A new theatre, in Orchard Street, opened on 27th October 1750, with a performance of Shakespeare's Henry IV. John Palmer, a prosperous brewer and chandler maker published new proposals in March 1748, suggesting that the cost of the enterprise should be met by subscriptions of £50 of twenty shares. The Orchard Street Theatre was more adequate than the last sites, with more space and a larger stage ment it could attract a bigger crowds and bigger shows. However only five years after building the theatre the much greater demand ment Palmer was concerned, it seems, about suggestions that the Orchard Street site might now be unsuitable; the fashionable centre of the city was shifting to the north-west and Orchard Street was far from it. In 1804, plans for a new and improved theatre in Beaufort Square were made. Just one year from its conception, the new building was completed. It was designed by George Dance, professor of architecture at the Royal Academy. The theatre opened on 12th October 1805 with a performance of Richard III and Orchard Street theatre closed.
The Theatre Royal also changed in respects to the building and fabric.In the last half of the eighteenth century the physical characteristics of English theatres were undergoing change.The pit, formerly the resort of a noisy, standing section of the audience, was now being furnished with benches. I think this change represented how the theatre was socially moving up in classes. No longer was the theatre a place for the lower classes to talk in the pit, but for the upper classes to come, sit down and watch the show. Palmer took steps to implement these changes when he carried out alterations to the Orchard Street Theatre in 1755. they involved the replacemclassesent of the flat ceiling by a lofty dome decorated with sculptures in high relief, and a general improvement in the appearance of the auditorium. When the theatre re-opened in March 1767, the changes were welcomed but it soon became obvious that they were far from satisfactory.
Early in 1814 several alterations and improvements were carried out at Beaufort Square. The box office was enlarged, and much of the interior of the theatre was repainted in light green and gold. The Casali panels were restored, and the ceiling which provided their elegant background assumed a delicate shade of pink. Green velvet drapery, edged with gold. The interior of the theatre at the time represented how Geogian Bath, socailly, was improving due to the fact it was fashionable and with a very high rate of tourism Bath that was making it become a very rich and prosperous city.
On the morning of Good Friday 1862 a fire broke out and completely destroyed most of the theatre in Beaufort Square. It was proposed that a limited liability company should be formed, with a capital of £12,000 in £5 shares to rebuild the theatre on the shell of the old one, making use of the walls that remained, and retaining the essentially Georgian character of the original building.
Changes were made to the type of plays that were shown and this reflected in the audience. Georgian Bath peaked at around 1840, by then bath was one of the most fashionable places to live and visit. In 1700 Bath was still a town with narrow streets and cramped buildings and around 3,000 inhabitants. By 1800 it was home to 35,000 and famous for its high society, frivolity and indulgence epitomised Georgian Bath. Life was prosperous and fun and ths reflected the plays in the Theatre Royal, plays were extravergant with lots of comedy and sex. With bright colours, make up and masks. The audience went to these productions to be seen by others more than to watch the play. Rich women would wear huge dresses and sit in boxes that faced the rest of the audience rather than the actual play. It was a social occasion.
In contrast to the Georgians, Victorian Bath was a much more serious place to be in. Bath, now no longer seen fashionable in society and with tourism rates low, Bath and the Theatre Royal was seemingly under attack from puritans and the rest of the country. Have you ever noticed how many Victorian churches there are in Bath? Queen Victoria brought with her a very religious feelings and it was not soon before puritans started blaming the theatre for being a place of sinfull indulgence. The Revd John East said “The character of the theatre is marked with almost every evil ." As ticket sales fell, well known actors from London were brought in boost sales, but it was always met with the backclash of puritans.
I think the main factors that caused change was the change in fashion and tourism, the change in religion an the role of certain individuals. Fashion and tourism because it made Bath and its theatre such a popular place in the early 1800's and dramaticly less popular in the late 1800's to 1900's. The change in religion because in the Victorian era it had such an devastating impact on the number of people that attended the theatre as a large number considered attending theatre sinfull. Individuals like George Trimm and the Royal Family contributed greatly to improving all aspects of the theatre and putting it where it is today.
The rate of change was very quick, from 1705 to 1805 the improvements to the theatres in Bath have been amazing. Within a matter of half a century, Bath had changed from a young, fashionable, fun and very visited city to the unfashionable city that was elderly, up tight and too religious.
George Trimm and George Dance were very influencal individuals that designed key theatres in Bath, George Trimm designed the fist real theatre in Bath and George Dance constructed the one that still stands today in Beaufort Square. The royal Family played a large part when they visited Bath and granted the theatre a royal patent, the first outside of London. It helped the theatre attract stars from London to come and perform in Bath. The ups and downs the royal theatre has experienced has only made the theatre stronger. The importance of events has been vital in evovling he theatre to keep it modern and fashionable.
The Theatre definately did mirror the changes in society during this period. The perfect example was the decor of the Theatre Royal when it was constructed in 1805, the rich Georgian green and chanderlers illistrate the money fashionable Bath churned out from tourism. The boxes which face the audience rather than th stage illistrate how theatre was seen as a place to be seen as it was in fashion. And when the theatre threatened to close due to the Victorian depression where religous feeling were te theatre is sinfull and Bath was no longer fashionable. Fashion and religion influenced the changes of the theatre greatly because it dictated weather or not peolple would go to theatre. In the 1800's it was fashionable and acceptable and in the 1900's it was unfashionable and looked down upon by religion.
Typical features of the theatres in Bath has been how they have made a steady improvement from 1705 to now, changes to the site, building and external factors like social changes has made sure Theatre in Bath has progressed with the times. The atypical factor that has amazed me is how quickly the changes have taken place, from 1705, Bath had a non-excistant theartre reputation and within 100 years became the first Royal Theatre outside of London.
Not long after the Royal Theatre in Bath recieved a royal patent, a small theatre in Yorkshire got one aswell and many other theatres in Britain changed, evolved and improved. Including the masive one in Covent Garden, London.
Using the available evidence I can prove my hypothesis as outlined in my introduction; there was a very close link between historical influence and development of the theatre.
