Ok...so it's all over the place at the other Lexington Theatre board, so let's jaw about it here for awhile...there was a piece in the Hearld Leader, that I'm sure all of you Lex types read, regarding certian area high school performances with 20,000 , 45,000 and even one south Indiana show with a whopping 200,000 DOLLAR BUDGET!
So what do ya think about all this? Too much? Reckless extravagence? None of our damned business? Chime in...and be candid...even if you've already posted an opinion on the other site, I'd love to see it here, so those from other areas can respond. BTW- Mr. Diva Master- LOVE to get your opinion, and any other H-town lurkers...
Here's the article link...
http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/entertainment/14348799.htm
Go nuts!
20,000 points for the song reference!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
29 comments:
Well, money doesn't make you happy. But it can make you happier, that's for sure. It's hard to believe that much money is being poured in to those programs. More later......
Being in music and theatre since high school, I have had to see us scrape and scrape to put on a production or go on a band trip when the sports programs got so much more.
If they are raising this money on their own and getting donations from supporters, then I see nothing wrong with it - as long as the talent is there and the kids are learning something about theatre - as long as they are being educated.
Tim, I can't...I can't dispense another new thought on this besides the ones I already have at "the other place." As the one who started the whole bloody threat over there, I refer you to it to read my droppings on said subject. If you agree, disagree, or wish to take me to task for anything I said, post here and I'll come back and either defend myself or mix it up some more. But, man, Tim, I was hoping you'd start a fresh topic over here so I could get a respite from the other. Something easy like favourite movies or worst plays or something like that. I just want to make lists at this point.
One question I posed that sort of got lost in the melee was what does it say about Lexington and its relationship to the Arts when it's easier to get funded a lavishly mounted high school show than it is a modestly-mounted professional show?
Good question,Chuck.And honestly, I find myself in agreement with you on a large portion of what you had said earlier.
I promise a nice, easy one in the next day or so. I've been so swamped with work I can barely manage to post on my own blog!
Pay Me My Money Down. Old sea shanty. Of course, Bruce did it too.
I'll take my points in beer.
Is it just the way it appears on my computer or does everyone now have to scroll down the page to find the latest blog? I have a big empty space at the top of my page. If I am not alone here, what happened?
It's not doing that on my computer today, but it did a few days back. I just logged off and back on again a few times and it remedied itself.
I think the High Schools with big budgets have more patrons actively pursuing funds than small theatres in small cities. In a high school production, every child has a trumpeter. Parents proud of their children and anxious for people to see them perform. These parents/aunts/grandparents, etc. all actively publicize productions and volunteer time for fundraising activities. The image of several soccer moms organizing an attack plan around a table at Starbucks comes to mind. Semi profressional and community theatres cast actors appropriate for age. Those actors don't have their parents out there hitting the streets to drum up cash anymore. Thus, less of a concentrated fundraising workforce. Lexington needs a private, centralized association to concentrate fundraising activities and disperse said funds appropriately in order to raise the operating budgets. A campaign manager, if you will. As far as whether it is good or bad that some high schools have enormous budgets, I don't know.
JB
"Those actors don't have their parents out there hitting the streets to drum up cash anymore"
Well put, JB...and I think it goes to the heart of Chuck's previous question. I don't necessarily begrudge High Schools for having huge budgets, I just wish there was a sense that theatre mattered more to the general populace. Would'nt it be nice if a group of soccer moms went to Starbucks to rack their brains on how to raise money for one of the community of professional theatres in their towns?
Well...I am a high school Drama teacher and was a Middle and High school Drama teacher at Sayre for 8 years.
When I started at the "rich" kids school I had a budget of $500. By the time I left we were doing about 10,000 for the high school musical. Now granted -the school may have money but less kids...and there were rules about fundraising as it is a private school.
I agree with most of you. If it can be raised then.....so be it. If you can drum up support for your cause and parents respond...so be it. If it is frustrating to see the sports programs get more support...so be it. It's the way of the world.
