Nascent Fringe

8/9/2019 Nascent Fringe

1/37

Nascent FringeThe Edinburgh Festival Fringe 19561963: Continuity,Evolution and Legacy

David Jarman

School of History and ClassicsUniversity of Edinburgh

MSc DissertationAugust 2005


2/37

Page ii

Declaration

This dissertation has been composed by David Jarman, a candidate for the postgraduate award of Master of Science from the School of History and Classics, at the University of Edinburgh. The work it represents is the candidates own.

David Jarman, 8 August 2005


3/37

Page iii

Acknowledgements

The Edinburgh Festival Fringe is an annually changing, ever-growing event in the citys calendar.Such relentless expansion can limit opportunities to take stock of the Festivals history. This paper attempts to redress the balance to a small degree, complementing undergraduate research and analysingthe impact of different developments on particular parts of the Fringe. My thanks go primarily to my

supervisor at Edinburgh University Dr Trevor Griffiths, whose help in formulating research questions,and attempting to answer them, has been invaluable over the past year. Contact with several influentialindividuals from Fringes past has been very illuminating, particularly Dr Patrick Brooks and AndrewKerr who have longstanding connections with the Fringe Society, and Jim Haynes whose variedcontributions to the Edinburgh Festival survive today in the form of the Traverse Theatre. Theefficiency of the staff at the National Library of Scotland and the Scottish Theatre Archive is a boon toevery researcher using their material, and proved crucial in the course of this research. Extensivethanks are also due to colleagues, friends and others I have met over years of involvement in the Fringewho have provided interest, support and assistance in the course of producing this piece of work. Artsfestivals are increasingly important in the life of cities across the globe, and are attracting increasedacademic attention. The work that follows is a historical contribution to a multidisciplinary field of research, and hopefully a good read, covering as it does a process of change and drama in a fascinating

period of British history.

David JarmanEdinburgh, 8 August 2005


4/37

Page iv

Contents

Acknowledgements iii

Illustrations acknowledgements v

Introduction: Of fringe and Fringe 1

Supply and demand 15

What took so long? 23

Accentuating the positive 31

Conclusion: A late review 37

Bibliography 42


5/37

Page v

Illustrations acknowledgements

All images used below are taken from the Festival Fringe Societys anniversary book The Fringe. 50Years of the Greatest Show on Earth, written and edited by Alice Bain and published by The ScotsmanPublications Ltd. in 1996.

Page 9 Fringe programme cover, 1961: The Fringe, p. 5.

Page 15 An Edinburgh Fancy programme cover and ticket, 1957: The Fringe, p. 24.

Page 20 Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead poster, 1966: The Fringe , p. 13.

Page 29 Additional Entertainments programme cover, 1957: The Fringe, p. 5.

Page 34 Cast of Beyond the Fringe , 1960: The Fringe, p. 15.

Page 39 Fringe programme cover, 1966: The Fringe, p. 5.

Page 40 Better Late poster, late 1950s: The Fringe, p. 13.


6/37

Page 1

Introduction: Of fringe and Fringe

The very essence of the Fringe The Fringes power lies in the fact that a good group with adifferent play can find an audience in Edinburgh from the front row one can touch theactors in some scenes. The available space is handled cleverly The general approach owesa lot to the cinema technique there are short episodes and rapid changes of scene.

Edinburgh Evening Dispatch, 23 August 19561

Mr Charles Barron, the Aberdeen students leading actor and chairman of their committeesuggested that there should be some sort of co-operation between all the fringe companiesHe suggested the formation of a committee of producers and stage managers on the fringe tokeep in touch throughout the year to obviate overlapping. Could not all the fringecompanies unite in putting out a brochure about all the non-official events instead of eachcompany having to print and circulate leaflets as at present? he asked.

Glasgow Herald, 29 August 1957 2

In these two quotations the character and potential of the fringe movement, which had developed

around the Edinburgh International Festival of Music and Drama since the inaugural event in 1947, are

laid out.3

In only a decade the unremitting arrival of uninvited (yet increasingly welcome) groups haddeveloped some coherent characteristics, on which each subsequent annual influx of contributors,

audiences and critics developed the event. This research develops the themes of these opening

passages, and demonstrates their roles in an evolving narrative capturing two distinct yet increasingly

co-dependent phenomena: the nature of the work performed on the fringe, and the foundations and

ideology of the fledgling Festival Fringe Society. On the eve of its sixtieth anniversary, reassessment

of the Edinburgh Fringe is pertinent and necessary. The evidence discussed below clarifies the

centrality of the period in question to the Fringes apparent success in the intervening years, and

contributes to current discussions of the place for such events in Edinburghs cultural calendar at a time

of increased national and international festival competition.

Arts festivals have been the subject of a flowering of multidisciplinary interest in the last decade or so.

The current work takes a place alongside papers on their political, economic and spatial relevance such

as Anderson and Prentices Festival as Creative Destination and Watermans Carnivals for Elites? 4

Waterman outlines geographys broadening scope, from focuses on cultural and economic production

to public consumption. A festivals impact is seen to extend beyond its transient existence to a

realignment of identities, values and celebrations, akin to that historically encountered in country fairs

and folk cultures. Anderson and Prentice, with a foundation in tourism research, also concentrate onconsumer-side analysis, defining seven segments of Edinburghs festival audience. 5 While both

studies, particularly Watermans, benefit to a degree from historical contextualisation, their focus is on

1 Edinburgh Festival Society Papers (hereinafter EFSP), National Library of Scotland (hereinafter NLS), Dep. 378:401,Edinburgh Evening Dispatch , 23 August 1956.2 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:402, Glasgow Herald , 29 August 1957.3 It is hoped that distinctions will be clear where necessary between references to the Edinburgh Festival fringe and the FestivalFringe Society created to support it. Likewise references to the Edinburgh Festival(s) both the overall event held between mid-August and mid-September in this period or its constituent parts are context specific. It took several Festivals before the Fringe

became accepted as a proper noun, although this did predate the Fringe Societys formation.4 V. Anderson and R. Prentice, Festival as Creative Destination, Annals of Tourism Research, 30(1) (2003) 7-27; S. WatermanCarnivals for Elites? The cultural politics of arts festivals, Progress in Human Geography, 22(1) (1998) 54-69.5 Anderson and Prentice, Festival as Creative Destination, pp. 11-12. Audience segments include Serious Consumers of International Culture, Scottish Experience Tourists and Accidental Festival-Goers.


7/37

Nascent Fringe Of fringe and Fringe

Page 2

socio-anthropological analysis, researched with primary reference to the present day and the

development of models that may be applied to other similar situations in the future.

A more overt historical grounding informs Jamiesons work on the Festival Gaze, examining the

modern local authoritys creation of select bounded and seemingly spontaneous spaces conducive tosafe but exciting interaction for and between visitors. 6 Her narrative explains how Edinburghs first

international festival re-established communities of high culture and conferred legitimacy to the spatial

and temporal structure of arts festivals in the city. 7 The notion of conferred legitimacy, in the

appropriation of a canonized European culture sphere, established foundations on which Edinburgh

subsequently sought festival city status. Jamieson demonstrates the importance of the festivals roots

in understanding later developments, a theme this paper will return to when concluding, and in turn

provide a historical context for subsequent literature.

f Twenty-first century publicity material from the Festival Fringe Society succinctly portrays the early

years of the Edinburgh festival for those performing outwith the high profile main event: setting up

independently of any organisation and finding their own venues none of the performers was invited

to take part, they used small and unconventional theatre spaces and were obliged to take all of their

own financial risks. 8 The same publication trumpets the extraordinary statistical record of the modern

event, including over one and quarter million tickets sold in 2004, while recognising both the implied

and overt bequest of its much smaller and less coherent younger self.9

The fringe was a collection of amateur, professional and student groups, seeking to contribute their agendas and ambitions to

Edinburghs elitist International Festival, claiming some ownership of the model. 10 The Fringe is now

the worlds largest arts festival, an open access international showcase of talent, served by a central

administrative organisation. A complex historical narrative links the two by accident and design, of

which the years studied here marked the first watershed, defined much of the landscape and scenery,

introduced key protagonists and laid out a plot which as yet shows no sign of concluding.

