How can we trust art organisations wanting to support independent artists/ inventors?

Convenor: Li-E Chen

Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:

I initially raised this question at the State of The Arts conference 2012 in Manchester few weeks ago. I posted this issue again at the DandD7 as the question hadn’t been properly discussed and I hoped that there were people at DandD7 who could suggest what and how “Trust” could be created and developed between independent artists and arts organisations.

Organisations can support independence within the arts and the production of radical and challenging work. I feel many organisations work too ‘safely’ and often support the same artists. Is this because it is easier for them to work and follow the same pattern of programming and producing?

Artists need full creative freedom, without the limits of expectation and space.

Unfortunately many organisation seem to be results driven and focused on production. This is detrimental to artists work where focus is on the process. There is a notion that if a work is not finished or incomplete it has failed. This is because organisations still caught up in the commodification of art and deem it necessary to show an end product in order to justify money spent or place value on the artist and their work.

Risk taking between artists and organisations:

I think ‘great art’ comes with work that is ‘incomplete’ leaving an openness to it. When work is complete it has already died and become merely a product, no longer art.

The highly rigid structure of many organisations programming and commissioning can in turn disconnect audiences.

In the discussion meeting at the State of Arts conference 2012, , Producers and arts organisations were concerned that artists couldn’t deliver or complete their works. I think they should not under-estimate independent artists’ abilities, even though they may not speak out. I hope the trust can be repaired through conversations. Producers must be prepared to take the same risks as artists in order to achieve greatness within the arts. I wonder which art organisations and producers are willing to take the same risks as the artists do?

Conclusion

“Dream of Trust”

I wonder if organisations can establish their own independent spaces where any artists/individuals regardless of their practice or project, are free to work together. This would be a space for building trust, love, and a better society to live in. Artists could thus be more independent and use these spaces for experimentation, development and have time to understand the work they are producing.

“Achieving great arts for everyone” is not only the responsibility of the arts organisations, it is the artists also who need to take responsibility.  Artists can’t produce ground braking work without the support of time and space; not just time and space, but a supportive environment where cross-generational artists are encouraged to take risks.

Young Vic is an example of an organisation I think successfully addresses this via their young directors programme - this allows individual and independent directors/artists (any ages and backgrounds) to develop exceptional new works. The support that the programme is delivering is focused on directors’ on-going professional development, as well as giving on-going opportunities.

Improbable’s D and D is a great example of an open platform that is given opportunities for artists, arts professionals, and audience to engage in an open dialogue in an on-going process.  It alleviates isolation and allows for genuine and progressive collaboration and dialogue.

I think this is something ]performance s p a c e [  also attempts to do through the provision of space and events it curates - an independent space where artists can develop any kind of works without limit to any artistic practice. However, I wish there are more spaces like this, rather than only a space created by artists.

My dreams of Sadlers Wells, Tate Modern, Royal Opera House, National Theatre, South Bank Centre, and all the arts organisations.... I wish they will have their own independent spaces which are run as an Open Space and open for everyone like Improbable’s D and D monthly. I attended Improbable’s D and D for most of every month since 2009, because this is the only space where is open to everyone. I wish there are more spaces like this within all the arts organizations where any individuals can be part of it. It is really important to recognize the value of this that can change the society and create a better place for people to live in and give opportunities to create greater arts in the future.

I can understand it is really hard for organizations to understand the value of it, therefore, I have created one and want to demonstrate that it is essential to have a public space within each art form where new forms could emerge in this open environment.

Action to take:

Send report out

Tell people about it and create dialogues with arts organization

I dream about this dream imagining that I am one of the art and cultural leaders who want to create great arts for everyone and dream for a better society to live in every day life.