We worked hard for the money we raised and the experience of a "lavish" Middle School production of Fiddler on the Roof (great set Russell!!!!) was enjoyed by the students, staff, parents and community. I loved the pride I saw in my kids and I felt great that they worked hard and sacrificed some to reach that goal. I know I was luckier than most programs cuz I had financially comfortable parents. But they worked very hard too. Nobody's butler was out there helping to move a set in or create and print programs. I think a Drama program big or small fights hard to get what they can.
So be it
And X...
I agree with you too. Wouldn't it be nice if the Sayre Fine Arts Guild or Dunbars Drama "boosters" would and could raise awarenes and $$$$ for local theatre.
Or if the Theatre Genie could grant us the wish that communties were raised to support local arts. Hopefully by raising a generation of kids who love the theatre, we will generate more support in the future.
Yeah, I agree whole heartedly, $.
I remember one particularly dull production of LITTLE FOXES that I saw as a young lad that almost turned me off to Theatre for good...I think the key with young folks (and this is sort of another thread, but what the hey) is to take them to "age appropriate" theatre. I have a theory that the reason why so many college age (and possibly older) folks hate Shakespeare (or as many a student and adult alike has told me "It's soooo boring") is that they were drug
to some full blown production of Richard III when they were 11 and they've never fully recovered. How the hell can you expect an 11 year old to get that? Answer: THEY CAN'T! So take them to something that's a little more pre-teen friendly, and move em up the ladder as age dictates. This will inspire a love of the art, and help to make theatre an enjoyable, meaningful part of their lives...
My high school didnt even HAVE a drama program. So i cant relate to any of that article.
Theatre was my escape from school. Thank goodness for community theatre. As a child and teen i had no inkling of budget problems or funding, i just enjoyed seeing the plays and getting onstage myself. Im sure the shows ran on very modest budgets, especially the childrens theatre because it was run by Parks and Rec.
I do think its unfortunate that some parents are rethinking letting their children be involved in programs like SCAPA becuase of the individual cost to the family. That seems unfair.
Tim, I'm not sure what "age appropriate" theatre is. I'm sure many of the things that lured me to theatre were plays and movies far beyond my ken of understanding at the time. I mean I didn't understand what "dance hall" girls in Westerns really were until much later in my teens.
My very first theatre experience was one of the most enticing and intriguing. In the fourth grade we were bussed as a class over the Ohio River from Northern Kentucky to the Emery (Emory?) Theatre in downtown Cincinnati to see a production of BEAUTY & THE BEAST that owed much more to the mystery and surrealness of Jean Cocteau's film than Disney's much later incarnation. I remember they stole the Arms holding sconces bit from the Cocteau version (of course, I didn't realize where they had stolen it until much later in college when I first saw the film).
What I took away from the play was the eerie fantasy and the strange melancholy mystery. Fragmented images and slightly discomforting emotions that I didn't fully grasp at my tender age. But it mesmerized me.
Much of my theatre enticement was like that...movies like The Maltese Falcon which, when I first saw it, I'm sure I didn't fully follow the plot nor understand all the subtext and subtle suggestions of affairs and homosexuality and amorality, but again I was swayed and intrigued by pure style and the compelling performances and the snappy dialogue (and much of that probably went over my head the first time I saw it).
I can remember my brother (also a Tim) and I discovering THE SEARCHERS when I was about nine or ten when one of the local TV stations must have showed it about 9 times one summer. It became one of our favourite films... well over a decade before it became embraced as a cinema darling by the French auteurists, critics, and a coterie of prominent directors like Scorcese who always invoke it as a great film.
The film worked on so many levels and I'm sure my brother and I were consciously drawn to it for its basic Western elements, but I'm equally sure all the darker undercurrents of the film and its rich emotional tapestry were probably intriguing us on some unconscious level as well, even if it wasn't until subsequent viewings over the years that made me realize just how many levels the film worked on (and why it always stays fresh for me).
