State of the Arts

Consolidating Back Office In Columbus

by

I was listening to NPR this weekend and caught a story about Columbus Association for the Performing Arts CAPA, a Columbus, OH organization which area arts organizations have contracted to perform administrative functions.

About a year ago, I wrote about the excellent series the Non Profit Law blog did on the experiences non-profits have encountered merging their administrative functions.

Most of the examples used in that series were social service organizations so it was of some interest to hear a little about how arts organizations were entering the same arrangement. I wondered if it might become more prevalent in these tough economic times given that six Columbus area arts groups entered into arrangements with CAPA in the last year and a half. (This assumes there are businesses around the country who are able to offer these services. Not aware of too many in existence.)

I share a similar concern as Russell Willis Taylor quoted near the end of the piece. Relationships really matter when making the specific case for your organization in the community. Since CAPA seems to have varying scopes of responsibility with each client company, presumably an organization can reserve certain functions for itself and perhaps be involved with CAPA’s efforts on their behalf. But for a lot of artists and groups, the temptation to cede those functions to another so they can concentrate on creation of work alone may prove seductive. In the long run, their presence and public profile may wane as a group like CAPA’s waxes due to their adroit handling of so many responsibilities.

I don’t doubt that an arrangement with a group like CAPA can be extremely beneficial. Large for profit companies outsource their accounting, human resources, marketing, advertising and other functions all the time to great effect. But they also work very closely and stay very involved in every activity affecting the public image of their product because that is what is necessary.

As a little aside- I must confess that I had a moment of glee when I heard them describe the political cartoon implying CAPA is taking over. That anyone feels an arts organization is growing too powerful is so novel a concept, I can’t help but feel some joy. I mean, I don’t think I have heard anyone accused of that since the late 19th century with the Theatrical Syndicate. (Okay, I will grant you Clear Channel/Live Nation.)

What Do You Do With A Stolen Actor?

by

I attended a talk by minor theater deity Richard Schechner last week at an open event for the International Brecht Society Conference. He was speaking about environmental theatre (aka site specific). We just finished a site specific work last month so I was interested to hear what a person who had been doing it for decades had to say on the subject.

There were things he spoke of which matched my original desire for the work but which got scaled back by the artistic team due to various limitations and considerations. The good thing was that one of the people on the artistic team was there listening as well so we will have a common frame of reference for our next event. The talk was scheduled for longer than I thought it would be so I couldn’t stay until the end to ask questions or speak to those friends also in attendance.

I wish I had been able to speak with him because I would have liked to know how he might balance making a performance a more interactive experience with the alienation/intimidation factor of what he was doing. Some of the things he spoke about struck me as “only in a big city like NYC.” He made groups split up on entering so that they would be forced to explore the space more trying to find each other. And if they didn’t like it, they didn’t have to see his show because he had a full house every night. (That option came up a lot as he spoke about the performances he had done.) He also spoke about leaning folding chairs against the wall and letting people set them up wherever they liked without consideration of whether it would be in the way of the performance or technical operations.

My first thought was that while people may crave a more interactive experience, many are already intimidated by the thought of attending as a passive observer. How much worse might their anxiety be if they set themselves up right in the middle of some intense action? I mean I think there is too much contact when I go to a Cirque de Soleil show and one of the performers somersaults right into my lap. Okay, well that is probably too much contact for anyone, but even watching the performers move around the room playing with audience members raises some anxiety that I may be next. Though if you don’t introduce people to the concept, people can’t become more accepting of that type of interactivity. I would imagine setting has a lot to do with it. A performance in a nightclub where you expect to be bumped into and jostled might not cause the discomfort that the same activities in another place would.

The thing that really intrigued me were the rules he set up for his performances. In his production of Dionysus in 69 which is based on The Bacchae, Pentheus has an opportunity to avoid being killed. The actor goes into the audience and picks someone and starts to caress them. If the person doesn’t resist and the actor obtains satisfaction, by his own definition, from their physical contact, Dionysus loses, Penethus lives and the play ends. Schechner said there were only two times that death was avoided. Once, Pentheus ended up in a fairly torrid embrace with an audience member and left with her when they came up for air. The second time, a group of people who had seen the show and decided Pentheus was getting a raw deal abducted Pentheus when he went into the audience. The audience was dissatisfied that the show wouldn’t be concluded and Schechner called for a volunteer who would be fed the lines and actions as he/she was stripped down, anointed with blood and underwent a simulated dismemberment. Schechner said a 16 year old boy stepped forward and you could see him trembling with both fear and excitement. That is one of those powerfully visceral moments that theatre people constantly seek. Everyone is engaged in the moment because even though it is scripted, no one knows what is going to happen.

He told of another instance, I believe with Mother Courage, where they chose 15 people to come up on stage. If you were chosen you could either go up, pass being chosen on to the person next to you or leave the theatre with no recourse to return. But the show wouldn’t continue until they had 15 people. Schechner said one evening the audience apparently decided to test their resolve and the show was delayed at that point for four hours. I would say this is another one of those authentic moments in theatre, though less sought after.

I am sure people have played with the idea of propagating rules for a performance that can end it all in a potentially dissatisfying manner, but it is one of those “new to me” situations which fires the imagination. There may not be anything new under the sun, but parts of this production from 40 years ago might point the way to creating a more interesting environment for people who haven’t considered themselves as theatre attendees.

