I don’t know why I am so apprehensive to begin this post. Perhaps I am worried that my perceptions of events that took place in Toronto while I was blissfully unaware in an elementary school in Halifax is prime opportunity for my foot to end up in my mouth. And perhaps that is true, but I still feel compelled to raise my voice to champion the ideals I cling to so fervently.
I have big dreams and lofty goals, and I know these things require money. It is the goal and the dream that require money, however, not the dream and the goal to acquire money. And I sit here and I sift through (albeit not enough, for time is at a minimum now) articles about Garth Drabinsky and LivEnt and I see what he did for Toronto’s theatre scene and then I wonder why? In true actor fashion, I jump immediately to, “what’s the objective? What’s the motivation?” The questions everyone are asking don’t really interest me. Is he guilty or not? Will he get jail or house arrest? What I wonder is, how much was Drabinsky doing because he had a dream and an artistic vision for Toronto, and how much was he doing a lucrative business venture?
Of course, one could argue my question is moot, that it doesn’t matter why Drabinksy created these shows, all that matters was the eight years where the world looked to Toronto, and shows transferred to Broadway and Brent Carver won a Tony Award for Kiss of the Spiderwoman. However, I think his motivations and objectives are important not for how we analyze the past, but for how we look to the future. Canada does not need to look backwards (either with fondness or bitterness) right now, but we must find a way to overcome the cloud of despair and insecurity and classic Canadian inferiority that the failure of LiveEnt has left behind. Garth Drabinsky’s greatest contribution to Canadian theatre was not Phantom of the Opera or Brent Carver’s Tony Award (I think Brent Carver’s Tony Award was the accomplishment of Brent Carver and to imply that he owes that to anyone but himself is a wild injustice to his talent). No, Drabinsky’s greatest contribution was simple affirmation. Garth Drabinsky affirmed for Canadians that we could compete on the world stage. He affirmed that Canadian actors were just as talented as our American cohorts. The failure of LiveEnt was the failure of individuals. Individuals who I think became greedy and corrupt and who lost their perspective (if they had any to begin with). We need to stop seeing this as the failure of “Canadian theatre.” My god! Our actors are just as talented as they were 15 years ago! Our ability to compete on the world stage has not dwindled or evaporated! We are just as great as we always have been; our confidence in ourselves has just retreated like a turtle into its shell.
It is true that our government does not support Canada’s theatre community as it properly should. So, what are we going to do about it? If that was Drabinsky’s problem, did he ever address it? What steps did he take to approach and amend these sorts of issues? What political stance is he taking now as Stephen Harper attempts to drain our country of culture in every form? And, what are we going to do about it?
Economic success in the theatre has little to do with talent or with excellence, it has to do with money and it has to do with publicity. Garth Drabinsky was not interested in creating art; he was interested in creating a buzz. I don’t mean that in judgment, I just think we need to keep this in mind when we’re speaking about his contribution to Canadian theatre. Richard Ouzounian, in his video address on http://www.thestar.com/, said that he misses Drabinsky’s Toronto because the theatre scene here used to be exciting. My God! Toronto’s theatre scene is exciting! Right at this very moment, the theatre scene in this city is so alive, it is bubbling up underneath everything, it is rejoicing, it is pulsating and it is red hot. Toronto’s theatre scene is on the brink of exploding right this very moment. The problem is that not even Richard Ouzounian, Toronto’s own theatre critic, is aware of it.
Creating an indigenous Canadian theatre scene that the world looks up to isn’t about bringing in shows that have garnered buzz in New York and London and sticking a few random Canadians in it and telling the world, “look, we’re just as good as you are in your hit show!” It’s about having the confidence and the pride in our own theatre, the shows that are created here, to publicize them and herald them for what they are: phenomenal and ours. Visitors should be flocking to Toronto to see shows at Soulpepper and Tarragon, not to see The Sound of Music. The only reason that people choose one over the other is because The Sound of Music is the only show that is advertized outside of Toronto, and it’s the show with the best publicity campaign in this city. I believe, with ever fiber of my being, that the world would look up to Toronto, the world would look up to all of Canada, with more excitement about the shows that are ours, than they ever did with Drabinsky’s shows which were not. We just don’t give them the opportunity to shine or to be seen.
There has been a lot of name dropping in the press as of late, and so I will leave you with Harold Prince’s words, because regardless of the context he has been put in, I think his own opinions on the matter warrant the most consideration.
“I am concerned… about the paucity of creativity in the commercial theatre… It’s not just our epidemic, but an epidemic in all forms of art, significantly influenced by corporate dictatorship… I note that in introducing me someone referring to audiences said, “What is it THEY want.” I would propose that THEY do not always know what they want. The shows that established my reputation are those that nobody knew they wanted until they wanted them. You would really rather have a new equivalent West Side Story or Fiddler on the Roof than one of the McShows you are so busy trying to book. Why don’t you just raise the money and collaborate with the advertising agents, forgetting the playwrights, the composers, the directors, the choreographers, the designers? They just get in your way… We’ve all witnessed the disappearance of the mom-and-pop business in our country. The theatre is not a grocery store. It is the theatre and it needs mom-and-pop business.” (Hal Prince’s address to the League of American Theatres and Producers, of which he is not a member, November 12th 1999.)
