Esplanade CEO Benson Puah. Photo courtesy of The Esplanade.

Benson Puah is a very busy man. So imagine our "woot" moment when we finally got to sit down for a chat. But since he likes to wear his two hats separately, this was officially an Esplanade-related interview. But no complaints at all as the Durian officially turns 10 this October, with a weekend celebration lined up here. Read on as the Esplanade CEO shares his thoughts on the Esplanade, past, present and future. Wah.

***

Esplanade is celebrating its first decade. How does it feel? Ten years is still very young for a performing arts centre. Particularly one that has taken upon a certain responsibility to help the industry and to be a cultural institution. For that reason, if you remember last year, when we announced our tenth anniversary and people asked why there’s no big bang. In some ways, that gives you an insight into the culture, the ethos of this institution in the making. When we announced that the anniversary was not about the Esplanade but about values—and this predates the discussion about values today—we felt it was important because for us, Esplanade was not just about presenting things on stage. The presentations onstage were really a means to a larger end, and that end was really to transform our society in various ways. The discussion on values, hopefully gives an insight into the responsibilities that we hold unto ourselves. So throughout this year, we try to have certain values inform the programming. I guess it’s the thematic way, but in some ways it’s to reinforce with the public to think about these things. And the Values Inspired Project with schools has been really well taken. This was even before the new minister emphasised that values should be emphasised in schools. In some ways we opened up that conversation first. But these ten years is the beginning of a journey for us. There’s much more to be done. We know from the very beginning it’s a long haul. That it will not be easy. But then, there has to be that determination and commitment from us. And the Esplanade had a controversial beginning, of course. Esplanade, in the early days, before it even opened, was very controversial. At that point in time, the artistic community was totally distanced from us. Very simply because when Esplanade was first mooted, it was actually much bigger than this. There were medium-sized theatres, there was an experimental, adaptable stage, there was an artist village. And the local community was very excited, especially about the smaller and medium-sized spaces. But there came a point in time, the decision had to be made because of budgets, whether to build the three smaller (venues) or the two big ones. The decision was the two big ones. So of course the community was like, hello, we’re stranded. How can we use two big venues like these? Immediately it was seen that the decision was tourism-driven, economics-driven, (and) it doesn’t serve their needs. It didn’t help at that time that the Esplanade team didn’t, maybe, connect as well with the artistic community. So there was a wide rift. That was when I came on. I succeeded a gentleman named Robert Iau, who was quite the character. He’s passed away. It was a time when the building was being built and I came in with no background. It was “Who on earth is this fellow? What does he know? What can he do?” I knew that no amount of talking could convince anybody. But I did hold dialogues with the artistic community, just to share what I hoped Esplanade could do. But at the end of the day, everyone was of course quite sceptical. I was like, I don’t blame you, just judge us after we’ve opened by what we do. So did the tide eventually turn? Within one of these dialogues, (Kuo) Pao Kun was there. So Pao Kun of course stood up—and really gave it to me. (Smiles) Not me personally but cultural policy, what rubbish is this, and everyone was just stunned. This was back in the container office. Then I said, “You know, Pao Kun, I’ve recently been appointed. And I need help. This building is going to be built. It is built for us. Will you help us make this work for us. `Cos otherwise it will become a white elephant.” He kept quiet and after a while he said, “Okay, Benson, let’s do it together.” Of course, unfortunately, he passed away soon after. But that was a turning point, for us at least, that at least with Pao Kun, a hand was reached out and it was received. Now how then we (would have) journeyed, we never found out. But it was a great uplift for us. Personally, I knew there was much I needed to do. But I was already quite clear then on what Esplanade needed to do. And Esplanade for me, even then, was not meant merely to be a place for consumption. We needed to do more, to help develop local artists (and a) canon of work. Because I saw it, being the only and largest centre in Singapore, as pivotal to our own cultural development through the arts. Whatever arts we present will have a material impact on how we evolve as a people. And that’s the reason we had to open the way we did—with a broad range of things to demonstrate what was possible. And Forbidden City as a commission was really to make a point that we can do something of our own and we can be proud of it. The pressure then was to do something Broadway. But I didn’t feel it was the right thing to do. Likewise for our opening, we commissioned SDT (Singapore Dance Theatre) for Reminiscing The Moon, still one of the more beautiful Asian contemporary pieces. And we got Boi Sakti to choreograph that. It was also a statement—a local company, Asian contemporary, working with an Indonesian choreographer with a certain sensibility. But of course we were handicapped—we were handicapped all this time. When you have two large venues and two small studios. Because, when you want to do more work, and work with local and regional companies, we need medium size spaces. 