Info You Can Use: Intern or Employee?

by

A few weeks ago I did an entry on the social impacts and elements of internships in the arts and very briefly referred to the question of whether unpaid internships were legal.

It only occurred to me later that the whole legality question wasn’t really dealt with very well. I read a lot about it, but didn’t really pass the information along or give readers the sense of urgency to follow through.

Well, hat tip to the ever resource full Non-Profit Law Blog which linked to an entry on Blue Avocado which really tackles the question in much greater detail than the NY Times article I had linked to in my previous entry.

The federal criteria to which you must adhere according to Ellen Aldridge at Blue Avocado are:

1. The training, even though it includes actual operation of the facilities of the employer, is similar to what would be given in a vocational school or academic educational instruction.

2. The training is for the benefit of the trainees.

3. The trainees do not displace regular employees, but work under their close observation.

4. The employer that provides the training derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the trainees, and on occasion the employer’s operations may actually be impeded.

5. The trainees are not necessarily entitled to a job at the conclusion of the training period; and

6. The employer and the trainees understand that the trainees are not entitled to wages for the time spent in training.

You must meet all six or else pay minimum wage. Number 4 is probably the toughest to adhere to. The fact that non-profits can have volunteers adds another dimension to the whole question. You should really read the entry because I can’t get into all the nuances like laws dealing with stipends and the nature of functions being performed without reprinting the entire entry. There is, in fact, a significant difference between an intern and a volunteer, part of which determines the type of work each can perform.

At the end of the entry, Ellen Aldridge recommends two NY Times articles on the topic. The first is the one to which I linked in my previous entry. The second is the guidance the California Labor Department provided on the subject of unpaid internships.

The guidance really just supports the expectations an intern would have of their experience– something relevant to their career goals and not predominantly copying and filing.

In that situation, the agency suggested that payment was not required if an intern “performs culinary tasks directly pertinent to his or her education only, is closely supervised,” and “does not displace regular workers.” But, the agency said, if a restaurant required an intern to bus tables or wash dishes, that would probably be considered an employer-employee relationship and the intern would most likely have to be paid.

Mr. Balter cited another guidance letter that said film studios should pay college students who do routine work like delivering messages, filing tapes and clipping newspaper articles, partly because the work was so similar to that of regular employees and could displace such employees.

In the new guidance, the agency noted that it had previously concluded that interns should be paid if they did any work normally done by a regular worker.

But showing more leeway, Mr. Balter wrote that interns could do occasional work done by regular employees, as long as it “does not unreasonably replace or impede the education objective for the intern and effectively displace regular workers.”

This is only the interpretation in the state of California, and a recently altered one at that. Your state may differ so it will be prudent to see where things stand locally. It is promising that they take their lead from the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals which is considered more moderate than the 9th Circuit in whose jurisdiction California falls.

Measuring Sports With Arts’ Yardstick

by

For a long time there has been a sort antagonistic undercurrent between the arts and sports, more on the part of the arts than sports. Personally, I think it can be traced back to high school where artistic and athletic pursuits both competed for after school program funding, but that is just my theory. (Borne out by those humiliating wedgies and locker stuffings the jocks carried out on the drama kids. Not me, mind you. Just something I have heard.)

But you see signs of it all the time. Arts organizations will pull out stats that show more people spent more money on their events than on sports. Folks in the arts bemoan the loss of reviewers in newspapers while the sport section expands.

Things seem to be shifting a little bit though. There was the Minnesota law that combines arts support with funding for outdoor sport hunting and fishing.

I came across a less beneficial pairing of art and sport today in an editorial about increasing student activities fees to support college sports.

“On the revenue side, even the most popular sports are perennial money losers, weighed down by staggering travel costs and erratic attendance. Just like the Honolulu Symphony, everybody loves the idea of a collegiate men’s basketball team, but not enough people turn out to support it.”

It is tough to know where to begin. The paper does the symphony no favors by reminding people of it’s woes. There is also the idea that only things that make money are worth having around. That is an argument the whole non-profit funding system exists to refute in some degree. In this case, the situation is not the same because the core purpose of the not for profit university is theoretically to educate, not necessarily to support ancillary athletic programs. I will leave it at that so as not to become embroiled in debates about the value of athletics to learning and the monies collegiate programs bring to schools.

There has always been a bit of an assumption that sports were getting all the funding to the detriment of the arts, especially in high schools where the arts are cut but sports often aren’t. But it is starting to look like colleges and universities are no longer willing to support sports teams any longer. In the last year, both Hofstra and Northeastern Universities shutdown their football teams (though 13 new football programs were announced as being in development) because the schools were no longer willing to make their funding a priority.

My first impulse was to follow this observation with a “there but for the grace of God…” statement noting that if the arts’ traditional opposite is threatened, wither stands the future of the arts? But that plays back into the whole concept that the arts are of lesser value than sports. Honestly, I can’t see that arts programs at schools are in any more danger of being cut than they usually are.

If anything, I would say the standards long applied to the arts are being applied in other areas. It isn’t just sports. In education as a whole, the intrinsic value of learning is being displaced by the what degree pursuits are of practical use and financial value upon graduation. This isn’t a matter of what majors student are choosing to pursue, it is also a discussion educational institutions and government officials are having over what degrees are worth offering.