Site:

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/arch
ive/2016/01/the-state-of-public-funding-for-the-
arts-in-america/424056/
Background
Despite being home to a number of performing arts institutes, Kāpiti currently does not have a
community theatre. In fact there isn’t a community theatre from Wellington to Palmerston North.
The Kāpiti Performing Arts Centre started as a Kāpiti College initiative. The College has a reputation
as a training ground for burgeoning performing arts creative talent. Wanting to do more to support
its students, the College set about planning to build a new performing arts centre. Aware that the
Centre could be more than just a College facility, and seeking to connect the College to its wider
community, the College initiated discussions with the Kāpiti Coast District Council as part of its
planning process.
Following community consultation, what started as a College project has grown from an initial $5
million design for a performing arts centre to suit the school’s needs as well as some community
use, to a $10 million project designed to meet the wide gap in community facilities available and
strong interest from outside groups.
Our community continues to grow. Its estimated resident population for 2015 was 50,000, up from
47,500 in just ten years. Key strategic assets including the airport and the motorway extension
further define and add to the region’s potential to attract business and economic activity, and so also
residents. To complement the region’s economic development, the District Council is also
committed to ensuring the arts have a role in the expression and development of individual and
community identity, pride and wellbeing. It shares the College’s vision that a thriving performing arts
scene is part of what brings Kāpiti together and grows pride in community and culture. The Kāpiti
Coast District Council recognised the need for a purpose built performance facility in the region in its
long term plan for 2015 – 2035 – Future Kapiti.
In response to a well-recognised need and with the support of the Ministry of Education, the Council
is supporting the Kapiti College initiative to build a central performing venue for the Kāpiti Coast.

Progress to date
The College Board is working with the Ministry of Education and the Kāpiti Coast District Council on
plans to build the Kāpiti Performing Arts Centre. We are well along with our planning; we have land,
roading infrastructure, detailed architectural plans and almost 85% of the funding needed. Building of
the foundation is planned to start around Christmas 2016.
We still need to get the community (local businesses, philanthropists, performing arts groups,
families etc) to come on board and raise the final $1.5million, for this project will benefit the entire
region, across all ages!
 Site: https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2016/01/the-state-of-public-funding-for-the-
arts-in-america/424056/

Who Should Pay for the Arts in

America?
At 50, the National Endowment for the Arts is still fighting to make the
performing arts available to everyone, while the influence of wealthy donors
increasingly tilts the balance.

 ANDY HORWITZ

 JAN 31, 2016

One morning last August I visited Williams College in Massachusetts to teach

a workshop on “building a life in the arts” with a group of racially,
geographically, and economically diverse young people working at the
Williamstown Theatre Festival. Later that night I attended a show at the
theater, where I saw these idealistic apprentices taking tickets from, ushering,
and selling merchandise to an overwhelmingly white audience—mostly over
60 and, judging by appearances, quite well-off. The social and cultural
distance between the aspiring artists at Williamstown and their theater-going
audience couldn’t have been more pronounced. This gulf is quite familiar to
most producers and practitioners of the performing arts in America; it plays
out nightly at regional theaters, ballets, symphonies, and operas across the
country.

Kickstarter Expects to Provide More Funding Than the National Endowment

for the Arts This Year

The current state of the arts in this country is a microcosm of the state of the
nation. Large, mainstream arts institutions, founded to serve the public good
and assigned non-profit status to do so, have come to resemble exclusive
country clubs. Meanwhile, outside their walls, a dynamic new generation of
artists, and the diverse communities where they live and work, are being
systematically denied access to resources and cultural legitimation.

Fifty years ago, the National Endowment for the Arts was created to address
just such inequity. On September 29, 1965, President Lyndon B.
Johnson signed the National Endowment for the Arts into existence, along
with a suite of other ambitious social programs, all under the rubric of the
Great Society. Johnson imagined these programs as ways to serve “not only
the needs of the body and the demands of commerce but the desire for beauty
and the hunger for community.”

Half a century later, the ethos upon which the NEA was founded—inclusion
and community—has been eroded by consistent political attack. As the NEA’s
budget has been slashed, private donors and foundations have jumped in to
fill the gap, but the institutions they support, and that receive the bulk of arts
funding in this country, aren’t reaching the people the NEA was founded to
help serve. The arts aren’t dead, but the system by which they are funded is
increasingly becoming as unequal as America itself.

