Theater Commentary: When the Curtain Falls — Like an Axe

By Bill Marx

Vibrant, independent theater in Boston and throughout New England will not be sustained if the demolition starts at the bottom and moves up.

What is being planned to help Boston theater survive the coming bloodbath? Many of those in the city’s small and medium-sized theater community feel as if they are dead ducks, sheltering-in-place. Read the panicked commentary from JJ Gonson, the owner of Cuisine en Locale/ONCE Somerville, a music performance venue. An organization vitally interested in the health of New England’s cultural sector, ArtsBoston, is waiting for the data to come in before they take any action or announce any strategy. Why am I not reassured by its caution?

About a week ago, ArtsBoston sent me a copy of The Arts Factor, which detailed the $2 billion economic impact of the region’s arts and cultural sector. The idea was to show what was at risk with the arrival of the pandemic. This felt like Trump-ish sleight of hand to me: that was then — and this is now, soon to be followed by a “new normal” for the performing arts. What are ArtsBoston’s strategies for what’s to come? I was told that the organization would be “the regional Boston partner for an international longitudinal survey of artsgoers. The study will have regular reports about the feelings/concerns/expectations of ticket-buyers, showing the changing nature of what they’re thinking as the pandemic and recovery develops.” The project will “get underway later this month with some initial results in early May. ArtsBoston will inject regionally appropriate questions and get localized results.”

Meanwhile, other cities are garnering information a bit more quickly, and the “longitudinal” news is sobering. According to an April 13 survey of 2,762 DC-area theatergoers by Bethesda-based Shugoll Research, Inc. only 25% of the audience is likely to immediately return to attending live events once the CDC says that theaters can safely reopen.

Only about 1 in 3 (31%) say they are very likely to return immediately while about 1 in 5 (21%) are very unlikely. Around half (49%) suggest they will probably wait a few months or more before returning while only a quarter (25%) think they will attend right away.

“This will be disappointing news for Washington area theaters who already lost their spring and potentially summer seasons” said Mark Shugoll, Ph.D., the study author. “Many theaters are counting on a strong relaunch to begin to offset the significant losses they suffered during their closures from the pandemic.”

Granted, as the pandemic progresses and businesses begin to slowly reopen, these wary sentiments may change. But the bottom line is clear: the public’s health fears will not end until there is a vaccine, which by all reports may be well over a year away. This spells financial catastrophe for many stages, a majority of which have extremely limited reserves. Chances are that only the big, well-endowed theaters will be fit enough to weather the coming storm. Are we just supposed to watch as small, independent companies are eradicated before interested parties offer their help? Given the need for quick action, what can be done? On April 16, the Theater Communications Group released a survey (set up in March) from 168 of its members. The highlights:

    • The majority of theatres had already made hard decisions to cancel performances and other activities. Eighty-eight percent of participants had cancelled performances that had already been scheduled to take place and/or were scheduled to take place in the coming weeks, 58% had already cancelled education programs, and 38% had already cancelled their annual gala.
    • Revenue losses will be substantial. Theatres are not only losing income from ticket sales but also from other revenue streams such as rentals and investment income, and their usual fundraising efforts are severely compromised. In respondents’ earliest projections, the lost revenue through June 2020 totals nearly $120 million. As stay-at-home orders have extended and expanded, the true lost revenue will no doubt prove to be much greater for those theatres and for the field as a whole. TCG estimates that for the larger universe of U.S. professional not-for-profit theatres (1,855 theatres per TCG’s Theatre Facts 2018), total revenue loss through June 2020 alone will exceed $500 million.
    • Theatres need immediate and ongoing relief and support. With limited cash and no revenue, many theatres are fearful about the survival of their organizations. They need flexibility in the use of existing grants and significant additional support from the government, foundations, corporations, and individuals both for the short-term and beyond. Theatres are concerned about the pressure on the funding community, since every arena is being affected by the pandemic, and they worry about where the arts will fall in funding priorities.

TCG argues that these “losses will have a dire financial effect on individual theatres and, in turn, on their communities and the U.S. economy as a whole.” Fair enough. We are then informed that “TCG joined a partnership of more than 40 national arts and culture organizations in sending a new slate of policy recommendations to Congress on Monday, April 21. The recommendations urge the federal government to do more to support the arts sector as funding is exhausted for programs created under the CARES Act.”

