A site I used to peruse more often back in the day has had some back and forth about the essay. It's interesting because most of the people discussing the essay are from the world I came from, doing theater full-time on top of a full-time job, trying to make it work. While there has been some positive responses there, there's also a strain of criticism that I think is interesting, so I'm going to be indulgent (it is my site; you don't need to read, after all) and address some individual points that pertain to the essay.
The short answer is: yes, the theater owes her a living because she is fantastic.
The longer answer is: yes, the regional theater movement's bedrock was repertory companies that created ensembles of supported artists in regional cities. It betrayed those ideals because it was expedient, and had they had the courage of their convictions not only would actors be better off today but the theater created (and the health of regional theaters) would be much improved if the legacy of this short-sighted decision wasn't still with us.
I have no doubt that if there were a repertory system in place this woman would have found a home in it; so yes, I am saying that if the theater knew what was good for its health, and good for its artists, she would be making a living.
The fact that ARTISTS in a regional city are certain that it's crazy that a gifted actress should be able to retire, afford a theater ticket or even their rent indicates how totally beaten down they've become.
What's sad to me is that this is also from someone working in the arts—you can taste the hopelessness. It's "unrealistic and childish" to even discuss why the regional theater movement has ended up where it is today. "There is a reality to the market forces"...this is from people working in the arts RIGHT NOW.
"We cannot will an impossibility into being." Why? We *willed* a regional theater movement into being...through the blood, sweat and tears of so many, and they would be horrified to see what had happened to their legacy today.
What fascinates me is the strain of Puritanism and stoicism here—it's a viciously reductive worldview where resources diminish every year, and the sooner others figure that out and get out of the pond the sooner the last few can fight over the scraps that are left. It's impossible to argue with or effect a corporation, so people look for the nearest thing to kick—and unsurprisingly, it's usually a person, as they are easier targets.
I think the regional theater movement should do better, and needs to do better, because it's the failures of that movement which have contributed to the decline in theater's relevancy as a vibrant art form. I refuse to submit to hopelessness, but the dark lure of doing just that is very real, especially for those working in the arts—they're on the front lines, and as we become exhausted from the fight people can harden and turn inward.
That's it for this evening...there's much to do for tomorrow.
5:49 AM