As a child, from my bedroom at night, I could also hear the TV and catch fragments of movies or Hallmark Hall of Fame plays. I can remember listening to a production of The Tempest with, I think, Maurice Evans as Prospero, Lee Remick as Miranda, and Richard Burton as Caliban. I understood enough of the odd and musical language to be sucked into the story. I think later, after reading Romeo & Juliet ( or whatever starter play you first read in 7th or 8th grade), The Tempest was the play I picked to read when we were assigned to read another Shakespeare and do a report on it.
Several years ago, I was sitting with my wife, watching an old black and white (still my favourite kind) film from 1939, called THE LIGHT THAT FAILED, a tale by Rudyard Kipling of British colonialism that is actually the story of an artist trying to finish his masterpiece before he goes blind...and much more. I had first seen the movie when I was about twelve, lured in by a promo for it, showing camels and battles and cavalry charges across the Sudan.
But, as I was sitting there watching this movie with my wife, as a big adult, I'm weeping copious tears...big wrenching tears dredged up from somewhere deep down in my gut and far more water than the emotional content of the film deserved. I finally figured out what had caused this cathartic reaction.
This was the first film I think I ever saw where I understood it was necessary that the hero die. As a kid, I didn't like it that necessity and secretly yearned for a happy ending. But somewhere as a budding dramatist and as an intelligent audience member, I instinctively, unconsciously knew that it was right and dramatically correct that the hero die. To try to graft a happy ending onto it would be a cheat and a lie. So though I was unhappy to see Ronald Colman bite the big one, somewhere inside me I was satisfied as a viewer.
Now how much of the this growth as an audience member was influenced by my home environment I could not say. Probably a lot, it was a time when you had only one TV in the household and you pretty much watched what your parents wanted to watch. Also just watching as a family unit and comments about the various fare get absorbed and processed, just like the drama does. But I'm sure just the exposure to things that I couldn't fully grasp had a great deal to do with forming my appreciation of theatre.
I somehow was able to fathom somewhere early on that great drama lies in the greys, not the blacks and whites.
We went to a matinee in London once of Merry Wives of Windsor when phalanxes of school children anywhere from ten to twelve trouped into the rows in front of us and behind us. "Oh, we're in for it now," I thought. But I have never sat with a more attentive, quiet audience. How much of it, they absorbed I have no idea, but they talked during the intermission and after animatedly about it among themselves. And maybe their interest is just one of those British abberations.
I often wonder and fear, given the glut of media, the move away from literacy, the need for mere sensation rather than meaning, if we are not living in a world of surfaces, and if we are not immediately drawn to the obvious and when our craving of instant gratification isn't promptly satisfied,
we get bored.
I hope not.
I still believe that though the viewer cannot always consciously understand or often articulate the ideas he sees in a play or movie, he still absorbs them on some level. They affect him and they enrich his appreciation of what is being played out.
Viewers, standing around the water cooler or the school yard the next day, may only be able to recount the plot to their pals. But the plot is like the melody line; it leaves out the left hand. In drama, the left hand is where all the ambiguity, poetry, character nuance lies...those things that may affect the viewer, disturb him, and intrigue him without him often even being aware of it...and they are the things of truly great drama we carry around with us and inside us years afterward. And they can affect us at a very young age.
Still, do I want to be sitting next to somebody's five year old at a performance of The Wild Duck? You bet your ass I don't. But then I don't want to sit next to the kid during a performance of Cats either...
I suppose it's different for some folks, Chuck. I, too, was really influenced by some of the older films my Mom and Dad, who were older parents (my mom was almost 40 when I was born)- In fact THE SEARCHERS was just such a film (along with other great westerns such as HIGH NOON, THE CHEYANNE SOCIAL CLUB, and my favorite John Wayne THE COYBOYS) I, too, was turned onto theatre by a very "over my head " production of THE ROAR OF THE GREASEPAINT- I remember leaving the theatre thinking "I'm not sure what the hell just happened, but I dug it!"-
But,like you and most of the folks on this site, I have devoted the better part of my life to this field. I was gonna catch that bug anyway, anyhow...I suppose I'm speaking more of the casual audience member. To me, they are ones who hate Shakespeare cause they were drug to a four hour Hamlet when they were 10. I don't necessarily think they have to see CATS or some spectacle o be interested, but look at the type of work Larry and Vivian do at LCT- good, high quality theatre for kids. That's also why my wife has such a love (despite what she might tell you) for the theatre- she was introduced to good, high quality theatre for youth as opposed to being forced to wathc THE WID DUCK before puberty! (Not sure I wanna see that one now...)
