In Perspective #9 - An IJ jump (About Production Houses Dance)

Next to the industrial complex was another large hoisting plant. Inside were some reminiscences of past activity. The factory hall in Amsterdam-North where Stork made its machines was now completely deserted, cold, bare and quite dirty. Here we stood, director and chairman of Dansmakers Amsterdam, Ger Jager and me. Was this going to be the new home for Dansmakers? And was a lot of scepticism among our relations: how could you want to be so secluded on the other side of the IJ? Nobody would come here: no dancers, no audience. That whole stretch by bike across the ferry? Who was going to do that? Us, we took the plunge.

This dancing leap across the IJ was only a decade ago. Urban developments, gentrification, popularisation and the veryupping of Amsterdam North, it all happened very quickly1. So was the development and decline of Dansmakers, in a long-running soap opera.

The road to a Dance House

In 1993, the dance workshops Perron 2 and Danslab merged. Ger Jager turned it into Danswerkplaats Amsterdam and renamed it Dansmakers Amsterdam (DMA) in 2010. For some 25 years, the ex-dancer was responsible for these successive workshops/production houses. Jager, highly appreciated by some, criticised or distrusted by others2 - if only because he was also active in Amsterdam politics- also made a case for establishing a Dance House in Amsterdam. The municipality saw much potential in those plans, first at the Stenen Hoofd on the IJ, then in Oost in the now bustling Oostpoort, then in Noord at the Kromhouthallen where Dansmakers had meanwhile settled. Each time it went wrong.

Amsterdam did not get its Dance House. For the latest failure, Dansmakers was blamed. As involved as I have been myself, I can say with my hand on my heart: wrongly so. The Theaterkrant objectively reported that the financial conditions were unbearable for Dansmakers.3 However, the turn of events did not add to the credit of the already beleaguered but tough organisation.

Dash through production houses

For a while, Dansmakers Amsterdam, like many other production houses, was part of the basic infrastructure (BIS) of the state. There were also multi-year subsidies from the municipality of Amsterdam and project subsidies. In 2011, state secretary Zijlstra drew a line under the production houses.

What not many people know is that this had been handed to him by some spokespeople from the sector: "If you have to make cuts, do something with those obscure and undefinable production houses," he was informally whispered.

All at once, the survival of 22 production houses, mainly in the performing arts, became uncertain. Some of them continued in smaller line-ups, some were (partially) compensated by their municipality - as was Dansmakers - others went defunct. The 22 organisations included, for example, Productiehuis Rotterdam, Korzo Den Haag, Het Veem, Muzieklab Brabant, Grand Theatre Groningen, Toneelschuur Haarlem and youth music theatre house Oorkaan. De Theaterkrant listed their divergent visions of their own future4.

In retrospect, Dansmakers' response was as remarkable as it was telling: "Dansmakers sees no need for major adjustments and just wants to carry on." Dansmakers also went ahead, with support thus from the City of Amsterdam, the Performing Arts Fund and other funds. It realised an intensive refurbishment of its accommodation in the Hamerkwartier with performance hall and rehearsal rooms, opened in late 2015 by alderman Ollongren. Now well-known choreographers such as Caecilia Moisio and Fernando Belfiore were given their first opportunities there. Dancemakers collaborated nationally and internationally in networks and festivals such as Aerowaves, Moving Forward and Moving Futures.

But the tide of appreciation and of subsidies had long been turning. Replacing Ger Jager with Suzy Blok as artistic and general director could not change that. Her commitment to local, national and international networking did not pay off in time in the urban assessment. Dansmakers did not make it into Amsterdam's BIS and did not receive enough money from the Amsterdam Fund for the Arts to continue its work at a high level. In January 2021, Dansmakers Amsterdam merged into urban dance company ICK, as 'Artists Space', a dance development site led by Suzy Blok.