I have big dreams and lofty goals, and I know these things require money. It is the goal and the dream that require money, however, not the dream and the goal to acquire money. And I sit here and I sift through (albeit not enough, for time is at a minimum now) articles about Garth Drabinsky and LivEnt and I see what he did for Toronto’s theatre scene and then I wonder why? In true actor fashion, I jump immediately to, “what’s the objective? What’s the motivation?” The questions everyone are asking don’t really interest me. Is he guilty or not? Will he get jail or house arrest? What I wonder is, how much was Drabinsky doing because he had a dream and an artistic vision for Toronto, and how much was he doing a lucrative business venture?
Of course, one could argue my question is moot, that it doesn’t matter why Drabinksy created these shows, all that matters was the eight years where the world looked to Toronto, and shows transferred to Broadway and Brent Carver won a Tony Award for Kiss of the Spiderwoman. However, I think his motivations and objectives are important not for how we analyze the past, but for how we look to the future. Canada does not need to look backwards (either with fondness or bitterness) right now, but we must find a way to overcome the cloud of despair and insecurity and classic Canadian inferiority that the failure of LiveEnt has left behind. Garth Drabinsky’s greatest contribution to Canadian theatre was not Phantom of the Opera or Brent Carver’s Tony Award (I think Brent Carver’s Tony Award was the accomplishment of Brent Carver and to imply that he owes that to anyone but himself is a wild injustice to his talent). No, Drabinsky’s greatest contribution was simple affirmation. Garth Drabinsky affirmed for Canadians that we could compete on the world stage. He affirmed that Canadian actors were just as talented as our American cohorts. The failure of LiveEnt was the failure of individuals. Individuals who I think became greedy and corrupt and who lost their perspective (if they had any to begin with). We need to stop seeing this as the failure of “Canadian theatre.” My god! Our actors are just as talented as they were 15 years ago! Our ability to compete on the world stage has not dwindled or evaporated! We are just as great as we always have been; our confidence in ourselves has just retreated like a turtle into its shell.
It is true that our government does not support Canada’s theatre community as it properly should. So, what are we going to do about it? If that was Drabinsky’s problem, did he ever address it? What steps did he take to approach and amend these sorts of issues? What political stance is he taking now as Stephen Harper attempts to drain our country of culture in every form? And, what are we going to do about it?
Economic success in the theatre has little to do with talent or with excellence, it has to do with money and it has to do with publicity. Garth Drabinsky was not interested in creating art; he was interested in creating a buzz. I don’t mean that in judgment, I just think we need to keep this in mind when we’re speaking about his contribution to Canadian theatre. Richard Ouzounian, in his video address on http://www.thestar.com/, said that he misses Drabinsky’s Toronto because the theatre scene here used to be exciting. My God! Toronto’s theatre scene is exciting! Right at this very moment, the theatre scene in this city is so alive, it is bubbling up underneath everything, it is rejoicing, it is pulsating and it is red hot. Toronto’s theatre scene is on the brink of exploding right this very moment. The problem is that not even Richard Ouzounian, Toronto’s own theatre critic, is aware of it.
Creating an indigenous Canadian theatre scene that the world looks up to isn’t about bringing in shows that have garnered buzz in New York and London and sticking a few random Canadians in it and telling the world, “look, we’re just as good as you are in your hit show!” It’s about having the confidence and the pride in our own theatre, the shows that are created here, to publicize them and herald them for what they are: phenomenal and ours. Visitors should be flocking to Toronto to see shows at Soulpepper and Tarragon, not to see The Sound of Music. The only reason that people choose one over the other is because The Sound of Music is the only show that is advertized outside of Toronto, and it’s the show with the best publicity campaign in this city. I believe, with ever fiber of my being, that the world would look up to Toronto, the world would look up to all of Canada, with more excitement about the shows that are ours, than they ever did with Drabinsky’s shows which were not. We just don’t give them the opportunity to shine or to be seen.
There has been a lot of name dropping in the press as of late, and so I will leave you with Harold Prince’s words, because regardless of the context he has been put in, I think his own opinions on the matter warrant the most consideration.
“I am concerned… about the paucity of creativity in the commercial theatre… It’s not just our epidemic, but an epidemic in all forms of art, significantly influenced by corporate dictatorship… I note that in introducing me someone referring to audiences said, “What is it THEY want.” I would propose that THEY do not always know what they want. The shows that established my reputation are those that nobody knew they wanted until they wanted them. You would really rather have a new equivalent West Side Story or Fiddler on the Roof than one of the McShows you are so busy trying to book. Why don’t you just raise the money and collaborate with the advertising agents, forgetting the playwrights, the composers, the directors, the choreographers, the designers? They just get in your way… We’ve all witnessed the disappearance of the mom-and-pop business in our country. The theatre is not a grocery store. It is the theatre and it needs mom-and-pop business.” (Hal Prince’s address to the League of American Theatres and Producers, of which he is not a member, November 12th 1999.)
