Snape Maltings Concert Hall
(Hikitsurisan, public domain image)
In
May 2017, ten minutes or so before a choral concert at the world-famous Snape
Maltings Concert Hall in Suffolk, I witnessed a man in the audience being torn
off a strip by a member of the theatre staff.
The
concert was far from beginning, and not even was there anyone on stage. He had
been talking to his friends about the attractive wooden ceiling, shaped to fit
the original use of the building in bygone times as a malt factory, and he took
a photo of it. It was only an iPhone he used, so the quality wouldn't be up to
much. Then a suited member of staff came halfway along the row of seats,
disturbing other audience members, and chastised him. "We don't allow
photos."
The
unfortunate man explained, in a pleasant and friendly manner, I thought, that
he wouldn't be taking photos during the concert and that he only wanted to
appreciate the concert hall's ceiling. "The ceiling is copyright," he
was told. "And I will ask you to delete the photo." It wasn't a
request.
There
were a few uneasy seconds as they stared at each other. The man's wife, tight-lipped,
said, "Right," and, after the "security operative" walked
away, she whispered to him not to
delete it.
I
sincerely hope that this clumsy and ill-judged approach didn't spoil the man's
enjoyment of the recital, nor that of his friends.
It
would certainly have spoilt mine.
Later
that evening, photos and videos taken by other audience members began to appear
on Facebook, and of the concert itself. Good on them! The man I saw was just the
unlucky one. Here you have family members and friends who want memories to
cherish, and this is understandable.
Exercising subtlety
Okay,
so it can be annoying when you're at a gig and there's someone holding up a
camera or phone, with its bright LED screen causing distraction. But these days
most people – notice that I said most,
not all – are aware of this, and they exercise subtlety.
But
what if that man and his family and friends at Snape have decided to never
again bless that concert hall with their presence? I wouldn't blame them. Why?
Because it was so unnecessary. The ceiling is copyright? What a load of
nonsense – it's in a place where the public have been invited, and that's a paying
public, by the way, and the seating prices aren't exactly cheap; there aren't
even concessions for senior citizens, nor are they exactly comfortable and many
of the regulars had taken cushions with them. Whoops, I'm off the point here…
Slow suicide
I've
already mentioned that photos and clips appear on social media, which leads me
on to an unfortunate aspect of this senseless and archaic attitude that is
bordering on the financially inept: reducing visibility on social media amounts
to a slow suicide.
Younger
audiences are the ones to think about; they are the future, and they have been
bred with technology coming out of their ear holes. They take photos and share
them. And sharing these images and videos is free marketing for both the
performers and the venue – it is promotion that industry professionals couldn't
even afford to finance by usual means.
As
an example, I can name one international singer/songwriter who isn't paranoid
and allows the taking of photos and videos at his concerts so they can be posted
on Facebook and also his own website – and he thanks them for doing this! He
doesn't wail about it being copyrighted material because, quite simply, these
fans aren't making bootleg copies of his recordings; they are simply sharing
their enjoyment of his live concerts and encouraging others to attend.
See
what I mean? This kind of exposure is priceless, but if theatre staff start
jumping on audience members and tearing strips off them (as I've witnessed), in
the end the losers will be the artistes and the venues.
Old-fashioned
Of
course, the final choice as to whether photos are allowed is down to the artiste
concerned. Ken Dodd, so I'm told, doesn't allow any of it, but then, in his very
late-80s, he may not be aware – nor care too much about – the long-term
benefits.
However,
the oldest choral society in the world, Halifax Choral Society, does allow photos, and they indicate
this when booking with the theatre concerned. But on numerous occasions, like
at Snape, I have been embarrassed when seeing audience members being
tackled, in some cases rather heavily-handedly, by torch-wielding usherettes at the Halifax Victoria Theatre.
Apparently,
the staff assumed that photos were disallowed for
everyone, by default. Not checking the booking details demonstrates a lazy
attitude. Needless to say, it is unlikely I shall ever attend the Victoria
Theatre again because I find the whiff of fascism quite sickening.
So
the Halifax Victoria is another venue guilty of not recognising the growing
trend for photos and their value in perpetuating a business. The council-run theatre
has been in financial difficulty for some years; I'll say no more.
The
solution is quite simple: theatre managements should actually read what the
performers have specified regarding photos, and maybe announce that, should
they be allowed, to please not use flash, no camera clicking sounds, and not
inconvenience other audience members. Simple. Reasonable.
Then
everyone can enjoy the show. The performers will have lasting images of their
performances, the photographers will have lasting mementoes, and an
understanding and modern-thinking venue will have repeat custom.
