Forum - A STUDY OF ONTARIO'S PERFORMING ARTS RESOURCES

Wendy Warnken

This study was commissioned by the Arts Heritage Committee of the Ontario Arts Council

Most people can appreciate the value of a 19th-century theatre programme, and there are few who would argue against its careful preservation. The same, however, cannot be said of material being generated at this moment by the dance, theatre and music companies of Ontario. Despite a healthy, growing field of Canadian theatre studies over the past decade, the actual papers and objects needed to write the history of this country's cultural life are slowly being eroded and lost. Since the Symons To Know Ourselves report in 1978, other reports, studies and pamphlets have been written, conferences and workshops held, but the state of performing arts material in Ontario remains one of serious deterioration. During the course of a study commissioned and funded by the Ontario Arts Council I discovered evidence showing every rule of archival practice being broken. Dirt, crumbling newspapers, unlabeled photographs, stolen videos - the list goes on.

In 1976 the Co-ordinated Arts Services sent archivist Jim Aikens to the 'Big 6' arts organizations (Canadian Opera Company, Toronto Symphony, National Ballet of Canada, Toronto Arts Productions, Stratford Festival, Shaw Festival) in order to organize the ever-growing amounts of paper these groups were generating. In 1977 Dr. Aikens reported that the clean-up was 'virtually complete'; but nine years later visits to companies in all three disciplines proved to me that the very nature of archival management disallows any notion of a completed stage. Without an aggressive, ongoing policy with regard to a company's records, the company's history is doomed. A clean-up is simply the preliminary step in saving the records of Canadian performing arts.

The Archival Resource Project, commissioned in 1986 by the Ontario Arts Council, is threefold in its purpose:

1  to identify the types and quantities of material being generated by professional performing arts organizations in the province;
2  to define the methods, if any, used by these companies in preserving their archives;
3  to determine methods by which the companies' materials can be better managed and saved for posterity.

The project began with a mailing to the theatre, dance and music clients of the Ontario Arts Council in order to determine what types of materials were being stored by these companies and what particular, if any, methods of handling they used. They were asked whether these methods were proving successful in the groups' day-to-day running of both their artistic and business affairs. The final questions pertained to whether they had ever made any attempts at finding a home for their archives, and under what conditions they would consider such a move. The questionnaire also included a checklist of the basic kinds of materials most often accumulated by performing arts groups.

The covering letter for the mailing attempted to identify the problems of artistic groups documenting the work they are producing. The groups to whom the mailing was sent were divided into three categories:

1  active performing groups
2  groups whose materials are already known to be deposited in an archive
3  service organizations and schools.

Different letters were sent to each category, taking into account the individual experiences and ideas that each group could offer this study.

Despite the common belief held by the artistic, archival and academic communities that questionnaires rarely prove successful, with an average 10% return, the OAC achieved an amazingly high 79% return. The reason for such a successful rate of return may well be attributed to a growing awareness on the part of the groups queried of the need to handle their own material. Another factor is that many of the companies can no longer be considered young by the standards of creative groups. Many are at least ten years old, have accumulated more and more paper and objects, and are aware of the ever-growing physical presence in their already cramped office and backstage spaces. This study has demonstrated that the majority of the arts groups feels a responsibility to record their work, yet lacks defining principles as well as staff, space and financial resources to accomplish the task.

After studying the returned questionnaires, conducting interviews in person and by telephone and visiting the archives established by the artistic community, the results show that there is an enormous wealth of material documenting Ontario's theatrical, dance and musical life. The methods used range from primitive to basic housekeeping, but the attempt has been made and the majority of artistic directors and business managers proved to be aware of the need to preserve their history. The fact that they could not do so properly does not mean the attempt should be abandoned. The existing circumstances of archival material in Ontario prove that the present and future needs of these companies must be recognized immediately and fundamental steps be taken to ensure that the pervasive deterioration taking place be halted at last.

The results of the Project's survey are important in a number of ways. The high 79% return implies that groups are willing and indeed eager to communicate their concerns. Surveys can also give us the essential facts and numbers needed as a foundation for a serious study of the existing larger questions.

Most of the 30 producing theatre companies who responded to the questionnaire collect playbills, photographs and business papers. Press and publicity material is also well covered.

