AMERICAN THEATRE: Following interviews with 13 people who participate in the leadership of some of the country’s most influential professional nonprofit organizations, I thought it wise to consult with a group of people who know quite a bit about all this, but are not currently themselves helping to run theatres. All are sharp observers of the field, as I believe this chapter demonstrates. I was curious to see what they thought of what artistic leaders had told me in my interviews, and how these different perspectives might help us draw some conclusions and perhaps come closer to answering the question I posed at the beginning: Are we going to make it?
4 comments:
I think that ultimately, the reasoning behind this shift in focus on the lack of connection with mission statements comes back to capitalism. Because our nonprofit theatres are still entirely self-sustaining, and there is less of a trend for the uber wealthy to be philanthropic as it was in the past. For example, during the time of Andrew Carnegie, he popularized an idea in his book The Gospel of Wealth, in which he describes that people who have an obscene amount of money have a duty to give it back to the community. Part of that was tied into their belief that that would stop people from hating them, or rebelling about the amount of money they had and the unfair labor practices that their workers were under. Although these issues still exist today, for most of the nation's millionaires, billionaires, and trillionaires, they care more about hoarding their wealth than they ever would about sharing it.
One of the biggest challenges working in a not for profit theatre is as the artist doing the work we are working on productions we don't authentically connect to. I believe that this is due to the fact that the selection of the art produced is not fully in the hands of the artists. For us to continue to get money we have to produce things that the donors are okay with supporting. This starts to bring a whole layer of politics to the art making process that prevents certain stories from being put on the larger stages. I think that especially now as we have watched the Kennedy Center changed drastically due to a shift in administration. I think one of the primary reasons I went into technical direction is because I'm connected to the art but ultimately not responsible for the arts content. This gave me a way to detach from the fact that we are doing another sexist golden age musical to keep the donors happy. I think that shifting away from this model may put the art back in the artists hands and allow for new stories to be told and possibly allow for theatre to be produced authentically without the fear of losing funding.
This article was eye opening in certain regards as someone who is still acquainting themselves with the larger world of theatre and the kinds of institutions that exist and how they support themselves financially and from a point of their mission in the creation of theatre and art. My question in response to the article is what the author thinks the current failings of nonprofit theatre in the US are and what are they a trend down in relation to theatre 20 or 30 years ago? Surely this is covered in an earlier chapter of the book, so maybe it is just worth a read to better understand this article. Further, I wonder what other people the author interviewed to get a better understanding of the state of nonprofit theatre in the US because while leadership and artistic directors are an important part of the trends in nonprofit theatre, it seems equally important to interview those with a potentially better grasp on the way that financials for theatres have shifted in the recent past and what are the largest barriers for theatres to stay afloat during these times. Much to be explored and read about in this book it seems.
Some theatres are doing well in their current forms but unfortunately a lot are not right now. With the still relevant collapse of many businesses and organizations during the covid 19 pandemic a lot of places needed to shutter and file for bankruptcy because they could not handle the loss of revenue for that long. Also with the collapse of the subscription model a lot of semi-permanent funding that theatre organizations could rely on for funding without looking to sell each show evaporated and shows needed to sell to make money. A lot of recent changes to nonprofit theatres have forced them to make sweeping changes or shutter their doors for performances. A lot of those decisions are made because they have high operating costs and budgets to make theatre to draw people in with dazzling lights, sets, costumes, and sounds. These costs are made not by the performers on stage but by the people behind the scenes.
Post a Comment