The rebirth of Nigeria’s National Theatre, was greeted with excitement across the creative community. Over decades, artists, playwrights, dancers, musicians, filmmakers and culture enthusiasts, had longed for the day, the country’s foremost cultural edifice – the National Theatre, would once again become the heartbeat of Nigeria’s creative ecosystem.
The renaming of the complex as the Wole Soyinka Centre for Culture and the Creative Arts, further heightened expectations. Many believed that after years of neglect, Nigeria was finally returning its most iconic cultural institution to those for whom it was built – the artists. Sadly, reality appears to be telling a different story.
Today, many culture and arts practitioners look upon the magnificent structure from a distance, wondering whether they are visitors in their own home. The building has become more accessible to event planners, than to theatre practitioners. The calendar appears more attractive to corporate ceremonies, than to institutional artistic programming. One begins to wonder whether somewhere between the reconstruction and reopening, the National Theatre quietly transformed into a premium event centre, wearing the costume of a cultural institution. That is the tragedy.
The National Theatre was never conceived as an events arena. It was built as Nigeria’s foremost arts and culture centre, a place where creativity lives daily, not occasionally. Great cultural institutions across the world thrive because they are driven by carefully institutionalized programming. There are resident companies, repertory productions, educational engagements, artist residencies, festivals, workshops, children’s theatre, dance seasons, music concerts, exhibitions and community outreach. These are the activities that make a theatre breathe. Hall rentals merely support the ecosystem; they do not define it.
Unfortunately, one gets the impression that those currently steering the affairs of the Centre have mistaken a cultural institution for a commercial property. If the measure of success becomes the number of halls rented out for ceremonies instead of the number of productions nurtured, then something fundamental has been lost.
The management under Disun Holloway appears yet to fully appreciate that culture cannot be managed like banking operations. A theatre is not a banking hall. Creativity does not operate on deposit slips, balance sheets and quarterly projections alone. Art requires vision, accessibility, collaboration and consistent programming. The economics of culture are different from the economics of finance, even though both demand accountability.
This is why the committee of eminent bankers that midwifed the refurbishment deserves commendation for restoring the physical infrastructure. They mobilized resources and returned dignity to a national monument. That achievement should never be discounted.
Continue reading with Eandel
Subscribe to unlock the complete story and receive your subscriber benefits.