Not as many companies collect backstage photographs, set models, videos, production diaries, wardrobe bibles and souvenir booklets. Only 50% of the groups have set and/or costume designs in their archives.

The majority of the groups felt they could easily or partly use their material, yet more than half felt they were not properly documenting their work. Almost all had no specific methods of handling their archives and most had not attempted to find a home. Nevertheless, only one company responded negatively to the suggestion.

Of all the performing arts, theatre would seem to suffer the cruellest fate where archives are concerned. The sheer volume of material generated by active, producing groups as well as the extraordinary variety of 2- and 3-dimensional objects makes it impossible for any theatre to properly preserve its history. No matter how well funded, staffed and regarded, theatre companies all seem to share the same fate: their work will not live past this century if something is not done to assist them.

There is a serious lack of understanding on the part of the companies regarding proper treatment, organization and, more fundamentally, priority of selection. One company believes it does not need to keep set designs because it has the actual sets; others keep only one copy of each item and 'the pictures slowly disappear over the years.' Another stores costumes and props in company members' basements until they are finally disposed of. Running out of space, and needing money, a group gets rid of all its props and costumes by auction. Papers are put in cupboards, set models, fragile yet bulky, are stacked in corners, the artistic director's home becomes the repository, or the items are 'simply scattered everywhere.' One company builds its sets and props in a barn 'and we stuff the boxes of paper there.'

Most groups admitted they made no real attempt to maintain things for posterity and that archives have always been an area of neglect. In many cases the histories of the early years are already lost.

Visits paid to several companies show little if any improvement on the general picture. At one company conditions exist which make their material a prime target for extinction. In humid and dirty rooms, 1985 newspapers (which lack any ragcontent) are already yellowing. Many slides and photographs are unlabeled, and when they are labeled, ink is used. Press clippings are cut so close to the text that several handlings of the article will render it incomplete. Posters are tooled up and crammed into filthy boxes along with old heralds, flyers and manuscripts. Dust is everywhere, and the thought of fire prevention or security in general is non-existent. All this is despite a positive, cooperative attitude on the part of the staff who must understandably spend all their time, money and energies on the business of producing plays.

Although superficially not in the same extreme condition and while enjoying the serious and professional commitment of a dramaturge, another company nevertheless suffers from many of the same fundamental problems. The dramaturge has a number of other extremely important and demanding jobs to do, leaving archives at the bottom rung of the administrative ladder. In attempting to mount an historical exhibition of the company's work, the dramaturge found the material and its organization 'woefully inadequate.' Other problems exist: scrapbooks use paste or tape; there are no attempts at temperature and humidity controls or fire prevention and the air quality is not adequate for the material. The company is, however, a retentive organization and has managed to keep much of its history. Unfortunately, space limitations prevent the material from residing in one controlled area and we find set models in one part of the building, scripts in another, with props and costumes and business archives all placed in different corners and occasionally on different floors.

Theatre service organizations and schools are, if possible, in a more precarious state than the producing companies. There is no question that the majority are not properly documenting their dealings with theatre groups and individuals. None have specific methods of handling their material, and most have never sought a repository but would consider it. There was a general tendency for the service and school organizations to doubt whether this survey applied to them, unaware of the importance such groups have.

One organization believes it is barely preserving what is going to be of value. Its file systems are idiosyncratic and frequent staff changes make it impossible for any one person to make a commitment to the archive, making continuity impossible. During a move in 1986 they 'threw out things,' but could not tell what items were discarded.

Another group will also be moving within the year and hopes to have enough space for its papers, although once again this cannot be a top priority. For the moment, recent documentation can be easily used, but anything before 1984 is extremely difficult to find. With no computer, indexing, or cross-referencing, and with changing personnel, the organization acknowledges it needs help.

One of Canada's most important theatrical organizations has a wealth of material sitting in boxes, file cabinets and on shelves. A reorganization in 1986 has enabled them to use recent files, but 'the past needs a major commitment of sifting and organization time by an individual well versed in Canadian theatre, present and past.' Decisions regarding what to keep, proper quantities, and proper storage methods are not ones which can be made by the present administration. They requested assistance and guidelines for these matters.