“Theatres have been working hard to apply for Payroll Protection Program relief through the SBA as well as other forms of federal relief, but the severity of the crisis has outpaced the relief that is available,” said Laurie Baskin, director of research, policy, and collective action, TCG. “So, in addition to working to access relief and fundraise in their communities, theatre leaders are also contacting their elected officials in record numbers to tell their stories of COVID-19 impact.”

Understandably, no mention in the report is made of a real life debacle that centered on Washington, DC’s Kennedy Center for the Arts. According to Noah Schaffer, “tucked into the $2 trillion stimulus bill was $25 million earmarked for the DC arts complex. By comparison, the entire National Endowment for Arts, which provides grants for thousands of arts groups nationwide, was only allotted $75 million, at a time when every art organization has had to close its doors or cancel its season.” These shenanigans are symptomatic of business as usual: political/economic muscle means that some theaters impacted by COVID-19 will receive a lot more love than others.

The failures of the Payroll Protection Program are coming to light, spotlighting stories of big fish gobbling down money meant for the small fry. (The lack of support for self-employed and independent workers in these replenishment bills is also telling.) So the TCG’s advice to theaters — that they contact their elected officials — is worrying. Why? Because institutions with the coziest connections with government officials inevitably pocket the most mazuma. The Huntington Theatre Company, the American Repertory Theatre, and ArtsEmerson will thrive in this kind of glad-handing environment — they have the resources, the political heft, and the tony patronage. Like DC’s Kennedy Center, they will no doubt argue that, as major nonprofit theaters, they deserve generous support, if only because of the number of people they serve and employ. My fear is that, given all the well-documented misfires of the PPP, theaters down the food chain will end up being kicked to the curb, along with so many other small-to-medium businesses. Vibrant, independent theater in Boston and throughout New England will not be sustained if the demolition starts at the bottom and moves up. In fact, it will further homogenize a stage scene that is already dangerously innocuous.

We don’t need data to be forewarned and forearmed about this all-too-familiar pecking order in the “creative economy.” Members of the Boston theater community should be prepared to question, forcefully, which theaters are selected to be funded and at what level. There should be public commitments from ArtsBoston and StageSource — as well as government, business, and grant organizations — to support the survival of small, medium, and fringe companies — no matter the data. Hyperlocal companies that serve the community — rather than Broadway — deserve to be nurtured in this brave new world. The media’s arts coverage must give up on happy talk, even if it means that some well-heeled favorites might be caught red-handed. Elizabeth Warren has it right: in this crisis we need to chuck business as usual and remedy systemic abuses, invest in the have-nots rather than suck up to the haves.


Bill Marx is the editor-in-chief of the Arts Fuse. For over three decades, he has written about arts and culture for print, broadcast, and online. He has regularly reviewed theater for National Public Radio Station WBUR and the Boston Globe. He created and edited WBUR Online Arts, a cultural webzine that in 2004 won an Online Journalism Award for Specialty Journalism. In 2007 he created the Arts Fuse, an online magazine dedicated to covering arts and culture in Boston and throughout New England.

7 Comments

  1. Will McMillan on April 23, 2020 at 8:45 am

    A sobering summary…

  2. Leland Stein on April 23, 2020 at 9:13 am

    Sobering, indeed, Bill. Appreciate your detailed assessment of this crushing situation. Although The Regent Theatre is not a non-profit venue, we are independent, and quickly becoming insurmountably non-profitable…

    • Bill Marx on April 23, 2020 at 10:24 am

      Yes. But the truth should trigger action rather than despair. Too many in the arts community seem to be stuck dreaming the dream of Wall Street. They want some sort of time machine — once the data comes in and the virus is beaten it will be back to business as usual. That will not be the case, and we should plan for a different future, a “new normal.” The magazine will offer up some ideas about ways to sustain small and medium-sized theaters (and re-invigorating programming) in the weeks to come. Meanwhile, an interesting if incomplete piece in the NYTmes on why the virus will not revive an F.D.R. type Arts Job Program. Yes, a part of the problem is ideological — but (unaccountably) the writer does not deal with other crucial factors, such as technological and cultural change.

