Following up on my previous post weighing in on IsherGate 2007, I'll point you to Garrett Eisler's thoughtful post on the deeper roots of the New York Times's Broadway-heavy slouch toward consumerism over recent years. Eisler sees the editorial slant toward emphasis of the pricey shows as part of an overall Times move to appeal to a wealthier demographic and to wealthier advertisers; fair practice from a business standpoint, but unfortunate for the audience in New York and across the country that still look to the Times as the arbiter of taste that it once could afford to be.
Elsewhere, Wall Street Journal critic Terry Teachout cites the ongoing Broadway strike as the reason for his trip to Chicago last weekend. I certainly don't mind Teachout plugging our fair city's vibrant theater scene for the second time in a month (his reviews of Victory Gardens's A Park in Our House and Court's What the Butler Saw can be read here, and last month's reviews of CST's Passion and Strawdog's Aristocrats are here), but the implication seems, if less egregious than Isherwood's, still a bit insulting to Off- and Off-Off-Broadway—"Broadway's dark, so I flew to Chicago." I love Teachout for regularly writing in his New York-based but nationally-read column about shows at regional theaters across the country, reinforcing the idea that great theater can be found in cities all over the U.S., but I hope he remembers that great theater can also be found in smaller, cheaper spaces all over his home city as well.
Speaking of cheaper, Teachout also has a column in Saturday's WSJ noting that, even when adjusted for inflation, Broadway's top ticket prices have doubled in the last 40 years (and that's not even counting "premium" tickets like those at Young Frankenstein). Teachout quotes the stagehands' union's statement that, no matter what concessions they make to Broadway's theaters and producers, those ticket prices aren't going to come down.
The days of individual showmen like David Merrick are gone; these days Broadway shows are produced by consortia and corporations. I wonder if the panic over the Broadway strike doesn't illustrate the perils of a city, a media, and an industry becoming too beholden to the commercial side of the art.
I didn't celebrate Thanksgiving on Thursday. Instead I relished the first day in a long while that I wasn't expected to be anywhere—no work, no plays, no social engagements—and enjoyed staying in my pajamas, watching movies and reading, and feeling guilt-free about not being more productive because almost everything in the city, from the theater to the laundromat, was closed for the holiday.
Instead I'm heading out to the burbs this morning for a Saturday Thanksgiving dinner with friends/family. So I find myself thinking this morning about what I'm thankful for. There's the aforementioned friends and family and the other usual suspects, of course. But in the context of what I write about here and in print: I give thanks that I live in a city that provides theater on every level, from million-dollar musicals to the fringiest shows produced on the director's credit card, and that the theater community takes all of it seriously. And I'm thankful to be employed by a publication that strives to give equal coverage to every level as well, that encourages me to be a critic that, as Garrett puts it, "actively engages with the theatre as a living artform." Even when I see a show I don't care for, I learn something from it, and if I'm writing about it I try to write so that the artists can learn something from me. I'm thankful for having Chicago's theater to engage with.
I hope you're all having a wonderful Thanksgiving weekend as well.
Comments