Writing the Festival Fringe Societys first Treasurers Report in 1960, R. Neil Barber reflected that It

was decided that the initial [preceding] year would be one in which it would be possible to decide in

what direction the aims of the Society should be managed. 11 Thus 1959, the year that immediately

demonstrated the advantages of even limited cohesion, such as advice on halls, central booking

6 K. Jamieson, The Festival Gaze and its Boundaries, Space and Culture , 7(1) (2004), p. 69 (emphasis in original).7 Jamieson, The Festival Gaze and its Boundaries, p. 66 (emphasis in original).8 Edinburgh Festival Fringe, Annual Report. (Edinburgh, 2004), p. 8.9 Edinburgh Festival Fringe, Annual Report (2004), p. 6. Total Fringe sales in 2004 reached 1,253,776, a 73% market share of attendances at Edinburghs annual festivals.10 D. Jarman, Mirror of the Nation. The Edinburgh Festivals and Scottish national identity, (Univ. of Edinburgh unpublishedM.A. dissertation, 2001).11 Festival Fringe Society Papers (hereinafter FFSP), Scottish Theatre Archive (hereinafter STA), Special Collections Departmentof Glasgow University Library (hereinafter GUL), L.a. Box 1/1, R.N. Barber, Treasurers Report, Balance Sheet and Accountsfor the year ended 31 st December 1959, (Edinburgh, 1960).


8/37


Page 3

facilities, and more adequate publicity, rooted itself as a fulcrum for the period under examination. 12

Implicit in Barbers words however is the suggestion that the aims of the Society had already been

defined, conceivably while or even before steps were taken to constitute a body to administer, but not

direct, the Fringe festival.

1956 itself saw a healthy level of speculation on what just such a development might look like, and

marks the entry point to the period being studied. Donald Wolfit, appearing in a play outwith the

International Festivals programme, proposed that the Festival Society acknowledge the presence of

acceptable Fringe groups the rest would remain strictly on the fringe of the Fringe. 13 The

Spectator reflected further on the inherent disparities of life in festival Edinburgh, a tale of Two

Nations, the haves and have-nots, fringe groups driven out to small and draughty halls, producing on

a shoe-string, unrecognised, unassisted, even (most unfairly) unendowed, sometimes, with sufficient

talent!. 14 Therefore although there was recognition of the existence of fringe groups, clearly enjoying

diverging resources of funding and talent yet identified under a common broad heading, little

coherence united them outwith press listings compilations. By 1963 however considerable evidence

may be presented of an ambitious Fringe Society, coupled with a wider festival that was responding

positively to the values of democratic open access and innovation. Turning again to the Treasurers

Reports, Dr Patrick Brooks outlined a record [fifth] year, with Society funds up 270 on 1962, future

plans to run the Fringe box office as a private venture thus relieving the [voluntary] Society of any

administrative and financial responsibility, while future expansion of services would hopefully

increase membership levels. 15 The Society had no ambitions to expand its original aims, but plenty of

new ideas to fulfil that remit better. Indeed the 1963 AGM agreed an amended (2 nd) constitution which

obliged the Society to take ultimate responsibility for the provision of a centralised box office, while

altering its winding up clause. 16 Initially, any funds held by the Fringe Society were due to go to the

International Festival Society upon dissolution. This was altered to include such other body as may be

decided at the final General Meeting of the Society, for the Fringe had now established itself in

Edinburgh, and should a new organisation be required to improve still further on its administration it

would build on a recognised pedigree.

Contextualising these years within the broader British cultural and political experience turns up iconic

events, individuals and movements. Labelled by Dominic Sandbrook as taking the nation from Suez

to The Beatles these were days when most of our people have never had it so good according to the

Prime Minister Harold Macmillan, while John Lennon reflected that in fact nothing happened except

that we all dressed up. 17 Other cultural historians point to the Cultural Revolution the great period

of transformation between 1958 and 1973 that fed, for example, a structuralist movement prioritising

the breaking down of boundaries between genres, and focusing on language as key to understanding

12 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:442, Glasgow Herald, 02 September 1959.13 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:435, Edinburgh Evening Dispatch, 24 August 1956.14 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:436, The Spectator, 07 September 1956.15 FFSP, STA, GUL, L.a. Box 1/5, Dr. P. Brooks, Treasurers Report for the year 1963, (Edinburgh, 1 July 1964).16 FFSP, STA, GUL, L.a. Box 2/29, Festival Fringe Society Constitution, (Edinburgh, 25 August 1963).17 D. Sandbrook, Never Had It So Good. A history of Britain from Suez to The Beatles (London, 2005), pp. xviii; xxi.


9/37


Page 4

human and social behaviour. 18 Such commentators often question the extent to which these

phenomena extended from the metropolis to the provinces or vice versa. In the Edinburgh Fringe there

was at least the opportunity to both disseminate new ideas between attendees, wherever they came

from, and foster local cultural opportunities for artists and audiences.

Few appear to deny the myth of the Angry Young Man and his New Wave impact on British culture,

born in 1956 of John Osbornes play Look Back in Anger and Colin Wilsons book The Outsider .19

Returning to Sandbrook,

Within six years it was widely accepted that Osbornes play marked an irrevocable andrevolutionary shift in post-war British culture in the context of the Butskellite consensus, dissentcould only be expressed in cultural terms [Yet] New Wave theatre appealed only to a small,well-educated minority of the public. 20

While reflecting Hobsbawms assertion that the rise of a revolutionary popular entertainment industry

geared to the mass market, reduced the traditional forms of high art to elite ghettoes, both historians

recognise the artists role in affecting the perceived legitimacy of social and political structures. 21

Sandbrook juxtaposes the grittiness of Kitchen Sink dramas with Westminsters cosy post-war,

post-Suez welfare complacency, and Hobsbawm notes the appeal of contemporary East European

artists who had the sense of being needed by their public. 22 This is not the only period in Scottish,

British or European history in which the iconic or partially mythical powers of particular cultural

products held sway over popular consciousness, the media and so on. What may be asserted is that the

years in question, and certain elements therein, have left a legacy in the collective memory of this

nation and the Fringe at least.

Contemporary outlets for this influential work need only have been limited, and their actual direct

audiences small, for the right combination of opportunity, attention and means of expression to ensure

that such voices as spoke for and of the common experience were heard. 23 This is the broader artistic

and cultural context in which the Edinburgh Fringe of the late fifties and early sixties is located. While

dwarfed in some respects by the International Festival, just as consumer exposure to Salad Days and

The Sound of Music was in another league to the products of the New Wave, the Fringe could both

announce revolutionary work and see some of its efforts disappear without trace. This paper describes

the means by which largely unquestioned legacies were created by Fringe performers and

administrators. It will not be argued therefore that the Fringe has stagnated since this period, but rather

that it has continued to evolve. Positioning 1956-1963 as the single most important phase in its history

provides a necessary chronological focus, yet pertinent material will also be used from neighbouring

18 A. Marwick, The Arts in the West since 1945 (Oxford, 2002), pp. 101; 180-183.19 R. Hewison, In Anger. Culture in the Cold War 1945-1960 (London, 1998), p. 152.20 Sandbrook, Never Had It So Good, pp. 180; 184.21 E. Hobsbawm, The Age of Extremes 1914-1991 (London, 1995), p. 509.22 Sandbrook, Never Had It So Good, pp. 182-183; Hobsbawm, The Age of Extremes, p. 506.23 Hewison, In Anger, p. 152. Look Back in Anger received its opening night on 8 May 1956, 18 days before the publication of Colin Wilsons The Outsider . Both could be discussed in the same breath The reviews in the Sunday papers gave the signalthat something was happening, and the popular press followed.


