EXCLUSIVE Exit, Stage Left (If you're a white male writer): Inside the theatre summit where banning white men was seriously on the table

Daily Mail​

01-05-2025

It was meant to be a gathering designed to bring together some of the leading voices in British theatre.
But at Soho Place in the West End on Wednesday, a proposal to ban staging plays by white male writers for a year nearly stole the show - and divided the room.
The proposal came from director Katie Gilchrist, who presented the idea as part of The Stage's 'Big Ideas' symposium.
The intention behind the proposal was to challenge existing programming norms in an industry often accused of gatekeeping.
But the idea of a year-long exclusion of works by white male playwrights was met with mixed reactions.
Some saw it as an opportunity to address underrepresentation, while others viewed it as an exclusionary move.
There was no open-floor debate during the symposium. Delegates were required to submit questions through an app, with only the most 'liked' questions being answered.
'It was Stalinesque – very controlling, very woke way of censoring different views of things. It's divisive and alienating,' said one attendee.
Following the proposal, an anonymous delegate asked: 'What about white working-class men? What about disabled/neurodiverse white men? What about trans men?'
The response to this question was: 'As Katie mentioned in her speech, there were no trans writers of any kind being programmed on the West End. Implying trans men will lose out as a result of this idea is a straw man – rising tides raise all boats.' This comment received 11 likes.
Another delegate responded: 'The immediate 'whataboutery' in these comments is exactly why this is important. A brave, big idea, thank you Katie.'
However, not all attendees were in agreement.
One delegate, who requested to remain anonymous for fear of being blacklisted, told MailOnline: 'Banning white male playwrights for a year is idiotic, right-on nonsense.
'The Stage should not have platformed such a divisive idea, especially when around 50% of the room was white and male. What's more alarming is that not one of them spoke out against it for fear of being labelled a 'misogynist'. It's bonkers.'
In the end, Ms Gilchrist's proposal was not adopted.
The idea that gained the most support—receiving 40% of the vote—was to devolve the National Theatre. Actor and director Rob Myles raised the question: 'Labour has made devolution a central policy elsewhere – why not in this industry?'
When asked whether the proposed ban would include Shakespeare or Ibsen, moderator Amanda Parker, a Royal Shakespeare Company board member, 'just laughed.'
All this played out the same week the National Theatre announced its new season—prompting fresh criticism about ideological orthodoxy in British theatre.
'They go on about tolerance, but only want one kind,' said one delegate. 'The theatre world is agenda-driven and resent differing views.'
In response, a spokesperson for The Stage said: 'The description of the day is inaccurate. No debate was restricted – on the contrary, delegates were encouraged throughout the day to share their thoughts and comments.
'The whole conference was a platform for open, generous and lively debate. It also included an extended panel discussion that explored issues of censorship and freedom of expression.
'All six open-sourced presentations put forward as part of our Big Ideas strand were received warmly in the room. A proposal for a devolved National Theatre won an open vote as the conference's favourite proposal of the six.'
The controversy didn't come out of nowhere.
Days before the event, Ms Gilchrist's pitch had already raised eyebrows after it was announced it would be among the final six ideas presented to senior theatre figures.
In her own words, Ms Gilchrist described the idea as 'an invitation for us to critically examine whose voices dominate our stages and what it could mean to shift that balance… even for the historical equivalent of an exhale'.
The suggestion would have excluded virtually every foundational playwright of the Western canon - from Shakespeare and Marlowe to Ibsen and Pinter.
Writer Patrick Kidd called the idea 'batty, sexist and divisive', remarking: 'Art should offer opportunities without banning a group of writers. Perhaps she would also like to exclude white men from theatre audiences?'
Gilchrist, who has directed regional productions of Mamma Mia!, Steel Magnolias and Dial M for Murder, was one of two Americans to make the shortlist.
Another finalist, Catherine Russell - general manager of New York's Theater Center -proposed live AI translation of theatre into more than 60 languages.
Last year, former prime minister Rishi Sunak condemned theatres that hosted 'Black Out' performances - nights reserved for black-only audiences - as 'wrong and divisive'.
It comes as ticket buyers attending its upcoming production of Shakespeare's Hamlet have been advised that the play contains themes of death, grief, suicide, madness and coercive behaviour.
The play, a cornerstone of English literature and widely taught in schools, ends with a fatal duel that sees most of the principal characters - including the prince himself - dead by the final curtain.
The production, which opens in September as part of Indhu Rubasingham's inaugural season as artistic director, stars Olivier Award-winner Hiran Abeysekera as the Danish prince.
Alongside casting announcements, the theatre slapped the production with a trigger warning, stating: 'This production contains themes of grief and death, including suicide and the loss of a parent, depictions of madness, violence, and coercive behaviour.'
The warning prompted raised eyebrows among some theatre-goers and commentators, who questioned whether audiences need advance notice that a four-hundred-year-old tragedy contains tragic elements.
Roy Schwartz, a historian and author, told the Mail: 'A trigger warning is meant to alert that something contains potentially distressing material. It's gratuitous to include it in something that's well-known to have mature subject matter, and it's frankly ridiculous to include it in a classic like Hamlet. For that matter, why not have a trigger warning in every history book? Every Bible and Sunday sermon?
'Coddling audiences against reality only serves to infantilise culture. A trigger warning is fair when the audience might not expect something 'triggering,' not in the most famous play in history.'