A Success Story of Sorts

As 2011 drew to a close and the New Year was ushered in with dropping balls and cheap champagne toasts, I contemplated the first Director's Notes blog of 2012 to kick off this new set of 365 days. 

What big sizzler could I start the New Year with?

A blog about how the Buffalo News Arts reviewer Colin Dabkowski's non-sensical, written near-deadline columns that do absolutely nothing for the WNY Arts Community as a whole? 

Nah, that can go without saying.

The over-saturation of yuppie magazines like The Block Club that are comprised of 85% advertisement with the the rest of the glossy garbage filled with cute, psuedo-urban/intellectual articles about the same city faces and the same city places?

Boring, like those magazines. 

How some cultural groups, who receive Erie County public, Fund for the Arts and/or Give for Greatness money, can take out full-page ads or purchase time on billboards dotted along the 33 despite the Cultural Groups facing tough economic times? 

Intriguing, but that seems to be status quo. 

So there I was, staring out the window at a green January when the phone rang. 

On the other line was an American Repertory Theater of WNY alumni, and a friend of mine. We started the conversation off in a pleasant exchange but their voice began to waver and eventually crack after this person told me about some impending medical news that could have dire consequences. 

In the Arts World, we are constantly reminded of the human condition. Once in a while, we come across a work of art or a particular theatrical piece that moves and brings us to closer to humanity without the realism behind it, a la "Art Imitates Life". 

Then there is the real "life".

When one hears about another's fear of the unknown, in whatever circumstance, this expressed realism truly connects us as human beings. We don't hear the words or see the actions synthesized by an actor, a painter or musician. That emotion is coming from a real place and not some pretended creative action. 

There I was chatting with this individual about the possibility of their leaving Buffalo to be with family depending on what the medical report determines. In this conversation there was tears and sadness, but not because of the uncertainty or the potential inevitable outcome. It was because this individual was  emotionally burdened by the thought of having to move to join their family and would have to leave  friends and this "wonderful" theater community behind. 

Real life.

This individual may be faced with mortality and yet it was more emotionally devastating to contemplate leaving this area and all the good things this person has been part of. 

What makes this even more compelling is that this individual did not grow up in this region and attend the same high schools or colleges like all Buffalonians. When this person moved to Buffalo, there was nobody they knew and, yet, was able to carve out a great acting career and build a good circle of friends. 

These are the types of human condition stories that fly under the radar yet contain so much richness and speaks volumes about this community.

As we finished our conversation, this personal revelation effected me far more than a play with fake British Isle accents. The obvious effect being eventual mortality and a perspective of one's life while underneath, upon further rumination, the context of this person's story in the region we live. 

Despite all the external (and internal) distractions, the Western New York Arts scene is a strong community. Indeed it has as many problems as a dysfunctional family with an alcoholic uncle during the Holidays, but there are some good folks trying to make the best out of this community without having to be seen as the spokesperson for every Arts advocacy group. 

And the first thing they do is make the conscious choice to remain in this area. 

I have faith that my friend will beat this medical setback and return to ART's stage, am proud that this person has included me in their circle of friends, and, regardless of the perceived sadness, find this individual's story somewhat of a success for us who remain in Western New York and continue to be part of the Arts community.  

Onto 2012. 

Dabkowski Gets 1 1/2 Stars

Sometimes a person's heart and/or intentions are in the right place, but then, unfortunately through action, they try to offer opinion that ultimately creates damage than actually helping out a cause.

We've all been there.

This can be applied to the recent Sunday article featured in the Buffalo News Spotlight page written by local theater critic, Colin Dabkowski, mysteriously entitled "Theaters should pool resources to stay afloat."

It pains me to write a blog response to this article for two reasons.

Firstly, Mr. Dabkowski does a great job with his columns focusing on issues facing WNY Artists and Cultural Groups. Knowing that the only daily newspaper in Buffalo reserves space to follow the local arts is comforting as well as the weekly input of Mr. Dabkowski's articles reflects to the general public an outsider's opinion on a particular subject facing the Arts. This, in turn, offers a fresher (or newer) view on a subject as opposed to hearing the same old Cultural Group representative repeating the same old Cultural Group mantra.