It’s gonna take years: On the virtue(s) of taking your time

Convener: Simon Bowes

Participants: Joanne Hartley; Steve Ryan; Bethany Pitts; Alex Lehman; Matt Ball; Daniel Pitt; Ros Williams; Maddy Costa: Dachel Davies; Steve Pitman (and others); Greg McLaren

Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:

Note that the session was called to try and identify a dissatisfaction with two (seemingly pervasive) orthodoxies, the FIRST: Edinburgh-once-a-year-or-you’re-invisible; the SECOND: Scratching-it-will-make-it-better: This is what we come up with: Maybe we NEED urgency – bound up with who you have to ask for the money – gestation periods can be too long (lost-in-gestation!) – “...being okay with your shit ideas” – “we should be practicing all the time” (perhaps a painter who produces one painting a year is automatically going to be a shittier painter than one who produces ten a year) – Scratch culture often ensures that by the time an artist “…considers the work finished, everybody’s seen it…” – Can early-career / emergent artists afford to work privacy? Is there an alternative to scratch that is artist-led, rather than venue-led, fairly enclosed, invitation-only, free, not pay-what-you-can? EXAMPLE Uninvited Guests just can’t do anything quickly (Mr. Dufty and Mr. Clarke have FULL TIME JOBS) – necessitates short, infrequent working patters (presumably with plenty of time for reflection) – they might not be prolific but they maintain their profile and never look seem to look hungry – how do we find dedicated time? – TIME IS ECONOMIC – Who says audiences knows better than artists what the work should be? – Audiences notice things the artist may have overlooked, but often give artists BAD ADVICE about how to develop their work – contrast all this with EXAMPLE Song of the Goat (Poland), or other comparable European companies: length of time spent developing the work permits depth and intricacy – “What’s the life of a show?” / “2 years to make, 2 years to show” / crossing over – “‘time’ is a question of efficiency…” – “wider than one individual process” – “there is no ladder to climb” – “…we’re not footballers (only as good as our last game)|” – No! – “…We’re as interesting as our entire body of work…” – but if let’s say, the reviewer / writer sees a bad one, they might miss a show or two before they go back – WRITING ABOUT THEATRE – “…you’re as good as the last thing you did and the thing you’re going to do next…” – is it possible to write to support a work / artist in another way? – getting a little review (well-starred or not) isn’t always that helpful – “…I’m discovering that I’m a slow thinker and a slow writer…” (becoming Okay with that) – SPILL Festival salons/ dialogues / ‘stings’: commissioned writing – all pretty encouraging – cut – EXAMPLE: “…Frayn had a five year hiatus before ‘Copenhagen’…” – MONEY BUYS TIME – but fuck the money – “…you have a duty of care to the work…” (you have a duty of care to the audience) – long timeframes permit continuities, sustaining the discourse around the work (documentation, critical thinking) – “…the little commitments make up The Big One…” – if we want to slow things down, there’s a value in that…if we make the process part of the show…a long process doesn’t necessarily mean a slow process – “the luxury of time” – “…we’re working in an industry where everyone wants to be working in that industry…” – “if you’re going to do something, really fucking do it” – “…if you can do it for £300, try getting 6…” – talking about getting Lyn to see your stuff: “…be sure that you’re ready to invite me along…” – A CULTURE SHIFT of TAKING YOUR TIME – generosity towards emerging artists (or: to an emerging / developing work, even if it’s made by an old artist) – giving time to something can buy you out of that economy EXAMPLE: Simon from Rough Fiction – a permanent ensemble, by consensual agreement – free space donated by the Actor’s Centre, for six hours every Saturday – core artists working on skills, founded in an open space, leading to a deep sense of collectivity – nobody got paid – has resulted in a finished show developed over eighteen months, equivalent of nine weeks of rehearsal spread out – in some circumstances the work itself is its own reward – what else are you spending / investing in, if not time – some kind of TRIANGLE DIAGRAM, like an equation Quick = Money, Good = Time – yeah: it can’t be cheap AND good AND quick! –  you’ve got to GIVE THE PROJECT WHAT THE PROJECT ASKS OF YOU – “…long time-frames are all well and good, but you’ve got to have outcomes, and you’ve got to stand by them…” – the work asks you: what kind of artist do you want to be –

I want (to make?) a project which pays people to make connections and come up with ideas

Convener: Bridget Floyer

Participants: Dan Baker, Zoe Cobb, Aliki ?

Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:

Not many people came to my session and I still can’t decide whether that means it’s a bad idea, not needed, too good to be true (I did choose Utopia as my location) or whether I just worded it badly. Certainly there feels like there is a lot of context I struggled to get into my punchy title. I probably could have (there have been other conversations about what we can and can’t do this weekend) but didn’t manage to.

My idea came from several observations verging together about which I also still haven’t quite decided whether they come together meaningfully or not.