10/37


11/37


Page 6

and venues which pioneered new ways of working. An exemplar of this from its opening night in

January 1963 has been the Traverse Theatre, a self-conscious illustration of the diversified rationale of

the Fringe which provides another bookend to the years studied. An inherent paradox in portrayals of

the theatres history reflects the disparate nucleus of committed individuals who founded it, each

having distinct cultural ambitions. Subsequently, however, accounts express the desire to see festivalEdinburgh reflected in a public forum a theatre, a gallery, a bookshop, a meeting-place not for

three weeks of the year, but always with a practised ease. 31 Regardless of the unrest and scandal,

personalities and near financial ruin an accepted version of events appears to have emerged, and to that

extent it may even serve as a model for this study. Born out of opportunity, partly because of perceived

gaps in the Internationals programme and partly the momentum of Fringes past, an institution has

grown from roots that undoubtedly saw tension between the creative impulse and a growing need for

administrative and financial organisation and accountability. And yet the fringe, and the Fringe

Society, lack the comparable works that have emerged to document one of its most important elements,

a small Edinburgh theatre [with] a huge influence on British cultural life [and] a reputation that

spans the globe. 32

Alistair Moffat held the position of Fringe Administrator from 1975 and published The Edinburgh

Fringe three years later, parts of which approximate closer than any other work to the aims of this

paper. His purpose in writing its history is to account for it as it developed recording such facts as

were available rather than attempting to recreate atmosphere. 33 A rigorous approach produced a

well-sourced account, including the development of a more formal organisation, no longer seen as

merely an Additional facet of the Edinburgh festival. People had come to expect something of the

Fringe, as a permanent feature. 34 Promoting a philosophy of spontaneity and complete artistic

freedom, alongside Innovation and the Right to Fail, the Fringe threw off the shackles that afflicted

certain International Festival circles. 35 Moffats commentary style eschews excessive narrative, except

when discussing case studies such as the Traverse Theatre. This reflects both the hands-off approach

of the Fringe Society and its mandate to administer, not direct, the festival, but also the authors

proposal to present facts hindsight is seen to privilege structure and apparent progression over the

realities of complex and protracted negotiation. We are therefore introduced to the need for a Fringe

Society as a consequence of pragmatism, shared aims, mutual benefit, and a fairly rapid acceptance of

the situation once it proved successful; underpinned of course by a democratic ideology of serving the

performers. Essentially that is how the Fringe Society operates today. 36

The final two writers analysed for their contributions to the

existing literature continue the theme of works reflecting both

their subject and authors. Another former Fringe Administrator

31 J. McMillan, The Traverse Theatre Story (London, 1998), p. 11.32 J. Killick, A. Pollock and S. Unwin (eds) The Traverse Theatre 1963-1988 ( Edinburgh , 1988), p. 3.33 A. Moffat, The Edinburgh Fringe (Edinburgh, 1978), p. 11.34 Moffat, The Edinburgh Fringe, p. 3335 Moffat, The Edinburgh Fringe, pp. 15; 35.36 Moffat, The Edinburgh Fringe, p. 44.


12/37


Page 7

from the 1980s, Michael Dale, published Sore Throats and Overdrafts in 1988. 37 An instinctive

emphasis on creating atmosphere, contra-Moffat, simplifies certain narrative elements, perhaps

pursuing readability at the expense of insight. Dales own place in the story is exploited through three

extensive interview/conversations at the end of the book, and a historiography that directs the material

towards his contemporaneous Fringe Society. This contrasts quite noticeably with Moffats efforts to present the Fringe as foremost a movement and even philosophy, striking a balance between

pragmatism and opportunism with regards the Society.

If the two authors discussed above exemplify some tension between insight and accessibility it can be a

false choice where an author achieves both. Owen Dudley Edwards opens his contribution to a

collection on Scottish theatre with the following summary:

the EIF [International Festival], wishing in 1960 to define its parameters, declared themto be Beyond the Fringe; the Fringe, conscious that in 1967 the EIF had been declared aMausoleum in the New Statesman by Tom Nairn, grew into a protest movement all the sharper as the EIF establishment snorted and sneered its contempt. 38

This it would appear is all one needs to know about relations between the Festivals in this period.

Elsewhere he characterises an early Fringe Administrators resolve that the only way it [the Fringe]

could carry out its chosen destiny of revolt was by giving itself vital rules and sticking to them. 39

There is therefore little distinction between case study, memoir, and review, characterising the Fringe

itself as the action moves between shows, interspersed with meetings of old friends and reflections on

Edinburgh. Once again, the work is a product of the author and his experiences, filtered according to

his priorities.

The research outlined below is a historical contribution to the current increase in academic attention

paid to arts festivals, taking its place in a multidisciplinary arena. Thematically it is more focused than

other historical accounts of the period, yet remains broad in the range of sources used. While drawing

together existing contributions to the history of the topic, the paper breaks new ground in devoting

space to recording and analysing the motivations and ambitions of those who laid the foundations of

the modern Fringe: administrators, venue and theatre company managers, playwrights and even

journalists. Substantial interest in the proposed research from those attending a recent conference

suggests it is both necessary and timely, as does current anxiety regarding the pretenders to

Edinburghs festival city crown. 40 Examination of those key elements in the Fringe narrative that have

left legacies to todays practitioners will provide at the very least an account of what inspired the

present situation, which values and priorities have been maintained and why. While other disciplines

may present a more overt interest in the present day festival, this paper contributes both a cultural-

37 M. Dale, Sore Throats and Overdrafts (Edinburgh, 1988).38 O.D. Edwards, Cradle on the Tree-Top: The Edinburgh Festival and Scottish Theatre, in R. Stevenson and G. Wallace (eds),Scottish Theatre Since the Seventies (Edinburgh, 1996), p. 35.39 O.D. Edwards, City of a Thousand Worlds, (Edinburgh, 1991).40 Festivals and Events Beyond Economic Impacts, Leisure Studies Association conference, Napier University, Edinburgh, 6-8 July 2005.


13/37


Page 8

historical context for such work, and an independent critical engagement with the worlds largest arts

festival.

f As suggested above, research for this paper has also been informed by consultations with keyindividuals from this period of Fringe history. In contrast to the majority of information available,

interviews allow historians to directly pursue particular themes with key contributors. As it is in the

nature of open access arts festivals to encourage private enterprise there will necessarily be a variety of

concurrent narratives and priorities, both at the time and when recalled some forty or fifty years later.

While contact with these individuals has been relatively unstructured, initial discussions aided in

contextualising the period and providing new subjects for case study attention. The lack of Fringe

based historical work may have contributed to a high level of interest amongst contributors: as the

immediate post-war period is receding from living memory opportunities to revisit such experiences

may be rare.

The opening two quotations to this introduction borrowed from press coverage and analysis of the

Edinburgh Fringe. Journalistic sources must always be approached with caution in historical research

for they are the production of numerous agendas, such as the journalists and his editors. The

coverage given to a story may also be heavily influenced by the importance given to it by that

publication compared to other contemporary news stories. And yet the most substantial Festival

archive makes just such material available, providing countless media insights into the period inquestion. The Edinburgh International Festival houses its archive in the National Library of Scotland,

and fortunately for this study appears to have interpreted its media-gathering role relatively flexibly for

at least its first twenty years. Thus the coverage comprehends Edinburghs early Documentary Film

Festival, the Military Tattoo and those additional entertainments on the fringe of the main event. For

the purposes of this research all available printed reports of the period in the archive were considered

via a trawl of scrapbooks compiled from cuttings identified at the International Press Cutting Bureau in

London, and pasted up by the Scottish Tourist Board. 41 The weight placed on an event may be judged

to an extent by the volume and breadth of press coverage included: royal visits held a very high profile,

as did Menuhins performance at an outer-Edinburgh council estate hall in 1958. 42 As will be shown

below certain developments in the first contested steps of the Fringe Society received press coverage,

both reports of meetings and direct contributions to the debate from journalists who had seen the event

develop over many years. With no minutes of these meetings thus far discovered, articles from 1958

onwards that detail the ambitions, interim constitution and inaugural office holders are often the best

sources available. 43 It is also clear that the press was in turn used as a means of publicising the new

Fringe Society, granting space to appeals that those groups intending to perform the next year contact

the newly installed Secretary. Further evidence of the importance of the media is provided by many of

41 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:402, Edinburgh Evening Dispatch, 15 September 1956.42 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:404, Bulletin (Glasgow), 12 September 1958.43 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:404, Edinburgh Evening News, 11 September 1958.


14/37


Page 9

the cultural historians discussed above, with Sandbrook explaining that the term angry young man

was a press officers invention and showing how a label such as kitchen sink drama stuck as fast as

the presses rolled. 44 The medias role in identifying, popularising and legitimating cultural expression

by connecting it and the ideas it carried with a broader public has proved as important in this period as

any other.

