I am convinced that community theatre is a dying art form. Hell, I agreed with Patti LuPone when she commented that theatre in general is a dying art form. In this age of instant-gratification entertainment, of Wii and NetFlix and internet movies, live theatre simply has become passe, like typewriters and postage stamps.
I just completed a run of James Goldman’s The Lion in Winter at the Canal Fulton Players Theatre in the Canal Fulton Methodist Church in Canal Fulton, Ohio. I played King Phillip of France–as previously noted, it’s a role I always wanted to do, and being that I was fourteen years too old for the part, I was damn lucky to get it. The fact that they needed someone, pronto, because they had lost the actor initially cast, helped immensely. The production was good, the other actors were great, the director, David Van Gaasbeek, was wonderful to work with…but…WHERE WAS THE FRIGGING AUDIENCE????
Opening night, we played to a house of six…closing night, eight. The only decent audience we had was on this past Friday (luckily, that’s when all my family members came, so it wasn’t too humiliating), when about fifty people showed up. But that was the only performance we did that actually felt like a performance instead of just another dress rehearsal.
David was very disappointed and frustrated, as were we all…but try as I might, I can’t think of a solution to this problem, which has become more and more thwarting in my recent years as a community player. Why play at all when there’s nobody to play to? Do community theatres really have to do only shows like Annie and The Sound of Music in order to bring the people in? Are musicals full of children and dogs and Nazis really all they want to see? I realize that times are bleak, but does that have to mean that the public stops thinking completely?
The Lion in Winter is, of course, a straight play (oxymoron) with highly sophisticated language and little action. If properly staged and played (and I would venture to say that our production was) it can be a tremendously intense, entertaining, and absorbing piece of theatre. But no one in this area of northeast Ohio, within a hundred-mile radius, seemed convinced of that. Didn’t anyone remember the classic 1968 film version, at least, with Katharine Hepburn and Peter O’Toole? Evidently not. And even if they did, I suppose they preferred to sit at home in their living rooms and watch it through NetFlix.
The handwriting seems to be indelibly scrawled on the wall, much as I’ve tried to disregard it in the recent past. When it comes to entertainment today, people only like what they know, because that means they don’t have to take the risk of shelling out money for something they aren’t familiar with and may not enjoy. Our production cost only eight dollars a seat (six for students and seniors), but in a recession, I imagine even eight dollars is a lot to ask for an evening out.
It’s too bad, because what this means is fewer and fewer opportunities for both audiences and actors to grow and learn through the magic of live theatre. They say that Broadway is dead. I don’t know if the virus has completely spread to the big cities like New York, where people are still sophisticated enough to know quality entertainment from reality show drek, but it certainly seems to have all but wiped out volunteer playhouses in the provinces.
And what does this mean? Regrettably, either more productions of well-known shows featuring orphans, dogs, Nazis and singing nuns, or no productions at all, unless actors and directors put them on solely for their own gratification, because you can’t compete with technology. Why go to the theatre and pay to see a live production of The Lion in Winter when you can stay home and watch either the movie or another video-recorded production on YouTube for free?
A dying art form, indeed.
1 Comment(s)
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
I agree with your premise to a certain extent. However, I think a fair amount of audience really has more to do with competition, promotion, quality of previous performances at the location in question and possibly the reputation of the theater involved. I’m not really familiar with the Fulton Players, so I can’t make an assumption about that theater. However, from most of my experience watching local community theater I’ve been severely disappointed, sometimes to the point of agony. While this has been true for both musicals and ‘straight plays’, I would have to say a bad straight play is much more tedious to endure than a musical which at least might have some fun dance numbers and a song or two that I recognize. I’m not so sure it’s as much about the money (bad economy) as it is about my time and whether I want to ‘spend’ it watching a movie which I will probably really enjoy or a local theater production that could be devastatingly awful. I certainly believe we should support local theaters, but there is a lot of really bad performances that have just left me with a bad taste in my mouth. Here in Honolulu I’ve been to one local theater performance that a friend was performing in. I went expecting the worst and was so shocked with the quality of the staging, performance and the over all presentation. The show sold out every night and was actually extended two additional weekends. Ultimately, good theater is good theater. If you provide a high quality production in time the word will spread and the theater, director, performers etc… will get noticed. Maybe the flood of entertainment is a good thing. It will require us to put that much more effort into the performances that we are creating. I wish I would have been there to see your show. I loved your performance in “Alice” and I’m sure this one was great as well. Don’t be discouraged, just keep creating your best work and eventually the word will get out. =) Just my two or three cents worth.