The second reason is the inevitable damning of American Repertory Theater of WNY to a future of 1 1/2 star ratings if Mr. Dabkowski decides to start sending himself to review productions. Perhaps it may be a good time to look into taking out ads in The Buffalo News to soften the blow?

But to be frank, Mr. Dabkowski's article is perhaps one of the most irresponsible and misconceived journalistic pieces authored by this theater critic. If his work was to undergo the same scrutiny his newspaper places on theatrical productions, Mr. Dabkowski would get a 1 1/2 star rating.

Let's begin with Mr. Dabkowski's title that suggests the pooling of theater's resources could be a way of "staying afloat."

As indicated in his article, it is no stroke of brilliance to understand that local theaters should collaborate in order to save costs. Everyone from Herr County Executive Collins to an 60-year-old patron has suggested this mode of operation as a way of saving money. But what Dabkowski fully fails to recognize is that local theater companies shy-away from collaborating because, as recently said to me by a local theater's artistic director one evening at Founding Fathers, "You know that's impossible because everyone is doing their own thing."

The main reason Buffalo has "a sprawling theater scene" comes directly from the fact that individuals, not being able to practice their dramatic arts, became frustrated with a closed-in theater scene and set-out on their own. If one looks at the past 25-year history of Buffalo theater, there are several examples of this due to the clique-infested, artistically myopic-driven, entrenched feudal system of Buffalo theater.

As splinter groups emerged, the idea of collaboration became less and less appealing. This fostered the practice of these "newer" theatrical companies, who became increasingly established, to become insular, like their predecessors, and force a newer generation to seek establishment of their own companies because of the same reasons.

And so on.

Dabkowski fails to recognize this historical point and simply choses to lay claim that a majority of Buffalo theaters open shows that are half-baked and encourages the theater going patron to attend closing night because of the inability of the less-resourceful theater's production to "cohere before the curtain goes up."

The relevancy of this suggestion (besides driving patrons to closing weekend and creating box-office nightmares) and why theaters should pool resources because of this result is unclear. Perhaps Dabkowski could be sending some sort of plea to those theater companies who have rent-free space to grant rent-free (or a minimum fee of $10/night) rehearsal space with those "have nots" so they can come up with some sort of well-done grilled piece of Filet O' Steakspeare on opening night.

Akin to a pepper rub, Dabkowski throws around the term "resource" like some tire-gauge of what is good and mediocre theater. Further indicating that because of resources those who "have" can produce a 5 or 6 show season of fully baked theatrical presentations on opening night. Those with less "resources" who attempt to produce the same amount are doomed to mediocre Hades.

I agree with Dabkowski in that sometimes its a matter of quality as opposed to quantity.

The truth of the matter is that those more established theaters with "resources", because of arrangements or deals years ago, pay little to no rent unseen by most of Buffalo's contemporary theaters. In turn, these companies can conduct four to five weeks of rehearsals before the "curtain rises". That money saved on rent (and in some cases utilities) then can go towards talent and tech crews that expedites the rehearsal process.

With all this going, a company with "resources" should damn well have their shit together by opening.

In these economic times, the deals made to theater companies twenty years ago will not exist again. Any theater company attempting to start up in Buffalo will most likely have to rent or take out a lease on space they will have to modify into a performance room. When Dabkowski mentions that some theaters are "happy to put out six or seven (or more) under-baked productions a year" indicates he does not recognize the fact some companies are forced to pay rent or close up.

Now I can hear those Economic Darwinians from the back-row, but this survival game is the same one being played by Collins as it pertains to Cultural Groups who need public money to keep existing.

What's the difference?

Should these types of companies collaborate? Absolutely, and, in essences, reflect what Dabkowski is trying to express. The problem with this comes down to the simple economic fact that in order to pay rent and utilities, these companies would have to ask for numbers that could crush any startup theater companies' budget.

So the choice becomes whether a rent-paying theater should sub-lease to another company with faith that rent and utilities will be paid, actors and staff will be somewhat compensated and whatever resources are not depleted by this joint venture.

Or simply keep producing on their own piece and avoid this uncertainty.

It may be safe to assume that twenty-five years ago when folks were performing in living rooms, school auditoriums, cramped modified spaces, or on the Nietzsche's backstage, the question of being underbaked on opening night was not being raised. Instead the positive statement of "I'm doing my dramatic art and I love it" was being made.

