Theater or Theatre? (pre-renovation Arkansas Rep signage) – April 2011

On Tuesday night, as I scrolled through a variety of comments about the Rep on websites and social media, I’ve been struck by the deep affection people feel for it.  But it is not a simple “let’s roll up our sleeves,”  to use football parlance, raising the needed $750,000 only gets the Rep back to the line of scrimmage.  It does not win the game.

For the Rep to survive, it must be a sustainable organization.  What does a sustainable Rep look like?  Does it continue to have a contract with Actors Equity?  Does it produce six shows a year?  Does it provide education offerings? Does it share space with other arts organizations? Regardless of the answers to the questions (and many others), what it has to have is a dedicated audience and consistent donor base.

It is not enough to say “we need a live professional theatre in Little Rock.”  There must be a commitment to attending and continually financially supporting it.  As a youth, my ever-wise father frustrated me to no end if I said I did not have time to do something.  He would respond, “You didn’t have time or you did not want to make the time?”  Yes we are busy, but in order for the Rep to survive, we have to make the time to attend it and support it with our dollars.  And it’s not just the Rep that needs our support. It’s the Symphony, the Ballet, exhibits at the Arts Center and Museum of Discovery, Wildwood, the Zoo, and the list goes on.

The subscription model for arts organizations seems to be on its way out.  But theatres still rely on it.  (As do symphonies and opera companies.)  If people are only interested in three of the season shows, or have no idea if they’ll be in town for several shows, or are uncertain about attendance because they don’t know what their obligations will be in six months, they are not likely to subscribe.  For the financial well-being of the Rep, this will need to be examined in looking at the future.  There are a few other models that are out there. It is scary to try something new. But with the Rep in a mode of self-examination, maybe now is the time.

I’ve read a lot over the past year about the last days of the Arkansas Gazette. There were some well-intentioned efforts to keep the paper going. But nothing was financially sustainable. The players finally had to admit they could not make it work.  Emotions gave way to reason.  While I definitely hope this situation plays out differently for the Rep and results in it being a continuing organization, the fundamentals are the same.  Emotion and enthusiasm can only sustain so much.

When the Rep started, Little Rock had two daily newspapers, three locally owned TV stations, and several locally owned large banks as well as savings and loans. The utilities were either locally owned or had local control of their philanthropy.  Plus there was potential funding from locally owned hospitals, major insurance carriers, etc., etc., etc.  AND the number of non-profits seeking dollars from the sources outlined above was significantly smaller than today.  (Between 1976 and 2018, there seems to be an inverse relationship between the available pools of money and the organizations requesting said money.)  In the mid-1970s, the National Endowment for the Arts and the Arkansas Arts Council were both looking to fund theatres, and like Little Rock’s donors had fewer organizations requesting funds.  It was a different day. One that is long in the past.

It is not fiscally prudent for the Rep, or any organization, to rely solely on one or two major funding sources.  This has plagued certain Arkansas arts organizations over the years.  It creates the sense that your contribution doesn’t matter because there is always someone else who will make up the difference.  What happens when that funding source closes? or dies? or changes interests?

A future Rep must have a long-term and deep-seated commitment by a wide swath of patrons in order to survive.  It cannot live on an occasional audience member’s nostalgia for that fun evening six years ago.  It cannot make it on simply ticket sales (even if every show was a sell out). It needs a mid-term and long-term plan for both itself and its audience members.  If there is only a burst of enthusiasm now which peters out in six to sixteen months, we’ll be back where we are now.

If the Rep is our theatre, it is our responsibility to bring it back and support it. Not just tomorrow, but next year and next decade.

The announcement today that the Arkansas Repertory Theatre was suspending operations was a sad, if not completely unexpected one.

Over the past months, the Rep has been struggling financially.  Theatre is expensive.  Professional theatre has expectations and requirements that make it even more expensive.

For 42 years, the Arkansas Rep has been presenting live theatre in Little Rock. First in an old church in MacArthur Park and then on Main Street in an old department store.  These were the sites of first dates, anniversaries, birthdays, and celebrations.  Sometimes they provided escapes from the stresses of daily life.

There is no argument that Arkansas Rep has contributed enormously to the cultural life of Little Rock and Arkansas.  But that value has not always translated to dollars in the coffers.

And that is the problem.

Musicals tend to be more popular with Little Rock audiences.  They are also much more expensive to produce employing more actors, musicians, more settings.  The additional actors wear more costumes and carry more props.  (Little Rock’s preference for musicals is not unique; most cities are that way.)

I’ve heard it said that a play can sell at about 80% of capacity and clear more money than a musical selling at 95%.   Over the past few years the Rep has programmed more musicals (sometimes three out of six shows on top of a classic play with a large cast). Did that create more excitement in the community?  Yes.  Did it put more money in the Rep’s pockets?  Apparently not.

Over the past year, I’ve heard finger pointing and bemoaning.  Some have said the excitement over shows at Robinson have taken away entertainment dollars from local groups.  Since it reopened Robinson has certainly seen more events — but the past few years have also seen Verizon Arena book a lot more large acts.  This is a bonanza time for the touring industry.  And because it alternates between feast and famine, when it is feast time, operators seize the day.

When the Rep started, there were only two other local theatres programming for general audiences – Murry’s Dinner Playhouse and the Community Theatre of Little Rock.  Now the options also include the Studio Theatre, Weekend Theatre, Argenta Community Theatre, and Benton’s Royal Players.  There are weekly improv performances at the Joint.  Plus programming in Conway.  Last weekend Praeclara presented Into the Woods.  In other words, a whole lot of alternatives for live performances.  Are the other alternatives the same types of theatre (non-profit, union professional theatre) as the Rep?  No.  But they are part of the mix when competing for resources.  That is all a good thing. But it does mean that people have to make choices for their time and money.

The “Next Act” for the Rep will have to take this new environment into account.  It can be a scary but also exciting time to see what happens.

As the Rep’s board reassesses its future, it is important for the Little Rock community to come together to support live, professional theatre in Little Rock.  We must also redouble our efforts to support other cultural institutions.  For people who came to Little Rock after 1980, they do not not remember a time without the Rep, the Symphony, the Arts Center,  the Ballet.  But there were times without them.  We cannot take them for granted.

Over the years, many other cultural anchors in Little Rock have faced uncertain financial futures.   This spring marks 50 years that the Arts Center faced closing its doors if it did not take drastic measures. To keep afloat, It dropped its unsustainable model (very expensive degree granting programs) which eventually gave rise to the establishment of the Museum School, the Children’s Theatre, and a combination of permanent and temporary exhibits.  (When the degree granting program was underway, it basically took over all the spaces for academic purposes.)  In 1968, there was much hand-wringing and uncertainty.  But, as was pointed out in newspaper articles at the time, this decision allowed for it to return to its original mission.  And look what we have today!

Other theatres across the country have taken these steps the Rep took to stop.  Some have restarted.  Most have not. (I don’t have numbers in front of me, this is based on anecdotal memory from about 30 years of reading many national theatre publications).  It is up to us to put the Rep in the “Re Start” category.

I certainly hope this is a Reset for the Rep, not an RIP.