The Pasadena Playhouse announced this past week that the final curtain will fall on Feb 7, 2010. It will cease operations with the closing of the currently running Camelot. The historic theatre represents 90 years of American Theater history and undoubtedly, its closing will be a big symbolic and physical loss to the artistic world beyond the shores of the United States.
Founded in 1917, the playhouse was designated in 1937 as the state theater of California. Actors such as Dustin Hoffman and Gene Hackman have been associated with it through the years, and the current company has launched productions that went on to runs elsewhere: The musical adaptation of the hit film “Sister Act” is currently playing in London, and “Looped,” a one-woman show about Tallulah Bankhead starring Valerie Harper that was seen at the playhouse in 2008, is to open on Broadway this spring. – LA Times
Non-profit regional theatres serve as as important incubators and stepping transitional blocks for works that are eventually pipe-lined into the commercial machines on Broadway, the West End, and other theatre markets around the world. Like the rest of most of America’s economy, it’s clear that the non-profit arts needs to find a financial model that allows for the nurturing of important works that are less commercially viable (ahead of its time etc), keep the organization afloat, and (perhaps most importantly) relevant in the community’s eye.
In observing how and why people donate or purchase, the big financial donors are often those who want the glitz, glamour, and prestige of being associated with a theatre, or simply a tax break; on the occasion ticket buyers buy tickets as treats or luxurious indulgences; season subscribers or regular goers could be sincerely appreciative of the nuances of theatre, see the organization as a relevant community space, or simply all of the above above. Needless to say, a purchase decision is complex and highly subjective so I shan’t profess that I’ve got it distilled into its elements.
One thing is clear though: buying a ticket to watch a theatre is not as simple a decision as buying a ticket to watch a movie. Neither art forms are mutually exclusive, but both are competing for our time and money. I bring up movies because with the cheap proliferation of cinematic media, going to see the theatre is more expensive and therefore considered luxurious by a more practical society. Theatre is largely perceived as high brow. To me, this is theatre’s double edge.
But what I am personally struggling with, in trying to figure out a financial and brand model for COLLAB Theatre Ensemble, the new Singapore theatre company I set up with 7 other actors, is how do you make/create a theater product that is relevant – commercial and community-wise? We’re lucky that there is a growing number of young Singaporeans (X, Y, and Z generations) who value theater as a social space for voicing and hearing alternative points of view. But theater nonetheless remains a subject for those who are excelling academically or have free extra-curricular time outside of class, those who can drop $30-$100 for a ticket, those who understand the abstract – it’s still considered pretty high brow in the Singapore mass market.
I’m convinced that to create a financially viable (not commercially viable) theatre organization, we need to be relevant to the community. Some companies use humor (some low brow, others more “sophisticated” with flying rigs and all) others use celebrities and TV stars (i.e. glitz and glamor) to pique interest and access minds. We’ve also seen companies explore specific themes targeted at specific communities (remember those few years where everything on stage was about a gay issue?). The success and failures of these individual experiments is the litmus test, so there is no need to superimpose my own aesthetic sense or the value of the trajectories (in some cases, tragic-tories) that they eventually took.
I do know that the theatre I want to be part of looks past the glitz and glamor, into what is relevant and true. It has to touch the heart, our sensibilities and hopefully incite some kind of change (change in aesthetic appreciation, change in thought, change in status quo, change in sensibility, change in inertia). This, I suppose, is draft one of my artist manifest.
Post Script: Would love to hear your thoughts on the relevance of theatre to you personally, be it if you’re a regular theatre goer, or a theatre newbie 
There’s an amazing installation at the MOMA NYC by Beijing based artist 
Walking through the exhibition, these innocuous commercial products lose their cold, industrial edge. In its place, I realize that each of these items were dearly valued, some probably loved. The human and history behind each of these material, commercial items was haunting. Amassed over 50 years, I could almost trace the modern Chinese’ journey from Mao to now. Poor to rich. Each item, each nearest, slightest possession was luxury. A value that can’t possibly be compared with the spoils that we modern urban folk throw out a daily basis.
Yet seeing these items laid out in a New York City building, surrounded by people foreign and touched by a tribute of a stranger, I felt a strange and ironic familiarity. Off-white electric hot water boilers that you have to pump by hand. Beautifully designed shopping bags that I could always count on getting from my 二姨, who kept them even though they had accomplished the task of transporting her purchases safely home. Metal mooncake boxes my 大姨 would keep just because they were pretty. Modest wooden framed beds with rock hard mattresses, exactly the ones I slept in whenever I stayed over with my aunts. Dark, unfinished wooden cupboards emptied and moved when my grandfather passed away.