Despite early—and not inaccurate—accusations of elitism, the NEA has been a

huge success. It leveled the playing field for countless arts organizations,
particularly in African American and rural communities, which were often
considered “too grassroots” to be funded by private or corporate philanthropy.
By providing crucial financial support and cultural capital to such
organizations as Philadelphia’s Philadanco and the Dallas Black Dance
Theatre, the NEA counteracted a kind of philanthropic redlining. As a result,
these smaller groups enjoyed a reputation boost, and eventually drew the
attention of local agencies and private foundations that had previously ignored
them. As The Washington Post’s Philip Kennicott has written, “If you want to
understand Johnson’s cultural agenda, you have to see it not as an appendage
but integrally related to the War on Poverty and the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”

For almost two decades, public arts funding was stable. But after the 1980
presidential election the NEA found itself under attack. As Ronald Reagan
radically reworked the tax code to favor the wealthy and set precedents
for union busting and deregulation across multiple sectors, he also went after
the NEA. One of the first proposals by Reagan’s budget director, David
Stockman, was to slash the NEA’s budget in half. The arts served as a canary
in the coalmine for the devastation of federal funding for social services that
began with Reagan and continues to this day.
The arts aren’t dead, but the system by which they are funded is increasingly
becoming as unequal as America itself.

In other words: Attacking the arts was a stealth strategy for Stockman and his
ilk to articulate conservative antipathy towards the federal government
specifically, and the public sector generally. Stockman’s goal was finally
realized in 1995—under the Clinton administration—when the NEA’s budget
and staff were cut by 50 percent, disproportionately affecting minority and
disadvantaged communities that couldn’t turn to individual mega-donors or
corporate foundations to fill the gap. As a result, arts funding became more
dependent on private dollars than ever before—in line with Stockman’s vision.

As of 2012, the non-profit arts economy in the U.S. comprised about 40,000
arts organizations with budgets over $25,000, and another 70,000 groups
with budgets less than this amount. (Groups with budgets less than $25,000
aren’t required to file form 990s with the IRS, so little aggregate data exists
about these organizations.) The non-profit arts economy for these larger
groups has expanded significantly since the NEA’s budget was slashed in 1995:
According to the National Center for Charitable Statistics, revenue increased
from approximately $14 billion to $31 billion in 2012. However, based on
estimates from the NCCS and from Steven Lawrence, head of research at the
Foundation Center, the distribution of funding has changed dramatically since
1995.

As of 2012, the largest source of revenue for the arts was individual giving,
which at $13 billion a year makes up 42 percent of the total. That’s an
inflation-adjusted increase of 67 percent since 1995. Earned income (i.e. ticket
sales and subscriptions) made up another 41 percent of total revenue at $12.7
billion (up 37 percent since 1995, in adjusted dollars). Private foundation
support providedan estimated 13 percent ($4 billion, up 56 percent since
1995).

As of 2014, only 4 percent of all arts funding in America ($1.2 billion) comes
from public sources. While funding has increased numerically, it has not kept
up with inflation, leading to a decrease of around 26 percent in public art
grant money since 1995.

“There’s a structure in place that has kept opportunity away from certain
folks,” says Janet Brown, the president of Grantmakers in the Arts, a national
consortium of groups that help fund the arts. “A lot of organizations and
communities are as impoverished today as they were years ago.”
The DeVos Institute of Arts Management at the University of Maryland
recently released a report titled “Diversity in the Arts” looking at this disparity.
The report was offered as a “wake-up call” to address inequality in the field,
but that phrasing seems deceptive. The report recommends that funders
actually support fewer minority organizations, giving “larger grants to a
smaller cohort that can manage themselves effectively, make the best art, and
have the biggest impact on their communities.” They cite as evidence a study
that finds the median percentage of individual donations to black and Latino
arts groups was five percent, where “the norm” is about 60 percent for large,
“mainstream” (read: white) arts organizations.

Art happens in communities everywhere, not only in symphony halls, opera

houses, and regional theaters.

The fact that minority and community-based groups are “plagued by chronic
financial difficulties” is undisputed. But what isn’t being acknowledged is that
these difficulties are the result of systemic economic inequality. It should
come as no surprise that people in minority, disenfranchised, and rural
communities don’t usually have access to millionaires and billionaires who
they can cultivate as donors. Nor should it shock that these organizations will
suffer if the public-funding system that was helping them build capacity, gain
cultural legitimacy, and become sustainable is decimated.

According to a 2011 report prepared by the researcher and arts advocate Holly
Sidford for the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy, 55 percent
of contributed income in 2009 (gifts and grants) went to the two percent of
arts organizations with budgets over $5 million. “It’s only gotten worse,
actually,” Sidford told me recently. Statistics from the NCCS indicate that in
2012, one percent of arts organizations—those with budgets over $10 million—
received close to 50 percent of all contributed funding for the arts. “Not only
do the big institutions continue to get the bulk of the revenue,” says Sidford,
“but their portion of the total is going up.”

The disproportionate allotment of funding to large, conservative, Eurocentric

arts organizations is accepted by default and justified—or so the common
wisdom goes—because organizations like Lincoln Center or the Kennedy
Center serve so many more people than the smaller ones. In fact, the numbers
tell a different story.