• Trying to make work independently for the first time aged 32 feels difficult. Lots of schemes which help people are for those under 25 or under 30.  I think my experience of working for organizations for the last 10 years is helpful but I don’t think it makes it SO much easier that I don’t still need (want?) help! And there are others for whom this will be so much more true
• Even development funding needs a strong idea – a  creative idea and an idea of key people you want to work with. This takes time, energy and often money, and until you have an established organization this usually means doing this unpaid
• An article in the Guardian about how many old Etonian actors there are
• Feels to me like there is a gap between being encouraged to get involved in the arts as a young person and being able to move into employment. Audiences and workforces in mainstream theatre are not getting bigger or more diverse. I don’t think anything will change until we genuinely empower people from more diverse (culturally/socio-economically and otherwise?) backgrounds and that means giving equal employment opportunities. If people can’t afford to do the frequently unpaid schemes which are on offer and they need to get experience to get paid jobs then that is very exclusionary – equally if they can’t afford to give the time energy and money to coming up with ideas they’ll struggle to get started independently

My idea is to have an intensive scheme that brings people together maybe for just a week to have time to work on ideas and have time to work practically with other people, and help them get to a place where they have experience and maybe ideas to move forward on. Mentoring could also be involved.

This would have an emphasis on process over product though I was imagining some form of sharing.

There doesn’t seem to be such a scheme (though China Plate? does seem to operate a scheme slightly similar for devising companies to have paid time with new writers) so I want to try and make one.

Ideally I’d like this to help people from a variety of disciplines – producers, actors, directors, designers, writers, other artists. Everyone should be paid but as equally as possible.

My questions

• Who owns the idea afterwards if you bring different people together
• What’s the role of the producers in that space?
• Who gets involved / who really needs it / how do you make sure those people are the ones who get involved
• Will anyone fund it? (I reckon it could be done for £25k (or smaller and cheaper) if space and some other venue-type support was in-kind)
• Who decides who takes part – do I have the expertise/experience to choose?

PREAMBLE OVER: BELOW ARE THE RESULTS OF THE SESSION

As already mentioned, one piece of feedback was the lack of people at my session.

I spoke to three people, one other producer and two artists. Both artists agreed this would be useful and that they have ideas which they need help to get off the ground. This seemed to be partly about them needing a producer (and a producer that doesn’t need to be paid until the idea has mileage) and partly about a desire to collaborate and work ideas through.

Won’t be able to note whole conversations but these were key things for me:

Dan and I talked about how it would be important for it not to be too restrictive with too many conditions or caveats. We said both that there must be loads of empty spaces around but also that space really seems to be at a premium (I have seen various possibilities for space during DandD so that’s been interesting)

Zoe mentioned lots of things that would be helpful that I hadn’t even thought of (as I had a practical workshop style thing in mind) eg phone, computer, wifi, conversations, planning and strategy sessions, advice on what makes a show workable etc as well as practically trying out ideas.

This was good because it slightly answered my question as to what the producers might do in that space without becoming glorified stage managers. I felt strongly they should be involved (ha, of course, as I'm a producer!) as that feels like an important relationship to allow people to create as well as artist to artist relationships.

I also realised during discussions that ideas can take a long time to develop and maybe my thought that ideas could be come up with during the session is overambitious. Aliki and I talked about how lots of artists will have an idea but they may be unformed and not in a state that’s fundable. Maybe I should be looking for artists who have ideas they want to bring in to explore.

Another thought that came out was not to have to know answers was positive – to have a space for trials, where a sharing was the ideal end result but not necessarily performance, not audience focused and that the possibility of no sharing at all was an option

I was also assuming a theatre venue was the space I was looking for but other spaces could be a possibility especially if a performance (even a scratch one) is not going to be a necessary end result of the project. Even scratch performances are quite formal in a sense if they’re in a theatre space so maybe more beneficial not to be.

OTHER THOUGHTS WHICH DIDN’T COME OUT OF THIS SESSION BUT OUT OF OTHERS

I’ve been interested in who leads with an idea and I went to some sessions about post-dramatic drama and design-led theatre which all questioned who can lead a process. I’d be interested in having people come in with ideas who are not directors.

