CLOSE THE CURTAIN ON THEATER TICKET PRICES!

A love of the theatre is so general,

the itch for acting so strong among young people.

Jane Austen, Mansfield Park

I wrote the blog “Why the One Percent Must Read (or Re-read) Austen’s Mansfield Park” (April 24, 2014,  www.shadowwaterwriter.blogspot.com ) responding to the blinder-wearing elite who have not learned that the class system continues to wield its ugly head. To become an actor during Austen’s day meant little income, grudging recognition and ostracism outside of the theater by society. Yet, as seen in the above quote, Jane Austen understood the pressing need for all to have access to the theatre as performers or audiences.

As a child, I loved everything about theatre and often play-acted with friends, saw summer stock, regional and Broadway performances and performed in school-plays. Later, I interned and worked behind-the-scenes at various theaters including New York’s Public Theater, The Vivian Beaumont, Hudson Valley Shakespeare Festival and the Cape Playhouse in Dennis, MA. I share Austen’s passion for the stage.

After hearing about the outrageous ticket prices, a genuine example of exploitive capitalism, for Lin-Manuel Miranda’s final performance in “Hamilton” (as much as @ $6,000 with the lowest being @$1,700) I yelled at Charlie Rose’s devil-may-care attitude when he reported his experience on CBS This Morning. He blithely accepted the inevitable high prices and reveled in his good fortune, albeit with modesty. Ironic, the word “fortune,” with its denotations, e.g. good luck or large amounts of money, has become commonplace in our vernacular.

My anger regarding Broadway prices simmered for a week until I recalled Jane Austen’s life. She observed going to the theatre in Bath and occasionally London, as a privilege Austen humbly appreciated, knowing how few could afford such a treat. Indeed, she often went as a guest, for richer friends understood Austen’s hardship. (For more on Jane Austen’s life, read Claire Tomilan’s superlative biography, Jane Austen, A Life, 1999, Vintage)

Though there have been periods since where the American populous, at least, have been able to afford to attend Broadway or even regional productions, history has since come full circle. Present day, New York’s average ticket price for orchestra seats, musicals, is $150. Tickets which are sold from the TKTS’ booth (via the Theater Development Fund) at discounted rates start @$49, rear mezzanine seats, for popular musicals to $109 for the best seats.

Regionally and locally, ticket prices have also increased: the non-profit theater down the street from me charges $25 for most productions performed by non-professionals. Professional/semi-professional theaters here charge as much as $75 for the best seats. Disheartening for those on Cape Cod who are either on a fixed income or disability or for the average worker who can barely support their families’ basic needs. Theaters, here, have depended more on second homeowners or tourists for box office revenue. Some have been forced to stay open year-round to grab theater-goers who could become loyal subscribers and donors. As history suggests in the U.S. and England, any available government subsidies often award large or city-based non-profit institutions, leaving regional arts organizations in a lurch.

True, production costs have markedly increased in the for-profit and not-for-profit theaters since the seventies and eighties. Then, discounted tickets meant “significantly reduced.” Today, in the commercial theatre where ticket brokers grab blocks of seats via computer algorithms, much like the stock market scenario portrayed in the film, The Big Short (2015), only the upper-middle class or rich will be able to afford to attend the theatre regularly. And middle class attendees will be forced to go once a year, at best.

During the twenties, my mother’s childhood, theater-lovers from various strata could afford the theater, but little else. The situation worsened with the onset of the Great Depression. After World War II however, the general populous had more access, particularly with radio and later television where people could listen to or watch live performances.

Yes, economies are cyclical but in our modern age generations who could once afford to attend the theater can no longer do so. Moreover, with competition from movies, in-home entertainment, portable technology, potential theater-goers will be lost, and deprived of live drama or musicals; deprived of becoming captured by theater magic as Jane Austen did.

“No man dies of love but on the stage.” Fanny tells Mr. Crawford she has realized his love isn’t real; he is only pretending as he acts in a fateful play on a makeshift stage. Fascinating that Austen uses the scene to illuminate the climax of the story. Mr. Crawford is unmasked and Fanny sees the truth. Jane Austen knew first-hand how theater could serve as a form of escape from the drudgeries of everyday life. All should have that opportunity.