220 seat, limited space studios—those studios were actually converted from rehearsal spaces. That’s why they’re nice spaces but they’re not perfect. They were supposed to be rehearsal spaces for, at that time, the resident orchestra and resident, perhaps, opera company. I didn’t feel we should have a resident orchestra because it will define the concert hall and I wanted it to be a hall for all things and for all people. `Cos when you have a symphony orchestra that dominates it, then people will stand back because they think it’s only for Western symphonic orchestra. Although we worked with SSO for them to have their seasons here, we wanted to ensure that the hall was one that could be used by different forms. And likewise for the theatre, because I felt the Western opera form was expensive. The investment to develop it would have depleted me of my budget to do anything else. What about visual art? Was it an afterthought? That space there (Jendela) was meant to be a bar. When I looked at it I said, well, you know we have enough F&B here, I don’t have a space for visual arts. And it seemed like a nice space at the end, tucked away. Let’s convert it into a visual arts gallery. I’ll always remember, there was a lot of scepticism as well because it’s a curvilinear space. How on earth can you do any visual arts here? And I said, better than nothing. I was quite confident with our younger artists, that with installations, they can respond to the space. And that’s how I challenged the visual arts community to use any space they think they can use. That’s (also) why we converted the concourse steps. In fact I was belittled by many of our senior artists when we did that. How (it was) disrespectful to put art like this when it’s not a specific space. I can tell you that a lot of the work that we did using the tunnel, the concourse area, was not initially well-supported by the more established artists. But then we wanted to work more with the young artists because they don’t have that platform. And I guess we’ve commissioned the most site-specific installations. So no space was sacred. I wanted all forms of arts to be pervasive. `Cos one thing I wanted was, you know, in the concourse, we have outdoor performances, visual arts—when a visitor comes, especially a Singaporean family, and come regularly, through time we are able to influence their visual and aural aesthetic. And it’s true. Because for ten years now, I’ve seen young teenagers grow up and they have been influenced by the art that they’ve experienced here. Outdoor, indoor, visual arts. That’s the purpose of all these free presentations. Because you chance upon it and if you regularly do so, it will influence your inner ear. So I’m always working with programmers that whatever we programme is of our artists, things that we should be familiar with and supportive of. Are you amazed by how going to the Esplanade has now become a kind of norm after the previous scepticism about its place in the scene? Or was it an instant success? Well I don’t know whether I can use the word “success”. When we first opened, the way in which we opened with our opening ceremony was to ensure that the public was embraced. The emphasis was on the opening carnival and the outdoor shows. That was the emphasis. Not so much on the grand ceremony. In fact, we downplayed that to a certain extent. Very few cultural institutions on a national scale are opened without a speech—we didn’t have a speech! The president declared the opening through a specific performance that was on the forecourt that was shared with the public. So the “ribbon cutting” moment was not something amongst the high society but right with the public. Obviously that created a certain excitement. We wanted people to come here and be comfortable. Hence we don’t have the sort of rigid rules institutions have. We are very happy for people to find their space. And although in the early years we had some vandalism—one or two instances (perhaps because) it was new and people were curious—we have very little vandalism now. People are now respectful of the arts. Maybe during the first year there was a curiosity factor. But we’ve stabilized, between 6-7 odd million visitors a year. Majority are residents who come back three to five times. We always wanted coming to the Esplanade part of the habit that people will form. When you were starting out and coming from a different background, did you feel like a fish out of water? Not at all. I have always, from young, been involved in almost all the art forms. I started learning music before I went to school. I played the piano. I was involved in the orchestra, the school band, I was president of the Literary, Drama and Debating Society (at Anglo-Chinese School). I think (Ong) Keng Sen and Ivan (Heng) eventually went to the same school years later. I used to dance, did some theatre. I was very much involved. Arts was very much part of who I was. Actually, so was sports. I was a bit unusual—a sportsman and also involved in the arts. That’s the reason why I appreciate