Piloting would be a good idea and this could be possible in a much smaller way than I was originally thinking I’d want to pilot. Maybe one group made up of one artist with an idea and others in a venue which has very close links to a diverse community and could bring in emerging artists (of any age) to see how the week itself works and what’s useful before looking at the wider format of applications etc

In fact not having applications per se in an open way but referrals might get the “right people” – or even better a mix, not to ghettoise?

Might be useful to bring in some established artists who might not need the project so much but benefit from reinvigoration of practice from working with new people or having a test space for an idea (or working on someone else’s idea) and again meet less ghettoisation, more useful for emerging artists to meet a mix of people.

Would it then be even more important that everyone gets paid and everyone gets paid the same?

Seth Honnor (hope he doesn’t mind me quoting) said creative practice is a constant tension between openness and quality and though I need to think about that a bit more, I think that’s a good context in which to set the above – have some known quality and some unknown openness (which doesn’t mean either isn’t risky but to different degrees?)

Again possibilities for space came from other sessions eg the Theatre Lab session about people in Streatham Hill (music project, aaaaagh have temporarily lost email address sorry) who have space and want to encourage use of it for artistic collaboration and no-one came to that session either – interesting!

If anyone is post-DandD interested in this or can offer help for me to do it (I’m determined to try) I can be found on Twitter @bridget_flo or at http://anoccasionalwildgoose.blogspot.com which is a slightly rambling blog about theatre and finding 100 things to love about London but you can contact me through it.

Stepping Up – be brave, be great, it’s your choice

Convener: Poppy Burton-Morgan

Participants: Poppy Burton-Morgan, Rosy, Marie Vickers, Loren O’Dair, Morven Macbeth, Simon Pittman, Lucy Avery, Jen Tan, Jen Lunn, Arabella Lawson, Seth Honnor, Lucy Westell, Jennifer Jacksons, Jamie Zubairi, Kelly Golding, Malwina Chabocka, Matthew Smallwood

Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:

Feeling from some people that this D&D not as inspiring as last year –

What inspired you last time? – Discovery, seeds of ideas, leads to collaboration

Turning optimism into something concrete.

Having to step up when you have a baby.

Step Change program NT/ROH – Jen had an interview – felt they were really looking for people wanting to be creative producers.

Acknowledging you’re the ones who care the most about a project so you’re the best placed to set up and make it happen (in a sort of producer-y way) or facilitate others to come on board to help you. But either way we have to take responsibility.

Focusing energy.

How long it takes to get a tour off the ground (it will happen!)

Offering opportunities to people who come and work for you.

How to make the right connections.

How to best communicate and say who we are

Make a psychological choice – this is the year that I will…

Lucy Pittman Wallace (Director) good at helping people get what they want – asking difficult questions.

Reminding self that you are stepping up!

Investing in self – approaching new companies/people

Being brave – where do you get the bravery from?

Ringing people is hard and there’s a different level of helplessness as a performer in that you’re more beholden to other people choosing (or not choosing) you.

EVERYONE IS SCARED (even Nick Hytner. Especially Nick Hytner!)

How do you deal with that?

Everyone feels like they’re a fraud, about to be found out.

There is something empowering about writing a letter (and a bit less scary than the phone).

PEOPLE ARE PEOPLE

Put yourself on people’s radars.

Get a ‘press quote’ from a friend/colleague about what you bring to something.

Whatever stage you’re at there’s always someone ‘further along’ and those people are also always trying to step up!

Celebrate your accomplishments – it’s very easy once we’ve achieved great things to undermine them because the very fact that we achieved them means they’re doable and in time doable becomes equated with easy.

DARE TO BE GREAT

Nothing of any worth every comes in comfort.

There’s a cost to everything, there’s a risk.

How can we be less risk-averse?

The gains always outweigh the risks actually because even massive ‘failures’ give us huge learnings and experience.

We need a reason to jump.

It takes practice – break the comfortable seal and keep breaking it.

Seeing other people be brave makes us brave. (And knowing that we will try to catch them if they fall so there will be people who will do the same for us)

TRUST.

We are our own worst critics.

It’s our attitude – therefore we have the power to change it.

The language we attribute to ourselves is really powerful – how we talk about ourselves changes ourselves.

Visualizations techniques.

Other people can help chivvy you along – mentors – people who believe in you.

Each of us here are artists and all of us are trying to use our art to change the world – we’re offering something else to the world. There is a huge generosity in that.

ART IS A GIFT.

