|
home
forum
features
reviews
interviews
events
best-of
links
gallery
whoweare
| |
An Interview with
Bruce Sansom
the
new Head of Development at Rambert Dance Company
by Stuart Sweeney
October 2002
Bruce Sansom, former principal dancer with the Royal Ballet is now
the Head of Development at Rambert Dance Company. Sansom retired from
dancing in the summer of 2000 and since then has completed two Arts management
programmes in America. Stuart Sweeney interviewed him about this new professional
direction.
Q. Why did you decide to go into dance administration rather than
a “pure” dance role as a ballet master for instance?
A. If you’re looking to have a career that expands in the future, you
need to have experience in as many areas as possible. Everything I’ve
been working towards opens many more doors than would have been possible
if I had stayed purely on the artistic side. It’s very apparent that if
you are going to be a high level manager on the artistic team you also
need a lot of experience in administration to really bring full value
to an organisation. So what I’ve set out to do over the past two years
is give myself the options of working at a high level on the artistic
side or staying within administration
Q. You had experience on the Artists Development Initiative at the
Royal Opera House. Was that an important step for you?
A. That was the opportunity that made me realise I could do Arts administration
and that it would be a very valuable thing to focus some time and attention
on. The ADI was originally set up for organisations outside the Royal
Opera House and was not advertised internally. When I found out about
it I went to Deborah Bull [the organiser] and said, “I think I could benefit
from this. Can I be involved?” It was then that Philip Mosley, David Pickering
and myself came in from the Royal Ballet to support three of the groups
from outside.
We created an environment where people from within the Company also benefited.
While it wasn’t the intention to exclude us, it had been seen as an opportunity
to involve outside people, but the inclusion of insiders made the project
even stronger, it created links deep into the ROH.
Q. What was the attraction of going to San Francisco and did it live up
to your expectations?
A. I danced one season there in 1992, so I already had a connection with
the Company and with Helgi Tomasson. I met him in the spring of 2000 and
explained that I was planning to go to University to take an Arts Administration
course, which was the only route available in the UK at that time. A couple
of days later he called me to say that he could offer me a combination
of administrative and artistic management for a year. I realised straight
away that it was exactly what I was looking for. The one thing I had been
concerned about was walking away completely from the artistic side of
things.
It certainly lived up to my expectations. I’m a great admirer of what
Helgi has achieved for San Francisco Ballet, taking it from a regional
company to international standards. And to do that in a 15 year period
is near miraculous. I learned a lot from him about how he puts his team
together and how he works with them. He’s very involved with the administration
staff and that’s very important to me. I’m against the idea of there being
two worlds. Both should mesh together. That’s what I’m hoping I’ll be
able to provide for the organisations I work for.
Q. What were your main roles there?
A. On the artistic side I taught class, took Company rehearsals and was
in charge of one of the Robbins ballets. Specifically I did a lot of work
with the principal dancers on many of the rep works and with a few of
the dancers returning from injury. I also worked with some of the funders.
As a past exponent of the art form, I could talk with them at functions,
providing a conduit into the art form that perhaps they wouldn’t normally
have had access to.
On the administrative side I worked in Press, Marketing and Development
and with the Executive Director and the General Manager. I was keen to
experience as many things as they could provide for me. A lot of it was
observing, but there was also hands on, practical experience, where I
could work on something for them and follow it through to its conclusion.
I became part of each team, but in an interesting way as I was moving
around departments.
Q. Did you find a lot of differences between what goes on behind the scenes
in the Royal and San Francisco?
A. Yes and no. Companies have their own dynamic, which affects how the
dancers and management approach their work. As I mentioned earlier there
is a strong link between the artistic and administrative sides that has
much to do with the physical set-up of the organisation. With the redeveloped
ROH this has now been addressed for The Royal Ballet in the same way.
