After ten years of kicking the system, the power of 'the seducers' seems a bit elaborated

For more than a decade, the seducers have their indignation flows freely in the world. What started with Sharp satire on the bankingreceived a follow -up with fillet performances about, for example, the pharmaceutical industry, privacy and gender inequality. But the company also received criticism, for example after they were in a TV program in 2019 De Wereld Draait Door Big van Leer pulled against the AIVD, but many of their claims turned out to be incorrect.

Now there is the anniversary performance BUIDSCH SCHOT (the tenth seducers production) in which the consultancy industry is cut. Hold your heart, you would think.

Consultancy is not a subject that you will immediately go to water as a theater goer. The world of companies such as EY, McKinsey and KPMG, in which advisory processes let the cash register ring: make it exciting theater. Fortunately, the jubilating company specializes in this. Earlier performances every fact that the makers needed to make their point were presenting in such a way that even annual figures or a dry graph yielded fascinating theater. Director Leopold Witte also tries to keep the pace high in the new performance, but the result is varying. Have the seductive forces of the critical theater makers been worked out a bit, after ten years of kicking the system?

In BUIDSCH SCHOT a fictional consultancy firm is being performed that wins an assignment from a decisive minister. Scenes at the ministry and at the office of the hyper-commercial agency are interspersed with mini presentations on blunders of global consultancy firms and industry figures. For example, theater maker George van Houts calculates that one (educational) consultant is working for every two educational staff, and then zooming in on a – supervised by Consultants – vision process for a primary school. From these intermezzos, a picture of a totally got out of hand looms up, in which a lot of money is earned with chatting and throwing with incomprehensible terms.

Disappointing argument

How could this sector become so great? In the script of Tom de Ket, the seducers sketch roughly two reasons for that. One: there are a lot of theoretically trained Dutch people, who 'cannot do anything' (or at least: do not make furniture or lay streets) and therefore come to work at consultancy firms where they develop or perform visions. Two: Nobody wants to take responsibility, Pierre Bokma argues in his role as head of the fictional consultancy firm. We dare not be the ultimate responsible and therefore, for far too high amounts, hire others to do this.

Based on the idea that hardly anyone dares to stand out his head above ground level, a storyline about a university teacher (played by Victor Löw) also arises that is accused of intimidation by anonymous complainants at his university. Office Buitenschot has investigated the complaints and the teacher comes to get a story. He wants to know who is behind the reports. With the words 'cross -border behavior' nowadays everyone can 'cancel', the idea is. And in addition, there are also two consultants at the start of their career (Linde van den Heuvel and Steye van Dam) who – firmly elbowing – fight their way up at the Buitenschot desk.

All in all, it is a lean and disappointing argument that the seducers present this time. Yes, there are a huge number of consultants and also a lot of coaches – two professional groups who are swept in one heap in performance, but the implications of this are hardly worked out and there is no clear substantiation. Buitenschot office seems rather careless. It is a wild mix of statements and stories, which convinces less than previous performances.

To share





Mail the editors