As already discussed above certain Fringe Society documents are also available. The Treasurers

Reports are accompanied by AGM Minutes, Constitutions, letters, marketing material and other

communications in the Scottish Theatre Archive held at Glasgow University. One of the immediate

benefits of the new Fringe Society from a historical perspective therefore was the impetus and capacity

to maintain a written record of its business from the late 1950s. It is also interesting and revealing to

note that press attention in the structure of the Society declines substantially after its first full year of

action in 1959, although coverage continues of individual shows and events. This is perhaps a further

sign of the immediate acceptance of the Society. Its presence continued unopposed, leaving debates on

its remit and responsibilities to be held internally and at the AGM. Again, the material that has made

its way into the archive and is therefore available today can only be a proportion of that which might

have been useful to this or any other research. It is hoped however that as several administratively

important documents remain, among many others, that substantial insight can be gained from these

sources.

f Some key hypotheses will guide this paper, based around the concurrent progress of both the Fringe

Society and changes in the festival it was created to support. They will also serve to provide much of

the structure below through three main chapters, drawn together in a final concluding section. It is

proposed therefore that between 1956 and 1963 the Edinburgh Fringe granted contributors the

opportunity to present particular agendas and new work, building on efforts from previous years and

reflecting the wider society that hosted the Festival. Secondly, the formation of the Festival Fringe

Society was a product of many interventions, but this paper explores the notion that its creation was

inevitable once enduring gaps in the existing formal structures and programme of the wider festival had

been identified and exploited: an accident waiting to happen. Lastly, if that was the case then this

period in Fringe history is vital to its ensuing existence as a positive creative force in Edinburgh and

the wider British cultural scene a progression from a more reactive first decade, and ultimately the

reason why it has survived and thrived with negligible alteration to its key orthodoxies to the present

day.

Within this discussion questions will also be raised about how new some of these developments

actually were, why certain genres had the success or profile that they did, and what role the individual

elements played in the Fringes early narrative. Personal interest on the part of the author has inspired44 Sandbrook, Never Had It So Good, pp. 178-179; 182.


15/37


Page 10

much of this work, including a desire to examine a festival model that has now been exported (with

varying modifications) to many cities on many continents. Perhaps the Fringe ideal is more important

than what actually appears on the stage, and on that basis it has survived the slings and arrows of tiny

audiences, poor funding, outrage and scandal or perhaps such things themselves contribute to the

essence of the Fringe.


16/37

Page 15

Supply and demand

While Riddles Court hall is certainly very small, the group have built up their techniquethere the surroundings, for those who see their entertainments at night, contribute a verydistinctive atmosphere.

The Scotsman, 27 August 1957 1

it was quite clear from the title which was foisted on us, that the Fringe had become acompetitive irritant to the organisers of the official Festival [ Beyond the Fringe was] anattempt to outbid the presumptuous outsiders who opportunistically pitched their tents on theedges of the REAL Festival.

Jonathan Miller 2

The twin genres of drama and revue dominated the Fringe in this period, with professional, amateur

and student groups fluctuating in their contributions. While smaller, The musical fringe has a less

improvised air than the dramatic variety noted The Scotsman in 1960, with groups often more locally

based using the Festival as a natural focus for their own calendar. 3 Puppetry was among other genres to

put itself forward onto the Festival, three groups featured in 1959 regardless of an official invitation.4

Indeed, this is the basis on which all fringe groups appeared by 1956, organising venues and publicity

themselves, distributing ticket stock out to agents and having little idea with whom or what they might

be sharing the Festival until they arrived. Moffat identifies two key fringe

characteristics at this stage: recognition from the

International Festival of the Fringe as an integral

(but not integrated) part of the Edinburgh Festival,

and that it was the proper home for Scottish

drama. 5 This chapter therefore concentrates to a

large extent on this consistently significant genre, in

common with both the press coverage analysed, and the

groups that appear to have contributed most to the

Fringe Society as recorded in the Fringe archive. The

research outlined below responds to the hypothesis that

contributors to the Fringe were exploiting opportunities to

promote work that reflected their society, and contributed to

developments in particular art forms, specifically drama.

A truism of Fringe history in almost any period will be the appearance of groups using the festival for

their own ends while contributing to the overall event. Taking the professional, amateur and student

categories in turn, this paper will suggest that this phenomenon dates back at least to the mid-fifties,

while testing the hypothesis that they represented and reflected the discipline of which they were a part.

Crucially the suggestion that they also demonstrated, indeed advanced new practice within their field

will be tested, potentially a reflexive exploitation of the opportunity to hand. It was a theme taken up

1 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:400, The Scotsman, 27 August 1955.2 Bain, The Fringe, p. 7.3 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:405, The Scotsman, 19 August 1960.4 FFSP, STA, GUL, L.a. Box 2/18, Lee Puppet Theatre Fringe Society Questionnaire return. There is not room for 3 puppetcompanies at this time it is only advisable to encourage one incoming puppet theatre.5 Moffat, The Edinburgh Fringe, p. 22.


17/37

Nascent Fringe Supply and demand

Page 16

by the Financial Times in 1958, rendering the fringe by the working of the laws of supply and

demand. The supply is the large number of visitors either culture-hungry or culture-weary. The

demand is the never-ceasing demand of the aspiring performer, whether amateur or professional, to be

seen and applauded. 6 Under this analysis, were the fringe an Edinburgh ice cream parlour many

increasingly varied flavours from around the world would flock to its freezers in search of a fabledaudience, eager to be noticed, sampled, applauded and talked about. The article surmises that Most

tastes are catered for, but neglects to clarify if this is the paying publics preference for performers, or

vice versa.

No professional performer held a consistently high profile on the fringe in the 1950s than Duncan

Macrae. He had performed in the International Festivals celebrated 1948 production of Ane Satyre of

the Thrie Estaites , and was a familiar face to audiences across Scotland from his touring productions of

repertory and new work. By 1955 he was emboldened to criticise the Internationals directorship for

the lack of native contribution, the only means by which the Festival could be more than merely a

commercial proposition. 7 A somewhat unsatisfactory reply celebrated his extremely big

contribution official or unofficial was, in a sense, immaterial to Ian Hunter, the Director in question.

A year later Donald Wolfits appearance indicated the London feeling that official Festival backing is

no longer required for a West End companys visit to Edinburgh at this time: audiences didnt seem to

mind, nor increasingly did the performers. 8 What may be in evidence however was a desire among

Scottish professional groups to present indigenous work, and primarily that which would find a

knowledgeable, often local, audience.

A similar policy is apparent in the history of the Edinburgh-based Gateway Theatre Company, ever-

present in the International Festival programme between 1954 and 1965 (except 1959 when most of the

Company were involved in another revival of The Thrie Estaites ).9 Tellingly, the principle of

including Scottish theatre in the Edinburgh Festival was a culturally significant one during this period,

though in practical terms it depended on the existence of a city-based producing company controlling

its own venue. 10 Macrae did indeed run his own venue for the fringe, the Palladium, where the work

presented helped finance other work presented by his Scottishows company. He later matched this

financial, pragmatic exploitation of the opportunity granted by the fringe with a vocal call for a

Scottish national theatre company while speaking at the Fringe Club in 1961. 11 Clearly those groups

and individuals who built the Edinburgh Festival and Fringe into their calendar had to judge to what

extent they could promote new work if it meant jeopardising their financial security. Part of Macraes

agenda in 1961 was also to single out the stinkers the International Festival had commissioned, while

attacking the Arts Councils policy of asking too much too rapidly from the countrys repertory

companies. Nearing the end of the period in question therefore the Fringe, and the Society, were

6 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:441, Financial Times, 5 September 1958.7 Moffat, The Edinburgh Fringe, p. 22.8 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:401, Edinburgh Evening Dispatch, 20 August 1956.9 D. Smith, The Gateway Theatre Company, in I. Brown (ed.), Journeys Beginning. The Gateway Theatre Building andCompany 1884-1965 (Bristol, 2004), 53-59.10 Smith, The Gateway Theatre Company, p. 59.11 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:406, The Scotsman, 29 August 1961.


18/37


Page 17

recognised soapboxes from which to question the direction of professional theatre in Scotland. It is

likely that Macrae would have found a way to make his views known regardless, but he chose to

exploit the exposure granted by the evolving Fringe model.

