reviewer who does try to draw some distinction between popularity and critical assessment finds him or herself in a selfmade quandary, since the spectator is so relentlessly positioned as a consumer looking for a guaranteed commodity. A case in point was Pigs, the third in a Fringe trilogy written and directed by Zhauna Alexander. Andrew Hanon writes, "No matter how much critics implore the public to steer clear of her plays, she keeps packin' 'em in." And Alexander replies, "Of course sex sells ... If we use that to get people out to the play, how is that wrong? It's not like we're lying. We never advertise things we don't deliver" (quoted in Andrew Hanon, "Critics be damned," See Magazine. 16-22 Aug. 2001:9). Adam Houston's review of Cocktails at Pam's made this dilemma explicit by explaining that, "a packed house thought it worthy of a standing ovation, so I yield to the will of the people and bump up the rating a notch higher than it deserves" (Houston 3). But the media, along with the producers of the Fringe program, are the prime culprits in placing so much emphasis on knowing what to expect, thereby influencing not only what audiences go to see, but also what theatre artists choose to produce.
Of course, some of the new plays presented are "one-offs," put together for the sake of commercial appeal or topicality, and that can be a virtue. However, for some new plays, regardless of where they come from, it would be healthier to label them what they are: works in progress. After scripts are read and workshopped in play development programs, for example, they can proceed to a Fringe production as the next phase in their growth. But their appearance at the Fringe would have to be understood as part of their larger process, without the illusion of being a finished product, and with a more realistic acknowledgment of how plays are created and (ideally) nurtured along through multiple phases. Likewise, when unknown theatre artists look for a play to take to the Fringe, they can select a Canadian play that audiences are not already familiar with. But will the Edmonton Fringe, its audiences, and reviewers welcome them? There has to be a sense that there is a place for them at the Fringe.
In a festival as large as the Fringe, there is room for everyone, and there is no reason the work of a first-time actor-turned-playwright, the remount or re-working of a Fringe favourite, and the production of an "older" Canadian play cannot happily co-exist. Theatre artists win their place in the Festival first, even before their offering has been determined, so it is not as if the organizers can be held accountable for the final line-up. Rather, I am arguing that a climate exists which tends to encourage certain choices, and that what might be touted as a celebration of the margins (it is called the Fringe, after all!) is driven by a desire for the familiar. One could call for a Fringe of the Fringe, another festival entirely for those feeling excluded. My point, though, is that the existing Fringe might be encouraged to serve another function beyond commerce and entertainment. Because of its organizational structure, it is an ideal opportunity for introducing works in progress, experimental projects, and unfamiliar plays. It is an established event with a huge audience, and it could be integrated into a system of play development across the country.
WORKS CITED
Babiak, Todd. "Slurp up something fizzy at the end of the world." Edmonton Journal. 18 Aug. 2001:C3.
Bouchard, Gilbert A. "A Playwright's City." See Magazine. 16-22 Aug 2001:6.
Hanon, Andrew. "Critics be damned." See Magazine. 16-22 Aug 2001:9.
Houston, Adam. "Cocktails at Pam's 3 and a half stars." See Magazine. 21-26 Aug. 2001:3.
Matwychuk, Paul. "These must be plays." Vue Weekly. 16-22 Aug.2001:10.
Nothof, Anne. "A View from the Fringe." Canadian Theatre Review. 54 Spring 1988: 88-89.
Scott, Shelley. "Confessions of a Virgin Bride: Review of the 1999 18th Annual Edmonton International Fringe Festival." Canadian Theatre Review. 102 (Spring 2000): 82-84.