  3. Spin on April 24, 2020 at 2:33 am

    Not unexpected posts. Well, what can I say to “Trump” that? Sobering? If you were not sober due to the “theater situation” before you read the “Theater Commentary” I can only guess what you were. Leland, we already know that any entertainment other than big sports are squeaking out livings as “barely profitable” and finally, Bill (…your response to your own piece)…the link to the N.Y. Times story required a subscription to read! How funny is that!
    Now, having read J.J. Gonson’s piece I can say she has morphed her business many times and will hopefully survive in the business but if not: we all make our choices as to what business we are in that helps us eek out our livings and live sustainable lives.
    Finally the originator seems to state that an opinion is actual fact: “…the public’s health fears will not end until there is a vaccine.” Oh, really? I might counter with a thought that contagion awareness will fade as quickly as it arrived. We both know neither to be true, right?
    ALWAYS be wary of independent (T.C.G.) “data” fed to us. Nevertheless, Teresa Eyring (Exec.Dir. of T.C.G.) is a loud but shakey voice for the industry. Hopefully everyone has read the April 21st treatise sent to Congress entitled: The Arts Sector and COVID-19 Relief (highlighted in your piece on their own.) Let’s also remember that if theater goes away T.C.G.’s dues and revenue stream is gone and so too is Ms. Eyring’s job, perhaps.
    Nevertheless, your criticism of her seems a bit strong.
    Finally, I cannot agree with Elizabeth in her statement, at all. She always enjoys tossing a platitude and a panacea out and then has no legs to stand tall and walk the walk with.
    Bill, we stand on the brink of the future and hopefully are prepared for the call because ArtsBoston and StageSource are neither positioned nor foundational to the brand called, Boston Theater. We must take whatever cards we are dealt because there are frankly, many clamoring institutions to be fed, now.
    If your job is to rally the forces? Try, try again!

    • Bill Marx on April 24, 2020 at 10:57 am

      Hi Spin:

      First, the NYTimes article I linked to is free — part of the publication’s coverage of the virus, which it is making available to all.

      As for fear of the virus — I did not state it as a fact, but it is reasonable to assume that a vaccine is what it will take to allay anxieties. But I could be wrong …. we are all guessing about the future.

      Not sure what you mean about my criticism of the TCG. Skepticism about data is rampant on both sides of today’s political divide and it is not healthy. I have no reason to doubt what the TCG came up with in its poll of membership. My question is about pushing the notion that politicians and theater community honchos will do the right thing to help small and medium companies survive. The big fish will be fed. The others are in danger of starving — who will take a chance on them?

      Meanwhile, “ArtsBoston announced today it’s the regional partner for the COVID-19 Audience Outlook Monitor project, an international longitudinal study of likely arts-consumer behavior that aims to inform cultural organizations’ planning for when and how to resume their activities.” This sounds as if it will be a guide for the winners — those who can make it through the coming months will be given suggestions about when it will be safe to come out. Which backs up your contention that “ArtsBoston and StageSource are neither positioned nor foundational to the brand called, Boston Theater.” They will chronicle the carnage and come out when the coast is clear. And declare victory?

      Finally, the forces have to want to be rallied. There is enormous passivity out there, which is one reason I wrote the column, to kick things up. I and others will offer some ideas, but what is necessary is leadership and resources.

  4. Thomas Garvey on May 1, 2020 at 8:52 am

    Every cloud has a silver lining though, and the upside of the Covid crisis is that truly great theatre is available these days for free online. So in a way Boston audiences are better off than they’ve been in years! This Coriolanus from the Stratford Festival, for instance, is more compelling than any Shakespeare I’ve seen on any stage in Boston in forty years (and there are offerings from the National Theatre and others that are nearly as good):

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvkW1MhOYlQ

    Could exposure to theatre of an international standard actually induce local audiences to demand more from local offerings in the future? To be honest – probably not. But for this brief moment, we can savor the kind of exciting theatre that our local practitioners have never consistently delivered.

    • Bill Marx on May 1, 2020 at 12:55 pm

      I agree that there is some terrific theater available online for free. I have been relishing Anthony Sher’s King Lear for the Royal Shakespeare Company. But the silver lining is disturbingly Darwinian — Covid-19 isolation will only accelerate a change in theater-going habits. Why schlep out of the house to see the Actors’ Shakespeare Project or Shakespeare and Company’s stab at the Bard when it is cheaper and more comfortable to stay at home and take in a National Theater performance starring Ian McKellen? Issues of price point and convenience will undercut the existence of live, local theater. And seeing stagework on screens will change a generation’s ideas of how theater is best presented … as a film/video or live?

Leave a Comment





Recent Posts