Even Theater Can't Escape the Laws of Economics..Or Can It?

Today's Arts section in the New York Times contains one of the most casuistry-laden articles I have read in a long time. I had originally wanted to write about how even the performing arts industry can't escape the laws of of supply and demand. However, this post can easily be about one of the following:

1) the decline of journalistic excellence

2) the slow, painless, carbon-monoxide asphyxia-like death of the Grey Lady (New York Times)

3) The nostalgic craving for a decent Arts section anywhere in the country, such as that of the now-defunct New York Sun.


Lets take a look:

Broadway’s Tony Glow Goes Only So Far

With last Sunday’s Tony Awards unlikely to provide a serious boost at Broadway box offices because the big winners are already hits, producers are counting on word of mouth and discounts to prevent closings and dark theaters this summer.

Yet the post-Tonys fallout has already begun. Producers of the musical revival “Guys and Dolls,” which won no Tonys and has struggled this spring because of weak reviews, announced on Tuesday that the show would close on Sunday without recouping its investment. That news followed a similar announcement that “reasons to be pretty,” a play with three major Tony nominations but no wins, would also close this Sunday.

Two plays that did win awards, “Exit the King” and “Joe Turner’s Come and Gone,” will close as scheduled on Sunday rather than extend, spokesmen said.

The four Broadway theaters that are home to these plays are expected to remain dark through the summer, as are two other houses, where “33 Variations” and “Desire Under the Elms” closed in May. Another four Broadway plays, including “Blithe Spirit” and “Waiting for Godot,” are to close between June 28 and July 19, and their theaters also have no bookings until fall.

Eighteen new Broadway productions have been scheduled for the new season, but until then Broadway’s financial health will depend largely on the Tony winners and losers’ finding ways to build audiences at a time when New York tourism — a backbone of summer attendance — is projected to decrease slightly.

So the article begins by citing several examples of how major productions are either closing on schedule (reducing quantity supplied, i.e. law of supply) or having to slash ticket prices to increase quantity demanded (law of demand). The publicity and prestige normally associated with winning a Tony award is no match for the economic realities of a wobbly economy.

However, later in the article we see this remarkable pirouette (pun not intended--a pirouette is a dance move used in ballet an other forms of dance. In political lexicon it means a change of position or a "flip-flop." In this case, the journalist forgets what his or her original thesis is and writes the exact opposite):

To be sure, the Tonys can help: “God of Carnage” tripled its typical sales on Monday, after its Tony wins on Sunday, and “Exit the King” doubled Monday sales after Geoffrey Rush won for lead actor, Chris Boneau, a spokesman for both shows, said. He refused to provide specific figures, making it impossible to assess those magnitudes of growth in real dollars, however.

Over all, 14 current and closed Broadway productions won at least one Tony this year, a fairly wide distribution that makes it difficult for multiple shows to crow about winning many awards.

So which is it, Mr. Journalist? Did the Tony's help or not? Or is it difficult to measure?

I consider the decline of the performing arts during today's economic climate. During the Great Depression, show-business and theater were two of the better performing industries, losing to alcohol distribution/bootlegging. Obviously things were different. Live theater and radio were the dominant media. Movies and the newly invented were black and white. The Internet did not exist. But clearly Americans allocated some of their disposable income for the performing arts.

Up until until this recent economic downturn, I would have hypothesized that theater and the arts would have been recession-proof, since they are two industries that are enjoyed by people with fairly high, if not stable, incomes. I may have to re-think this and do a little research. Certainly the article above highlights the retreat in ticket prices, suggesting a decline. Secondly, the amount of charitable giving (and I include philanthropy that targets the creative arts) will most certainly decline as personal wealth declines and the Democratic Congress gets rid of the tax exemption on charitable giving.