Diffuse labels

Did the vulnerability of the production houses at the time of the first Rutte government indeed lie in their unclear profile? It could be. In practice, terms and tasks get rather mixed up: 'production house', 'workshop', 'talent development place', 'breeding ground' and whatever else has been coined. I would like to use the term 'production house' exclusively for subsidised and commercial parties in culture and media that aim to create productions. And that's a lot of parties, including, for example, pop venues.5

'Workshops' are, in my view, places of experimentation and development, also for experienced makers. They are also there for gaining experience with interdisciplinary collaboration or trying out educational innovation. The fashion of sticking the label 'talent development' on everything makes that label diffuse. It obscures the right to exist of professional production houses and places of experimentation for proven professionals. There is also a need for places where beginning theatre makers, directors, choreographers, video artists are given opportunities for - and guided in - making and pitching their first productions. These are houses for 'talent development'.

I readily admit that the functions can go together within one organisation (with some houses also serving diverse disciplines), but it does help to name them separately.

A lot of things are now mixed up, difficult for outsiders to grasp.

Veem ('House for Performance') calls itself a 'production house'. "We are a home for mime, dance and performance, where artists are given space to experiment, develop and present. Our focus is on movement (... ) of surprising performances by emerging artists (...).6

Korzo The Hague calls itself a 'makers' house' and says :" Korzo is a development place (...). A house where talented choreographers, makers and performers are given opportunities to develop further, and then move on. A house where you as an artist have the time and space to try things out to fall and get up again."7

Grand Theatre Groningen calls itself a 'development institution' and says it plays a key role "in artistic production and talent development in the north (...). We increase and strengthen the presence of artists and producers in the city. We invite makers to come and work here, co-produce productions, (...) offer talent rehearsal space and support with our (...) expertise." 8

Choose or share?

What also played a role in the run-up to the major cutbacks in the doubt about the production houses' right to exist was the view that their tasks (producing? developing talent? experimenting?) were - or should have been - actually the remit of the larger companies. In practice, many companies have now taken up this task, as the above-mentioned example of ICK and Artists Space /formerly Dansmakers, or at Orkater, (De Nieuwkomers) or the cooperation of the three Dutch opera houses that concluded a covenant on talent development, shows9.

What argues in favour of this is that the institutions then naturally have their own research & development department and use their expertise to promote talent development and innovation within their own organisation as well. What argues against it is the risk of a 'closed shop', of one-sided talent development within one school.

In its opinion on future dance policy 'Everything Moves'10 the Culture Council leaves it in the middle: it addresses both companies and production houses when it comes to talent development and productions in a vulnerable early stage.

I think this is the right answer: expect room among the larger companies (and among larger visual arts institutions) for their own talent development and experimental productions, but keep open - especially outside the Randstad - enough houses that specialise in experimentation and/or in talent development. In addition, the companies can be producers, preferably together with theatres, of productions without the label 'talent development' or 'innovative'. The challenge is to make their 'artists space' as autonomous as possible from general management. That produces the strongest substantive fruit.

Bransen and Gerris

Since early 2022, the Stork complex developed by Dansmakers has been home to Likeminds, which imagines itself as "a metropolitan development site for multi-voiced theatre makers from different disciplines (...) The great common denominator of makers and performances is idiosyncratic, fluid, diverse, activist, frayed and vulnerable." 11 With the Factory, Likeminds has its own pre-training programme where young people can develop their talent as theatre makers. To the ambitious Likeminds, the building on the IJ provides a good basis.

The Dance House has not come there, nor elsewhere in Amsterdam. Nor will it for the time being. Something like this requires a little more tactical, strategic, strict and sensitive action on the part of the City Council. But above all: a lot more mutual trust and solidarity in the Amsterdam dance world. And so: getting rid of some old pain and, above all, forging new connections. See, for example, the collaboration between National Ballet and the urban dance company ISH. Ted Bransen and Marco Gerris have found each other in this.

In the end, it is not institutions, workshops or production houses, but people dancing together or jumping across the river.