And most likely, patrons and those enamored with the now defunct Studio Arena were making claims that these small, splinter theater groups were mediocre, underrehearsed, had poor production values and were overproducing.

With that, Mr. Dabkowski should be relieved and happy to see these small underfunded groups never listened to the criticism or he wouldn't have a reference point to deem what is good and mediocre theater.

Matthew LaChiusa is the Artistic/Executive Director for American Rep Theater of WNY. His own work, "Axeman's Jazz" and two other ART productions (Greater Tuna & Last Meeting of the Knights of the White Magnolia) have received 2 1/2 star reviews from Colin Dabkowski. And for the actors, EVERY night is opening night...

Tom Bauerle is a Putz

I am not a big fan of talk radio and a good portion of my dislike comes from the brash, shock 'em approach many of these individuals take as they proclaim opinion on contemporary issues.

The constant one-sided, perceived "truth" these individuals spew out makes me cringe as these spin-doctors pounce on the First Amendment without any understanding of the consequences of spreading their negativity and misguided information.

Unfortunately, we live in a 21st century world where even if truth and fact contrast one's opinion that their belief still has substance. The art of compromise went out with the Y2K threat and we now live in a world with loosely connected pockets of shared opinions and an "us versus them" mentality.

Talk show radio hosts use this their advantage as they throw out subject they have opinions about in attempts to rabble-rouse demographic pockets.

I noticed this recently as I was told to catch a segment of WBEN 930's The Tom Bauerle show.

Apparently, Bauerle was on a tangent about the cuts to WNY Cultural agencies and had recently carried on a discussion with someone in the theater community who commented on Bauerle's anti-Cultural position. Bauerle ripped the caller claiming that the Arts should not receive funding and that those who are in that industry are nothing more than hobbyists.

A hobby?

According to Webster's dictionary, a hobby is "a pursuit outside one's regular occupation engaged in especially for relaxation." Based on this definition I will speak for myself and say that being in the Arts is not a hobby. Grant it, there is not much money in it and I have to look to other sources of income to survive, but I treat what I do as a job and get no "pursuit of relaxation" with it.

Now I have mixed views on Cultural budget cuts, but will take offense to someone calling what I do a hobby, so I called the The Tom Bauerle show.

In the ensuing conversation, he maintained those in the Cultural do it as a hobby. I countered to him that some people may feel the same way about on-air radio announcers in an era of online radio services. He disagreed by saying what he was doing "was his job".

"That is the same way some people feel about working in the Arts." I replied to him. "And some people treat use the opportunities in the Arts to help subsidize their income as well."

It did not register with Bauerle.

Neither did my point to him that although some creative passions begin as a hobby and with proper funding for venues, these hobbies can turn into full-time jobs. Much like a college student who takes up radio as a hobby and eventually becomes a talk-show host.

Clearly, Bauerle's opinion is set. What truly disturbed me was the callers responding to his show who were echoing his sentiments on the subject. One caller mocked the theater person by calling him a "Thurston Howell type with leather patches on his elbows,"and Bauerle kept feeding this prejudice by creating an "us versus them" mentality with his callers.

The overall point that Bauerle and his callers missed is that those involved in the Arts are not some toy-soldier painting group of intellectuals. We are folks who are dedicated to pursuing our creative passion. We treat what we do as professionals. We get the greatest satisfaction in doing our best, without any hint of relaxation, with our crafts.

True, there is no money to be made in the Arts, but it does not mean we treat it as a hobby. Most importantly, although some changes need to be made with business models, funding Cultural groups enables them to pay individuals their creative worth. With this, the frequency of paycheck may not reflect a more traditional job, but the concept of getting paid, instead of the work being a labor of Love, qualifies the industry and the creative passion. Eliminating the idea that what Artists do is a hobby.

To say someones passion is a hobby because the work does not generate a good income is ludicrous.

After all, some might believe that being an outspoken, on-air talk-show host for a small AM radio station in a small city with a listenership-demographic comprised of angry white people, technophobes, folks over the age of 60, and ignorant ridge-runners is just a hobby as well.

Right Tom?