A Nationaltheater with only one main stage has been completed as an international cultural institution

A Nationaltheater with only one main stage has been completed as an international cultural institution.

This is a debate post. Any opinions expressed in the text are the responsibility of the writer. If you want to participate in the debate, you can read how here.

Should Norway spend money on the National Theatre? Is it right for us as a nation to preserve and operate an institution that will develop Norwegian performing arts and give audiences theater experiences at a high international level?

One could argue that the answer is no. Around the country there are plenty of cultural centers and private actors who still want to do theater. But if the answer is yes, if we as a cultural nation want to be at the forefront of the art form that has given Norway everything from Henrik Ibsen to Jon Fosse – last year’s winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature, then there are a number of consequences that we cannot just turn a blind eye to.

Jump over important dilemma

The last few weeks’ debate in Aftenposten, including the newspaper’s own editor last Saturday (April 20), conveniently skips over an important dilemma in the discussion about the future of the National Theatre.

It is as follows: Today, the Nationaltheatret building houses three stages. One main stage and two smaller stages. When Statsbygg will one day refurbish this venerable building, the National Theater will lose two out of three stages. We will only be left with the main stage.

This happens because Statsbygg needs space for everything required by the new universal design, lifts, air ducts, more toilets and so on. It is also because they want to convert the 125-year-old main stage into a stage for modern, ground-breaking theater productions.

Like any national team – to borrow words from an area where Norway is willing to invest money – we also need arenas where we can develop, recruit and experiment in order to maintain a high international level. Therefore, the discussion is about where any temporary replacement scenes are to be placed, which Aftenposten argues should be located in the peripheral zone of the capital, not the important one.

Oslo needs culture throughout the city

The discussion must be about where and what the National Theater should be after that we have renovated. In other words: What do we want the institution Nationaltheatret to be in a new centenary perspective? “That’s it the question”, as we usually say in the theatre.

Of course, we would also very much like to start refurbishing our venerable theater building. It is urgent, but before we do that there must be a clear answer to the following questions:

Should the National Theater end up with a single stage that will function as a kind of theater museum commemorating a time when cultural nation-building was taken seriously, and otherwise only have stages spread out like satellites outside the city core? Or should it continue to be a powerhouse for the development of Norwegian cultural life in the center of the country’s capital?

The fact that we are co-located is essential for us who make theatre. Because theater is a team sport. It’s analog, it’s old-fashioned, and that’s where our strength lies. So to be really good, we have to be together. We have to see and be challenged daily by each other’s work. Such co-location also has a significant financial gain which must be included in the calculation.

But why does the National Theater have to be in the centre?

We are not against theater at Løren. We spent large sums on setting up one theater production at the defunct Økern centre. We did that because we thought it was important. We have played theater at Torshov since the 1970s. Oslo needs culture all over the city.

The entire nation’s theater

But the National Theater is not Oslo’s theatre. It’s called Oslo Nye. The National Theater is the entire nation’s theatre. And it is not without reason that one of Norway’s largest hubs for public transport is precisely called – The National Theatre. Our cultural arena was placed in the axis between the Storting, the University and the Palace. The location has historical value for us as a nation. A core we all share.

Therefore, the solution of moving the two scenes we are losing into an already empty National Gallery, and a building underground at Tullinløkka, is a fantastic idea. And it is feasible.

There will always be reactions to changes in the cityscape. But one thing must be agreed upon. To preserve Tullinløkka as the half-way car park it is today – that is not a good idea for the next hundred years. With the theatre’s plans, it actually will be more park and city life at Tullinløkka than today. And in addition a power center for the entire country’s cultural life.

Will cost

In the end, it will be a question of cost after Statsbygg and the Ministry of Culture have had their say. But we know this: A Nationaltheater with only one main stage is finished as an international cultural institution. If we are to maintain a Nationaltheater at the current level, two new permanent smaller stages must be built somewhere. It’s going to cost, no matter where it ends up.

If Statsbygg’s total calculations come to the conclusion that, from a societal and centenary perspective, it is better to fill an empty National Gallery and build underground at Tullinløkka – instead of building completely new somewhere else on the outskirts of Oslo – there is no doubt that from a professional point of view, the co-location of the National Theater in the center is the absolute best.

Both for the art and for the public. If you want Norway to have a real National Theatre.