The Traverse Theatre appears on the Fringe at the end of this papers focal period, and discussions between its researcher and Jim Haynes, a key founder of the theatre, identified its role in granting

accessing to the Fringe for professional actors. Moffat describes a decline in this component of the

Fringe, the larger scale shows from Macrae giving way to one or two person works, a development the

Traverse could capitalise upon, and then lead. 12 A steady sequence of productions of avant-garde

classics through 1963 proved the venues credentials, while working under club status meant the Lord

Chamberlains censorship could be avoided. 13 As a year-round venue the theatre helped sustain the

livelihoods of various people involved in the buildings work, while also simply granting them a place

to perform, and have their work performed. During the Festival however, it also provided national and

international attention, both reflecting the reputation the venue was building and accelerating the

gathering exposure its methods of working were attracting. The Guardians theatre critic Michael

Billingtons introduction to a 25 th anniversary volume on the Traverse questions why a small

Edinburgh theatre, seating around a hundred, should for twenty-five years have had such a huge

influence on British cultural life. 14 Contributory factors must include the drive to create a space where

professional actors and directors could produce intelligent and challenging work, capturing the festive

spirit as filtered through the founders of the venue. That their efforts fed back into the Fringe helped

galvanise new means of working, a play can exert a unique psychological hold on a small audience

What the Traverse discovered in the early Sixties has since reverberated round Britain and the world. 15

The amateur dimension to the Fringe appears to have been focused to an extent around the Scottish

Community Drama Association (SCDA), hosts of an annual competition for the opportunity to perform

during the Festival. In presenting Thieves Castle in 1955 the Edinburgh Evening News generously

recorded that director Callum Mill has taken his cast to the limit which their experience imposes. 16

1961 saw them relocate the final to the refurbished Leith Town Hall as the Evening News foresaw a

stable footing for amateur theatre in Edinburgh. 17 Falling between these two events meanwhile

dramatist T.M. Watson levelled a challenge in the Glasgow Evening News that sub-standard Edinburgh

groups were denying more worthy regions the chance to appear. 18 While the drive to exploit the

Festival appears unchallenged, Only the fact that the festival was held in Edinburgh gave these clubs a

position it is time that the Edinburgh tail stopped wagging the Scottish dog.

It is therefore apparent that breaking into the open access Fringe often involved working within an

existing framework. The Traverse created the opportunity for performers and playwrights to present

12 Moffat, The Edinburgh Fringe, p. 33.13 McMillan, The Traverse Theatre Story, pp. 15, 18.14 Killick et al (eds), The Traverse Theatre 1963-1988, p. 3.15 Killick et al (eds), The Traverse Theatre 1963-1988, p. 3.16 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:400, Edinburgh Evening News, 30 August 1955.17 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:406, Edinburgh Evening News, 6 September 1961.18 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:436, Glasgow Evening News, 1 September 1956.


19/37


Page 18

their work, while the SCDA performed the same role for its member groups; both organisations had a

year-round programme as well. Moffat records an increase in amateur groups from three to eight

between 1955 and 1959, beyond which the Fringe Society was in place to aid more groups

introduction to the Fringe. Any development prioritising inclusion whether it be to present amateur

work judged the best of its kind, or an attempt to represent different elements of a particular community can become considerably less effective unless the structures of power and influence

which control that inclusion are understood. From its inception the Festival Fringe Society

incorporated any group into its programme that met the necessary deadlines etc, theoretically opening

the opportunity to perform with full marketing and administrative support to any group. Amateur

companies outwith the SCDA did appear on the Fringe, yet the risks involved resulting from poor

attendances were substantial at this time, and have continued to be so. Likewise the level of

decentralisation in todays Fringe was further exaggerated in the period studied while the Society

emerged and set about defining itself. The SCDA appears to have taken an interest in the formation of

the Society itself, the South East Scotland division attending founding meetings according to the

Glasgow Herald. 19 The paper makes no mention of any ulterior motive it may have had to influence the

administration of the Fringe, but once again there was clearly an apparent advantage in being privy to

the developments.

The first attempted central Fringe box office, a most important addition to the booking facilities in the

Edinburgh Festival, was established in 1955 by the students of Edinburgh University, using rooms in

Old College off Chambers Street. 20 The convener of a series of open meetings in 1958 that led to the

formation of the Festival Fringe Society, Michael Imison, was a member of the student Oxford Theatre

Group: he was duly elected the Societys first President. 21 Former student

performers also supplied the personnel for Beyond the Fringe in 1960,

Tom Stoppards Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead in 1966, and

have maintained close links with the Fringe Society throughout its

existence. 22 There were also recurring themes among universities

experiences: multiple presentations, such as Aberdeens three pieces in

1956, from George Bernhard Shaw, Jean Cocteau and a revue; rented

spaces, well used by old hands at the game of camping in their hard-

won church halls, others have never perhaps, even been away from

home before; while the 1963 revues from Oxford (a shabby lot

except for a ravishing girl) and Cambridge (suave, civilised, soign,

brushed and bourgeois) were both applauded by Harold Hobson in The Sunday Times. 23 In his

Festival roundup he felt It may be thought irresponsible to exalt a couple of light-hearted amateur

revues above serious and complicated professional plays, but it seems to have been a common

19 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:404, Glasgow Herald, 8 September 1958.20 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:399, The Scotsman, 17 August 1955.21 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:399, Edinburgh Evening News, 11 September 1958.22 Moffat, The Edinburgh Fringe, pp. 69-72.23 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:401, The Scotsman, 13 July 1956; Dep. 378:402, The Scotsman, 27 August 1957; Dep. 378:409, TheSunday Times, 25 August 1963.


20/37


Page 19

occurrence. A healthy combination developed, of pragmatism to minimise expenditure, and groups

seemingly at ease bringing new work to the Fringe in search of an audience, such as new playwright

John McGraths Why the Chicken from Oxford Theatre Group in 1959. 24 Student enterprise is one

pillar on which the modern Fringe is based, for which there may be several reasons.

One theme developed above discusses the notion that while the audience for a new piece of work such

as Look Back in Anger may have been small, the play attracted a large amount of attention and helped

define an era. 25 According to Robert Hewison one of the remarkable changes in cultural life after 1956

was the shift of emphasis that brought theatrical writing back into the mainstream, which was an arena

dominated by the products of higher education. 26 Sandbrook demonstrates with almost contrived

regularity how many of the trailblazing angry young men were Oxbridge scholarship educated, and

while 1950s theatre could no longer aspire to the massive popularity of the cinema, its audience was

associated more than ever with intellectual eminence. 27 An environment might therefore be described

whereby ambitious students, filtering modern influences through their provincial universities (Moffat

records groups from Sheffield, Cardiff, Cambridge, Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Oxford Universities in

1956) helped define and expand the work presented on the Fringe in this period. 28 Those who sought

careers in the field helped consolidate links to the metropolis as well, via institutions such as the BBC

and its expanding role in television, and thence a national audience.

The Fringe stage was, literally, set for groups and individuals to use, but again there are signs that real

advantage was to be had by working through established structures, with existing resources to hand.

Even by 1954 a high pedigree was expected in the Edinburgh press from visiting Oxford groups, the

Players brought over seventy people, the girls lived separately from the boys of course. 29 A year later

saw Oxford Theatre Groups last year in their Riddles Court venue, lamented in The Scotsmans

letters page for having consistently brought high quality new work that contributed to the overall

Festival. 30 The following year, in a new venue, they continued to do well, but it was success and

innovation built on proven and established foundations. Continued innovation could therefore be

cultivated not through building a group that could deliver that was already in place but by

introducing new work into the repertoire, confident that an audience was in place to approach the

material critically but supportively. Aberdeen was already the second group to present Look Back in

Anger by 1960, while the Oxford Times made no mention of living arrangements when suggesting that

the citys groups were taking too many shows to Edinburgh and risking over exposure. 31 Festival

histories have a tendency to look back at events and imbue them with influence, yet the engaged

manner with which student groups approached the Fringe and helped mould it to suit their agendas was

at times genuinely progressive, and acts as a model for all subsequent contributors.

24 Moffat, The Edinburgh Fringe , p. 36.25 Sandbrook, Never Had It So Good, p. 175.26 Hewison, In Anger, p. 165.27 Sandbrook, Never Had It So Good, p. 175.28 Moffat, The Edinburgh Fringe, p. 33.29 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:398, Edinburgh Evening Dispatch, 5 August 1954; The Scotsman, 5 August 1954.30 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:398, The Scotsman, 29 August 1954.31 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:405, Evening Express (Aberdeen), 6 August 1960; Oxford Times, 2 September 1960.


21/37


Page 20

Todays Fringe is an amorphous experience at times, and this chapter has only highlighted a few

groups out of a similarly fluid period. In August 1958 The Scotsman asked Where does it begin and

where does it end? of the fifteen to twenty theatre and dozen or so musical productions expected that

year.32

Highlights included a cycle of Yeats plays by the Irish Festival Players and TheSporranslitters damming of Braid burn for their outdoor performances. Clearly the professional,

amateur and student elements studied above only offer limited snapshots of the overall Fringe.