the value of arts and sports in developing a person. I think I benefitted a lot from it. And even though in my working life I was in different trades, I didn’t lose complete touch (with the arts). In fact I remember when I came back to Singapore, SSO had just formed and I was one of the early subscribers—I tried to attend concerts and performances… But it was a surprise when I was asked to consider joining. It wasn’t on my radar. But I understood the importance and the potential of Esplanade. So when I said yes to it, I said yes not to manage a building or a venue. I said yes to becoming an agent for our eventual social transformation. And that’s why it’s informed a lot of what we do. A lot of decisions we made were not specific to Esplanade but hopefully we’ve always thought what was good for the industry. A lot of it was not apparent at the time we made the decisions, a lot of our programming was not apparent as well. But I also understood that I cannot make decisions to be popular, to be immediately accepted, `cos change like this will take time. And hence my plan was actually over 20 years. One generation. So we’ll have to wait for ten more years for the real celebration then. I think the real celebration may not be for us to celebrate but when Singaporeans embrace not just the Esplanade but the arts and life in a different way. You mentioned that you wanted for Esplanade’s direction to be one where local and Asian works are programmed. Was there a resistance to this in the early days? It wasn’t so much resistance but the challenge was the enormity of the space and the scale that’s required. In the early days, not many of our companies had the ability then. Not so much about talent but they’ve never done anything on such a large scale. It’s not a matter of just scaling up. So the programming in the early days wasn’t because we didn’t want to work with local companies, but we needed time to build up the capabilities and the appetite for local companies to put big works. And look at the companies now right? But even so, it’s a lot of risk. A medium size space is still an ideal space for local companies to do a lot of the work that they can do, and the big space is really for the occasional one. So the medium-size spaces will still push through? We do have a Phase 2—but that needs funding. And now’s not really a good time lah, to be asking for lots of money. (Laughs) Well, in a sense, this “version” of the Esplanade feels like one complete centre. If you were to critically analyse, we are probably the only centre like this that doesn’t have medium-size spaces. Yet we are so busy. We live with what we’ve got and do our best. But the thing is, in some ways our audiences have a rather skewed diet from the Esplanade—the big scale works and the very small works. We haven’t been able to programme 85% of what happens in the world out there in theatre and in dance. That’s why we can’t really do a theatre festival. It’s not possible. We can do it in the studios, but in such a space it tends to be more experimental. In the big spaces, there are only so many companies that do that scale of work. Our da:ns Festival is not as complete as I would like it to be. Because a lot of good work is really for 600-700 seaters, and we don’t have that, especially for contemporary dance, which is something we want to do more of. And with medium-size spaces, there’s a lot more work that we can do with local companies. As it is, The Studios series has informed almost all the theatre students in the past years. Can you imagine if we had medium-size spaces and we did a lot more theatre and dance? How it’ll influence succeeding generations—let alone audiences? What are your thoughts on the crazy annual calendar of arts events that Singapore has right now and of the integrated resorts? I think the integrated resorts, particularly Marina Bay Sands, the two venues do Broadway-style shows, big international names. That, in many ways, supplements the entire experience. If you look at Las Vegas, it’s not just about the gambling, it’s also about the shows, the dining—it’s the lifestyle. Actually, we’re quite happy for that to happen. In fact, in the early days, when Broadway shows came here, the public couldn’t tell the difference whether it’s Esplanade(-produced) or commercial. And so there was an uproar that the tickets were so expensive—how can we be a centre for everyone when it’s commercially driven? But if you look at the pricing at MBS, which is a lot higher, no one complains because it was accepted. It was part of the lifestyle. It was not quite a good fit here because it stood out from what we normally do. Although it did bring different audiences here. And I think the timing was actually quite elegant in that when we opened, we helped satisfy the wide range of diets. And now we’ve reached a certain stage where the audiences have got accustomed and it’s big enough now that Broadway-style shows being brought to a commercial venue created space for us to do other things. And what has taken over the space (here) is a lot of locally produced works too, which is what we wanted anyway. When the IRs was announced, I wasn’t particularly worried because I felt, that’s good. The more variety, the more opportunity for people to engage in different things. Because someone who likes Broadway shows and only that, you’re not gonna convert that person at such a late age to see a contemporary dance or a more sophisticated music theatre piece. Not