It is regrettable that the National Arts Council (NAC) supported the renaming of Singapore Repertory Theatre (SRT) to Singapore Theatre Company (‘No company can be Singapore Theatre Company’: SRT’s rebrand draws flak from theatre community, Feb 1).

Past cases of arts companies rebranding over the years drew no unhappiness because such moves tended to clarify their practice within an art form.

For instance, the Singapore Lyric Theatre became Singapore Lyric Opera in 1999, to make clear its focus on promoting Western opera. The broadly named Singapore Dance Theatre was renamed Singapore Ballet in 2021 to position itself as a professional ballet company, so people would not expect hip-hop, ballroom dancing or swing.

The disquiet around SRT’s rebranding lies in its specialised genre, now with a name that represents an entire art form.

Also, if the arts are a way to foster national identity and pride, there must be due consideration when companies bear the word Singapore in their names, akin to national flagship companies such as the Singapore Symphony Orchestra and Singapore Chinese Orchestra. 

NAC should not merely check off eligibility criteria, with scant appreciation for the nuance and significance of a name like Singapore Theatre Company. 

As a regular arts patron, I think no single theatre company can rightfully lay claim to that name. And this is very much the case for Singapore Theatre Company, whose repertoire since its founding in 1993 has hardly reflected the multicultural fabric or social discourse of Singapore society, and is not a prolific presenter of original local plays.

To audiences unfamiliar with local theatre offerings, the Singapore canon is richer than Shakespeare In The Park or the occasional local work like Forbidden City: Portrait Of An Empress or The LKY Musical.

I hope NAC and Singapore Theatre Company will reconsider the decision.

Angela Lau Tjia Hui