How can the “professional” world and the “fringe” play nicely?

Convener: Alex Lehman

Participants: Sarah Boesen, Dick Bonham, Aaron Paterson, Jake Orr, Nir Paldi, Sarah Gee, Gill Nathanson, Matt Ball

Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:

Basic Summary:

Started with discussion of all-volunteer show You Me Bum Bum Train vs Equity complaints about free work degrading the industry, as well as industry ‘gate keepers’ like Spotlight not recognizing alternative theatre artists. It became apparent that some ‘establishments’ are genuinely reaching out to developing artists in the form of support and space and can often be called upon to provide advice as well. Also reinforced was the idea that the “fringe” exists outside of the “normal” theatre world for a reason, that it already has its own support network, and to trust that. The importance of social networking as a way of breaking down barriers was discussed as well.

Notes Taken:

You Me Bum Bum Train: problem from paying actor’s point of view, what did they offer the workers? (implied: nothing) Show couldn’t become financially.

YMBBT counterpoint: it’s OK as long as all are aware of what they’re getting into. The way it’s approached is fundamental to whether it’s OK.

What does “fringe” even mean? Is it defined financially? Who are the “gate-keepers”?

Devised world version of Spotlight is the scratch performance

RE: Fringe vs. Professional, not helpful to define ourselves “against a center”

Arts Council has begun encouraging/requiring larger institutions to reach out to smaller companies & this has so far been a good system

In Devon, the organizers of the Fringe Theatrefest (of whom Gill Nathanson is one) worked closely with a large, local venue who donated infrastructure and space – even converting a main performance hall into a studio space.

Difference between London and regional theatre environments: in regional theatre, everything is more dispersed and there is more a sense that you have to actively seek out contacts among the theatre community in order to survive.

In some ways London feels more disconnected than regional because of the huge variety on offer.

“Fringe” is more of a meaningful term in the context of London than it is up north in Leeds, for instance

How is National Theatre Wales (represented by Matt Ball) reaching out to fringe artists? By giving people time and space to talk about their work. Starting scratch nights. Running an artistic development programme.

“Why” is NTW doing that?

Paraphrased: ‘Because we’re responsible for our country’s theatre. It’s important that that process be holistic. We need to ensure that Welsh theatre artists feel empowered and that there isn’t a sense that you have to go to London to make theatre.

General comment that Wales is a great place for funding and support.

Incubator Project is a good thing to know

London artist asking herself if she should “Move to Cardiff” for her career, but staying in London for personal relationship

Story about frustration of arts council funding which is available for R&D, but not for actually paying to put the show on in front of an audience.

Value of befriending entry level workers at arts institutions – today’s admin assistants are tomorrow’s gate-keepers

Getting ahead is all about developing professional relationships. Reinforce importance of Twitter for getting advice from people you wouldn’t normally have access to.

OK to talk to venues, especially when seeking advice on how they like to be approached and how their selection processes work. Also talk to other companies.

Mentorships are great – how can they be encouraged? (again, one participant found a mentor through twitter)

CPT & Emerging Artists as good resources

Another possible definition of ‘fringe’ vs ‘professional’: the difference between working the festival circuit to taking the next step to establishing yourself in the programmed world. Expression of difficulty in making that transition

Wide Awake Devon – mentoring program in Devon

Listing mentoring time as an in-kind donation on funding applications. Importance of listing in-kind donations for emerging companies.

Regional, smaller communities communicate more with each other.

Money and Audience are the points of competition amongst theatres. Complaint that big venues don’t do enough audience development, leaving fringe theatre with less public awareness. Do people even want to see theatre? How and in what form? Big venues as powerful force in developing public taste.

Not much small scale touring is possible anymore in regional theatre.

‘Fringe’ is sometimes seen as a stepping stone to somewhere else. Really, it is also its own destination.

Big organisations are often willing to be helpful in small ways – offering a free desk for an afternoon or half an hour to speak to an administrator. OK to ask big venues for help.

How does one find the balance between going too far in being persistent vs. being a nuisance? Sometimes it’s about not taking no, but not hammering on the same thing over and over – receive criticism/response and propose something new (example of rejected performance proposal coming back as a ‘lunch time’ event)

OK to ask a company you like if you can shadow them for a few days.

Old Vic New Voices now have monthly access to advice.

