Paweł Płoski

As we set out to develop EEPAP's first actions, we noticed the lack of even basic information on performing arts in Eastern European states. Despite geographical proximity and common history, the mutual knowledge about the culture of both the closer and the more distant neighbours in Eastern Europe is scant. Despite their location on the same side of the Iron Curtain and the declared politics of friendship, there had been few publications to testify to this closeness.

We realised that one way to help EEPAP's members get to know one another and promote better understanding could be to provide a set of comparable reports on the situation of theatre and dance in Eastern Europe. Therefore eighteen national reports have been prepared, forming a basis for a single general report.

The report describes the situation in dance and theatre after they have undergone a change in their relation to the society and to the authorities. Due to the large amount of material, we decided to focus the report on the organization of dance and theatre in the light of the transformation of the political system in the countries covered by the report. Therefore our research pertains to the turn of the 1990s and the last two decades. We also posed questions about: the ways in which the reforms were introduced, the directions that were chosen, the attitude of the authorities, and the preparation of authority representatives for managing theatre and dance institutions. Among the main topics, there are models of public theatre organization, new theatrical initiatives, international cooperation in theatre and dance, the development of contemporary dance, theatre legislation, and examples of implemented reforms.

We want to think of the report as a starting point for future research and of the conclusions we have reached not as final theses but as first steps initiating a broader discussion. We hope, however, that already at this stage we were able to capture certain phenomena, tendencies, and directions, and present various approaches to theatre and dance, conditioned by various national contexts. In fact, we were not aiming at finding a model pattern of change, but at comparing processes and different types of practice as those may serve as a source of inspiration or clues in determining which factors may have contributed to the failure of some concepts and the success of others.

With respect to public theatre in most countries of Eastern Europe, management decentralisation has occurred, which was in line with the general European trend regarding culture management. Theatre life in almost all of the countries began to welcome a broader range of theatre initiatives – from private to commercial to non-profit, and from the ambitious to the light-hearted. It seems, however, that the question of finding a balance in relations between institutional and public stages and new initiatives remains one of the key issues concerning the organisation of the theatre industry in the countries of Eastern Europe.

The report reveals the poor condition of dance in Central and Eastern Europe. Ion the other hand, it is clearly evident that there has been a growth in the network of international contracts – theatres from EEPAP countries are involved in foreign projects (networks, coproductions, international events). The report distinctlyreveals that the border of the Schengen Area, to a large degree, also marks the boundary of the circulation of European culture. Eastern European artists and curators point to a deep feeling of isolation – a lack of information and inspiration. 

The organisational transformations described in the report instigated and drove the adoption of a more flexible approach to theatre industry management. Unfortunately, the transformations did not resolve the issue of finances. In light of the unstable situation resulting from the recent global economic crisis, a remark of the author of the Hungarian report seems uncannily fitting: “Crisis-mode management is becoming an increasingly important branch of theatre administration.”

Yet, the picture unfolding is still not complete. In our work on the reports, we encountered questions and areas that need further examination. We have not found answers to the question how to effectively manage the challenges of modernity, but we have a summary of the important period of political and economic changes in Eastern Europe. Without that knowledge we would not be able to plan further activities.

DOWNLOAD THE REPORT