Terrapin is putting in place a new critical review process as part of the redevelopment of its new artistic model of practice. This model will form the basis of how Terrapin intends to create higher quality shows. This method of practice and review process will also provide the company with a way of measuring this assertion of ‘quality’ by putting in place a series of criteria by which the review process functions. This is particularly important in a period when Terrapin is embarking on a new theatrical direction with the exploration of digital puppetry.

Influenced by the Danish System and the Patch Theatre and Polyglot Puppet Theatre models, this review process will impact on the way that Terrapin creates its work. To summarise, Terrapin undertakes two one-week creative developments, which in turn is a response to a brief by the director. After this the writer produces a draft script and the designer finalises all designs. The sets puppets and props are then constructed and the script is then rehearsed in a four week extended third creative development. The work is taken to a level ready for professional preview.

At this point, the review panel, along with an audience including children are invited to a showing. The panel will consist of artists, designers, directors, educators, film-makers, architects and theatre presenters. Depending on the nature of the show the review panel will change to provide the best mix of professionals capable of giving the strongest feedback.

The panel will be invited to view the work in light of a directorial statement. After watching the work they will be asked to return the next day to participate in a meeting facilitated by an independent chair. At this meeting they address a series of questions. This meeting is minuted. After this initial discussion the director is invited to participate in the conversation. This is also minuted so that the director can compare what was said before he arrived with what took place after.

The criteria that the critical review panel will be asked to analyse the new work in light of are:

1. Is the show cohesive? Does the overall idea of the work shine through in light of the directorial statement?

2. Quality of the script from a literary perspective. Is it accessible for children, but entertaining for adults?

3. Quality of direction, in light of the scenography and over all vision. A major part of this is whether the play is adequate and inspiring for children.

4. Quality of design. The panel needs to review the cohesion of the design as well as how it supports the understanding of the story. It also needs to take into account whether it is appropriate or for children.

5. The quality of the performances.

6. The quality of the puppetry.

7. Does the show relate to its audience? Is it important and engaging for them?

8. Why do this work now; is this work relevant to the audience? This question encourages the panel to ask why this is an important work for the company to do.

The panel will also be asked to consider the following:

In light of the answers to the above what is the most important aspect of the production on which to do further work, to significantly raise the quality of the show?

Where Terrapin’s review process starts to differ from the other critical review models is in how this information is then used. Terrapin will quarantine an allocation of funds so that the director and designers can spend money on addressing the outcomes of the review process before a final rehearsal period of one week before the premier season. This allows for Terrapin to adequately respond to major changes to the work if necessary.