The world is a complicated place, and there’s a lot of division between people. The performing arts tend to unify people in a way nothing else does.
I understand that blame is rarely a productive place to start. Casting aspersions is easy compared to doing the actual work. I also recognize that there is a difference between casting blame and taking ownership. I’m unsure how to get us to do the latter without also doing the former. And productivity will be what I do next week. But right here and right now there is a point I can’t shake:
I blame nonprofit and regional theaters for the election of President Trump.
6 comments:
Besides this absolutely ridiculous clickbait title, I can't even begin to comprehend the level of privilege and entitlement this author has used to inform this article. You cannot blame the theatre industry for not trying hard enough to change the world. Theatre is a two way street, and while we have a responsibility to bring in and attract diverse audiences, we cannot drag people into the theatre to view stories that don't align with their deeply ingrained socio-cultural values. Not to mention the fact that not everyone can afford to go see live theatre. The people around this country who are living in poverty and voted for Donald Trump out of pure desperation for change would absolutely love to hear that they're voting for trump because the theatre's (that don't exist) in their towns didn't try hard enough to provide them with insight that would allow them to put their starving families aside to vote for Hillary.
I hear what you're saying, but (as the author), I can provide a bit more insight into why I wrote this and why I feel this way. I grew up in the very areas you're talking about, so I understand how deep-seated the socio-cultural values are and where they come from. My argument is not that we needed to brow beat people into "putting their starving families aside to vote for Hillary." My argument is that we as a sector bunted when we should have swung for the fences. We should have taken a point of view and forced audiences to engage with that point of view, positively or negatively. I acknowledge that there are many reasons why this happened, and I'm blaming my industry because we have some very powerful tools at our disposal that we didn't use.
There are ways we could have worked toward making theater more accessible and affordable. We could have provided space to use the artform to discuss current issues and listen to people's concerns. Theater is an amazing forum to build and practice empathy as a skill and we failed to use it as such.
I do appreciate your response.
I think I’m somewhere in the middle with this debate because it is a question I have been trying to answer for myself ever since choosing to go to college for theatre. How do we reach the ‘outer’ audience? And whose fault is it if the audience isn’t reached? I’m still on the fence (which is not a very good place to be – sitting on fences isn’t very comfortable!). I think the author is smart to point out that this sort of discussion is bound to ruffle feathers. No one wants to hear they’re to blame when they’ve been working to prevent the exact outcome that has occurred. At the same time, recognition should be given where it is due. I think the theatre industry itself has shown great progress in being, well, progressive – with significant efforts for promoting female playwrights and directors, discouraging racially-biased casting calls, and devoting projects to accessible and intentional experiences for disabled audiences (to name a few areas). The author points out that despite this progress, we still have work to go, BUT, there are a lot of organizations and independent artists out there doing the work that needs to be done.
I think where we have failed is delivering this progress to the outside world. And I think this is partially because we’re still pioneering within our own spheres. We still have remaining problems, and in an effort to address those we may have forgotten about the bigger cause. We see creating work for our usual audiences as doing enough. Clearly this isn’t, because our usual audiences will progress along with us as we take these steps forward. We’ve become an echo-chamber (a term everyone seems to be using post-election. The general “air of acceptance” is clearly only being breathed by a certain subset of demographics. As the author states, blame can be unproductive, but it can spark action. I think the blame is less an issue of Trump being elected, and more blame for the fact that the progress made within the theatre industry and its audiences not leaving its own boundaries. Have we let our own shortcomings overshadow the importance to look outward? We are completely to blame for that. As the author noted in her comment above (wow, meta), theatre can and should be made more accessible. And these developments in presenting progressive ideas need-not take the traditional theatrical form every time. I think for now I will continue to answer my question of reaching the outer audience with another question: How can we take our story-telling skills and apply them in ways that cross boundaries?
I definitely agree with Brennan that this article has some pretty key flawed thoughts on how those who supported Clinton want to be dealing with Trumps Election. I feel like the article completely ignores the fact that it’s very hard to make a statement without alienating people to the point where they go the opposite direction in response to the statement that you would have liked. I feel that this phenomenon was especially highlighted during the election cycle, people pushed back against those who called for the equal and fair treatment of all people because they felt that those who called for “equal treatment” were actually trying to take away the rights that they have enjoyed as Americans their whole lives. As a person who firmly believes in the fair treatment of all people, I have to worry about why the message isn’t being received the way it is intended to be. Yes, when we do not push towards inclusivity and toleration of all values, races, and creeds, we are contributing to the problem, but the social left seems to also have a very hard time accepting the social right’s ideals, and that can come across as hypocritical. And I get that a large part of that is because there are some (and I mean some, I think it’s very important to recognize that it is by no means all people on the right, and is also not necessarily even a majority of them) people who call for racist, homophobic, and discriminatory principles to be held by our highest offices, and there’s no doubt in my mind that those values don’t align with what this country should be about. But if you’re going to make an argument for the fair treatment of all people, the ones who you have to sell it to aren’t the ones who’ll buy that immediately. Jerking ourselves off about how inclusive we all are does very little to solve the very real problem this country has with accepting those who aren’t as privileged, and alienating those who have aligned themselves with values we oppose only furthers the divide in the country. Bringing the story of those who need their stories heard in a way that does not alienate those who need to hear it is a very tricky thing, but it also seems like just the type of cultural shift the arts could initiate. We just have to make sure we don’t shoot ourselves in the foot about it.
I actually see where the author is coming from because as someone who grew up in a typically middle-class community of white people, the theatres I attended did cater to the comfort levels of the audience and refused to push them further. I do agree with some of the commenters above who say that the theatre industry is not solely to blame for the results of the current elections, but we could have done more. I know for sure that I could have done more. I have let comments slide at work that I should have spoken up about, and I definitely let my conservative family get away with comments that often make me angry. If we do not stand up and speak loudly in our own fairly progressive industry, how can we expect conservatives to do the same? The answer is that we cannot with being hypocrites, so not only is it time to speak up in our personal live, but also it is time to look toward the programming our companies choose to produce for the sake of profits and move toward more experimental and forward-thinking pieces.
While I think that saying that nonprofit and regional theaters are “to-blame” for Trump’s election is a very broad, sweeping statement that doesn’t hold very much fact, I agree with a lot of the sentiments the writer uses to explain her main point. It is very true that for many arts organizations, it has always been a struggle to try and “balance” speaking out against important social issues and not alienating the white, upper-class subscriber base. It’s so easy to just keep doing things as they’ve always been done, but not nearly as easy to change the status quo and say “f you” to what is expected of certain ranks of theater. It’s very much a reality that while non-profit theaters gain very little of their money from ticket sales alone, it’s still important that they keep up a good reputation by maintaining a certain size of audience and making sure people come to see their shows again and again. However, it is also very much true that it is hypocritical for us, as a theatrical community bent on fighting for equality, to continue playing it safe when people’s lives and humanities are at stake. This isn’t to say that there isn’t a need for the classics, or good old happy musicals. However, this shouldn’t be the heart of our work. If we’re not fighting for those who don’t have the proverbial microphone, spotlight, or stage, then what are we even making art for?
Post a Comment