You’re not forced into contact, but there’s no physical barrier as there
used to be at the Royal when the Company was at Baron’s Court and the
administration was at the Royal Opera House.
There’s something to be said for the enthusiasm that dancers were bringing
to the Company in San Francisco. They have a hunger, which I think comes
from an acknowledgement that they are expendable. Their contracts are
not guaranteed and they work hard to maintain their standards. They are
excited by what they get to perform in San Francisco’s huge rep and I
was pleasantly surprised that they are so supportive of each other. People
move around more in the US and they seem to be quicker to integrate into
a new company.
Q. After San Francisco, you were part of the first intake for the Vilar
Institute for Arts Management based at The Kennedy Center Washington.
Was that a good experience?
A. It was great to get onto that programme and it was a fantastic opportunity.
For me it filled in many things that had been set in motion on the administrative
side when I was in San Francisco. The Kennedy Center, which has a strong
and under-recognised Education Department, had been able to construct
a programme of theoretical training, concentrating on the general principles
of Arts administration. It allowed me to look back over my time in each
of the departments at San Francisco and put the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle
together. So the two programmes were incredibly complementary.
Overall it was an exciting two years and there was much for me to learn
in America because they have some very good business practices in their
approach to the Arts. It was also an advantage not to have been in a purely
academic environment.
Q. How is it going so far at Rambert? [This interview was conducted at
the end of Bruce Sansom’s first week at Rambert.]
A. It’s been very good. I’m surrounded by papers which is not the way
I normally like to work, but at the moment I am trying to learn so much
in so little time that it’s become quite chaotic around me. But, I’ll
get there. There are already a couple of things that I have completed
and sent out the door. Nevertheless, it will take several months to get
to grips with everything.
Q. What was the attraction of the post at Rambert?
A. There were several attractions for me. It’s a very reputable Company
with a great artistic background and, they approached me, which was a
wonderful thing to have happen. I knew several people here that I had
talked to in the past and they recognised a potential in me and were prepared
to give it a go. It’s a one-year contract, which I knew from the start,
but that can be revisited.
I couldn’t ask for a better situation for my return to England. Looking
for a job is always a challenging thing to do, especially given that I
had been in America for two years. So it was very reassuring to have Rambert
ring up and say this is what we are looking for and we hope you will be
interested to come and work with us. It was great talking through everything
with them and it feels like a good fit for both the Company and me.
Q. In general do you think that we have much to learn here in the UK from
Arts administration and fund raising practices in the States?
A. It’s not that we have lots to learn; it’s more that we have to put
into practise what we already know. Whether funding comes from private
or public sources, it’s important that you can justify to people why they
should give you that money and demonstrate that you are going to use it
in a professional way. That thinking needs to be throughout the organisation,
but at the moment it’s filtering from the top down.
We have some very good leaders running many of the UK’s Arts organisations.
Nevertheless, in the past we’ve seen a lot of the approach, “I’ve gone
into this because I used to be involved in the Art and I’ll learn the
management skills on the job.” That attitude is no longer as viable as
it was in the past. It’s far healthier that people who have been involved
in the Arts can go and receive training, so that when they do step back
they are able to serve organisations at the highest level possible.
America has a very different funding system and has had to have a much
more business like approach to the way that the Arts are managed. For
instance, from my experiences there, it’s clear that my job with Rambert
is to build relationships. If in the process I increase revenue that’s
great, but what I need to do is to make sure that our existing relationships
remain strong and to build new ones, both with individuals and organisations.
It’s not about what can we get from them, it’s what can we both bring
to each other.
Q. CriticalDance has also interviewed Rambert’s new Artistic Director,
Mark Baldwin and I have to say that his ideas do seem to mesh with yours.
A. I’m very much looking forward to working with Mark. He has been away,
but I’m hoping that we will meet in the near future. It will be interesting
to understand his approach and what I can do to support his artistic vision.
Q. I was impressed that he is not overeager to introduce his own work
into the Company in the early days and will wait until he has established
his vision for the Company.