Big orgs need to be able to do their own work as well, and some barriers to communication are necessary for that. Sometimes a person has one day a week where he/she is available to talk – reserving other days for focused work.

Arts Admin & Oval House have advisor services available

Question: What is the first step in creating site-specific work – apply for funding or talk to venue?

Conversation is always valuable, no matter what starts it or where it happens.

Going to shows is important for learning the character of a venue & help you target your future inquiries to places whose missions suit you.

Importance of following your interests rather than the perceived ‘rules’ or ‘hotspots’

Don’t take rejections personally!

What are some actions that can come from this?

How can we let the professional world know our concerns on this topic?

Good to talk to venues and explore the barriers, eventually you will find a way through. But, again, be respectful and don’t hammer away incessantly if a channel opens up to you.

ArtsJobs is good. Devisers don’t really derive any benefit from Spotlight, anyway – stick to the way the fringe works and don’t worry about the other theatre world.

Is it possible to encourage more in-school visits from professionals to talk to students about the transition from school to the professional world?

Is London a healthy place to make art, as opposed to a smaller city, more community oriented, and possibly with more funding available.

One participant’s personal opinion: A first she thought London was amazing because of all the opportunities to literally put her work in front of other people. But eventually she hit a gap when she wanted to jump from being an emerging artist to being and established company. Now feels it might be good at this point to leave and return at a later time.

The Point in Eastleigh do residencies for companies trying to make that leap

‘Place’ is important to the kind of theatre you make

In some other cities the professional world doesn’t play as nicely with the fringe as they do in London. For instance, local frustration with the Manchester Festival bringing in artists from everywhere but Manchester. Let to the creation of the Not the Manchester Festival.

Best to be honest, when speaking to venues and networking, about the fact that you’re new or confused or need help. Don’t try to pretend you know what you’re doing if you don’t. That’s much worse.

Just remember that there are always alternatives to the ‘mainstream’ systems.

Big theatre world as hostile to the fringe. Big theatre school invited a devising company to come to a casting call and when they wanted to hire a student for an Edinburgh show, the school director sneered and said that they didn’t advise their students to get involved with fringe shows.

The Uncertainty Principle: How do I talk about work I haven’t made yet, in a way that is attractive to programmers/ venues, without closing down possibilities in my head?

Convener: Rachel Briscoe

Participants: Lots of people, some of whom were: Tom Latter, John Myatt, Nick Bruckman, Martyn Duffy, Mark Trezona, Matt Ball, Erica Whyman, Kate McGrath, Sam ???? Apologies to everyone whose name I don’t have.

Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:

General advice and thoughts:

-       practice with low stakes conversations

-       use the Radio Times technique (50 words, the DNA of the project)

-       Separate: Here is what I know/ Here is what I don’t know.

-       Be aware of the person you are talking to and don’t be afraid to ask: ‘What do you need me to know right know?’

-       Avoid getting defensive and making up rubbish when you don’t know.

-       Think about what excites you – and what will excite the programmer: what is the bit of passion in the middle of the project?

-       Give people safety handles: companies you’ve worked with/ it’s a bit like …/ our influences are …

-       If you don’t know the what, know the how. What process will you use? At what stage will you know more?

-       Be upfront about the risks.

More specifically on talking to venues:

Remember it is the audience that the venue are thinking about. Venues are not actively opposed to ‘risk’ – they are thinking about the audience, whether they will come, and whether they will come back.

Tell venues what they should tell their audience.

What is the story of the evening? i.e. what will an audience experience? (Different to what is the story of the piece)

Is it funny? Is it heart-breaking? Talk about emotional content of the piece.

Is it like your past work? Place it within context.

What if you don’t have a past body of work? Some venues will work with very early career artists.

On scratch process:

Does it help? Depends what you want to get out of it.

It can be a way of starting to build a history/ body of work for yourself?

Is it just visibility for the work or is it more helpful to think about it as building a two-way relationship?

-> a way for the venue to spend time with you

Tension between presenting something polished (to impress people) and something scratchy (to progress the work)

Remember that it is a scratch – it’s about finding out about the work

If you present something too polished, will people want to see the finished show?

The venue can help by providing a very clear context for you to present the work within.

Genuinely engage with audiences: tell them that they are important to what the work becomes and mean it.

Thank you everyone for your generosity and helpful ideas.