Columns
Live Art in a Pandemic: The Federal Government’s Responsibility to Theatre Allegra D’Virgilio / Communication Studies and Theatre 2022
F
or as long as we have existed, humans have created theatre. There is no universal definition, but the word “theatre” comes from the Greek verb “theasthai,” meaning to behold.[1] It’s a place where an audience comes together to watch a live performance. This storytelling tool has been present in every country and culture throughout history.[2] Over time, theatre became more than just a casual art form—it developed into a professional industry. The theatre industry in the US became one of the strongest in the world, always adapting, evolving, and surviving.[3] But the industry now faces unprecedented economic challenges due to the COVID-19 pandemic.[4] Because of physical distancing, audiences cannot come together to “behold” performers. Without its traditional funding, how can the show go on? Because the industry is so valuable, we must scrutinize the amount of government support given. Theatre is a powerful part of the US economy, contributing substantially to local communities and the country. The most obvious example is commercial Broadway theatres that stimulate income and employment in New York City.[5] However, there are countless cases across the country. Small theatres generate $80 million per year in Chicago; in eastern Kentucky, the Appalshop theatre and art gallery pumps $1.5 million a year into a region with some of the highest poverty rates in the country.[6][7] In 2016, arts and culture contributed $804 billion to the national GDP, significantly more than the entire travel and tourism industry.[8] About $33 billion of that came from admission to performing arts events, with theater, opera, and dance contributing $22 billion. In 2017, arts and culture employed 5.1 million people; 300,000 of them worked in the performing arts, while millions more worked in production, including marketing,
nupoliticalreview.com
publishing, construction, and design services.[9][10] Without theatre, arts and culture would lose one of its biggest drivers for profit and jobs. Before the pandemic, theatre experienced an economic resurgence after Hamilton’s record-breaking success.[11] Audience growth and box office statistics indicated a sort of golden age.[12] However, even in a thriving Broadway climate, with most productions independently funded by private producers, only about 30 percent of shows were breaking even or turning a profit.[13][14] These shows also stir other notable economic activity by attracting visitors who interact with different industries.[15] Organized theatre tours bring at least twenty thousand visitors every year to New York City. These tourists stay for a week or more and spend an estimated $2.5 million on shopping, hotels, and other expenses. Before the pandemic, theatre attendance was rising at a record pace; as theatre grew, other industries profited too. These businesses will suffer without theatre driving tourism.[16] Economic models vary, but Playbill describes American theatre as “extremely decentralized and fiercely independent.”[17] The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA)—established by Congress in 1965— strives to create opportunities for people to participate in and experience the arts. [18] It’s a major source of funding for thousands of nonprofits each year and partners
with philanthropic organizations, state arts agencies, local leaders, and other federal bodies. While technically independent from the federal government, the NEA does receive an annual stipend from Congress. Still, its grant made up just 0.04 percent of the 2017 federal budget.[19] Meanwhile, the agriculture industry received ninety times more than the arts despite adding four times less to the economy.[20][21] Congress’s appropriations illustrate its disregard for the arts in favor of other industries. If the government continues dismissing the arts, the industry will undoubtedly suffer. For theatre, the damages are indisputable. Performers, crews, and audiences are all at risk in a regular “full house.” If theatres reopen with distanced seating, much smaller casts, and lower ticket prices, the budgets won’t add up. There is also no guarantee that people would feel safe enough to return to an enclosed space anytime soon; even if they did, they might not want to spend money on leisure during an economic crisis.[22][23] As such, the industry needs enough financial support to survive a total shutdown. This is not the first time theatre-makers have asked the government to recognize the value of theatre and invest in it to help the industry through hard times. President Franklin Roosevelt’s Federal Art Project in 1935 boosted the economy by giving people jobs and developing public infrastructure.
Before the pandemic, theatre attendance was rising at a record pace; as theatre grew, other industries profited too. These businesses will suffer without theatre driving tourism.
Fall 2020
31
