The First 40 Years: 1988

This is part of a series of articles looking at the first 40 years of the Stephen Joseph Theatre (1955 to 1995) from the perspective of the theatre's Archive. The articles were first published in the SJT Circular newsletter.

1988: A Very Public Debate

by Simon Murgatroyd

In retrospect,1988 is a very strange year in the history of the Stephen Joseph Theatre.

For despite Alan Ayckbourn returning to the theatre after his two year sabbatical at the National Theatre, the year was dominated by an ongoing spat which made national headlines.

At its core was the Theatre Manager, Ian Watson, appointed following Ken Boden’s retirement in December 1985 and the Marketing Director, Russ Allen, appointed in April 1986. Ian left the company in January 1988 and launched a storm of accusations against the company.

At this point, it should be noted what was true and who - if anyone - was right is difficult to discern, but it is a fascinating story. There is also undoubtedly an element of self-aggrandisement; Allen was notorious for his publicity stunts, whilst Watson's polemic was largely unsubstantiated or later refuted.

It began on 4 January when it was announced Watson was to leave the company to concentrate on his writing - he was the author of Conversations With Ayckbourn; it would later be revealed he had actually taken redundancy rather than face the possibility of being sacked.

At the same time, Watson made a statement claiming the theatre had reported a 68% increase in earnings during the previous year, he had raised sponsorship from ‘virtually nothing’ to £22,000 and he had organised two of the longest, most "profitable and prestigious international tours" in the theatre's history. He was not leaving quietly.

Shortly afterwards, Allen announced the popular Sunday Rock Concerts were too be axed due to staff shortages and the absence of the Musical Director, Paul Todd, in London. Watson took exception to this and made a public rebuttal of all Allen’s claims. In a sign this was a personal spat more than anything else, it later transpired neither man was correct as the concerts had been cancelled after Alan Ayckbourn had discovered that technicians could not work overtime on play productions due to working on Sunday nights for the concerts.

Come March and Allen was claiming a £10,000 increase in subsidies was due to his ‘aggressive marketing efforts’ and he had helped halt a five year decline in box office sales with a 10% increase in sales.

Inevitably, Watson responded to this in the Scarborough Evening News claiming the figures should actually be seen in the light of a 18% increase in ticket price versus an 11% decline in attendance.

Any hopes this tit-for-tat might end were unfortunately thwarted by the theatre’s decision to cancel one of its new productions for the summer season, Peter Tinniswood’s State Of The Union. This in itself was not unusual as plays had been cancelled previously if judged not ready for production.

The cancellation threw into light Allen’s rather unorthodox publicity campaign for the play which had involved flyers promoting the play’s fictional seaside resort Hallam-on-Sands; The flyer did contain a phone number for further information though, which was presumably intended to be the box office number at which point all would have become clear. Except Allen did not put the box office number of the flyer; he put a security system telephone number which linked to Scarborough Police Station....

Matters came to a head on 16 June when The Stage published a front page story in which Watson claimed the theatre has lost £15,000 in sponsorship deals, was due to lose between £50,000 and £250,000 in public subsidies, that Allen has been demoted following a 'patently absurd' publicity campaign for State Of The Union, that the entire 100,000 run of the summer brochure had to be destroyed and reprinted after Allen wrongly named the sponsors, that audiences had fallen by 11% and that Allen destroyed the theatre's entire financial archive.

A statement from the theatre refuted these accusations with Allen noting: "The claims are totally unfounded but we do not want to become involved in a slanging match with a former employee." Interestingly, the theatre did draw up an internal report which convincingly rebutted the majority of the accusations, but this was never made public.

However, the news had gone viral and Private Eye magazine picked up making a series of accusations regarding the "theatre's self-styled 'marketing director' and a bit of a comedian in his own right" Russ Allen.

Watson also threatened to sue the theatre over a photo in the brochure which apparently showed him in The Square Cat restaurant and had been used without his permission; given the size of the photo, that Watson was unidentifiable from it and that - legally - he had no case at all.

Back in the pages of The Stage, a letter was published from Allen in September claiming that 80% of productions since the theatre opened 25 years ago had been new works. Watson provided his own figures refuting Allen’s. Actually both parties were wrong - not least because the theatre had opened 33 years previously and had averaged slightly less than 50% off new productions during that period.

At which point, something presumably had to give and in December it was announced Allen was also to leave the SJT for a new post at the Haymarket Theatre, Leicester.

With this, the controversy appears to have come to a close having generated a substantial amount of negative publicity for the theatre when it should have been celebrating the return of Alan to the company.

From an archival perspective, it’s difficult to know who - if anyone - was most to blame or most. Allen did make mistakes - including practically destroying the theatre’s entire Archive - and was responsible for some fairly astonishing statements of ‘facts’, but then he was responsible for promoting the theatre and gaining publicity. Whilst there seems to be a strong case Watson had some bitterness about leaving the SJT and although he may be seen as defending his position and reputation, Alan Ayckbourn’s Archive contains further acrimonious correspondence directly addressed at the playwright following Allen’s departure.

It is fair to say, neither men’s reputation came out untarnished and that the theatre had not publicly seen anything of the ilk before or since.

Article by and copyright of Simon Murgatroyd. Please do not reproduce this article without permission of the copyright holder.