NfPV Building Communities

Introduction
The early shots in the Culture Wars of the late 1980’s were a wake-up call for me personally. However, what struck me most was not the specter of censorship or the devastation wrought in the area of government funding. What transfixed me was an underlying truth that became clear, but, to my mind, was insufficiently noted then or now. Our nation as a whole does not much care about the arts. No more proof of this is needed than to observe that no government official paid any political price for opposing "the arts" and none improved their capital by supporting them. (Indeed, many that privately supported the arts would not come forward to defend them.)

This certainly helps explain the state of arts education in this country that every member of the arts community descries. There is no broad popular will to fund it. It also helps us understand the difficulty most communities have in securing city or county money for funding the arts. It may even give us a clue as to why arts organizations struggle so to raise money. Their support base is tiny, as a percentage of their communities.

This basic truth of American life has forced me, over the last fifteen years, to undertake some serious soul-searching about the causes of and potential cures for the situation in which we find ourselves. In a capitalist democracy, the long-term health of any industry depends on a majority (or at least a sizable minority) of the population believing that industry is important to them. (My gauge of this is not what they tell pollsters, but how they vote with their ballots and their checkbooks.)

Terminology
Before beginning in earnest, it will be helpful to present a mode of categorizing works of art. In an attempt to find a non-judgmental way to discuss different kinds of artistic expression, I have developed the terms reflective and visceral arts. [See Reflective Art and Visceral Art .] These terms represent a conceptual polarity that clarifies the intent of works of art without resort to pejorative (or approbatory) terminology. A useful shorthand for these terms is that reflective arts feed the soul, visceral arts entertain.

Arts Delivery Systems
The current state of the arts cannot be properly understood without undertaking a brief consideration of the history of "delivery systems" for the reflective arts in Western culture. A key feature of these systems has long been their relationship with great concentrations of wealth and power, whether it was the Church, the State, or an individual. From earliest times, these patrons supported the creation and presentation of the arts. In the Nineteenth Century, the rise of the middle class led to the development of a system of ticket sales and gallery sales for the generation of additional revenue. This response to changing social and economic realities did have an impact upon the arts created and presented. However, the patronage system continued to be an important part of the creative process. Patron subsidies remained essential.

In the Twentieth Century, in most of Europe the patronage system by the wealthy, powerful individual (whether monarch, noble, or merchant) was taken up by the state, albeit a more democratic state than had been true in the past. This was a relatively easy transition since patronage by a king or queen did, on the surface, look like state patronage.

A similar transition, but one more appropriate for U.S political and economic history, was made here. First, the presentation function was taken up by what evolved into the not-for-profit corporation. (It is worth noting that, in general, corporations have a tendency to be far more conservative than individual patrons.) Second, financial support was taken on by members of the upper class and by the corporation (as a surrogate for the upper class). A critical difference in the two systems is that a large measure of the reflective art supported in Europe was home-grown, a situation very nearly reversed in this country. As a result, a somewhat broader base of political support for the arts exists in Europe than in the U. S.

In the U. S., the arts maintained a relatively stable, if quiet, niche in society until the 1950's. Interest and activity in the reflective arts then grew until the mid-1960's, at which point an explosion in arts attendance occurred. After 15 years of booming growth from 1965-1980, attendance at professional performing arts events reached a plateau. A very readable analysis of the causes of both the boom and the plateau can be found in a book entitled Waiting in the Wings by Bradley Morison and Julie Dalgliesh. To summarize briefly, many factors contributed to the boom, but a thriving economy (at least through the first part of the period) and the explosion in higher education precipitated by the GI Bill were prominent factors. However, the principal influence was the role of the National Endowment for the Arts in decentralizing arts activities in this country and encouraging the expansion of arts opportunities into previously unserved areas. As a result, we went from having 6 state and 50 local arts agencies (like arts councils) to 50 state and over 2000 local arts agencies. Professional theatre companies increased from 40 to 140, opera companies with budgets over $100,000 increased from 35 to 109, the number of museums increased by 28%, and the number of dance companies increased at least fivefold.

