Vol. 7 No. 2 (Fall 1986)

The School: The First Quarter of a Century of the National Theatre School of Canada. Stanké, 1985.

J.A. Euringer

Jean Louis Roux's introduction to the book, in which he lays out his rationale for its structure - that of a bilingual collage, impressionistic and anecdotal - places the responsibility for the peculiar bias of the work squarely on his own shoulders. In sidestepping responsibility for the individual opinions (' ... do not necessarily reflect my own or those of the school') he cannot escape responsibility for the choice of contributors which has lead to this apparent bias.

To wit: French-speaking contributors include Françoise Barbeau, Jean-Pol Britte, Jean-Pierre Ronfard, Michelle Rossignol, and Marcel Sabourin, all of whom have been at one time or another, continuing members of the teaching staff. Diana Leblanc, one of the few bilingual performers in the country, is the only English-speaking staff member solicited; and Leblanc, whose relationship with the School is a long and distinguished one, was only a member of staff for one year in 1979-80. To have included Michelle Rossignol (Head of the French acting section) and not to have included one of either Joel Miller, Michael Mawson or Perry Schneiderman (not to mention at least three other ex-heads of the English section) indicates at the very least a gross error in discretion, and at its worst, suggests a devious sub-text which I would prefer to overlook.

The views of John Hirsch (who has not visited the School since 1974) and Guy Sprung (visiting director 1980) tend to enhance the impression of a 'golden age' in the sixties from which the fortunes of the English section of the School have descended. Now, this may or may not be an accurate picture, but M. Roux's failure to allow the current English staff a voice leads to the uneasy feeling that this 'Impressionistic' set of opinions which 'do not necessarily reflect my own' have been carefully chosen to slip M. Roux's impressions past us.

The mood of rejuvenation and cultural relevance which comes from the identification of the French section with the turbulent forces of Quebec theatre in the past two decades further heightens this disquieting air of malaise emanating from the English section, and re-inforces the impression insinuated by M. Roux's 'collage' - the impression of two no-longer interacting, but separate, schools functioning to the benefit of one and the detriment of the other. All rhetoric to the contrary, the book begs the question which I suggest that Mr. Roux would rather not have begged: are the interests of the 1980's English acting students best served by pursuing this 1950's dream?

On the positive side - Philip Spensley's adept pocket history is extremely useful. An expanded version would be a valuable undertaking.

J.-P. Britte's inside view of that same history is an interesting complement, although it does smack, occasionally, of self-congratulation.

Herbert Whittaker's name-studded recollection, following directly on these two, becomes largely gratuitous because of its placement, and is important primarily for its reminder of some early goals.

A number of early reminiscences - Martha Henry, Jean-Pierre Ronfard, Heath Lamberts, John Hirsch, Diana Leblanc - conjure a vibrant picture of those desperate, magical early years, from which emerge the electrifying personage of Jean Gascon, the adept managerial wizardry of James Domville, and perhaps most surprisingly of all to those who did not know him, the inspiring, mystical presence of Powys Thomas: the three of them bridging, as no one has done since, the gap between the two cultures from which the School was forged.

Specifically, the failure of the School to provide training for directors is brought up by several contributors, and the failure to provide a kind of post-graduate training company (possibly along the lines of Les Jeunes Comédiens) is lamented. It will be interesting in the light of these comments, to see if Nick Hutcheson, the new head of the English section, will be able to make a successful actuality of this plan - as he has proposed to do.

In summation: a glowing reflection on the past, and a disturbing reflection on the present of the National Theatre School of Canada. Perhaps that's what the editors wanted?