: American Theatre released results of a survey about virtual theatre offerings during Covid this week. Respondents represent 64 organizations from 25 states.
As you might already imagine, the bad news is that virtual programming was not financially viable for nearly all organizations.
Thursday, November 11, 2021
What’s Been Learned So Far About Offering Virtual Theatre
Butts In the Seats
: American Theatre released results of a survey about virtual theatre offerings during Covid this week. Respondents represent 64 organizations from 25 states.
As you might already imagine, the bad news is that virtual programming was not financially viable for nearly all organizations.
: American Theatre released results of a survey about virtual theatre offerings during Covid this week. Respondents represent 64 organizations from 25 states.
As you might already imagine, the bad news is that virtual programming was not financially viable for nearly all organizations.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I really hope that virtual theatre sticks around in some way shape or form for no reason other than accessibility.
At CCBC there was this elderly woman that used a wheelchair to get around that would have her son bring her in to see every single show that we did, regardless of if it was an academic production or a summer stock production. And it was clear that coming out to see the show put a great deal of stress on her. I always had this worry deep down that one day it would be too much stress and she wouldn't be able to come out for the 4 or so hours it took to venture out and see a show and return home.
I hope for people like her, virtual theatre sticks around so we can share this thing that is so meaningful to us with people that will find it meaningful.
When virtual theatre was starting to be introduced it seemed like two things to me. It seemed like a light at the end of the tunnel for live theatre but it also seemed like a band-aid to a bigger problem. However, I think the article said it best, that virtual theatre is not ideal and isn’t preferable to live theatre, but it’s better than no theatre at all. The economic facet to it is interesting because I am curious to see how the production quality differed among the companies that found it less and more expensive. Regardless of that, I think that virtual theatre has began something that will stick around for a while. I can see companies that will continue to film their shows and air them for those that cannot make it to the live show. Of course that is for the companies that can afford to continue this practice, however I think it would be cool to see.
I remember reading about virtual theatre a few weeks ago and saying that virtual theatre’s biggest advantage is its accessibility. And like this article says, the accessibility can be for those that are busy, disabled, have limited transportation or any other reasons that prevent them from watching live. As an audience, I’m in full support of this not only because of the accessibility, but also because it no longer matters where I sitt — everyone pays the same price and sees the same thing, which is usually a lot clearer and closer than watching live. However, as a theatre-maker, having live audiences is a big part of what makes what I do so interesting. Without the audiences in front of the curtain, half of the joy of being behind the curtain is gone. So this fine balance between how much goes online and how much stays live is yet to be found.
One of the considerations I had with this article was not theatre being solely virtual, but possibly a combination of the two. We’ve seen this in the past weeks for conservatory hour where shows are recorded, is there a way to design for the people in the theatre but with a more conscious thought for recording, possibly one day where you do just record the show, or live performances, I won’t can’t make that hard and fast decision. I like exploring that idea also because of Covid right now where audiences are often at reduced capacity, which hurts especially in smaller or blackbox theatres where that creates very small audiences. I feel like we could find a way to both have that in person theatre exist while providing a way to interact with it virtually as well, expanding the ranges of theatres beyond just days of runtime or needing to be able to make it to the physical location.
I think after the experiences of the last few years, most of us can agree that virtual theatre was a stopgap measure designed to get companies through the pandemic alive and get students some fraction of the education they were supposed to be getting, but that it was a lesser experience to both a live in-person performance and a film. There are absolutely ways in which aspects of virtual theatre can be useful, particularly with issues of accessibility - unless you’re touring, productions tend to be locked to single locations, limiting the audience to locals and those willing and able to travel, but putting it online expands the potential audience greatly. And I definitely think there’s a world where live-streaming shows or recording and releasing them after the fact becomes more normalized than it was pre-covid, but I think the mindset is very much ‘the live audience is the priority’ and we don’t want to go back to digital-only, and certainly not digital-only from separate spaces.
Virtual theater was not something most people enjoyed. As the article said, it was better than nothing but not by much. I do love that the discussion of accessibility was brought up though. It was great to see that theaters can create content for audiences who cannot be in their space. They realized that not everyone can be in the theater due to covid, or any number of other reasons. This is also a great spotlight to the problem of theater being only accessible for people who live in big cities with access to venues. Rural patrons are just as deserving of performing arts as people who are in the city. Then there are the people who are physically close but unable to be in person for any number of reasons. Increased accessibility is not just for people who live far away. Making theater accessible to everyone at a reasonable price (come on, pre-pandemic pricing for zoom theater?) is the best way for everyone to participate.
The results from this survey doesn’t surprise me. I actually didn’t watch any virtual theater until I was a part of a virtual production. I felt that it was not the same as an in person production and did not seem more enticing than watching a tv show or movie. I do believe that accessibility is a huge part of why some aspects of virtual theatre should stick around. Especially for people like me who have lived in several middle of nowhere locations. I did hear of a few industry changing virtual productions but it seems that a lot of theatre makers are ready to go back to the physical. It is interesting that the survey says that the audiences are too because in other articles that I have read, the ticket offices are struggling with selling. Lots of shows, even on broadway, have been closing exceptionally early because of a lack of audience turn out.
I am glad that virtual theater seemed to work well for many companies, and I agree that it is a great option that makes it more accessible. I think the costs of getting permission to stream shows will stop theaters from streaming within the next year or so. I wonder what the separation in engagement is between theaters that streamed performances vs theaters that did fully virtual theater. Personally, I felt that fully virtual productions were significantly worse than having no theater at all because it just reminded me of how awful everything was at that moment. Pro-shots of shows, however, were definitely better than nothing and are something I am fully in support of normalizing more. I would love if the surge in virtual theater led to a deconstruction of the assertion that pro-shots are bad for ticket sales. I honestly think all it does is make theater more accessible to people that otherwise would not have seen the show at all.
Post a Comment