March 1989

So our Annual General Meeting is over and we are now getting the new year into full swing. And how do we feel about it? Well, this year I have to admit I feel alot better than I have in previous years.

We had quite a reasonable roll up to the AGM and we are seeing some new blood taking an interest in the administration, as you will see from the AGM report elsewhere in these pages.

I do think it appropriate though that we acknowledge all the work that has been done in the past by those members of the Society’s executive that this year stood down from office. Primarily of course is Phillip Halsall Phillip is in fact the founder of the Society. Until last year he editing this magazine and wore the Presidency as well. Despite all sorts of pressure Phillip hung in there until such time as he was content that there were appropriate people to keep the Society on track. We owe him our gratitude for the job well done and sincerely hope he will be able to maintain a contact with us and give us the benefit of his vast experience from time to time.

The other committee member we lost was jovial Max Sutch Max is a foundation member and is best remembered by his very humourous cartoon series in the magazine title “Sutch Stars”. Max has been sorely missed in these pages lately as his health has precluded him from keeping up his contribution. I for one am very anxious for him to get back to peak condition so that we might again soon enjoy some more of his theatrical antics.

A look at the “Who’s On First” page gives an idea of what sort of a year we are going to have in amateur theatrical circles this year and I have to admit to being excited. As you will see form the AGM report, some good ideas were forthcoming and now we seem to have those few extra hands to help implement them.

A final thank you must go to Mr Peter Goers, well known critic in the Advertiser who devotes so much of his work to the amateur theatre, for making himself available to make the various presentations of awards and, for his supporting address to the meeting. He also left himself open to questions from the assembly during which he explained the criteria by which he measures the standard of a play. He stated that he made no differentiation between an amateur and a professional presentation and, that he expected that neither did an audience. Some Groups have suffered a bit of a drubbing from Peter now and again. Such statements perhaps make us a look a little better.