According to the NCCS’s statistics, out of the approximately 40,000 arts

organization in the country with budgets over $25,000 per year, there are
approximately 450 organizations whose budgets are over $10 million. That
means that there are 39,570 organizations who, “even if they are only serving
on average 1,000 people a year, in aggregate are serving significantly greater
numbers of people,” says Sidford. Given these structural impediments to
equity, it isn’t surprising that the sector’s definition of what legitimately
constitutes “the arts” doesn’t reflect America’s evolving demographics.

“We need to get back to that place where when we say ‘the arts’ to someone,
their mind doesn’t immediately go to a big-box building downtown where it
costs you $160 to go,” says Janet Brown.

The NEA’s current chairperson, Jane Chu, is an accomplished pianist as well

as a seasoned arts advocate, but she also has some personal experience of the
incalculable value of exposure to the arts. Chu’s mother fled Communist China
as a teenager and left her family behind to come to the United States. Chu’s
father was a student in the U.S. who stayed rather than return to China,
eventually becoming a professor in Oklahoma, where Chu was born. “I’ve
navigated my whole life through opposing perspectives,” Chu says. “My
parents … felt very strongly that the way for me to succeed was to assimilate,
assimilate, assimilate. So while my parents spoke Mandarin, I spoke English.
And of course I was dutifully taking piano lessons.” After Chu’s father died of
cancer when she was 9 years old, music offered both comfort and a way to
express herself.

While it’s easy to dismiss funding the NEA or arts education as “extras” or
“frills” that need to be scaled back in a time of fiscal crisis, the truth is that the
arts help create community and foster cross-cultural understanding. By
disproportionately supporting large institutions, which reach a tiny slice of the
American population, mega-donors and corporate foundations use the arts to
serve the one percent. Which is why a strong and robust NEA, and increased
investment in public funding for the arts nationally, is needed today, more
than ever.

Art reflects the values, aspirations, and questions of a culture; it’s a

mechanism for a society to articulate how it imagines itself.

At a moment when disdain for (and belief in the incompetence of) the federal
government is widespread, it seems almost radical to propose that
government programs make a difference, but evidence suggests they do. “The
closer you get to where people live, the more effective you will be,” Brown
says. Art happens in communities everywhere, not only in symphony halls,
opera houses, and regional theaters. “People of privilege have choices that
people with fewer resources do not,” offers Holly Sidford. “What we should be
working on is giving people with fewer resources more choices, not dictating
where they should go.”

The NEA does what no other funder does, public or private: It provides
funding to communities in all 50 states and five U.S. jurisdictions. The
geographic, demographic, and income diversity among the NEA’s grant
recipients is unmatched by any other U.S. funder. Its Challenge
America program is dedicated to reaching underserved communities, whether
limited by geography, ethnicity, economics, or disability, which means nearly
half of all NEA grants are awarded to institutions in poverty-stricken
neighborhoods, and more than half of their grantees are small arts
organizations. What’s more, 40 percent of the NEA’s grant-making funds are
delivered at the local level through partnership agreements with 60 different
state arts agencies and regional arts organizations.

The chair of the NEA, Roger Stevens, watches

President Lyndon B. Johnson break ground
for the Kennedy Center in 1964. (Wikimedia)

Like Medicare, Social Security, and other Great Society initiatives, the
NEA has long been under attack by conservatives who are ideologically
opposed to an empowered central government. And in much the same way
that opponents of the Affordable Care Act inveigh against socialized medicine
and characterize government-run health care as incompetent and failure-
prone, so too people dismiss the significant accomplishments of the NEA. But
the organization hasn’t just been a model for equity and inclusion. Through its
partnership agreements it’s provided a template for how the federal
government can work effectively with state and local governments. Its Our
Town program, among other initiatives, has modeled a way for government to
incubate new strategies and ideas that are adopted by the private sector.

This example of the private sector building on government innovation is

something Chu hopes to build on during her tenure. “On the occasion of our
50th anniversary, of course we want to celebrate the first 50 years,” she told
me. “But the other part is to look forward and ask, ‘What do the next 50 years
look like?’”

The NEA was founded to “nurture American creativity, to elevate the nation’s
culture, and to sustain and preserve the country’s many artistic traditions.” In
an inclusive, pluralistic society, arts funding should reflect our increasingly
diverse communities. Deliberately excluding art made by and for
underrepresented communities goes against the spirit on which the NEA was
founded.

