Where are the philanthropists? Is there someone out there that would care to step in?
Anyone else find this ironic just as we keep hearing about "too many plays, too much theater?" How about no theater and no plays? Would that satisfy economics and economic principles enough?
2 comments:
I think that may be a little alarmist. Two of the three have nothing to do with philanthropic giving. The Intiman sank itself through years of fiscal mismanagement, then last year launched a campaign to request a million extra dollars, which it was on-track to get when it closed anyway. As for St. Ann's, that's not a financial issue insofar as I understand it--NIMBY's sued to keep them from taking up the space the city granted them and the NIMBY's won. Once another space is located, I think they actually have funding in place to establish their residency.
I think maybe I wouldn't use the word "alarmist" but I get your point. There are clearly issues all over the place, and not all of them is just a lack of funding. There are, though, large donors out there and I wonder sometimes how engaged they are by these theaters and on what level. There's an epidemic of closings, and it would be terrific to see not only a change in management, but a sense of mission from some of the wealthier patrons.
Post a Comment