Nevertheless the case studies have examined common means by which groups brought work to

Edinburgh under their own aegis, seeking an audience for the sort of work they felt deserved the

exposure Edinburgh was increasingly willing and capable of providing. The importance of working

within and through clearly defined networks and organisations has been explored, whether they were

established community associations or ancient universities. Ultimately, some of the most successful

products of these organisations were instrumental in creating the body which has done more than any

other to encourage and facilitate participation on the Fringe, as examined in the next chapter.

32 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:403, The Scotsman, 19 August 1958.


22/37

Page 23

What took so long?

Why, the Fringe has even got itself a full-scale official club has all the atmosphere and fussof a Victorian Conservative club.

Scottish Daily Express, 8 August 1960 1

I asked him [Lord Grant] whether he ever felt that his connection with the Fringe was anembarrassment and I am glad to report that he said it was not. He agreed to remain Chairmanof the Board for another year.

Correspondence from Andrew Kerr, Company Secretary30 August 1971 2

The creation of the Festival Fringe Society at the end of the 1958 Festival marked the culmination of

broad disagreements over its form and scope, yet now seems both inevitable and subsequently barely

questioned in its remit. It provides one of the clearest narratives on which to build this research, also

tracing previous calls for such an organisation and the debates that led to its creation and first few

years. The first part of this chapter attempts to portray the environment in which the Fringe Society

was formed, later asking whether it was clear in the late 1950s that this element of the Edinburgh

Festival would prove so successful and why the Societys priorities appear not to have changed in

nearly half century.

The Fringe thus far described may be read as a compartmentalised festival, for although groups knew

they were attending an increasingly established arts event, an individuals experiences were dictated by

the fortunes of their theatre company. Everywhere these student encampments are warmly supported

by their local neighbours, who watch out for them reported The Scotsman in 1957. 3 There is

friendliness between the groups too, and it has continued to be so ever since, yet the motivation and

imagination to establish the Fringe Society the very next year demanded more than perhaps the lending

of props. The Society that was formed operated to protect and promote the interests of the existing

groups on the Fringe, and there are signs that it was perhaps those with most to lose who led the search

for a way to secure their annual investment in time, money and artistic credibility.

Early on in the 1958 Festival the Oxford Theatre Group, one of the senior of these unofficial

companies, launched an ambitious project to unite Festival Fringe companies in their own society. 4

The proposed aims of Michael Imison, from the Group, were to promote the interests of all the

Fringe groups by providing an organisation to pool information help in cutting costs [and] act as

an official negotiating body for the Fringe. The Scotsmans article covering the meeting explains

that the Society would represent the Fringe to the Official Festival, providing centralised

information for Press and public, preventing duplication and repetition by companies appearing, and

lowering costs by bulk purchases and block-hiring of equipment. The door, one might say, was not

being flung open to aspiring Fringe groups on these grounds, for although they suggest life would

become easier for all, the ones to benefit most would most likely be those accustomed to Fringe life, its

ups and downs, and of course its costs.

1 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:405, Scottish Daily Express, 22 August 1960.2 FFSP, STA, GUL, L.a. Box 2/19, correspondence from Andrew Kerr to Dr Patrick Brooks.3 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:402, The Scotsman, 27 August 1957.4 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:403, The Scotsman, 21 August 1958.


23/37

Nascent Fringe What took so long?

Page 24

There is no suggestion that anyone would be employed or rewarded for their service by this Society,

yet the proposals could never have been unadulterated altruism when a possible two-year qualification

before granting membership was discussed. Imison and Oxford would draft a constitution before a

second meeting, stating their overall aim was benefit from some central form of organisation and yet[it] would not affect independence of view. A realistic appraisal suggests that the only formulation of

a Fringe Society likely to succeed would indeed be one created for and of the groups. In seeking to

maximise their summer investment, naturally they tried to identify those areas information gathering

and distribution for example that would benefit the whole, without damaging their interests.

One of the most interesting aspects to the project was the focus on relations between the Fringe and the

International Festival, particularly as this was not a new topic of discussion. One of the most

distinctive aspects to the Edinburgh Festival from 1947, its very first year, was the provision of more

culture than anyone had planned for. 5 Local organisations established the Documentary Film Festival,

military retreats across the city built a platform for the Tattoo, and those groups credited with

representing the first fringe also claimed their right to take part. Commenting in 1954 John Christie

of Glyndebourne Opera, a founding component of the International, asserted that the Festivals success

was maintained through consistent high quality, arguably with one eye on those independent

contributions which didnt make the grade. 6 Later that summer a meeting of Fringe groups, also

striving for the highest standards, sought funding from the International Festival for a prize to

encourage the more experimental groups [which] might enable others to come back again. 7

Acknowledgment was craved, partly because people simply didnt know there was a Fringe until they

got to Edinburgh, hence the call for combined publicity also suggested at the time. Ultimately no prize

was forthcoming, for while Ian Hunter, the Internationals Director, promised a very carefully

considered response to the request, he foresaw ramifications resulting from official recognition. 8

Again each party looked firstly to its own interests and it simply didnt benefit the elite International

Festival to indulge in something ultimately beyond its control, which could prove the thin end of what

has become a very large wedge.

An extra couple of years, and a new Director at the International, helped alter perceptions of the

Fringes role within official circles. Robert Ponsonby felt that the Fringe should be given every

possible encouragement by the Festival Society, and, indeed, I think it does receive it, but he

recognised that any attempt to regulate the Fringe implied a policy clash between the roles of the

Festivals. 9 In this tenth year of the Edinburgh Festival a conscious assessment of the means by which

the city presented its prized summer attraction was all consuming, opening different elements up to

public and professional scrutiny. Iain Crawford, noting a Scottish Tourist Board report, felt

Uncomfortable evidence was being produced that the Festival was truly important to Edinburgh:

5 Jarman, Mirror of the Nation.6 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:398, The Scotsman, 26 August 1954.7 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:399, Edinburgh Evening News, 8 September 1954.8 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:399, The Scotsman, 9 September 1954.9 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:402, Edinburgh Evening Dispatch, 8 September 1956.


24/37


Page 25

discussions of ambition and direction were not restricted to Fringe circles. 10 Ultimately Moffat believes

this to have been a time of flux in inter-Festival relations, for while the Fringe needed support from

somewhere, it recognised the flexibility of unofficial status. 11 In keeping with its autonomous spirit, the

only place that support could feasibly have come from was within the Fringe itself, but it would take

further meetings in 1958 to clarify just how it was going to be attempted.

Fringe Society Again Mooted. Poor Attendance at Meeting. 12 The Scotsman listed nine, out of a

possible twenty-five, groups at Michael Imisons second meeting in August 1958. Now about half way

through the Festival, the article is still interested in relations between Festivals:

A suggestion by Mr Imison that the proposed society should attempt to gain recognition by theFestival Society did not go down too well with the other delegates But why do we want to berecognised by the official Festival Society, asked Piers Haggard, president of EUDS [EdinburghUniversity Dramatic Society] Recognition brings ties.

With hindsight it seems obvious that the Fringe had to take responsibility for its own organisation, and

based on the limited material to hand for this research defining motivations for seeking an alternative is

largely speculation. Widespread support is apparent for Imisons plans, an Edinburgh booking agent

even felt that [International] Festival officials are very keen on the fringe and very keen that it should

exist as it does just now. Anything they can do to help cannot be done in an official way. The young

Oxford students ambition had brought disparate elements of the Fringe together, and he perhaps felt

the weight of future expectation resting on his shoulders. Links with the International would provide

him with an existing structure through which he could fulfil other elements of the Fringes proposed

constitutional duties if passed at a third meeting. Alistair Moffat notes the opposition to a pet

Fringe within International circles, although the question of coordination was another matter for

some. 13 Everyone at the Fringe meetings represented a group, and each supportive group sought a

Society that would help it achieve its aims in attending the festival. External reluctance to assume

responsibility for it and internal resolution to maintain independence narrowed dissenters options

ahead of another 1958 gathering.

The third meeting, on 6 September, identified more fractures between Fringe groups, perhaps

signifying that the debate had moved on from the question of official recognition. Another Scotsman

article is the key source for this Cranston Street Hall conference, for which poor attendance was this

time blamed on an administrative glitch in distributing invitations, and a feeling among some

companies that they were established enough. 14 The Saltire Society believed that If we were in on it, it

might be from a benevolent point of view only. The general feeling is that we dont need it.

