In Arts News: HTFA Discourse, NYT On Intiman, Hugo House's Staff Changes

As expected, Wednesday night's benefit performance of Mike Daisey's How Theater Failed America provided a sort of catharsis to a nearly packed theater. Not surprisingly, among those in attendance were the actors, craftsmen that one would assume would be there; mixed in with them, however, were a large number Arts administrators and board members that may or may not have been leery of attending something that may besmirch them. Which wasn't the overall, or intended, effect of the evening, particularly after the round table discussion held immediately after the show.

The show performed was essentially a more refined version of HTFA that Daisey performed at CHAC in 2008 (still early in its development), mutated only slightly to address issues that are currently affecting the Seattle theater scene, primarily stressing the importance of theater companies using local artists in order to truly reflect the community.

The round table discussion afterward may have disappointed those who were hoping for it to digress into a shouting match between aggrieved local artists and 'those in power,' but perhaps it is better for all involved that it did not. While those who remained were largely theater artists, there was a sizable portion of the audience who were simply people who like and are interested in theater. And a knowledgeable bunch they were too; it was heartening to hear a sole voice utter the names of Alice B. and The Group (RIP both) while the table was discussing the disappearances of mid-size companies in Seattle in the late 90s. Not only was someone paying attention, they remembered what those companies brought to the community.

The sedate nature of the conversation did not mean that vital issues weren't raised in the process (though the manner in which some difficult subjects were eluded was a touch disappointing). Among the topics discussed: the lack of recognition of behind-the-scenes labor in general by the regional theaters; how Intiman's weak local focus made it possible to be apathetic about its demise; whether Seattle's LORT theaters appropriately reflected either the diversity or the younger generation; are the professional houses producing work that is vital or just filling slots in a schedule. (Seattle Repertory Theater deserves credit for organizing the evening, as does its Artistic Director, Jerry Manning, for being the face of Seattle's professional theater's administrative staff in what might have been some uncomfortable moments on the stage.)

If only a quarter of those in attendance decided to make a concerted effort to change and revitalize the local scene, then it will have been a respectful beginning toward the theatrical renaissance that Seattle has been on the verge of for quite some time.

Afterward, the group migrated to the nearby Solo for some beverages and conviviality, where a question that deserves immediate attention was raised: What is going to happen with Intiman's space, particularly if the company closes for good? Surely, somebody not affiliated with theater is already wondering that very thing and making plans toward providing an answer before anyone else has a chance to do something.

Let's avoid another Chihuly museum situation, shall we?

Speaking of the Intiman, the New York Times finally printed its story about the company's demise -- unsurprisingly, their take on the matter is simply "prestige (as defined by centering your reputation on New York City and what it thinks of your company) won't save regional theater". The article is remarkably free of any new information, with the notable exception that they finally get a quote from Bartlett Sher, Intiman's penultimate Artistic Director, whose regime many believe created the financial hole that caused the company's implosion.

Sher has the unmitigated gall to condemn Intiman's Board for catering to his whims:

While Ms. Whoriskey has refrained from criticizing the board, Mr. Sher has not. He described it as negligent while problems mounted and said it bungled the handling of the crisis. “Unless the board really steps back and deeply analyzes its own behavior,” it’s going to be “a very hard road,” he said.

While that is a valid statement, let us consider the source for a moment. This, friends, is what is known as taking the cake.

The number of administrators at local arts organizations that have announced they were leaving during the last few months have been plentiful. Nearly all of them have mentioned the difficulty in maintaining a successful non-profit organization during the present fiscal environment, which we assume is undoubtedly true.

Add Sue Joerger, Hugo House's Executive Director, to that group of departing administrators. In a near echo of Seattle Art Museum Director Derrick Cartwright's departing statement, Joerger refers to the success of her efforts to make Hugo House solvent, the harsh economic climate, and a desire to pursue her own endeavors as her reasons for leaving at this time.

We wish Ms. Joerger the best of luck.

While we could worry about what all of these departures mean for the health of Seattle's arts scene, especially in the face of Washington State's legislative impotency in failing to pass funding for 4Culture, we've decided to look at it as a massive changing of the guard. There may be lean times ahead, but hopefully with renewed fresh energy, some creative solutions to the possible calamity ahead of us could be achieved, and a stronger arts scene will emerge.

We're optimistic that way.