State of the Arts

For 25 cents More You Get A Large Coke And Opera Glasses

by

The NY Times covers the Metropolitan Opera’s high definition broadcast of Hansel and Gretel to movie theatres throughout the country. One of the questions they ask is whether the experience will translate into people going to see the opera live.

By some coincidence, I received a brochure from the Philadelphia Orchestra today offering me the opportunity to host a high definition broadcast of up to five performances this year. Except that I have a 15 year old sound system in my theatre, I could easily host one of these events. Actually, since their fees are fairly reasonable, I could rent sound equipment and probably still finish in the black.

I don’t foresee hosting one of these any time soon. But I have to think, if I got one of these brochures and I don’t program classical music, who else around here has gotten one? There are plenty of other places that could hold a screening. And even though I don’t intend to present one of these, there is nothing to say that someone may not rent my facility and a sound system to do so.

So what does this mean for my local symphony whose musicians haven’t been paid in over a month? Or any symphony whose audience is faltering or, like Jacksonville, is enduring a protracted strike?

Is seeing a projection of the renown Philadelphia Orchestra for $15 in a movie theatre on speakers set to make explosions sound good (and perhaps has said explosions bleeding in from next door) preferable to hearing the local symphony for mediocre $50 seats amplified only by the building’s natural acoustics? Do sticky floors and popcorn go better with Wagner than reserved seating and wine?

Philadelphia is fully supporting the program with all sorts of promotional materials and ideas, study guides, interactive discussions and post-performance online discussions in which audiences can participate.

And like the NY Times article asks, could the Philadelphia Orchestra inspire people to see the local symphony? Or because of the money and support they enjoy, are they setting the bar so high now that local orchestras will never be able to compete? The fidelity of sound may not be as good as a live performance, but Philadelphia may be providing the environment and interactivity that people expect from their arts attendance experience these days.

Humans being social animals, I have always been a little skeptical of the idea that 100 inch flat screen televisions, TiVos, video game systems and the Internet would ever replace the appeal of the group experience. However, if attending a video feed of an orchestra performance accompanied by a bucket of popcorn constitutes the new definition of “going to the symphony,” performing arts organizations of all stripes may have to reconsider the medium through which they are delivering their product.

Honolulu Symphony Musicians Play Though Promised No Pay

by

I was going to leave this topic to Drew McManus over at Adaptistration because his knowledge about management and musician relations in orchestras is far greater than mine. He also knows people in the Honolulu Symphony and has a better sense of what is going on.

However, one of the people Drew knows made a direct appeal that I comment and I agreed to do so. This past week, the Honolulu Symphony announced that it would not be able meet payroll for the rest of the year. The story was covered on television and in the Honolulu Advertiser. The musicians have been playing on knowing they wouldn’t be paid right before Christmas.

Orchestra musicians are apparently an optimistic breed. If you have been reading Adaptistration recently, you know that musicians in places like Tampa and Jacksonville, FL have been willing to show a lot of good faith and perform during labor disputes.

If you read the comments on the Advertiser article, you will see that the response of the local community is mixed. Some people blame the Governor for not releasing promised funds, some cite very poor policy decisions and mismanagement occurred prior to the arrival of the current executive and music directors.

The article and television report note that attendance was low because the symphony was bumped from their home and had their audience eroded by the 12 week Lion King tour. I can attest that my theatre and about 6 others on the island saw a significant drop in our audience prior to and during The Lion King run. Fortunately, my payroll isn’t as large as the symphony’s so my losses weren’t as great.

You wouldn’t think a Broadway tour would impact other arts activity so greatly. However, with the high cost of living, there is little disposable income. Yet you can’t blame people for taking the perhaps once in a lifetime opportunity to see the show. But people were explicitly stating in August that they wouldn’t be resubscribing or buying single tickets to local performances because they would be seeing The Lion King in November. Even though the tour just closed and moved on, with people spending for Christmas now, many of us are wondering how long it might take before attendance rebounds.

One phrase I haven’t heard anyone utter publicly yet and I hope I won’t is “Honolulu has to decide whether they want a symphony.” There are three reasons I am against saying something like this.

First, it makes it sound like a punishment. I don’t think you want to imply that people are going to be punished for not attending your performances. Or worse yet, punished for going to see The Lion King.

Second, saying that is an open invitation for people to opine that they don’t really think their lives will be impacted by not having a symphony. As bad as it will be for someone to stand up and say, “If this is what I get for going to see The Lion King, I can live with it,” having someone say “Eh, what do I care. It’s not important,” is even worse.

Third, the statement implies that the people of Honolulu can decide to save the symphony when in reality it will be a handful of people in city and state government, foundations, banks and other corporations who will determine the fate of the organization. Some individuals will certainly lobby these institutions to support the symphony, but my sense is that there won’t be large grassroots popular support.

In a sense, it is appropriate for these entities to be the ones to make the decision rather than making it an issue of popular support. These entities understand that having a vital arts scene is what will attract people to the city and state to live and do business. The symphony, for better or for worse, is the biggest and most visible performing arts group in the state and thus serves as the cornerstone of artistic value.

Now ideally, everyone in the city if not the state should recognize the value of the symphony to its overall appeal. That will be the symphony’s job if it gets past this crisis. In the past year the symphony has been making efforts in this direction by doing concerts in different parts of the island rather than just sticking to Honolulu proper.

They even came out and performed in my venue last Spring so I am hoping they will find success. Because, well, they haven’t paid their bill yet.

More On Cultivating Creative Minds

by

Apropos of yesterday’s entry, a commenter, who some call Tim, brings this great article about the dangers of dwindling imagination to my attention.

It is fairly well sourced and talks about the subject far better than I can. In fact, it even addresses my concern that maybe I was channeling my grandfather by referencing “back in my day.” Even if you are in the arts, you might be creating an environment that doesn’t challenge your kids/nephews/students to be creative. It is worth a read for that reason alone.

Father of the Subscription Dies

by

Via Arts Addict blog comes the news that champion of the subscription ticket, Danny Newman has died.

Newman was essentially the force that promoted the idea of getting people to commit to an entire season of shows, becoming a “the saintly season subscriber” as opposed to “the slothful, fickle single-ticket buyer.” Embracing that idea helped many art organizations succeed.

Unfortunately, the day of the subscriber has waned and many arts organizations are now subject to the whims of the fickle single ticket buyer.

Back in the early 90s when I was in grad school, we were seeing the writing on the wall. In one of my classes, we were assigned to compare and contrast Newman’s Subscribe Now! with another text promoting a different theory of audience development. We essentially derided many of Newman’s suggestions as dated and having no value in the last years of the 20th century.

One of the ideas we scoffed at was his suggestion of holding subscription parties, an event similiar to Tupperware and candle parties where individuals invited friends over and encouraged them to subscribe. Damned if not two years later a theatre I was working at that had lost the confidence of the community didn’t use this very tactic to regain support. Even though subscribing was a much more deeply ingrained practice in that community than in most, the experience taught me to be a little more humble and cautious about dismissing ideas.

Even though the subscription has had diminishing value over the course of my career, I have to admire the drive and audacity of Newman in championing the concept and helping so many organizations find success through it.