Over at Theatre Ideas, Scott Walters reposted a column he wrote for his local paper in Asheville, NC against the proposed construction of a performing arts center. Even though he is a theatre person and is generally not against government spending money on the arts, he felt that the construction was oriented too much toward bringing in Broadway shows and did little to help the local artists.
“Unlike other creatively vibrant local and regional arts organizations like, for instance, Handmade in America, the Southern Highlands Craft Guild and venues like Woolworth Walk, the proposed PAC is not focused on supporting local artists, but relies on touring shows to fill the 2,400-seat auditorium at its center.”
In the blog entry that encompasses the text of his article, he discusses his feeling that the construction of the PAC is motivated by a desire to keep up with the Joneses by erecting a complex as grand as every other municipality rather than one that reflects the character and needs of the community.
“We are outsourcing our artistic life, and it is time for it to stop. There is no reason that local taxes should be used to import culture. If housing touring shows was the way to become an arts destination, Greenville-Spartanburg would be the NYC of the southeast. People come to a town because they can get something there that they can’t get elsewhere. Nobody visits a town in order to hit the local multiplex, which is what this PAC resembles.”
He suggests that the construction money be used to renovate an existing area into performances spaces that are appropriate for use by local musicians, theatre and dance groups and provides a communal gathering place.
My personal feeling is that arts spaces that are part of the daily life of a community or city (i.e galleries, band shells, cafes that can be part of a lunch hour as well as an evening out) are far more preferable than a grand facility with a more remote identity in communal life.
I must admit that in the last 5-10 years I have been a little uneasy about the construction of large performing arts centers because it does appear as if they are considered key to the prestige of city. It seems to me that the time when such structures are relevant is nearing its end and they will prove albatrosses for many cities. Unless such a facility is going to support a city’s convention and conference business, I would generally be wary about their construction.
I agree with Walters that cities should be looking to support their local arts entities before thinking to woo Broadway tours. That is even before addressing concerns like spending tax dollars to import talent over their tax paying local talent.
This may sound a little inconsistent coming from a guy who receivesWa funding from his state arts council to import talent. I have been working to identify and include an increasing number of local performers in my season, though. I am often importing artists who are esteemed in their region and I am talking up the folks from my state in other places.
Walters is right that people don’t visit places for their large PACs. Every time I visit my friends across the country we are going to the cool venues downtown, the band shells, the natural ampitheatres in the park. These are the local features they are proud of and want to show off, because they reflect the character of the community–something the big performance halls can’t really do.
It is these types of places that will attract the creative class everybody is looking for to enhance their cities. These folks need places to express their creativity. If the city is cultivating large venues over their local creatives, they are going to gravitate to towns where local talent is valued.
