Hello all! Looking forward to seeing you in a couple of days.
As a continuation of Ilana's and my conversation about the
Professional vs. Pro-Am debate-- which I tend to boil down to a Professionals vs. Locals debate for a variety of reasons, though I think that dichotomy is changing too-- I have some statements to throw around in advance of our discussion on Saturday. Rather than framing them all as questions, I would wrap this whole post in a blanket of Do You Agree with This Statement or Not, and Why? What's Been Your Experience?
Note: The statements below do not actually reflect my beliefs about regional theatre, or the beliefs of anyone else involved with the blog. They're just meant as a series of potentially inflammatory jumping-off points which have been bandied about. The following statements assume we are in a city which is probably not New York or Los Angeles, and that we're talking about an older model, cliched regional theatre, pre-recession.
Do You Agree with This Statement or Not, and Why? What's Been Your Experience?
-- Locals are amateurs or could be called pro-ams, whereas professionals are from out-of-town.
-- This discussion isn't even relevant anymore because there are no such things as lines between amateur, pro-am, and professional theatre, and the recession is proving that.
-- Theatres want to hire the best/most appropriate person for the job, and if that person lives elsewhere, the theatre will use its available funding to facilitate bringing in the best person for the job; if the theatre has the money, they'll hire the best person from far away. If not, they'll hire the best person from close by.
-- The locals here in [insert city name here] must not be very good because they're still local and haven't moved to New York or LA. If they were serious about working in the theatre, they would have moved to a larger city than this by now.
-- The locals must not be very good if they have to hold down an additional job outside of the theatre to get by and therefore can't make daytime rehearsals.
-- To do a good job and earn a living doing theatre, one needs graduate-level training from a good school that, more often than not, is not located in the city in which professionals wind up doing their work, therefore of course the "professionals" come from somewhere else. (ie went to grad school in New Haven, work in Dallas, went to grad school in New York, work in Chicago, etc.)
-- Professional and graduate school training is ruining the American regional theatre model by churning out fleets of mercenary "professionals" who don't care about the cities in which they're living, but only the theatre in which they're working.
-- How are you supposed to "earn a living" doing theatre if you don't live in a theatre hub like New York? So people who live in New York are automatically outsiders to whatever "local" community they "invade" when they want to work professionally, outside of New York?
-- Regional theatre audiences expect the artistic variety that only a steady stream of newcomers and out-of-towners can provide, rather than the same old local stock.
-- It is cheaper to bring in actors and artists from out-of-town than to keep dozens of people on payroll and with benefits for a season. To fill the variety of roles and positions one needs for a successful theatre season, we would have to keep hundreds of people on retainer to make good shows and who has the money for that?
-- Since regional theatres were intended to be an alternative to Broadway, audiences expect their regional theatres to serve as a window to what's going on in larger, more artistically advanced cities, rather than just reflect local fare.
-- Theatres can't lure audiences in without the appeal of "big-city" names or an imported staff of artists.
-- Smaller mom-and-pop operations eventually implode without the administrative professionalization that staffers specializing in those particular areas bring. (Art people can't do money, money people can't do art.)
-- Local designers won't know what to do with a larger regional theatre design budget even if we did want to hire them because they're used to smaller budgets and they won't know how to fill the space.
-- As Americans, we will always have a "grass is greener" attitude when it comes to art and privilege the unfamiliar (from elsewhere) over the familiar (local).
-- Larger theatres will automatically have less personal connection with their audiences because of their sheer size and need to fill the theatre with more people. In other words, a theatre which seats 600 nightly will naturally have less connection to its audiences than a theatre which seats 20 nightly.
-- Professionals don't care about their work in the way that amateurs do because amateurs are doing theatre out of love, whereas the professionals are doing theatre for money.
Bring your coffee on Saturday morning!
