Isaac Bulter’s recent post Here Come The “Rock Solid”s could be a depressing but necessary read, but I prefer to think of it as a challenge to the field. He talks about the conservative leanings of institutional theatre in response to a crisis. I would argue the tendency towards conservative, safe choices began far before the economic implosion of Wall Street but that is another post. But however we got here Issac puts his finger on the proverbial button by pointing out:
Looking over season after season and theaters all over America is not exactly inspiring to say the least. I’m not saying this to draw some comparison between New York, which has plenty of theaters doing uninspiring work, don’t get me wrong. But I’m on a regional theater beat right now, and its a little depressing. …you get no sense looking over the seasons that they are serving their particular communities wants/needs, and many of the seasons look remarkably similar.
Certainly Issac is right New York City theatres are not immune from the issue. But the key here is if a theater isn’t serving a specific community and looks like handfuls of other theaters, are we (1) doing our jobs and (2) the least bit surprised that raising money, engaging audiences and selling tickets are such challenging tasks?
After looking at one theater’s safe choices for the upcoming season (even including a production of The Odd Couple), Issac goes on to portray the dilemma of the leaders of said theatres:
I’m even sympathetic to theatre’s plight right now. AD and EDs have a responsibility for the survival of their theaters. They have employees whose livelihood depends on the theater. They have boards to satisfy. There’s a lot of needs pushing and pulling their decisions other than “what is the best work we could be doing right now?” and I imagine most people are trying very hard to do the best work they can given the environment we have right now. Or at least, they think they are. No one wakes up in the morning and goes, “wow, I can’t wait to devote my year to doing uninspiring work that will at least make sure we don’t lose too many subscribers this year!” and I’ve spoken to an artistic director or two who took a bath over the last couple of years trying to move their theaters in edgier directions.
That it’s understandable doesn’t make it less depressing. Or, frankly, less frightening for those of us who care deeply about the future of theater in America.
Here’s the thing, to me the situation is understandable as in of course I get how we landed here – I lived it day and night for years, but there is a difference between understandable and acceptable. I think as theater artists and leaders we have to realize this isn’t acceptable. And before we blame anyone including our boards we need to look at our own place continuing this unacceptable course. The reality is the conservative, safe route is just that SAFE. It is easier. It allows us to bemoan the situation rather than doing something about it. But what can we do about it? Actually we can do several things:
1. We can understand our local community and its relationship to the national and global community and actually pick plays that are relevant to the issues of that community.
2. We learn to address the unrealistic expectations that are place on shows. Artists, audiences, press, and leadership have all placed ridiculous expectations of what we and a show are supposed to be versus looking at who we are and what a show needs. Guess what, Director X doesn’t get a huge set budget just because he is Director X. Some shows require a minimal setting. The audience and critics shouldn’t feel the show is under-produced because the bells and whistles they have gotten used to every production having are more often than not now-a-days are simply excess fat. The rest of the nation is putting an end to excessive consumption – shouldn’t the theater reflect that. As leaders of these institutions we need to assess whether our own expectations are about the work or about ourselves. Is the big enhancement project because we want to be players and have tricked ourselves into thinking it helps the budget or is it an important project for the company to producer that happens to help the bottom line. And as we strip away the expectations that have been handcuffing our organizations we need to publicly and eloquently debunk said expectations.
3. We have to stop making excuses and roll up our sleeves and create change. There are so many opportunities out there! The theater can do so much to address our community’s needs. We need to reset our minds. Find a way to break those bad old habits. We need eliminate the concept of structural deficits, we need to produce in a manner we can afford, and most important we must take artistic risks.
The good news is that there are a decent amount of theaters that are doing just that. Unsurprisingly, they are also weathering this economy a bit better. Issac pulled a random example to evaluate in his post, I want to point out the first theater that popped into my mind that is breaking the mold. It happens to be one of my local theaters (and yes, my definition of local included NYC).
There is nothing generic or boring about Hartford Stage’s 2009-2010 season – a nine play Horton Foote cycle, a gospel musical, a new theatrical experience exploring motherhood, and even their choice of Tom Sawyer for a family oriented show is spot-on in its tie in to Twain’s relationship to Hartford. I will certainly be heading up to see at least four of their shows this season and I am familiar enough with their work to know that the plays will likely be produced beautifully and simply. I congratulate Michael Wilson and Michael Stotts for a creative, intelligent and relevant season!