Rutherglen Repertory Companys Charles Baptiste is quoted as saying it would attract more groups to

the Festival, so perhaps another weeks contemplation had led some people to start seeing some

potential long term appeal in the venture. (Rutherglen were in fact one of the groups who missed the

10 Crawford, Banquo on Thursdays, pp. 43-44.11 Moffat, The Edinburgh Fringe, pp. 23-26.12 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:403, The Scotsman, 30 August 1958.13 Moffat, The Edinburgh Fringe, p. 43.14 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:404, The Scotsman, 8 September 1958.


25/37


Page 26

call to attend supporting the venture regardless boded well once lines of communication were

improved.) Edinburgh based groups with a secure financial base and audience could naturally see

relatively little benefit in a Fringe Society. Comparatively speaking, those who had to invest more

each summer recognised the inherent risks and difficulties they faced, and appear keen to throw their

weight behind an organisation that could open up the Festival to more groups. By this stage it appearsinevitable that some form of organisation would be created, the Glasgow Herald even listed the

companies who pledged 5 to make it happen, but its priorities, agenda and expected effectiveness

were open to further question. 15 The shift in emphasis, such as it is reflected in the reports available,

was however towards the final arrangements as agreed at a fourth and final meeting on 10 September, a

stage reached that is Essentially how the Fringe Society operates today. 16

Now at last some of the Fringe groups themselves have inaugurated an Edinburgh Festival Fringe

Society, announced the press, proving Edinburgh was a focus for the genuinely creative. 17 Drawing

the International in to the picture was now a question of comparison, for although one sought a

uniformly high standard. The Fringe by its very nature has no uniformity. The Bulletin adopted a

similar context for the fringe well organised should mean improved publicity and booking

arrangements still better things from those adventurous outsiders And the stronger the opposition

the more bold and vigorous the official festival society should be. 18 The Fringe had been an

irrepressible element of the Festival since 1947; the absence of an organising body for the first dozen

events reflected a decentralised nature that had suited the groups who returned each year, yet now they

had created just such a body. It is little surprise that it took time, and heartening to reflect that there

was so little opposition once the Fringe Society had been created. Perhaps the press already had their

articles written well in advance, waiting for the opportunity to support a venture from those who had

supplied such well received work in recent years. From 10 September 1958 the Fringe was served by

an organisation that owed its loyalty to all the groups who joined, run by people who made it their job

to both assist with everyday practicalities and look beyond them to the fullest extent of Edinburghs

broad appeal.

f The first Festival Fringe Society constitution, as held by the Scottish Theatre Archive, is an exercise in

self-awareness, reflecting the debates behind its creation and the interests of both the Society itself and

the individual groups. Under article 2 membership shall be open all companies presenting an

entertainment not sponsored by the Festival Society, during the Edinburgh International Festival

Season. 19 Firstly therefore this was always intended to be more than merely a listings or information

point, membership of a society implied a degree of interaction with it, and the promotion of a common

affiliation, if not identity with other members. And anyone could join, if they conformed to the spatial

15 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:404, Glasgow Herald, 8 September 1958.16 Moffat, The Edinburgh Fringe, p. 44.17 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:404, The Scotsman, 12 September 1958.18 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:404, Bulletin (Glasgow), 12 September 1958.19 FFSP, STA, GUL, L.a. Box 2/16, Festival Fringe Society Constitution, September 1958.


26/37


Page 27

and temporal boundaries of the Festival, observing the limits the Fringe placed upon itself.

Pragmatically, the management committee had no time, resources or probably interest in promoting

events outside the summer Festival. Limits on Society activity were also crucial to maintaining

widespread support from different interested parties and external observers: it had been created to assist

and act for Fringe groups, and that would only be possible if organisations such as the InternationalFestival were aware who they were dealing with when the time came, and who they in turn

represented.

Article 3 explicitly states that the Society is mandated to provide information to groups, public and

press, and do whatever else is felt necessary to promote its members interests. However, The Society

shall not attempt to control the policy or presentation of member companies. It appears that members

of the Fringe Society could hardly lose from its creation under these circumstances, maintaining full

discretion over their work in return for increased publicity and information. As portrayed above it is

unlikely that any other framework would have been permissible to the groups, particularly the longest

standing and most accomplished among them. And as the Society was formed exclusively by those

connected primarily to a particular theatre company or ensemble, it is unlikely any would have

contemplated interfering with anothers management or programming policy. Only once it was

established did groups encounter an organisation actively interested in certain aspects of their affairs,

by which time limits on its terms of operation had been set.

At a basic level, it was inevitable that a Society was formed, yet the level of disagreement described

above, and the variance in the means by which the organisation has fulfilled its constitutional aims

since imply that the devil is ultimately in the details of a consciously flexible administrative body. It

was clearly a work in progress for its first twelve months, managed initially by a committee containing

one representative of each member company, and trimmed down at the first AGM. The Edinburgh

Evening News identified ten groups as the core founders, now led by Michael Imison as President, with

those planning shows in 1959 asked to contact local printer Ian

Cousland for inclusion in an official programme. 20 Couslands

involvement from the earliest stage, alongside a 1963 amendment

to the constitution to include a centralised Box Office service for

members desiring to use such a service, correlate again with the

Fringe Societys ability to build upon and incorporate existing

practise. 21 Cousland had published a Festival map and listings

since 1954, funding this private venture through advertising. 22

Likewise, Edinburgh University students had run a centralised

box office, managing to undercut the normal ticketing agents,

from 1955. 23 That these fundamental elements of the Fringe

20 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:404, Edinburgh Evening News, 11 September 1958.21 FFSP, STA, GUL, L.a. Box 2/29, Festival Fringe Society Constitution, 25 August 1963.22 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:398, Glasgow Herald, 20 August 1954.23 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:399, Edinburgh Evening News, 17 August 1955.


27/37


Page 28

Societys justification for existing were previously in private hands lends weight to the inevitability

argument, for there was clearly a demand for them; indeed the programme and box office are among

the most important aspects of todays Society as well. Again we can trace an existing structures path

into the Fringes orbit, to be adapted and incorporated into the range of benefits to be gained through

membership.

Just as the genre, style and agendas of the productions which appeared on the Fringe were partially

selected on what was seen to be missing from the Internationals programme, so the Society itself was

formed by contributing groups to fill a gap in their developing understandings of their festival. A

balancing act between the different independent groups notions of what benefit such an organisation

might be to them, obstructed by the eleven months separating one event from the next, delayed but

ultimately secured the consensus that emerged. The Scotsman reflected this in 1958, recognising that

the Fringe was the something extra which no one had planned. With it the Festival took on an

unpredictable new life of its own, bursting the bounds of the original conception, but in a way that

immediately became recognised as right and natural. 24 Henceforth the Festival Fringe Society was

similarly regarded, for if in subsequent years it hadnt existed, it would have been necessary to invent

it.

24 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:404, The Scotsman, 12 September 1958.


28/37

Page 31

Accentuating the positive

There seems to be a happier relationship between the official Festival and the Fringe itnow seems to appreciated that the enthusiasts who bring shows to Edinburgh at their own risk are an asset to the whole occasion a stimulating challenge to the official drama.

George Scott Moncrief in The Tablet, 2 September 1961 1

The Company is established to promote, maintain, improve and advance education, particularly by the production of education plays and the encouragement of the Arts, includingthe arts of drama, mime, dance, singing and music, and to formulate, prepare and establishschemes therefore, provided that all objects of the Company shall be of a charitable nature.

Certificate of Incorporation of Festival Fringe Society Limited,22 May 1969 2

The use of the two quotations transcribed above illustrates a transition through the course of the 1960s,

from an appreciation of the Fringes contribution to the Edinburgh Festival with primary reference to

the International, to one concentrating solely on the ambitions of the Fringe in its own right. The 1969

incorporation of the Festival Fringe Society, as a company limited by guarantee with charitable status,

provides a postscript to the period studied in this paper. It was an opportunity to take stock of the

situation in the late sixties, and provide a platform for further improvements in the services provided.

Working within the 1956 to 1963 timeframe of this study, it is relatively straightforward to identify

those elements which were in place by the time Kennedy was assassinated and the Profumo Affair

helped end Harold Macmillans years as Conservative Prime Minister. From its first full festival in

1959, the Fringe Society had an opportunity, indeed was obliged, to make good on the expectations and

optimism of both its members and external observers.