And as for this...
" I often wonder and fear, given the glut of media, the move away from literacy, the need for mere sensation rather than meaning, if we are not living in a world of surfaces, and if we are not immediately drawn to the obvious and when our craving of instant gratification isn't promptly satisfied,
we get bored."
...I fear you hit the nail on the head...but I don't think Kids are necessarily the culprits here- this describes many of the adults I know!
"I suppose it's different for some folks, Chuck. I, too, was really influenced by some of the older films my Mom and Dad LOVED..."
* oops- in my haste to finish my thought, I didn't even finish the sentence!
...and OH MY GOD- not the COYBOYS the COWBOYS!!!! Damn typos...the COYBOYS sounds like some gay western porn...
X wrote:
"..and OH MY GOD- not the COYBOYS the COWBOYS!!!! Damn typos...the COYBOYS sounds like some gay western porn..."
Gives new meaning to the phrase "ride 'em cowboy."
I like cheese.
That is my thought on the subject.
TIM X WROTE...........
" I often wonder and fear, given the glut of media, the move away from literacy, the need for mere sensation rather than meaning, if we are not living in a world of surfaces, and if we are not immediately drawn to the obvious and when our craving of instant gratification isn't promptly satisfied,
we get bored."
I see the above every day, all day.
Ah...actually I wrote it...
"How do you decide who gets money and who doesnt. If everyone does, then do establish groups get more? How about a new troup thats forms?
If you think there are fracturs in the arts community now? This fundraiser for all will turn us against each other."
Yes, it would be difficult. But that does not mean one could not be successful. One may face a challenge, and one may fail. But if one refuses to face the challenge, one is a failure. (I didn't make that up, BTW).
"Would'nt it be nice if a group of soccer moms went to Starbucks to rack their brains on how to raise money for one of the community of professional theatres in their towns?"
Give them an incentive, make them feel personal about Lexington's theatres. A campaign, for instance, to make Lexington the center of Kentucky's arts. Louisville has ATL, W KY as Horse Cave, both highly regarded Equity theatres. Convince the soccer moms and the rest of the community that Lexington needs the arts, more specifically theatre, to achieve the same acclaim. Nay, nay, achieve more acclaim. Why should Lexington's theatre community play 3rd fiddle in the state?
(Note: there are wonderful productions in Lexington, just throwing out a hypothetic sales pitch).
Josh B
It's more than just Soccer moms that need to be sucked into the Arts scene. It is also Lexington businesses and politicos. Just last week there was a headline in the paper, in the wake of the gay student being pitched out of the Christian college, that said businesses are attracted to towns that have cultural diversity. It is an indication of an intellectual and creative culture (which means a good place to do business and attract talent to your business). Part of that cultural diversity is a vibrant Arts scene. If you want to attract smart, talented, creative people to your city or state, you've got to be able to engage them in their off-time....things like theatres, concerts, music...culture.
Unfortunately, as one businessman commented last week on the whole gay/Christian college flap issue thing: "Before people saw us as a backward state, now they see us as a backward, bigoted state."
Absolutely right, Chuck. That is another motivating point in my mind. Change the perception of Lexington by making a strong push for the arts. And technology. The other two communities draw people in, not just service their immediate area. I think Lexington does just the opposite.
I was at the Hamptons International Film Festival a few years ago and attended a workshop on the obstacles facing Independent film production. The panel was made up of several independent producers/directors and a peppering of the same from big studios like WB and Disney. An audience member broached the subject, and the panel spent a lot of time discussing how certain states and cities had created environments very conducive to filmmaking. Non-traditional areas such as Arkansas and Hawaii created incentive-laden tax plans and built studios as selling points. Even countries such as Romania had taken similar measures. Every single person on the panel, despite background, knew offhand the details in all of these plans. Some even quoted the increased revenue the aforementioned areas received.
