Something is missing from your manifesto, Mr Hytner

In a history going back nearly 40 years, the NT's raison d'être has never been detailed

Next week, Nicholas Hytner, the incoming director of the National Theatre, announces his first season of plays. I'm hopeful that he might be following my own campaign for cheaper tickets. He has been working on a scheme, which is in the final stages of preparation.

Mr Hytner has already given an insight into his thinking about the arts, the future of subsidy and the educational role of theatre in a "manifesto" in a Sunday newspaper. He also neatly dispenses with the odd politically correct dogma, such as the "young audiences good, middle-class middle-aged audiences bad" mantra. Mr Hytner says: "There's nothing inherently good about any particular audience. We mustn't judge the success of an artistic enterprise by its ability to pull in an Officially Approved Crowd."

All correct – as far as it goes. But, like his predecessors at the helm, Mr Hytner has nothing to say in his manifesto about an even more pertinent question: What is the National Theatre for? Is it, as I asked in this column last week, a National Theatre of Britain or just of England?

Perhaps even more importantly, does it have a duty to present regular appraisals of the work of the great dramatists of the 20th century? If so, is Mr Hytner going to stage plays by some of those writers who have been written out of the script at the NT? Terence Rattigan, for example, has clearly not been to the taste of any of Mr Hytner's predecessors. What is the policy? Do artistic directors of the National Theatre stage important and influential British dramatists, or do they just stage their favourites? One could mount an argument for either scenario. But it would be helpful to have a public statement of intent. What do the words National Theatre actually mean? Amazingly, in a history going back nearly 40 years, nothing in the NT's documentation and constitution has ever detailed its official raison d'être. Considering Mr Hytner's new fiefdom receives £14.3m of public money, a public statement of what the National Theatre is for and which countries it represents is not a lot to expect. Can we have part two of the manifesto, please, Mr Hytner?

* The Lister Experiment of offering best seats at cinema prices for selected performances continues. Readers will be able to buy best seats for the Madness musical Our House at the Cambridge Theatre, London (020 7494 5080) on any Monday in January or February for £11.50, the price of a central London cinema ticket.

In addition, the Royal Shakespeare Company has decided to put another two productions into the experiment. They are both in the acclaimed season of rare Jacobean plays being put on by the leading West End producers Bill Kenwright and Thelma Holt. The plays are Edward the Third on 27 January and The Island Princess on 29 January, both at the Gielgud Theatre in Shaftesbury Avenue, London (0870 890 1105). Readers should ring the relevant box offices and mention the Lister Experiment.

Others are beginning to share my conviction that a new audience can be encouraged to go to the theatre if there are cheap tickets. This week Ken Livingstone launched his own scheme, in partnership with the Society of London Theatre. It will last only a couple of months; it will depend on availability, and it is questionable whether Mr Livingstone should be using public money to help commercial theatre. For those reasons I give only one and a half cheers. If he and, more importantly, West End theatre managements, are really serious about attracting new audiences with cheaper prices, they must also speak out about public anger over booking fees, over having to book tickets through ticket agencies, over having to listen to long recorded messages.

Sir Stephen Waley-Cohen, president of the Society of London Theatre, does at least agree that there is a problem to be addressed. He says: "We all know the frustrations about buying tickets and getting recorded messages; and we're trying to do something about that."

Ken Livingstone had a topical answer to the same question. When I put it to the London mayor that people were fed up with phoning theatre box offices and receiving long recorded messages, he replied: "It's good practice for the congestion charges."

* The Swan theatre in Worcester has closed after a bitter dispute between its board and the local council. But, Worcester councillor Simon Geraghty says: "We are confident that the theatre will continue in Worcester on an amateur level." Amateur productions were well attended and self-financing, he said, and the same could not be said of professional shows. Mr Geraghty is, of course, right. Amateur theatre is unquestionably cheaper than professional theatre. Amateur football is cheaper than the Premiership. Watching an amateur band is cheaper than going to a professional gig. The world of Mr Geraghty may be a world lacking in top-quality performance and the opportunity to see performers who have trained in their profession. But it is also a world of low overheads. The financial logic is faultless... and scary.

d.lister@independent.co.uk