Is theatre too expensive?

Should theatre be more accessible or should the artists by more highly valued?

by Spencer Herbert

I hear all the time about how Vancouverites don't appreciate theatre, how small our audiences are, how great shows go unattended. I also hear how friends and acquaintances would like to go to shows but can't afford to. Or I hear from people who would never even think of going to the theatre as it's outside of their life, being too elitist or something like that.

I work in an area where ticket prices are often $20 for an hour and a half of reflection (often deemed unessential). I've heard the arguments about how we shouldn't undervalue our work, and how by having a high ticket price we teach the audience to value the work.

But would we make the same argument about food? Would we say “Sorry mate, you can't afford a meal, but we must keep it pricey so you know it's valuable.” No, food is kept somewhat affordable because it has to be. It's a necessity.

I hear people say that art is a necessity, that theatre can change our community, and that it helps us become more human and makes the world a better, and more interesting, place. I agree with all of these assertions. However, this is where the crack develops between one's argument and one's actions. If theatre is necessary, who is it necessary for? Is it only necessary for the middle class, and for everyone else, the TV should do?

You don't need to tell me theatre is expensive to produce. I know it is. I have seen the budgets and I've seen how horrible the conditions can be for theatre artists at times. If this is the case, why do we forget it when we go to choose ticket prices?

I was at a Vancouver theatre forum where I brought up the question of ticket prices. I was told by a large number of the participants that ticket prices were just fine where they were. They had audiences fill their seats. One person stated joyfully that they could have raised their ticket prices to $90 and still sold out!

If we are non-profit companies and given money by taxpayers to produce theatre that reaches out to everyone, should we not take on the attitude of the Canadian Health Care system, where we work to make it free? This seems to me to be a strong argument for taking a stand for what art can do for society and making ourselves relevant in the ongoing struggle for equality rather than just talking about it in our plays (if at all).

This is messy business, but just as we evaluate whether to stage a show based on whether we have the resources, we need to do so also in relation to equality and accessibility surrounding that show.

But then maybe I'm wrong and maybe TV is really more perspective widening and maybe we should let popular theatre die. I hope not.

****