A. It’s dangerous to come in and try to stamp your mark without any consideration
for the company. You don’t just slam on the breaks on a big ship and expect
it to stop or change direction at once. You have to be sensitive to what
has happened before, what the potential is and what the need is. You also
have to take account of what the 35,000 attendees want and you need to
know that the heart and soul of the organisation are being taken into
consideration as the changes happen.
Q. Some friends of mine tell me that a possible downside in the US
is that major donors can want to have a say in the way that a company
is run. Can this be a problem in your experience?
A. It is if you let it be a problem. You have to know who you are going
to, why you are going to them and what you think they will be interested
in supporting. In general, my job is to approach only those people that
will support the things we want to do. We don’t just go to anyone and
everyone; it’s not just about getting money in the door. Rather it’s about
getting a relationship that satisfies everybody. And if it’s not right
- walk away from it. The last thing you want is something that will cause
upset for either side. It’s far better to say that we don’t have anything
at the moment that works – let’s have another look in a few months. Michael
Kaiser is a great one for ensuring that he doesn’t get pushed around by
funders. He would rather present them with something they can’t refuse.
Q. What are you going to miss about the US?
A. It was just amazing to come back to England. One of the first things
I saw was “Albert Herring” at Glyndebourne, the most English of settings.
So a few days earlier I had been at the Kennedy Center and now I was in
this rural setting watching this rural life style on stage. It was funny
to return and realise that England really does look like England.
I loved my time in America and given the right opportunity I would go
back and work there anytime. There will be things that I will miss about
the US, but there were certainly things that I missed about the UK as
well. Overall I’m comfortable on both sides of the Atlantic.
Q. Do you miss dancing?
A. No, I don’t. I would love to have time in the future in the studio
working in a creative format, but my personal need to get up and perform
finished with my last performance. It was refreshing to realise that I
didn’t miss it. I felt I had achieved everything I had set out to do.
It was damn hard work and I loved the discipline, but I’m on to the next
set of things and I love it. My final performance couldn’t have been more
appropriate, as I was killed on stage.
Q. Turning to the broader question of the future of ballet, I’m looking
forward to seeing works by Preljocaj [this was before the RB programme
revisions], Kylian and Mark Morris in the Royal Ballet rep next year.
However, I know that some people feel strongly that ballet companies should
not be performing this style of work. Do you have any thoughts on this?
A. It will be interesting to see where it all ends up. At certain levels
ballet companies are stealing from contemporary dance companies and we’re
in danger of ending up with an amalgam, where companies’ reps become indistinguishable.
That’s a concern to me. A Company has to decide what they are, who they
are and why they are. It’s exciting to push the boundaries of ballet companies
and contemporary companies, but if they merge too much then they start
to steal from each other in terms of audience expectations. That’s not
an ideal situation for anyone.
However, someone like Mark Morris is one of the greatest classicists around
at the moment. Although his use of classical vocabulary is not complicated,
he gives it a new play, which is wonderfully refreshing. I thought that
“A Garden” for San Francisco was a stunning work. It was understated.
Without that need to impress on the visual or physical levels there was
room for nuance. I think there are many ways for ballet companies to go
within their own Art form. Nowadays few opera companies have their own
stars and you can go from one country to another seeing the same singers
in the same roles in the same productions. I worry we could end up with
a similar situation in ballet.
Q. What are your longer-term professional ambitions?
A. If you are going to be a successful Artistic Director you have to have
a very clear artistic vision for the organisation and also understand
how that will impact on the administrative side. I would like to think
that at some stage in the future that there will be the opportunity to
go towards that. But that is some way down the line. I’m very happy to
be back in the UK and working with Rambert. I have a lot on my plate at
the moment and that is where my focus will be. But a few years down the
line, we’ll see.
Please join the discussion
in our forum.
| |
Archives
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
|