so easy. What would be your memorable shows or artists that have graced the Esplanade? Frankly, it is not easy when you’ve done tens of thousands of productions. Sometimes I may not even remember an artist we presented. But the one that I was particularly proud of was a Malay music theatre production, Puteri Gunung Ledang (in 2006), which we brought in from Malaysia. It was the first time the Malay community had experienced a work like this in the theatre. But what was heartwarming for me was the swelling of pride amongst the community. They didn’t want to go home. They were all mingling in the lobby, they all wanted an autograph from Tiara Jacquelina, the main star. And she sat there and signed every autograph until past one o’clock. That for me was quite special. I attend almost everything but everyone has a special moment. But the one thing you will notice is that for Esplanade shows, the artists tend to be quite effusive. They give a lot when they perform and they always say so. And that’s the special thing. We develop a relationship and trust with the artist. It’s not just a gig where we pay you a fee and you perform. That’s why many of them all say they want to come back. What about the most memorable local production you’ve seen? More recent, I guess, if I were to use comparisons was (Ong) Keng Sen’s Lear. The first one, which I saw, and this one—the re-interpretation of his own work is quite remarkable (Lear Dreaming). I remember that because I just started my chemo and I was so determined I needed to see it. (Laughs) But something that was more polished than I thought it would be was the tribute concert for Emma Yong. I thought it was very touching. For the community to come together to put something like that, I don’t think there was a dry eye. Have you forged any special friendships with everyone? I did actually. Unfortunately she has passed away. Shirley Horn. It’s special because Shirley, when she performed here (at the Mosaic Music Festival in 2005), she didn’t travel (a lot) at that time because she had one leg amputated. And she came all the way here because she felt comfortable, I guess, with our sincerity. Since she had her leg amputated, typically she’d perform the first one or two songs on the piano then after that, her accompanist would take over. In this concert here, she played throughout. Although she thought she’d never come back after such a long haul (flight), after the concert she said she wanted to. And we spent a little bit of time together. I was quite saddened when I couldn’t get her back here. (Horn passed away later that year.) Which is your favourite Esplanade festival? I guess Mosaic particularly, because how Mosaic started was I’ve always wanted this festival. But we felt that the audience was not ready. So we had our Mosaic series. And then STB at that time brought in Claude Nobs, founder of Montreux Jazz Festival. And the intent at that time was for Montreux to have a festival here. They wanted a big name event. So Claude was being wooed. He gave me a call to say, “Benson, I’m getting very bored, can we go out?” So we went out. And he said, “You know, they want to pay me money for me to give my brand for a Montreux festival here.” And I said, “Well, I don’t see why we should have a Montreux festival here. I could do a festival.” And this was over a lot of drinks with another artist, I was hosting Misia then, a Fado singer, at the Mandarin Oriental. So Claude said, “Why don’t you do your festival and then I’ll come. Give me an excuse to come and have fun.” So I said, “Okay, I do my festival, I give you one night and call it a Montreux night. We’ll do everything, you just come and lend us your name for that one night.” And that’s how it started. Claude came here for several years. He gave the Mosaic brand some gloss but after a while, Claude even said onstage that Mosaic makes more sense as a festival than Montreux because Montreux Jazz is not about jazz whereas Mosaic I could do a lot. And we all felt that Mosaic could stand on its own. It was a good run and we’re still very good friends and keep in touch. But Mosaic developed on its own. And it is a festival that will continually evolve. Cos in the early days, we presented jazz greats. The thing is, after a while, you run out of jazz greats. (Laughs) But more importantly, the scene has evolved also. There are a lot more presentations of artists. I think now it wouldn’t have made sense for us to present George Benson because there are commercial presenters. We did it then because at that time time, (the commercial concert promotion scene) wasn’t that active. That’s the reason why Mosaic now is more edgy and continually we’ll find new areas to develop the market for others to come in. Jason Mraz—we opened the door for him. Rachel Yamagata also. And we’re quite happy for others to take that on and make a buck from it. We’ll find other sub genres. In a sense you could say Esplanade had a great hand in developing the whole indie scene as we know it today with Mosaic and Baybeats. And now you have all these music festivals. We’re quite happy—and that’s the premise, you see. That’s the very basis from the genesis of Esplanade. We’re not possessive. That’s the reason why in the early days, I remember some commercial promoters thinking we were bidding against them. But in fact, our conversations with agents and managers is that, if someone else in Singapore is interested, we will stand down. We’d rather let them do. Because