Building An Arts Community

by Phil RickabyCommunity, Culture, The Biz, TheatrePosted on One Comment

At the beginning of the year, I talked about wanting to start a creative support group. I said:

“I’d like to propose a regular get-together of creative people. Coffee (or beer, for those who drink it) at some place where we can sit and talk about theatre, or writing (or whatever), in the hopes that I can keep the creative juices flowing — and hopefully so can the other folks participating.”

A few people got in touch, so we created a Facebook group and started meeting up. We’ve had a couple of gatherings so far. Essentially, it’s a group of creatively inclined people getting together to talk about what they’re working on, share encouragement, and connect with others who make things.

Last night, we happened to discuss yesterday’s blog post, and the conversation turned toward the gaps between different artistic disciplines. Most of us around the table were from theatre backgrounds, and we found ourselves talking about how fragmented the “theatre community” really is. Often, the sense of community only exists during the run of a show — we come together for a production, then drift apart. One person described theatre as less a community and more like an underground brother- (or sister-)hood.

When you start thinking beyond theatre — about connecting with dancers, painters, sculptors, musicians — the separation becomes even more pronounced. Very few of us are actively engaging with artists outside our own disciplines.

So why don’t we socialize more with artists from other fields? And if we don’t, how can we expect to become the kind of arts boosters I wrote about yesterday — the ones who advocate not just for their own work, but for the arts?

When I first envisioned this “creative support group,” I imagined it as a space for artists from all backgrounds. But since most of my social network is theatre-based, the group has so far drawn mainly theatre folks. I’d love to expand it — to include dancers, musicians, visual artists, and creators of all kinds.

Personally, I’ve found these regular gatherings creatively energizing. I’d encourage you to start your own. Bring together artists of all stripes. Talk about what you’re working on. Encourage each other. Learn about art forms you don’t “get.” Stay inspired through the simple act of connecting with fellow creatives.

And maybe — just maybe — if more of us do this, we can start to build a stronger, more unified artistic community. One that’s better positioned to support each other, draw in wider audiences, and truly: “Make the case for the relevancy and value of our art.”

The Importance of the Arts and Government Funding

by Phil Rickabyart, Culture, TheatrePosted on One Comment

Yesterday, Howard Sherman, the director of the American Theatre Wing, posted a blog entitled This is not a Political Blog. In it, he opens a discussion about why governments find it so easy to cut arts funding programs — like the National Endowment for the Arts in the U.S., or the various arts programs that have been cut (or threatened with cuts) in Canada (see the situation in B.C., for example).

The heart of the discussion begins with this statement:

“The reason the NEA (and the NEH and NPR and PBS) make for such easy targets is that their audiences and their artists fail to make a case for their intrinsic value.”

He has an excellent point. Those of us involved in the arts — those for whom the arts matter deeply — can talk about their importance all we like, but for the most part, we’re just preaching to the choir. How do we make this something that people outside the arts believe in?

In the blog post, Sherman talks about how, from time to time, there have been discussions about creating a “Got Milk?”-style ad campaign for the arts. After all, pork, cotton, and milk still need to remind people of their importance — so why not the arts?

But is an advertising campaign really the way to go? I’m not so sure. How would it be paid for? If even a few cents of public money were used, you know it would be immediately jumped on by the folks at The Sun and likely decried by conservative leaders (see Stephen Harper’s “average Canadians” comment from a few years ago). So what’s the solution?

The part of Sherman’s post that really got me thinking was this:

“A big part of the problem is that those of us who are profoundly dedicated to the arts hold them as a sacred belief; we are called to them as surely as religious leaders are called to the cloth. Yet to pursue the comparison, religious leaders spend one day every week making the case for the relevancy and value of their religion (these are called sermons), while we spend our time selling tickets to individual productions or exhibits.”

He’s absolutely right. We don’t spend a lot of time making the case for the value or relevancy of our craft. Instead, we spend most of our time shilling for people to buy tickets to individual shows.

That’s not to say we shouldn’t be trying to sell our work — of course we should. But why aren’t we also spending time encouraging people to go to other people’s shows? And not just within our own disciplines. Theatre folks should be promoting dance, visual art, music — everything. How else can we raise awareness of all the incredible work happening around us?

People who are passionate about the arts get that they’re important. But people who don’t care — who never attend shows or galleries — often see the arts as something elitist, something for the rich. Not for them. And in a way, we help feed that belief by only promoting our own work. If we’re not championing the arts in general, how can we expect someone who sees public arts funding as wasteful to view us as anything other than (as our Prime Minister put it) whiners complaining about our cushy, subsidized lifestyles?

I think we all need to do more to talk up other shows, other artists, other disciplines. We all need to work harder to raise general awareness of the arts, and bridge the gap between those who care about the arts and those who don’t yet care.

To that end: if you have something you want me to promote — let me know. I’ll promote the heck out of it, whether it’s theatre, dance, a gallery show — whatever. All I ask is that you do the same. Promote a show that’s not yours. Promote something outside your discipline. Boost the arts as a whole, not just the thing you’re directly involved with.

How else can we “make the case for the relevancy and value of our art”?

The Annual Navel Gaze

by Phil RickabyDirecting, Life, Theatre, WritingPosted on 3 Comments

I don’t make New Year’s resolutions. They just seem to be a way to set unrealistic expectations, which lead to making you feel disappointed in yourself when you break them. So, no resolutions for me.

But I will set some goals for myself. So here, in no particular order, are my goals for the upcoming year:

  • Get paid to act. In the past, I’ve done too many shows just to be doing something. This has led to varying degrees of satisfaction. Some experiences were really great, others were not. So, the goal is to only do theatre that pays — unless (and the unless is important here) I am creating the play, or am invested in it (like a play produced by Monkeyman Productions).