Morison and Dalgleish begin their analysis by identifying the population as being made up of three categories of people with respect to the arts. They describe Yeses (3-5%), who are predisposed to be interested and active arts supporters; Maybes (12-15%), who could conceivably be brought into the fold; Noes (50-55%), who will never be even remotely interested; and Ineligibles (30%), who are too young, too old, incapacitated, or incarcerated. They observe that by the 1980's, through decentralization, nearly all Yeses were being served. Therefore, the market had been "maxed out." Converts had not really been won. All those who were predisposed to be interested had merely gotten onto the bandwagon because the wagon had gotten to where they lived. Most arts organizations had anticipated that the growth curve of the 1960’s and 1970’s would continue. They were caught short when it plateaued.

Complicating Factors
Twenty years later, little has changed. Those who can be described as interested in any individual reflective art rarely represent more than 15% of the population, and 5% is often a more realistic figure. Indeed, if anything, the situation has become more complicated.

Social factors present challenges. The rapid increase in "minority" populations across the country–populations for whom traditional reflective arts programming is even more culturally removed than for the descendants of Western European immigrants–is forcing the arts community to re-evaluate its practices. Media-induced information overload makes it increasingly difficult to get the attention of people who are not already looking for reflective arts experiences. And the toll in exhaustion that is paid in long hours and two-income households makes it difficult to entice people to take up new "leisure time" activities.

The economic realities are even more daunting. The productivity lag experienced by all labor-intensive industries is particularly hard on the arts. The rise in the cost of living and the parallel rise in the expected middle class standard of living (things once deemed luxuries are now "essential," like cell phones) diminishes the "disposable income" people have available. And the proliferation of not-for-profit corporations of all kinds, not just arts organizations, is creating a frenzy of competition for funding dollars.

Traditional Arts Marketing
In the face of these factors, many arts organizations continue to pursue marketing practices that they have been using for years. In an understandable abhorrence of consumer-oriented marketing ("Take a poll and see what kind of toothpaste people want."), some arts organizations pursue a de facto product-oriented approach to marketing. In this, the programming presented is sacred. The public is welcome to "consume" it, but it is the art form itself that is the ultimate good. There is an unconscious attitude that "If we present it, they will come."

Realizing that the base must be expanded, some arts groups have attempted to do so by offering visceral arts programming in hopes that attendees will become enamored of the medium and eventually choose to attend reflective offerings. The theory makes sense, but the "Crossover Myth" has been largely discredited. Visceral arts experiences are substantially different in perceiver involvement. The passage from visceral to reflective is not a step across a crack but a leap over a chasm.

The performing arts community has a particularly entrenched marketing legacy. The engine that powered its 1960's and 1970's boom was something called Dynamic Subscription Promotion. Based upon the work of Danny Newman and presented in his book Subscribe Now!, this marketing approach focused on a single-minded concentration on season ticket sales. The concept was successful, but it had the effect of making us view the people who attend our events as "ticket buyers" and, collectively, as "audience." This preoccupation with filling the hall and the relative ease of the expansion made us lose sight of the communities we need to reach.

A New Approach to Marketing
Almost all of us in the arts bear in ourselves an unexamined assumption that what we do is not for everyone. There are 3-5% (or for the highly optimistic, 15-20%) whom we believe are "reachable." In spite of protestations to the contrary, this is something that is believed. This mindset limits our thinking and, more devastatingly, sets up an again unconscious sense of superiority in the artists (as well as the public) that the uninitiated pick up on in any communication with us.

This premise is one that generates a lot of passionate objection. Very few in the arts community hold that view consciously. However, when pressed, few really believe that Waiting for Godot (for example) is destined to touch the soul of the general public. It is an acquired taste, not for all. (I do not believe that is necessarily a bad thing, but it serves to illustrate my point.)

As I began to realize this, I began to examine my reasons for becoming an artist. I am passionate about the arts. I believe that the reflective arts matter and that they bear value for everyone. Finally, given that, I began to question whether devoting my life to an enterprise that was touching the lives of 5% of the population (or 15% on a good day) was worth the economic and personal toll.

