At the time, the New Deal sensibility of societies working for the common good still imbued Copland’s worldview, as represented in “The Tender Land.” Not long after its completion, Copland was hauled before HUAC. He was deeply traumatized and was never the same afterwards. Those events represented the end of an American sensibility.

I hope some of you might watch the video linked below of “The Promise of Living.” The images are at times kitsch, but the video includes the text which is worth following. Anyway, the composition is a work that strives to be both moral and accessible, and seems relevant to this discussion:

I did a new count and found that there are 8 fulltime, year-round opera houses within two hours of my house here in Germany’s Black Forest: Stuttgart, Ulm, Karlsruhe, Pforzheim, Freiburg, Basel, Zurich, and Lucerne.

Last week I saw the premiere of “La Cenerentola” in Lucerne. It was a Regietheater production. Cinderella runs an ice cream wagon in a place something like and Italian community in Brooklyn. The action is centered around a ping-pong championship. This was all worked out in an ingenious and hilarious manner that delighted the audience. There were repeated ovations at the end in rhythmic applause.

In these small cities, it’s also wonderful to see opera in houses that only seat 500 to 800 people. For 50 Euros people can see the singers less than 50 feet away and experience opera in all of its transcendent, human viscerality.

The population of Lucerne is only 76,000 and the metro area only 250,000, but it has a fulltime opera house, a fulltime spoken theater, a fulltime, opera company, a fulltime orchestra, and a fulltime ballet, all resident ensembles. And the city hosts one of the world’s major musical festivals.

As an example of programming and morality, Lucerne has focused its season on women opera composers. The productions include Chaya Czernowin’s “Pnima,” Ethel Smyth’s “The Boatswain’s Mate,” and the world premiere of Elisabeth Naske’s “Der satanarchäolügenialkohöllische Wunschpunsch.” Not even the Met, in a city 105 times larger, can do this kind of innovative programming.

The season’s five other productions all focus on works that have strong female leads ranging from Cole Porter’s “Kiss Me Kate” to Bizet’s Carmen. The Director of the house, Dominque Mentha, drolly comments that it is also interesting to see how men portray women.

Moral programming, which often addresses controversial social issues, and which must find a balance between populism and idealism, can only be achieved upon a funding system that is also moral. Europe’s freedom of programming, the plethora of local opera houses, and the very affordable prices all raise moral questions about arts funding systems – to say nothing of the artistic issues that are resolved. I hope Americans will begin to consider the artistic and moral weakness of their system of funding the arts by donations.

It would be a pleasure to break bread with you … and preferable to Skype from my perspective. I’m in the Eastern corridor for an extended stay this fall and would love to do that. Will drop you a line in advance.

D

First: The journal headline “Markets Make Us Less Moral”. Recognizing that this is not Diane’s thought, it’s still reflective of a persistent way of thinking in the non-profit world that distorts our economic vision and drives me nuts. It’s a false dichotomy. Ma
kets are just a lot of people making decisions with their money. When we choose to “kill our mice”, the market is just pulling back the curtain on the ethics we already have. The market didn’t create those responses – it just offered the opportunity for us to expose ourselves. Money is fungible – it’s just a way for us to demonstrate what we value. We can argue about ethics (or the quality!) of individual choices, but we don’t have a choice about participating in this “market society”; it’s there whether we aim our efforts at our local community (one market) or Broadway (another). I think this is Don’s thought above: “The marketplace is about the real. Art is about ideals. This is the dilemma of human life itself. Marketplace values seem to come from what we are whereas the ideal seems more related to what we would like to believe we are.” To mangle Walt Kelley – “We have met the enemy (the market)… and he is us.”

Second: The section on the Coconut Grove and Arnold Mittleman. Here I am a raving Ragsdale fan. Non-Profit theaters are not buildings and administrative staff to be supported ad-infinitem at any cost and by any means. They exist for the support of performances and the artists who make them possible, period. For far too long the artist has been the last person at the end of a very long line of stakeholders, and has been forced to make do with whatever hasn’t been consumed by those in the front. I urge anyone reading this to check out the full text of Diane’s talk in Australia referenced above, particularly “Section IV, Sacrificing Our Mice To Stay Alive”. Yes, yes and yes. There are many specific ways to get up that mountain, but for now let’s just know that that is where we need to go. Full disclosure – I am an actor and Financial Advisor.

Seems to me the new takeaway here is located in this statement and question:

“As long as some theaters are getting tax breaks, and tax deductible contributions then, I would suggest that, yes, they need to pay attention to the lines. What’s your rationale for allowing them to disregard the lines (if I understand you correctly)?”

Here it depends on which lines you mean. There are legal lines, of course, that must be heeded — although the US government’s oversight of 501(c)(4)s at the present moment is clearly a political hot potato. My understanding of your original post was that the lines were moral — the right and the wrong. The legal lines are much easier to comment about.

Finally — on a personal note — one day you and I must Skype. Or break bread. Or something. It will not be tax deductible but I’ll wager we’ll find it a profitable exercise. LJ