The majority of the producing groups who responded collect playbills, photos, costumes, props, sound and lighting designs as well as business and publicity items. Fewer are able to save set and costume designs, videos and architectural drawings. The areas where there is the least documentation is backstage photographs, prompt books, production diaries, wardrobe bibles, costume construction information, and music prompt books, yet these are often the most valuable to the researcher. Only five of the ten companies keep dance notations and the majority considered videos to be comparable.

Answers to the survey revealed a paradox found in all three disciplines. While five of the ten companies felt they were adequately documenting their work, just as many could not easily use their archives and had no specific methods of handling the material. The majority have never attempted to find a home, yet would consider the option. The problems besetting these groups are inherent to the business they are in. We cannot expect artists to think of preservation in the midst of creating new work and it is equally difficult for administrative staffs of small companies who spend most of their time trying to survive. Nevertheless, it is worrisome to say the least when we find little thought for the future. The question concerning conditions under which companies would think of depositing their material was often answered with, 'when we run out of space.' Clearly, such lack of planning indicates a need for education.

While the dance companies visited showed a real sense of responsibility towards their documentation, both the older and the newer companies encounter many of the same problems. Fundamental problems to every group were lack of time, space, staff, archival skills and expertise, and money. Often the person completing the questionnaire or being interviewed was the only one involved in the archives and, at best, on a part-time basis. The largest and best-run archive has an archivist who can work only half-time because of her duties as education officer. Her part-time summer help in 1986 had completed a shelf-list index of what was contained in the one room allocated by the company's administration. Previous to that, there was no index and most information regarding location was stored in the archivist's head. There is a backlog of filing and cataloguing, and it is evident that they have run out of room with little hope for expansion. The office they use has no temperature or humidity controls and no precautions against fire. Materials are often kept in acid-free boxes, but the folders are acidic and the use of ink, staples, and metal paperclips is evidence that basic archival procedures are not being carried out. Yet this archive has come a long way since 1976 when archivist Jim Aikens wrote in his report to the Co-ordinated Arts Services that it possessed 'great masses of material but most of it is still in a rather chaotic condition. There is a firm commitment to an archives program on the part of the ... management and, in a year or two ... [it] may offer facilities second only to Statford's.'

The archive took closer to ten years than to the one-to-two predicted, and no one could claim its facilities are first-rate, but because of the housekeeping efforts of a few dedicated people, the material is at least brought together in one room and can be used by researchers. If that is the most that can be said for the largest and best-financed dance operation, what do we find in smaller companies? We can recognize that a concerted effort is being made, once again by one dedicated and responsible person, working under impossible conditions.

A large portion of the material in one such small company is stored in the same space as the administrative offices. Unfortunately, they are about to move to a smaller space on another floor, so there is little hope of the archives coming together in one room. Most of the paper is kept in boxes and files, but the costumes are jammed into crates, the wardrobe bibles are in the wardrobe mistress's home and the videos are kept in a separate, locked closet. The artistic director needed to study three of the videos, took them home, and had them stolen during a break-in. The tapes, lost forever, have caused a major problem for the administrator, who uses videos for her grant proposals for funding. The idea that someone, even at the highest administration level, can easily remove material from an archive is not unusual. Other dance companies noted that the videotapes of choreography were stored in individual's homes.

Since the functions and needs of the six dance service organizations and schools who responded are different from producing groups, it is logical to find that the majority retain more business and publicity material than production items. Yet while three out of six felt they were properly documenting and could easily use the archives, no group had specific methods for handling the material and the majority would consider depositing their papers in the proper institution. While serving different purposes, schools and service organizations suffer from many of the same problems as producing companies. One administrator told me props were kept 'because no one else has thrown them out.' Boxes and file drawers were kept in 'the dungeon. No one looks at them.'

Most groups interviewed requested that someone be sent who could tell them what to keep and what to throw away. This common dilemma is reflected in the questionnaires where we note one company has 2,000 posters but no dance notations; another has more fundraising material than production items; still another keeps more press and publicity documentation than the more valuable production material. And many only keep one or two of each item with no policy on lending, thereby leaving themselves open to losses of important archives.

It is evident that service organizations and schools in general are unaware of their potential for educating their clients and / or students regarding the saving, documenting and storage of materials relating to these particular careers.

