How we chose this year’s writers
Grace Waga Glevey takes us behind the scenes of the selection panel for Fresh Ink: Hull Playwriting Festival 2025
Hello! I’m Grace and I was one of the writers commissioned for Fresh Ink: Hull Playwriting Festival 2024.
It was in this capacity that I was invited to join the selection panel for this summer’s festival, alongside a mix of freelance artists, local arts leaders and key supporters of Fresh Ink.
This post is to take you through the group’s process, what each step looked like, and my takeaways as a writer and previous applicant.
1) Reading the applications
The process
Ahead of our meeting, the panel read the 19 shortlisted applications. These had been longlisted from 117 entrants by Middle Child literary manager, Matt, and then shortlisted by Matt and Paul using a scoring matrix.
This included factors like writing quality, does the timing of the opportunity feel beneficial for where the writer is in their career and does the idea feel like one Hull needs, and which speaks to the people who live here?
What that looked like
Not much to explain here! I digitally highlighted anything that stood out and kept bullet point notes ready for discussion.
My takeaways
This might sound obvious, but what a writer put in their application form was what we received. That’s it. And a good reminder that what’s obvious to me, won’t be obvious to a complete stranger.
I really loved the short application process when I applied, as it was more accessible, but of course it’s still a difficult creative task to articulate a new idea succinctly. Looking at multiple applications as a reader, I realised how much room there was to shine even in a short space.
It’s hard to summarise this but, for me, the strongest answers pitched the idea, captured a sense of their writing style and demonstrated the writer’s passion for both the idea and this specific opportunity.
If it helps, I recently found this guide on writing one page synopses on the BBC. It’s for screenwriting, but there’s definitely relevant principles for any pitch writing:
2) On the day
The process
The schedule for the day was to talk through all the shortlisted applications, grouped by commission: 70-minute, 30-minute and monologues. We discussed them one by one and at the end of each group, we all cast two votes (three for the monologues).
This started to whittle down the selection, but we still had more plays than commission spots. Finally, we discussed the remaining ideas, this time considering the pieces together and what they would look like as a festival programme. We then voted again until we reached our final consensus. It was moderated by Paul and Matt from Middle Child, but only the selection panel voted.
What that looked like
Each discussion began with disclosing whether the writer was known to us personally or not, and then the floor was open. We had seen the shortlisting matrix and had the spirit of the festival in mind, so although we had no set criteria, we typically found ourselves covering the same things. This included:
Idea: We usually began with the idea and what jumped out to us. That could be an interesting angle, new voice or perspective.
Relevancy: Some plays were particularly relevant to recent events in Hull and beyond. We spoke about timing and what was most urgent to be platformed in 2025.
Opportunity: Some applications were clear on why this opportunity would help the writer at this point in their career, like working with a dramaturg for the first time, or trying a new idea they want to develop further.
Tech capacity: There were some incredible show ideas we couldn’t take forward because they were too reliant on tech that was outside the limits of the festival or its nature as a rehearsed reading.
Theme: there were trends across some applications, like coming-of-age stories, particularly in regional or rural areas; stories rooted in moments of Hull history, particularly the last century. Were some more effective or original in their take on popular themes?
Form: Can the idea sustain 70 or 30 minutes? Monologues unlock so much potential too, so we talked about how the voice and topic suited that particular form.
Even with these considerations, individual artistic tastes and personal experiences led to differences of opinion among the panel.
In my view, this worked and only because the steering group was large and diverse.
Here were ten people from varying walks of life, ages, with different relationships to the arts, some known and unknown to each other, but who were all passionate about what Fresh Ink can achieve for artists and audiences.
I also found it to be a generous and trusting group, meaning no one view dominated and people spoke to why certain material was important to them, whilst also extending interests to themes beyond their lived experiences.
Thanks to this, it felt like there was an ‘evenness’ of bias, because of the group’s diversity and an accountability because of its size and openness.
Once we’d voted on our top pitches, we moved on to considering our remaining shortlist as a programme. So we thought about:
Having a range of writers, in both lived and professional experiences;
Having a range of stories for audiences, not just in terms of topics but in style, balancing comedy, drama and tragedy.
I made the process overview sound easy, but there was a lot of deliberation at this stage; a testament to having a strong field of applications.
At one point, someone asked if we could just find more money to commission more writers, the choice between some ideas was that close.
I suppose, in essence, we found the 2025 line up by reflecting on: why this? why them? why now? For writer, idea and in the specific context of the festival.
My takeaways
I’ve read for a few theatres and open calls and enjoy this format of reading and discussing as a large group best.
It allows for more varied experiences to be represented and feels the most fair and democratic. It was also inspiring and informative to be amongst more experienced creatives articulating their responses to art.
I’m confident that we’ve found seven timely and thought-provoking pieces and I’m so excited to see how the writers develop their ideas and craft at Fresh Ink.
As someone normally on the other side of things - applying, recouping, applying - I hope this transparency is helpful.
My earlier takeaway was to throw everything at writing a strong application, but this experience reminds me how many factors go into commissioning and that a rejection isn’t personal. Please keep going. We must all keep going.
This blog post was first published on the Middle Child website in January 2025.