It is this that has led me to a new way of thinking about marketing the arts. Avoiding the dual evils of pandering and elitism, it is time to review the essential mission of our arts enterprises. Reflective arts experiences designed to touch the souls of the entire community should be the goal. However, in almost all cases this means a substantial revision of the what, how, and where of our offerings to the public. It means that programming and marketing work as co-equals in the service of the mission. Thinking about an organization’s core aesthetic values and the needs of the entire community results in programming that reflects mission-oriented or, one might say, inclusive marketing.

Economic Imperative for Inclusive Marketing
There are economic imperatives for pursuing inclusive marketing. The performing arts are among the most labor intensive industries know to humankind. (Visual arts creation is equally labor intensive. However, economists have not studied it as thoroughly as performing arts presentation.) There is very little way to improve the economic "productivity" of a symphony orchestra beyond a certain point. There are fixed amounts of time required for rehearsal and performance. The classic assessment that it will always take four musicians to play a string quartet illustrates that, while other industries have been achieving cost savings through mechanization and organizational restructuring, that is not an option (or at least not an acceptable one) in the performing arts industry. Since almost all other industries have been insulating themselves from the ravages of inflation by such methods, the performing arts have been subject not just to that inflation but also to the fact that labor costs have been increasing exponentially as a portion of the nation's economy.

The only way to cope with this reality is to experience growth that is not only equal to but surpasses that of other industries. However, that would appear to be impossible. First, it has already been demonstrated that the market as it is currently understood is saturated. Second, being primarily a leisure time industry, the arts face the fact that as a nation we believe we have far less leisure time than was true several decades ago and what leisure time we have we often want to use cocooning in our own homes. Third, arts leaders are well aware of the dearth of quality education to prepare the audiences of tomorrow.

In an effort to deal with these challenges, the arts institutions capable of pursuing growth develop larger structures and centralize their activities in an effort to achieve economies of scale. However, there is a very real danger that this near-term survival strategy bears within it the seeds of destruction in the long-term. These organizations are creating larger, more powerful boards to raise bigger budgets and endowments, all the while getting further from the person on the street in the community. Size influences policy. Large, monolithic organizations quickly become invested in survival, often at the expense of their mission.

Moral Imperative for Inclusive Marketing
There is an equally compelling moral imperative that encourages the pursuit of inclusive marketing. Any industry that demands growth for survival at a time when it is faced with what appears to be a saturated market must undergo fundamental re-evaluation of itself. The human and financial resources devoted to the reflective arts are significant. To adequately justify that level of social investment, the arts should be reaching, not just seeking, a broad cross-section of the community.

The arts should not be a product delivery industry. They should see themselves as a personal relationship industry. Those of us whose heart and soul is our art must remember what it was that drew us to the profession. It had something to do with the effect that the arts had upon us individually and the connections it allowed us to make with others. If we must find a means to grow in order to survive, that growth can only take place by re-imagining what it is we do and for whom we do it. We need to engage not an undifferentiated "audience" but a collection of individuals in community with us.

New Thoughts about Inclusive Marketing
The Subscribe Now! approach to marketing is a product-based marketing strategy, an "If we build it, they will come" means of developing an audience. It holds that, for example, a Beethoven Sonata is an a priori good, regardless of the background or interests of the public we need to reach. While we may on first consideration think that is true, it should be remembered that for sixteenth-century Catholics, Palestrina was an a priori good. We do not, however, build an industry around his work today. There is a fundamental question to be addressed. Which is more important, that particular Beethoven Sonata or, on the other hand, the role that reflective music should play in our society? If it is the latter, we need to re-examine not only our marketing approaches, but our understanding of the product we present. The focus on tickets or body count rather than the people who are our potential market has led us away from creative thinking about how to expand our conception of that market.

Two Cases
Discussing the issues in the abstract helps clarify the need for reform, but it does little to assist in imagining what the ideas might mean in practice. What follows are brief descriptions of the activities of two performing arts organizations that are applying some of these principles in the field.

Oakland East Bay Symphony
Formed in 1988 after the collapse of the Oakland Symphony, the Oakland East Bay Symphony has, from its inception, operated from with a community-centered vision. Music Director Michael Morgan gives this description of the mission of the OEBS: "At this time in the history of orchestral music, every orchestra must be a community orchestra. The Oakland East Bay Symphony is setting an example for other arts organizations by demonstrating the convergence of artistic excellence and community service. Hence our relationship with other local arts organizations, civic organizations and, of course, the public and private schools. Our concerts are envisioned as community building events." (All information about the OEBS is taken from their website, www.oebs.org.)

