Thursday, February 21, 2008
Counting the cost of free theatre
Guardian Unlimited: "Barely a month ago, the McMaster report suggested, among other things, free arts events - an idea swiftly torched by Mark Ravenhill. Now, the Globe has announced a new programme of free events via its education department. The lineup offers free performances of Much Ado About Nothing (already 'sold' out), a piece created around Hamlet by pupils with special educational needs, and a minimally charged-for festival of Shakespeare's greatest hits, performed by students from 20 drama schools around the UK."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
This article really discusses the definition of art in performance and whether things are high art or just events. I really liked the part at the end where it delt with the fireworks aspect of a live show. Are the images created in the sky art? I would say yes, in fact this would be art as much as a lighting design or scenic art. There are always people to whom the lighting and scenery (or fireworks) are just there and that of course someone had to figure that out, but that there is not an artistic element comparable to the artistic work of the performers. But as I know from designing lighting and scenery, that there is a lot of artistic work in every piece as I am sure pyrotechnic companies use as well, and plan things out so that they will look good as well as evoke excitement from audiences.
"Whether that's Art or not is really just a matter of personal taste."
I think I have been waiting for someone to say this since I got here in August. Like Teddy said, someone has to design these things, whether or not they make money, whether or not there is a live performance with a cast of actors. If you can look at it and decide that your mind is open enough to deem this as art, then art it is. There is not other way to sufficiently describe art. Art is what the viewer (or listener) decides it is.
It would make me a horrible person but I think sometimes these theatre festivals often turn into a Disney parade. I think there are always enough elements of artistic in any form of art, even when people may call them a low art. I wonder if there is a real distinction between high art and low art.
These outdoor shows are perfectly legitimate cultural events. A unique one-off event creates a lasting impression on the viewers due in part to the experience that will never again be recreated. This contrasts most plays where the same material is repeated night after night, arguably distancing them from the original idea of unique art. Additionally, if an allegedly cultured critic refers to performers as “cunts on stilts” one begins to wonder whose opinion should be regarded as cultured.
Just because the cost of the show is free, it doesn't mean that no one is turning a profit from some other aspect of management. Think of the amazing amount of advertising revenue you can get from it, or donations to the organization. You also make money by bringing in new people to theatre that you wouldn't normally bring in at front row prices. Maybe I'm thinking too much like a manager, but really, you do make money off this stuff if you do it right.
Post a Comment