The point being, find ways to bring people into Lexington for the arts. Some ideas might require political savvy, some do not. An ally here and there can go a long way, especially during an election year...
Josh B
"I think Lexington does just the opposite."
I'll quantify that statement with "for the most part." I know AGL and the KY Film Commission have made some small steps, I am speaking of the community as a whole.
JB
Steve, I agree that the Arts/Sports debate is an irrelevant one.
I fear the answer to the other question: why is it easier to get the funding to produce lavish school productions as opposed to modestly-budgeted ones goes to the old populist argument. Your basic non-theatre-going theatre goer will only go out for the lowest-common-denominator crowd-pleaser stuff. Easier to bring in the crowd for the durable War horse musical that everyone recognizes rather than your Earnest or Shakespeare or new play or even your more unique musical...people seemd to prefer the tried and true (or the tired and true) than something they don't know...just look at the names of the musicals that have been produced recently here in Lexington...Fiddler on the Roof, Sweet Charity, Godspell, Grease, Carousel. some of these may be perfectly serviceable, well-written musicals...but safe, very safe. Many will be around again probably before we see a production of The Threepenny Opera, Assassins, or even a Boys From Syracuse. It's kinda like the majority of Shakespeare Festivals...lets trot out the same old 10 or so plays every year and pretend they are the only ones Shakespeare ever wrote.
The only answer I know of how to combat that this is by the slow process of educating your audience, coupling the familiar with the less familair and even the the dangerous in a balanced season to where the audience is gingerly exposed to more than just what they know and recognize and come to look forward to the new experience.
As for the hiring of experienced professionals to do backstage stuff. Again, I think school should be a learning process and if the kids are only expected to perform and not engage in the technical necessities of theatres I think this breeds prima donnaism. I think they should know how to build a flat and be a strike and know what it is to devote an evening to the theatre that's not just rehearsal.
But I think you address the real problem which is why do high school productions have sets and productions values that require the services of a professional? Why should they even be in a venue like the Opera House? It's to me teaching them all to run before they can walk.
They don't need grand productions at this stage. They need to work at their level. They need to learn and grow.
"...people seemd to prefer the tried and true (or the tired and true)..."
Good one, Chuck!
I agree, Steve, those little kiddies can pull the coins from mom and pop's wallet easier than anything else can. They'd rather pay to have the bragging rights to their kids' amateur endeavours than to see quality theatre in a professional venue...which, of course, makes it apparent that it is not the theatre the parents are interested in at all, but rather their kids...and I suppose that's a justifiable priority...but it sure don't help the state of theatre.
And, of course, it always comes back to that eternal question I keep asking: what does Lexington want in the way of Arts and what is it willing to commit to and how does one entice them? And then it goes back to my ever-more eternal question about the state of Lexington theatre...is it static or is there growth?
Coming to it as a home-boy who has returned after thirty years brings an unusual perspective (aside from a few forays back...two plays produced here in the eighties). In some ways it seems better, in some ways it seems worse, in some ways it seems to float along the same wave. And, of course, my view is always tinged with memories that may be rosier than the actual reality.
But again, I haven't really been here long enough to offer or figure out any solutions. I'm not sure I even have a full grasp of the problems and the assets yet.
"My question is still, does the greater Lexington community want to make the commitment in funding and support that it takes to support a truely professional theatre."
"They'd rather pay to have the bragging rights to their kids' amateur endeavours than to see quality theatre in a professional venue...which, of course, makes it apparent that it is not the theatre the parents are interested in at all, but rather their kids"
I think both of these points are dead on. I also think they lend a little credit to my earlier suggestion, that we need to give the community something else to draw them into the theatres. Something personal that is akin to their vested interest in their children. Motivating this community is possible, similar sized communities have been successful.
And I'm glad the Unified Arts fund is already present, thats fantastic! Hypothetically, would they have the resources to take on a major campaign?
Post a Comment