At the beginning of the Symphony’s life, three broad goals were set. First was to become a community orchestra; second, to cultivate a non-traditional audience; and third, to maintain traditional patrons. The OEBS pursues the first goal by intensive work with local schools (including a comprehensive music education program), partnering with other nonprofits to increase mutual visibility and share fundraising, and expanding performing venues in non-traditional locations (such as community centers). The second goal is addressed by presenting more culturally diverse programming, utilizing local performers, and, in particular, sponsoring innovative commissions for new works. (A recent commission was for a piece by Afro-Cuban composer Omar Sosa.) OEBS works to maintain traditional audiences with a judicious mix of programming that invites people of a broad range of backgrounds to come together in appreciation of reflective music.

Today, more than 60,000 people annually attend the Symphony's performances at the Paramount Theatre, at churches and senior centers, and at other community sites each year. OEBS boasts a six-concert classical series along with a three-concert free series presented in Richmond, CA. Maestro Morgan summarizes the current state of the Symphony by saying,

"It is my hope that our largest contribution to the art will be the exposure of it to those least likely to encounter it on their own. By reaching out to those communities not traditionally involved in symphonic music, I hope we can show them the human connections, which can be made by different peoples through art. Our concerts will continue to include music from various traditions and periods. We will continue to perform works, which not only demonstrate the great history of this art form, but also demonstrate that it has a vibrant, viable future and therefore relevance to a younger, more diverse audience.

"OEBS has made great strides toward becoming an integral part of an extremely diverse community. Collaborations with new local organizations and artist are generating new audiences and serve as a force for positive change and community building. . . . OEBS has demonstrated that it can be artistically excellent and fiscally responsible. It is now regularly cited as an orchestra that has found the pulse of its community."

The Roadside Theater Company
OEBS is an example of a performing arts organization that has its roots in a very large, very diverse community. The Roadside Theatre Company has a radically different base. It is a professional theatre troupe which tours throughout Appalachia but is resident in a town of 3000, Whitesburg, KY. Growing out of the War on Poverty program of the 1960’s, their mission statement says that "Roadside Theater is creating a body of drama based on the history and lives of Appalachian people and collaborating with others nationally who are dramatizing their local life." (All material is taken from their website: www.roadside.org.)

Their stated target market is the entire population of the region they serve. They commission and perform reflective art of a high order, drawn from the traditions and rooted in the experience of the people they are attempting to reach. They have become an integral part of the lives of the people in their communities; not as "others" bringing greatness down from on high but as fellow laborers on this earth. The results are impressive. The Company has a record of playing to sold out houses in the small towns in which they perform.

Perhaps not surprisingly, their appeal is not limited to their home region. Over the last twenty-eight years they have, in addition to success in their home base, toured to 43 states, been in residence at the Manhattan Theatre Club, performed at Lincoln Center, and represented the United States at international theater festivals in London, the Czech Republic, Sweden, Denmark, Los Angeles, Seattle, and Philadelphia.

Objections: Show Me the Money!
Reviewers of this article have objected to the obvious expense of these approaches. The requirement for outside funds far exceeds current norms. When asked about this, Michael Morgan responded that the emphasis on work "that is both socially and artistically important is what makes it attractive to people." He said, OEBS’s educational efforts, arguably the most expensive of its programs, are "some of the best funded aspects of our program. There is enormous enthusiasm from foundation and individual sources, some of whom would not otherwise support a symphony orchestra."

Dudley Cocke, Director of the Roadside Theater, concurred that an altered understanding of arts organization’s relationship with the public opens funding doors not otherwise available. In addition, this focus led to an interesting strategic decision fifteen years ago. In 1989, faced with more bookings than they could fill, Roadside Theater was faced with the choice of "pulling back" or expanding. The company chose the former for the purpose of working more deeply in their communities rather than broadening through relatively superficial relationships with new audiences.