Due to the nature of their work, music organizations do not generate the incredible variety of material that dance and, more specifically, theatre companies do. Few save tapes or production items. Only 19 of the 35 groups who responded collect playbills and only 17 have any pictorial record of their performances. More save business and publicity data as well as correspondence. Once again, as with dance, while a little over half of the respondents felt they were adequately documenting and preserving, the majority had no specific methods of handling the material. Most have never attempted to find a place to deposit their history, yet only one of the 35 would not consider such a step. 17 of the 35 groups answered they were able to use their archives easily, perhaps partly because most of it is paper.

Nevertheless, music companies suffer from many of the same problems affecting dance. Frequently-cited restrictions were space, staff and money: '[F]or seven years I have been trying to find the funding for a person to do work in [archives] alone - but every dollar we get goes to pay the singers.' If this statement comes from a 30-year-old group with a budget slightly over $500,000, what can we expect from the smaller companies?

Often portions of the archives are stored in individuals' homes, usually in the basement. What is left in the office is kept where it fits. Some companies do not save production history because space is so limited, and such conditions lead to frequent loss or destruction of documentation. The most extreme example is the company which is 18 years old and has only one file cabinet drawer devoted to documenting its history. As with dance, the more recent history is better kept and more easily used than the early material which often has been irretrievably lost. As with dance, a number of the newer groups felt they did not have to be concerned at this stage with records management.

Volunteers seem to play a larger role in music groups than elsewhere. However, the companies' records of such assistance are often nonexistent, and it is impossible to know to what extent and how well unpaid help is used. Many companies are looking for a 'volunteer assistant,' have an archivist who is a volunteer or have attempted to have 'one key volunteer to work on our archive resources' however, this only works on a part-time bases, with hiatus in between.' Clearly, this is no answer to a consistent pattern of preserving and retrieving material.

Many of the companies could not think of posterity, but saw the material as a practical part of the day-to-day running of their organization. The music companies which were visited included two of the largest and oldest arts groups in Canada, and two of the younger and smaller companies. Of the four, only one company seemed to be able to handle the daily operations of an archive. The administration in 1976 recognized the need of preserving its history, and with the assistance of Co-Ordinated Arts Services and Jim Aikens a proper mandate was conceived and executed for its archives. Due to the commitment of its permanent archivist, there is now a performance register as well as an index and researchers are able to use the material under his supervision. The archive is able to send out information to students, contribute to and mount its own exhibitions, and deal with queries from other orchestras and composer societies. All of this is gratifying to see, yet we must remember that by the very nature of the company's business they have met with far fewer problems than theatre or dance. The main contributing factor to the company's successful records-management program is the support and backing of the organization's administration. Without it the archive would not exist in its present state.

Unfortunately, this cannot be said of another of Canada's oldest music companies. It too was part of the Co-Ordinated Services' 'clean-up' in 1976, but many of the problems it faced then still exist. Despite the monumental work done in the past 13 years by the company's unpaid archivist, its history always seems to be on the verge of disappearing. The archive has been moved five times, always without consideration for the safety of the material. The lighting and air quality of the room visited were totally unacceptable, and security can have little meaning when items can be removed without the consent of the archivist. Set models were uncovered, and a sprinkler system was inches away from the only copies of master tapes. If the situation were not so drastic, one might find some ironic burnout in the fact that the company's board minutes are kept in a locked safe while the rest of its history is being left to deteriorate at an alarming rate.

The administrative staff of the two smaller groups visited were at least aware of the need to handle their ever-expanding files. The future of their archives, however, was in some doubt because both were preparing to find new spaces due to the sale of their present home. They have both lost photographs occasionally when lending them to the press. Posters are folded and costumes are stored in volunteers' homes. The air quality in both offices was unfit for the staff, not to mention the archives. Each expressed a need to have someone advise them on basic archival and preservation techniques.

Having determined the enormous wealth of performing arts material in existence throughout Ontario, and having discovered the perilous state most of it is in, the only logical conclusion one can arrive at is the following:

Theatre, dance and music companies whose mandate it is to produce new works have no money, space, time, staff or expertise to properly preserve the two- and three-dimensional materials generated by their work. The material in its present unprofessional and endangered condition should be removed and deposited in organizations professionally equipped to deal with documentation, management, preservation and conservation. It is unrealistic to think that with more money or part-time personnel any long- term or permanent goal can be achieved by these producing companies.