In summing up everything the Fringe now stood for, conscious of its value, The Times observed witha sigh that It is most unlucky that this overdue assertion of its own importance should be made in a

year in which the plays fall far below their usual level of interest. Nobody is to blame, for the groups

do their best and the Society was established expressly to eschew all programming responsibility. 3 On

press appreciation the Fringe hit of 1959 was undoubtedly John McGraths Why the Chicken . Harold

Hobsons review started ominously, for here was another visit to a cold Fringe venue with an apron

stage (they remind me of washing up), and after initially finding it easy to contain my joy a hush

marked the start of a real play. 4 Hobsons final accolade is to identify the only two International

Festival productions that could touch McGraths work: The Thrie Estaites and Flanders & Swann.

The Oxford Theatre Group, again key players in the Fringe, could not have intended to compete for

spectacle with another Estaites revival, or sought the familiar popularity of the double act. A Festival-

wide trait of playing to ones strengths, from the grandeur of the Tattoo to the ambitious Fringe groups

emphasis on strong writing and committed performances is therefore in evidence.

A common thread through much media discussion of the Fringe in 1959 is a buoyant projection of

future success. The Fringe Societys creation may be seen as a catalyst for many developments, not

1 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:408, The Tablet, 2 September 1961.2 FFSP, STA, GUL, L.a. Box 2/32, Memorandum and Articles of Association of Festival Fringe Society Limited, 22 May 1969.3 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:442, The Times, 3 September 1959.4 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:442, The Sunday Times, 6 September 1959.


29/37

Nascent Fringe Accentuating the positive

Page 32

least by providing a point around which to discuss this component of the Festival. The Scottish Daily

Mail, a title often sceptical of the excesses on the Fringe, heralded the newly formed Festival Fringe

Society, set up to act as guide, philosopher and friend to the small companies, [which] has paid off

handsomely. 5 By 1962 Ronald Mavor, writing in The Scotsman, declared that

it was never more evident that the drama is the poor relation in this Festival new ideasabout how it is to be managed are urgently needed [yet] this years Fringe, from the point of view of content, has lived right up to its now international reputation. 6

Implied in Mavors comments is a realisation that people now came to Edinburgh for the Fringe itself.

Journalists and audiences sought out work with the expectation that it might prove to be that years

hidden gem. Performers brought their work in the expectant hope that they might become a critical and

popular success, some even managing to cover their costs. Of 1962 still, the Glasgow Herald listed

Ionesco, Cocteau, Satre, Arthur Adamov, J.B. Priestley and Shakespeare among playwrights on the

Fringe, much of this work freshly translated and new to Edinburgh or even the world. 7 The majority of

the work highlighted was dramatic in character, a longstanding Fringe characteristic in response to

perceived neglect from the International, but it also appears that several annual components were

falling into place. A high standard of work would encourage critical attention, (many journalists loath

to leave London for the official fair alone,) and generate substantial publicity for Fringe groups.

Publicity encouraged audiences both to see particular shows and to visit Edinburgh in the first place as

it enhanced its reputation for good new work. And where theres an audience, groups have greater

security when planning to take part, either in search of attention or income. The Fringe Society played

a practical, pragmatic part in this, and symbolically it reflected a broad desire to see the Fringe survive

by way of innumerable individual contributions.

A particularly positive development, and one which coincides with the Fringe Societys arrival in 1959,

is intermittent discussion of the International Festival with reference to the Fringe, a reversal of

fortunes in only a dozen years. The Times Educational Supplement acknowledged that the newly

founded Festival Fringe Society is full of beans It may be a bad day for the main festival organisers

if the tail begins to wag the dog, but it will be great fun for the tail, and perhaps commentators. 8

Although apparently less so for the Internationals then Director Robert Ponsonby, who made it clear

that there simply would not be a fringe without the Festival. And life is easier for fringe organisers

than for organisers of the official Festival, who have to have their programme completed by January,

presumably with only the bare minimum full time paid staff in both Edinburgh and London. 9

Ponsonbys frustrations were published three Festival-filled weeks before he tended his resignation, to

take effect after the 1960 Festival. Millers 1996 history of the International Festival highlights several

of his main grievances, from the general policy of the Festival Society and its reluctance to

experiment with new works, to a tendency to play safe and preoccupation with the box office

5 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:443, Scottish Daily Mail, 13 September 1959.6 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:407, The Scotsman, 10 September 1962.7 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:407, Glasgow Herald, 18 August 1962.8 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:443, Times Educational Supplement, 11 September 1959.9 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:442, Glasgow Herald, 22 August 1959.


30/37


Page 33

appeal of the programme. 10 Whether it was apparent in International circles that the Fringe appeared

to have overcome these difficulties has not been revealed in the research for this paper, yet it seems

that finance, conditions and experimentation were causing one festival to thrive and the other to stall.

In terms of a general policy for the Fringe, it was of course to decentralise, and forego the pleasures

of Directorship and committee accountability.

No investigation into this period of Edinburgh Festival history, let alone one focusing on Robert

Ponsonby and relations between festivals, can ignore the four gentlemen who performed at 10.30pm

for a week at the Royal Lyceum in Beyond the Fringe . Part of the 1960 International Festival

programme from a Director who had always been rather irked by the success of the Fringes satirical

revues, the show has done as much as any to create Festival legend and foster a rich legacy. 11 Iain

Crawford labels the work fringe English from the traditions of Swift, Hogarth, Chesterton and

Coward the purpose was mockery or take-the-mickery not reform. 12 Dudley Moore, Alan Bennett,

Jonathan Miller and Peter Cook would probably agree, telling Michael Billington at the time that their

target was complacency. 13 Ultimately it is debatable if the work was genuinely beyond the Fringe for

it was indisputably of the Fringe in style, if perhaps of superlative quality as evidenced by its somewhat

unexpected transfer to Brighton, London and New York. The Fringe had crept up on the International

Festival, announced itself as a secure and integrated element of Edinburghs summer outpouring of

creativity, and with his parting shot one International Director had employed some of the cream of

revue talent and challenged them to out-Fringe themselves. On watching one rehearsal Ponsonby

couldnt help asking Oh my God! What have I done? 14

f With remarkable prescience The Scotsman published a

letter in September 1954 which warned of the The

Festival Fringe. A real danger. 15 The author

foresaw numerable consequences arising from

greater fringe coordination which would only

encourage more groups to come. Supply

would outstrip demand, undignified and

unworthy rivalry with the International

would ensue, and the professional

component to the fringe would go, replaced

by amateur work of lower standards that would lose the event the publics goodwill. Fortunately

ventures such as the Traverse Theatre were contributing to the Fringe by 1963 and the professional

10 Miller, The Edinburgh International Festival, p. 49. 11 Miller, The Edinburgh International Festival, p. 50.12 Crawford, Banquo on Thursdays, p. 64.13 Sandbrook, Never Had it So Good, p. 539.14 Crawford, Banquo on Thursdays, p. 64.15 EFSP, NLS, Dep. 378:399, The Scotsman, 11 September 1954.


31/37


Page 34

element was secure, particularly so with the many former students whose careers subsequently kept

them acquainted with the Edinburgh Festivals. It would appear that many of the other risks have not

been averted however, and after half a century there are indeed more groups on the Fringe because of

the feared levels of coordination; fortunately ticket sales over a million each year suggest demand is

keeping up with supply.

Evidence of what constituted coordination is available in the Fringe Societys Treasurers Reports,

which highlight the costs of producing publicity material for the Fringe as a whole, via the programme,

and the running of the Fringe Club and box office. These were means by which the Society supported

its members, providing information to various sources and focal points for what had previously been a

disjointed event. The International Festivals press archive contains barely a mention of former

debates surrounding the direction of the Fringe Society after 1959. It is possible that once it had

arrived, the International felt less need to record the efforts of those groups nestled around the main

event. However, the Film Festival doesnt lack for coverage despite being a separate entity from 1947,

so it is quite possible that the Fringe Society was simply accepted as a necessary and correctly

constituted body as soon as it proved its worth from the end of the 1958 festival. Coverage instead

tends towards the tangible benefits made possible by its creation, such as the coffee mornings with

informal talks by revered distinguished exponents of the Arts. 16 One such noble figure was a much-

delayed 22-year-old Peter Cook, explaining to Fringe President Michael Imison that his flat had been

invaded by reporters following the previous evenings premiere of Beyond the Fringe .17 By default,

design and accident the Festival Fringe Society, and the festival it had been created to support, were

looking forward to continued innovation, exposure and influence. The relationship between the two

was sometimes ambiguous, but quick acceptance of the benefits, and risks, of coordination established

a progressive momentum behind the Fringe that has barely been dented since.

1

Nascent Fringe

Documents

Transcript of Nascent Fringe