Have You Heard? L.A.’s a Great Theater Town

I was pleasantly surprised to see two recent stories in Calendar about arts criticism. Hopefully, this is the beginning of a new discussion about arts and theater criticism in Los Angeles.

Los Angeles is a great theater town, offering productions ranging from large-scale musicals to intimate Equity-waiver plays. But many people don’t have an inkling of how much quality theater is produced here. Media exposure for all the arts is important, but if we expect Los Angeles to be known as a theater town, we must rely on consistent and comprehensive coverage in newspapers, magazines and on television and radio.

That is precisely why I recently hosted the first in a series of seminars about theater in Los Angeles, co-sponsored by Theatre LA and Harmony Gold Pictures. The topic was media and the theater in Los Angeles, and the goal is to have Los Angeles recognized as the theater town it is.

Initially, the idea of the seminars was to focus on theater’s access to broadcast media, but it quickly became clear that it was impossible to continue without devoting time to print media and the issue of criticism in general.

Press, in the form of reviews, news stories and feature articles, is an important way for a show, or the city’s arts community in general, to get noticed. Depending on advertisements is an expensive and unrealistic proposition and, practically speaking, is a luxury that only larger theaters can afford.

In fact, Kathleen O’Steen, writing for Variety about “The Phantom of the Opera” increasing its advertising budget, suggests that the Los Angeles production needs to spend more on advertising than New York. She states, “There’s also the tourist trade, which New York theater can bank on but Los Angeles legit has yet to significantly tap.” So the answer isn’t in just placing more ads.

It is hard to imagine why theater should be a hard sell here. The quality of our productions, the scope of theater offerings and our substantial tourist base are all strong indications that theater in Los Angeles should be thriving. Why in the world, then, should tourists headed for New York and London feel that their trips to those cities are not complete unless they attend the theater and museums, but Los Angeles-bound visitors do not? The only explanation is that both the local and tourist audience still hasn’t discovered what we have to offer.

How then to reach those audiences? Through the media, of course! George Green, general manager of KABC Radio, posed the following rhetorical question at the first theater seminar: “Does theater make itself more important so the electronic media covers it, or do radio and TV make it more important by covering it?”

This question only served to further open the discussion into economic realities, from the perspective of both those involved in theater production and the media. Questions of economics and marketing were then expanded to address media and theater’s responsibility to reach out to new audiences, as well as the harsh realities of theater’s need to survive as both an artistic entity and as a business.

If the questions were not all answered, they were at least being addressed, and people with an interest in theater are being brought together to rethink the common wisdom of what theater in Los Angeles is all about.

That is why I am so encouraged to see in print two perspectives on theater and criticism. The first article, by theater producer Jan Foster (May 27), dealt with the power of a critic to “close” a show, and the second piece, by Times Critic at Large Sheila Benson (June 4), examined the art of criticism.

Regardless of whether one believes that some critics may abuse their power, most people in theater/criticism would agree with Foster’s observation that “for theater to be successful both creatively and economically in Los Angeles, it is important that the media support it.”

Those who work in the theater were quite clear during the two seminars that the lack of reviews could be as damaging as bad reviews. Given that no one starts out to produce a poor show, and great effort is made to mount a production, it is worth the chance of getting a bad review, rather than having no one know your show is being presented.

Benson cites an essay by John E. Booth, “The Critic, Power and the Performing Arts,” and describes the qualities essential to a good critic and how in may cities critics are called upon to comment on areas for which they may not have experience. It sounds like this should be required reading in journalism and arts circles.

Perhaps, as we continue the seminars on theater, a separate dialogue will be opened within the field of criticism. In fact, criticism, theater, the other arts and popular entertainment and recreation have many complementary features that are enhanced by mutual consideration.

Los Angeles has become a major cultural center for all art disciplines. I want the Los Angeles theater and arts community to continue to grow and to be appreciated by increasing numbers of people, both residents and visitors. To that end, I am confident we can redefine the concept of criticism, giving it greater value, and hopefully more relevance to artists, patrons and the citizens who make up the audiences.