There’s a great article about the Williamston Theater in Michigan…we’ve distilled some of it here and would like to know your thoughts.
Where art is concerned, there are (very) generally two groups of people: the artistes and the ‘regular’ people. “Some artists assume that they know what ‘the common man’ likes, and dismiss their interests and opinions. Some regular people assume that “those artsy types” are purveyors of snobbery and elitism.”
So…often, the efforts of artists and arts organizations can seem like a sociocultural shove to get people to like the ‘right’ things. The Williamston Theater’s approach has been a little different:
“We went in and said, ‘We want to make it about here, plays that audiences relate to.’ We struck a chord with people…We believe that theatre can enrich our lives and make a positive difference in our community, both culturally and economically. We believe that theatre should be accessible and affordable to everyone, whether they live in a large coastal city or a small Midwestern town. We believe that there are voices in the Midwest worth hearing, and our goal is to create moving, entertaining, professional theatre for and about this part of the world.”
Williamston’s artistic director says, “Don’t tell me that the people paying money coming into my theatre have an opinion that should be of a lesser value. They have just paid their money. They were moved, or they weren’t…That’s just as useful to me in the making of our art with a deadline as the ‘higher’ train of understanding. I don’t need to know how my digital watch was built … but I can tell you if I think it’s cool … and if it works.”
What do you think? Would such an approach result in a less artful, less excellent, over-marketed product? Or is there value in this kind of collaboration?
Link to this page
