By Christian Viveros-Fauné
By Miriam Felton-Dansky
By Tom Sellar
By Tom Sellar
By Jessica Dawson
By Tom Sellar
By R. C. Baker
By Tom Sellar
Were living through a rough time for workers. Corporate executives, politicians, and pundits all suddenly love cost-cutting, and the cost they most love to cut is that of their employees wages and benefits. To downsize, to outsource, to maximize productivity while minimizing workers earningsthese are the goals engraved on every business leaders heart. Or, at least, they would be if business leaders had hearts.
The realm of the performing arts, where even a solo event requires a multitude of collaborators, is in no way immune to cost-cutting pressures. While public funding, even for the best-established and most culturally conservative institutions, slides slowly down the drain of neo-con disapproval, every belt pulls tighter and every eye darts about in search of the angle, the name, the gimmick that will bring in money to cover the shortfall. We are under the gun, and we all know it.
Money can be found, of course. Economic downturns are redistributions, not vanishing acts. The disappearing value of your foreclosed home went into the pockets of the crooked lenders that made the real estate market bubble by peddling subprime mortgages; the disappearing tax revenues that made federal and state deficits balloon went into the bonuses of big corporations executives and the high-priced lawyers who make sure that they and their corporations pay no taxes. The question, of course, is how the arts get to the surplus money that the rich have stashed away: You cant simply walk up to a vice-president of GE and convince him that he needs to endow a repertory theater more than he needs a fifth vacation home, while kidnapping and extortionthough tempting where the rich are concernedare illegal. Artists, regrettably, tend to have a conscience.
Even with a conscience, though, the arts can find ways out of their straitened financial situation. Having a conscience may even prove an asset, especially in the theater, traditionally a place where moral values and spiritual meanings are debated. The right, which is oblivious to all culture except the culture of profit-making mass distraction, pays constant lip service to a wide range of moral dogmas which it doesnt believe in and doesnt practice. Hypocrisy is Americas favorite sport.
This gives the theater a moral advantage: It can, if it doesnt get too self-righteous about things, dramatize the issues that hypocrisy and lies try to paper over with accusatory buzzwords. A certain alertness is called for, which has not always been theater artists priority in recent years: I dont mean alertness to hipster notions of whats current, or to trends in the mass-market showbiz that rakes in hard currency, but alertness to actuality, to whats going on in the world and to what those goings-on mean for ordinary Americans as individuals. And I mean alertness in terms of having a fine-tuned bullshit detector for shibboleths on the left as well as on the right. You must always think about everything, says a character in a play by that socially alert guy, George Bernard Shaw, and you must think about it as it is, not as it is talked about.
Some individuals who played major roles in giving the New York theater that meaning and that alertness over the past five decades died this year. Ive put off mentioning them till now because this article is about us and the future, not about me dwelling on the past. Ellen Stewart, to take the example that instantly leaps to mind, did not come to New York to break into the theater. She had made some money as a fashion designer, she had some aspiring playwrights among her friends, and shed seen some of them get snarled up, futilely, in the commercial theater system.
Accordingly, she started putting on plays in her apartment. She had probably never heard that someone in a Clifford Odets play had once said that life shouldnt be printed on dollar bills, any more than she had heard of fire laws or light plots or 501(c)(3) status. Over time, she learned about these things, but she never viewed them as primary matters, merely as obstacles to be gotten over. She was dedicated to the playwright and to all aspects of the theater.
Look where she started, look at what she achieved. I was talking about politics when I said alertness, up above, but thinking over Stewarts story reminds me that there is an inner alertness, too, that we need to cultivate. Stewart, who did not read scripts but picked up psychic emanations from them (nobody was ever sure if she called those impulses beeps or peeps), became a center of energy for a have-not theater in an affluent time. La MaMa did not begin as an institution; it fought its way up to being an institution. Who wants to be the next impulse-riding fighter for art to make magic and meaning grow from the corner of his/her living room? Applications are now being taken.
Or consider Lanford Wilson, a college dropout and aspiring writer who, in his wanderings, fell in with a batch of idealistic college grads (in Chicago, where many such things begin), and went on from early, eccentric monologues and one-actssome of them produced by Stewart at La MaMato become one of the touchstone writers of his age. Passionately concerned for individuals, Wilson saw the world in group terms: All his best plays are social microcosms. A lonely, dreamy boy from a broken home, he built himself a family in the theater, and built his family into a company that gave meaning and presence to dozens of other artists. Look where he started and look what he did. Are you an artist with nest-building instincts? Apply now. Opportunities unlimited.