Many experienced arts managers will see in these approaches the potential for tapping seed money for new initiatives. They will also immediately sense a concern about long-term financial viability–foundations in particular are not interested in providing programmatic support in perpetuity. The funding corner to be turned is arrival at a point where a large percentage of a local populace sees the direct benefit of the work being done. When that moment arrives, government and corporate support will be much easier to justify than has ever been the case before; and the pool of potential individual donors will expand far beyond the experience of most arts development officers.

Lessons
The Oakland East Bay Symphony and Roadside Theater represent only two possible approaches to the dilemma addressed here. Each organization seeking to accomplish a similar transformation must find its own path because the solutions will be unique to each organization and each community. The secrets of their success, upon reflection, do not seem so secret, but they do seem to be untried in most of my experience with the reflective arts. First, they view their product as something that has as its role to serve the people, not the other way around. Second, they emphasize grassroots arts activity that is based directly upon the experiences of the people who attend their performances. Third, they are seen, individually and collectively, as approachable members of their community. Finally, it is clear they have genuine respect for the large majority of their audience who are uninitiated in the traditions and language of the arts.

Re-Imagining Arts Programming
The more difficult question may be what might we do to emulate these approaches? As just stated, there is no single, simple answer. However, the process begins by clearly defining what the arts organization’s basic mission is. In order to effectively address these issues, that mission statement should include ample consideration of the needs and desires of all individuals who make up the community that the arts organization serves.

Second, the arts organization should actively consider what elements of the community are not being served at present. (Remember that if "they" are not attending, for whatever reason, "they" are not being served.) The only effective way to engage the community is to develop new relationships–enter into on-going dialogue with those who currently do not see the organization as being important in their lives. The goal of the dialogue is to make it so.

Third, specific ways to promote participation in reflective arts experiences must be developed with these community representatives. Any opportunity for grassroots arts activity must be explored. As I have said in numerous venues, all the arts are local. The arts have their greatest impact on the personal, individual level. Whether it is artists in schools, in homes, in workplaces, or in neighborhoods, any place where people can be found to gather together, artists should be also. These are the places where relationships are formed. Once formed, people will be much more interested in venturing out into more distant venues. In addition, given a personal relationship with some of the artists, most people will more readily give the arts the "benefit of the doubt" than would otherwise be true. We must remember that for much of the public, attending a "classical" concert or museum exhibition carries with it some of the same anxieties that attending a revival meeting would for others.

Arts organizations can collaborate with non-arts organizations for mutual benefit. In addition, arts groups should actively encourage the creation and presentation of reflective art that has its materials and forms rooted in the experience of the people they are trying to reach, not the experience of those extensively trained in the arts of Western Europe.

In everything we do, we should educate and listen. All our interactions with the public must be seen as two-way relationships, knowing both what we give and what we get in each exchange. All of us who make community arts presentations are aware of how much we know and how little "they" do. This inevitably results in a learning disability on our part. We fail to hear (or worse, turn off dialogue about) exciting insights from the lay public. We know very little about how reflective arts can be made important to the "outsider". Our communities are the best and only teachers we have. It is our job to learn how to learn from them.

Certainly we should continue to be active in the schools for the sake of the future of our industry. However, that represents no solution for the current dilemma. As I stated earlier, we must also be active in workplaces, neighborhood recreation centers, and every other gathering place that represents a viable venue for making connections with people.

The Fundamental Question
There is one question that can be used as a benchmark to determine whether efforts in the direction of inclusive marketing are being successful. That is, "How are the lives of the people of your community made better by the work you do?" An answer honestly seeking to reach out will not beg the question of how many or which. The goal is all.

There are numerous forces at work to threaten the future of the arts. They demand that, at the very least, we examine commonly held assumptions both about the things we do and the way we do them. To develop the social, economic, and political support that will be required for survival, artists must learn how to become partners with the members of their communities in exploring the meaning of the arts and the role they should play in all of our lives. The goal is to become vital members of our communities, partners in all that is important to those communities. As I have already said, paraphrasing Tip O’Neill, all the arts are local. This is not just a statement about making our product viable, but it is also a statement about where we are most able to be an agent of change in people's lives. It is in understanding ourselves as community builders that we can find the key to our future and fulfill the call that led us into this profession in the first place.

Perhaps the most important lesson to bear in mind is that, in arts programming as in most everything else in life, there is no them. There is only us.