As promised, I will try to get the bad news out of the way early in the year, to make way for lots of good news (and there already is some--but, more on that later).
Last month, an article in the NY Times illustrated just how difficult it is going to be in the non-profit sector this year, especially across the pond in New Jersey (of course, in this context, "the pond" is the mighty Hudson River). Feel free to read it
here. For the hyperlinkophobes, here's a brief summary:
- The incoming NJ Governor, Chris Christie, sent a memo to the outgoing governor, Jim Corzine, requesting a freeze on all "discretionary spending" in order to try and buffer a ginormous deficit that Dirty Jerz has racked up in the last years (and by that, I mean more than one governor's term). The amounts of this freeze include "some $12 million for about 200 arts groups--including grants of up to $600,000 for 26 local theaters that are crucial to their financial health."
Now, let's keep in mind, that this blip on the economic radar has existed for a while. So, non-profit theaters across the country have seen their donations and funding dwindle over the last couple of years and they have had to cut corners accordingly: First they had layoffs and combined positions (which often means double or triple the work for half the pay), then they tighten for the future with smaller budgets: which means smaller casts, crews, and anything else that requires "capital" (which is the big-boy word for "money"). They have already cut themselves to a shoe-string budget. Now, if they do not get this state funding (that they budgeted for) in time, it could literally put them out of business. Click here. That is the staff list for the Shakespeare Theater of New Jersey, now in it's 47th season. In the Times article, Artistic Director Bonnie J. Monte called this freeze "life-threatening" for the theater. If their doors close, that staff list will not exist. I know it doesn't seem like many people, but, they could soon be among the too-many in this country without gainful employment. Furthermore, this would "trickle-down" (I thought I'd use that term in its true context--more often than not, poverty is what "trickles down") to the many actors, scenic designers, composers, directors, crew members, and other contracted workers. So, a small staff list suddenly becomes a lot larger when you consider a single season at a non-profit theater.
Furthermore, one man's "discretionary," is another's "necessary." To say that I get a little put-off when the arts (and in this instance, I mean any and all--including, music, theater, painting, sculpture, etc.) are the first to take the fall for baby-people mishandling lots and lots of money to cause a financial collapse is a bit of an understatement. In addition to the performance season, many of these theaters (not just in NJ, but all over the country) have robust education programs, giving students avenues to express themselves and achieve a new level of comprehension. These theaters give back to their communities. They encourage creativity, unity, and a sense of purpose, for both adults and children. To deem that funding "discretionary," as in "you know, if you feel like it," is a downright shame.
This situation further exacerbates a prevalent criticism of regional theaters across the country. Regional theaters were created to explore new works, encourage untested artists, and essentially be a local theater for local artists across the county, independent of the commercialism of Broadway (read more about it here). However, for many years, a number of regional theaters have been going the safe route: picking marketable shows (often with smaller casts) for their subscription base and attempting to get "stars" to headline productions. So, they are becoming, in essence, the opposite of the spirit in which they were created. A very recent NY Times article showcased playwrights and their ability (and, more importantly, inability) to break in via the regional circuit, as the playhouses are choosing more proven shows that will fill seats (read about it here). And, again, administrators say that it comes down to dollars. They need popular shows because they need patrons to buy tickets and come see the shows. They cannot take the chances of the past because their revenue streams are not what they used to be. Donors aren't donating as much and governments are not funding as much. With costs of living (renting, producing) rising and unearned income (meaning donations, etc.) falling, it becomes an un-artsy math dilemma. Therefore, you are gonna see Jackie Mason's newest one-man show over a cast-of-75 version of Showboat.
These problems have been around for many years. However, the added pressure of The Great Recession has really brought this to a tipping point. Will we see the end of many a theater that, in some cases, are a community's only resource for culture? Well, that remains to be seen. But, unfortunately, we may see it sooner rather than later.
A discussion needs to be had by the artistic community, and beyond, to try and find a solution. Many know how to complain about it, but few are engaging in fruitful dialogue. But, there is hope. A theater group is about to launch a nation-wide program that will attempt to create a new model for the theater community. And you'll find out all about them.....(Seacrest Pause)......in my next entry.
Just a heads-up to the producing and advertising team of Spiderman: Turn off the Dark: This poster is still in Shubert Alley. For those that don't know, Shubert Alley is an alley (go figure) in the center of the theatre district between 44th and 45th street (along the side of the Shubert Theatre), where damn near every show on Broadway puts up a creative poster to advertise. 