  • Do more directing. I have an idea for a particular Shakespeare play that I would love to do. I need to find a way to fund that. Before I tackle that play, I’ll want to improve my directing vocabulary.

  • Write more. Write more. Write more. Finish the play I’m working on before moving on to the next.

  • Become a better theatre marketer. I am the “Marketing Manager” for Keystone Theatre and tried my hand at some publicity for Monkeyman for the last show. I certainly need some improvement. I have a bit of time before Keystone kicks into gear, so there is some time — but I want to know what I’m doing before that happens.

  • Become a better schmoozer. Be able to go to parties, make small talk, meet the right people, and the like. I’m not very good at this, and I need to get better.

  • Get an agent.

So, those are my goals for the year. There are more of them than I initially thought there would be. I might not complete all of them, but at least I’ll have made some serious headway if I accomplish some of them

What are your goals for the year?

When Media Turns on the Arts

by Phil RickabyArts, TheatrePosted on 2 Comments

Links in this article have been updated using the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine.

This past summer, The Toronto Sun published a series of articles damning the SummerWorks festival for producing a play that “glorified terrorists.” They published three articles on the subject (1, 2, 3) without ever having seen the play. The crux of their anger was that the SummerWorks festival received funding from the federal government, and how dare this festival accept funds to produce a play celebrating people who want to destroy our way of life. After the play opened, it was revealed that the play was not what they said it was. The Toronto Star reviewed the play and had to acknowledge the furor in its review, said that the play was “definitely not a play that supports or romanticizes terrorism,” but did say that it wasn’t a very good play.

The Sun had apparently been so successful in stirring up outrage about the play that the Star’s review spent half of its article space debunking the Sun’s claims. In the end, as the Star’s Richard Ouzounian points out, since the funding for SummerWorks isn’t earmarked for specific plays and really only goes towards the rental of the theatre, the Sun was making a big deal out of what amounted to $850. 

Then SummerWorks ends, the play is revealed to be not very good, and the Sun is revealed to have some pretty shoddy fact-checking and ethics. Story over, right?

Apparently not. Out of nowhere, the Sun has revived its attack on the SummerWorks festival, so far with two articles in the last two days (1, 2). Once again, they are going after SummerWorks about their federal funding, and continue to do so based on their having produced Homegrown last year.

I ask myself a couple of questions:

Why now? Why the renewed attack on this festival of new plays?
 The Sun is not a paper that speaks to me. Their opinions hold little interest. So why does this enrage me so?

The answer to the first question is likely that funding deadlines have passed, and the festival’s funding has been renewed. The fact that SummerWorks applied after the deadline and yet still received funding seems to be the thing they are attacking. So, their renewed attack is merely one of opportunity.

The second question is perhaps more complex. It is true that I do not read the Sun regularly. And when I do, it is more with the attitude of “Let’s see what the other side thinks,” and more often than not, I am repulsed by what passes for journalism. So the paper does not speak to me. But what makes me angry is the people to whom this paper does speak. Because they don’t remember that the Sun was wrong about the play — they only recall the stories from before the play opened. And worse, the people more likely to read the Sun are actually the people that our current federal government most wants to placate. So when the Sun calls up a Minister and starts asking uncomfortable questions about funding for an arts organization, that Minister doesn’t speak about the importance of the Canada Council for the Arts being an arm’s-length funding agency. No, they talk about how SummerWorks’ grant will be reviewed. Which is exactly what the Sun wants. The Sun, if they support government arts funding at all, want all the dollars allocated to the arts to be accountable to the whims of the Canadian people. Which, on a certain level, is admirable. We are a democracy (a Parliamentary Democracy at that), so the will of the people should count for something, right? But the Arts Council’s job is to fund the arts — to allow exploration and excitement, to fund projects that are new and push boundaries. Of course, artists understand this concept. But the Sun’s base doesn’t. They probably don’t think about arts funding at all, and when they do, they picture (as Stephen Harper put it) “a bunch of people at, you know, a rich gala all subsidized by taxpayers claiming their subsidies aren’t high enough.”

The Sun, as an organization, doesn’t believe in funding for the arts, so they take every chance they can to bash it. But I can’t help but wonder: what do we lose if they are successful? If the Sun is successful in its campaign against SummerWorks, and the funding for the festival is revoked, then there’s no SummerWorks this year, and Toronto loses a vibrant part of its arts schedule and a number of new plays will never see the light of day. But worse, if the Sun is successful now, what happens to the next festival they turn their attention to? Once they’ve seen that they can shame the government into intervening, will any funding for any arts organization be safe? Likely not.

And what will happen then?

Making a Spectacle of Theatre

by Phil RickabyTheatrePosted on 3 Comments

I’m finding myself thinking about theatrical spectacle of late. Most of the theatre that I’ve been doing lately could be described as “small scale”: a few actors, on a mostly bare stage with just the suggestion of a set. And while that kind of theatre can often be engaging and entertaining, I want to do something…bigger. I want to create theatre that has both substance and a visual appeal, something that sticks in the memory of the people seeing it. I’m not talking just about great costumes, but I’m talking about large cast, with live music, and perhaps dance. Something multi-disciplinary. I have ideas that I’m working on, scripts that I’m editing that will fit the bill. Sadly, the only thing that stands in the way is finances. The ideas I have are expensive.

Perhaps one day.

What do you think of spectacle in theatre? Do you find it missing of late (outside of the big budget Broadway-style musicals)? Do you enjoy it? Or does it annoy you (or worse)?