This conclusion was reached through consideration of all the possibilities by which the companies could safely retain their material. Even the best-run archives have been seen to be imperfect when strict archival standards are used for comparison. For space, staff or skills to be available, funds are necessary. Unfortunately but predictably, all roads are marked by the dollar sign, and the amounts needed for a permanent commitment to these companies are simply unrealistic in today's atmosphere of ever-increasing competition for funds and grants. An ongoing commitment is the only answer when dealing with archives. The possibility of companies raising funds for archives is also unrealistic. In the Special Committee for the Arts' 1984 report to the Ministry of Citizenship and Culture, the complaint was made that arts organizations need to learn more about fundraising. The Committee believed the groups should be better informed on corporate support. Many arts groups, the Committee reported, do not adquately research the companies, do not include the right information, and do not follow through after receiving a commitment. The conclusion was that the groups need guidance. Clearly, that assessment still stands. Yet the Ministry of Citizenship and Culture, as well as other government agencies, neglect to realize that producing companies are caught between two funding groups. Those who give funds to producing companies find it unacceptable to have them used for archives. Those who give funds for archives would, quite rightly, wish to have the money used in archival institutions who have already established appropriate and professional credentials in the field. In other words, it would be most difficult to achieve long-range commitments for funding the archives of a producing organization.

Where, then, do we place all those papers and props, designs and costumes, videos and set models? It is not the purpose of this study to argue for any one method of preserving the cultural history of Ontario. Nevertheless, visits with the directors, librarians and curators of established archives, libraries and museum collections in the province provided the opportunity to review the policies and procedures of these institutions as well as to record some of their philosophies and suggestions regarding the holdings of performing arts groups.

In general, it was interesting and surprising to observe the varying degrees of commitment among the organizations. Certainly material often has a better chance for survival when deposited in a government or university archive, a federal or provincial museum or a municipal library. But the conditions, archival procedures, funding and basic interest vary profoundly. When these institutions do not aggressively attempt to locate the important papers and artifacts of Ontario's performing arts history, individuals may take the initiative themselves. There are fundamental problems when this occurs, and basic among them is a lack of defining principles. At a time when we recognize clearly that an archive takes enormous concentration of skill, expertise and money and is a full-time profession, it is unlikely that individuals can understand the intricacies of archival collection. They often fail in dealing with copyright, permission fees and union negotiations which must be resolved. Occasionally they do not regard the actual artifact with primary concern. As an example, seeing a costume's image in a photograph or on a monitor is not adequate for a researcher or historian. A curator with a sound knowledge of fabric can study the actual costume and retrieve countless examples of historic dating, production history, costume design, even information relating to the economics of a particular company. This information will be lost if equal care is not given to the physical artifacts. Other difficulties include not receiving all donations as outright gifts, and the storage of material in private homes. Often no precautions are made for theft, fire or water damage. A comment such as 'we're insured' is clearly not an adequate answer in archival terms and, in fact, is a cause for general concern for the safety of the material.

In conclusion, addressing the common problems performing arts companies share with regard to their archives is our present and immediate concern. Certainly no thought to the future can be entertained if histories are now being lost. Yet if the problems listed in this study were corrected, it must be noted that they are mere stop-gaps, albeit important and necessary ones, in the preservation of material records. It would be foolhardy for anyone to think that historical preservation will ever be a priority for performing arts organizations themselves. Their creative energies, time, space and financial resources must, by definition of their profession, be focussed on producing new work. After putting in 20-hour days it would be, to use Urjo Kareda's word, 'wicked' to ask these individuals to document and preserve their work. Documentation and preservation are serious, full-time professions, and any attempt to force the companies to do an adequate job in these areas is destined for failure.

Whether the answer is a centralized system of different museums, libraries and universities using on-line computer cataloguing, or one museum for each discipline, there is no question that eventually the material must be placed in a more sympathetic and professional environment. In the meantime, there have been enough reports, studies and conferences, and it is now time to physically save the material from further destruction.