if someone is willing to do it commercially, that means we shouldn’t be doing it. We should be doing things that no one wants to do. And that continues to be the case. Because we want to develop the industry and not compete. Is this the Esplanade you envisoned from the start? More or less, ya. With how the (Esplanade) calendar has planned out, things that we’re doing, education and the outreach. All the things that are now in place didn’t happen by chance. But it needed it to be at a certain pace that we are able to manage, that the market can accept. And that’s the reason the first phase, in my mind, was to complete this calendar. There will always be gaps but more or less, a full calendar within ten years. We did that in about five to six. The next phase was to then focus on local and regional development. Which you are already doing in a way. Yes, but I could do a lot more. Commissioning, presenting works in these medium-size spaces. Can you imagine if I were able to present a lot more dance and theatre from the region and the sort of conversations that can ensue? Put artists, companies together to create new work. That’s still something not yet realised. In the absence of that we’re doing what we’re doing and a lot more of it. Does that mean you’ll see it through all the way to the next ten years? Well, when I came to Esplanade, I didn’t take it as a job. I took that firstly as a responsibility and something I felt I wanted to do. So I will stay as long as I can, as long as I’m able to contribute, I guess. And I mean that sincerely because sometimes we might overstay if we run out of ideas. I haven’t seen through what I’ve envisaged yet. I’m doing what we can given the constraints we have. But we always work around it. And how does your other job at the National Arts Council impact your job here at the Esplanade? It hasn’t split, it’s doubled. (Laughs) I guess I don’t have as much face time as I have with my team here or even at NAC. I like to be with my team. I get to know them, I enjoy mentoring and guiding. That needs for me to be here full time. That’s something I’m not able to do as much as I would like to. Especially amongst my younger team. I’ve limited my travels, though, and usually when I do travel, I bring my team with me and introduce them to my network. Because the way we work here, if you’ve noticed, all the spokespersons are the people who manage the programmes. It’s not me. Unlike other institutions where the CEO likes to take all the credit. Here, each of them have their ownership (of the programmes). My time is rather stretched because at NAC there was a lot to do. To change all the policies, the grants, which is still in the process of being rolled out, and building a new team at NAC as well, and helping them change their mindsets and approach towards policy. But I’m enjoying it. The NAC work was not alien to me. All the time here at the Esplanade, I always thought of the bigger issues, cultural policies, issues that impact our arts community. I was a stranger walking into Esplanade back then but I wasn’t a stranger that walked into NAC. And the issue of conflict of interest? There has never been any conflict. Only recently NAC and Esplanade had some things that they did together. That was Drama Centre. Cos it was directed by MICA that the Esplanade should manage. What happened at Drama Centre, the contract signed, I’m hands off. My teams handle that on both sides. I keep a watch over what’s happening but I don’t influence at all. But the issue of that sort of conflict of interest—I sit on several public listed boards as well. We’re all trained to understand governance and where we have to declare conflict of interest and where you abstain from decision making. So for me, it was not a problem. But there’s no direct relationship between NAC and Esplanade. Do you get confused sometimes? Not at all actually. I guess I’m quite used to multitasking. But if you look at the list of things I’m involved in, I need to switch. So whenever I’m in a different organization, I will think like I’m embedded in the organisation. I’m thinking about how difficult it is to juggle not just two big things but two visions. In a way it helps because they’re not conflicting visions. The Esplanade’s vision is a part of a larger picture. NAC has a larger picture and Esplanade plays a certain part in helping to fulfill that larger picture. And that comes to the debate about arts and culture. Culture is who we are and how we chose to behave, what values we hold dear to us. The arts must be part of our cultural makeup. And in fact, influences who we are. It is not the other way around. So the arts in fact plays a critical role moving forward in helping to define what we want to be. What are the traditions, the practices, that we are proud to say “This is who we are.” In fact, right now, we haven’t many art forms that we readily associate with, that defines us as Singaporeans. So what’s your take on the future ministerial changes and the subsuming of “arts” into “culture”? For me it’s a word. What is important is the thinking, what we can do, and our understanding of what we can do and its importance. But then, the ministry has yet to be formed. (Laughs) And I think if there’s going to be a national conversation and redefinition of how we want to define ourselves as Singaporeans, the arts, sports, things that I’m very familiar with, I know will help define our future generations. Cos I know its important.