If you look at the more than 1,000 projects set to receive NEA funding this
year, you can see the historical (and present) richness of American culture that
all but demands to be preserved and supported. A small literary press in
Hawaii that mostly publishes works by Asian American and native Hawaiian
authors. A Chicago children’s theater that puts on performances that can be
enjoyed by visually impaired audiences or those on the autism spectrum.
Songwriting workshops to teach Tlingit children in Hoonah, Alaska, about
their culture. A New Orleans film festival for Louisiana filmmakers. Art
reflects the values, aspirations, and questions of a culture; it’s a mechanism for
a society to articulate how it imagines itself. The projects funded by the NEA
reflect the growing diversity—and beautiful complexity—of America itself.

Site: http://www.philstar.com/arts-and-
culture/577469/struggle-philippine-art-
then-and-now
The struggle for Philippine art - then and
now
ARTICIPATION By Clarissa Chikiamco | Updated May 24, 2010 - 12:00am

2 604 googleplus0 4

Bea Camacho’s 11-hour performance at the Turbine Hall, part of Green Papaya Art Projects’ program for “No
Soul for Sale.”

(Conclusion)

Last week I discussed some criticisms I had of the current art scene that paralleled similar issues outlined in
the book The Struggle for Philippine Art by Purita Kalaw-Ledesma and Amadis Guerrero, written over 30 years
ago. Stopping off in discussing the quest for international recognition, I would like to continue by discussing
funding, funding structures and the pursuit to improve the quality of art.

X
In The Struggle for Philippine Art, it was related how that hothouse for modernism, the Philippine Art Gallery,
founded in 1950, struggled to make ends meet. Founder Lyd Arguilla had even been “driven to tears because
there was no money to pay for the lights.”

It could be said that the situation is similar today for independent art spaces that are brazen sites for artistic
experimentation. Occupying a critical position that withholds from being swallowed by the commercial gallery
apparatus and the supposed behemoths of institutions, independent art spaces, also called artist-run or
alternative, provide a crucial threshold for contemporary art, a more accessible environment ripe for the
speculative. There have been a few of these spaces throughout the years — those that have folded in the past
decade include Big Sky Mind, Surrounded by Water and Future Prospects. The artists that have passed
through their doors already form an important part of today’s “who’s who” in the art scene.

It seems inevitable, however, for independent art spaces to close. While funding for projects is difficult enough
to scout for, these spaces need money for day-to-day expenses — the most difficult to find. Operational costs
are the basic necessities which funding institutions nearly always shy away from, preferring instead to back
output-type undertakings such as events or publications. Without stable funding, time tick-tocks on the
expiration date of these spaces, which just like PAG 50 years ago, need money “to pay for the lights.”

One of the longest running of these spaces is Green Papaya Art Projects, founded in 2000 by Peewee Roldan
and Donna Miranda. Their efforts in contributing to the Manila art scene were recognized in the invitation
extended to and the participation of Green Papaya in the 2010 edition of “No Soul for Sale.” Billed by the New
York Times as “the Olympics of nonprofit groups,” “No Soul for Sale” is self-described as “a festival of
independents that brings together the most exciting not-for-profit centers, alternative institutions, artists’
collectives and underground enterprises from around the world.” Held in the Tate Modern’s Turbine Hall in
London from May 14 to 16 for the Tate Modern’s 10th anniversary and curated by Cecilia Alemani,
Massimiliano Gioni and the artist Maurizio Cattelan, each invited group had to be self-reliant in finding their own
funding to participate in the convention.

Lifestyle Feature ( Article MRec ), pagematch: 1, sectionmatch:

After informing people and institutions for their need for financial assistance, Green Papaya received two major
donations, one from the Ateneo Art Gallery and the other from art benefactor Olivia Yao, which covered the
costs for the brochures and posters. Other donations and fundraising efforts were made and, while deeply
appreciative of the support received, Green Papaya unfortunately did not make enough to cover the significant
airfare, accommodation and set-up costs that are expected when participating in such an occasion. The
request for funding to the National Commission of Culture and the Arts (NCCA) was denied, strangely because
the event wasn’t in the “list of prestigious international events” identified by the visual arts committee. Post-
event and after advancing personal funds to participate, Green Papaya plans to appeal.

Incidents like this show that the funding structure of the NCCA needs to be re-examined. The first questions
offhand may be: What is this “list of prestigious international events” and how is inclusion in the list determined?
Isn’t an event held at the Tate Modern prestigious enough? Yet, it only foreshadows more difficult things that
need to be asked, such as how accessible are the funds for the arts to those who need them? Is the NCCA
funding the art scene in the ways the scene needs support? If not, what concrete steps must be taken in order
to bridge the expectations the art community has of the NCCA regarding what it actually does? The schism
between the NCCA and the community seems to have gotten wider in recent years, the government having an
increasingly notorious reputation as a consistently unreliable source of support for the arts. Support in tangible
materials is obviously in short supply but it goes beyond that to demonstrate a demoralizing lack of appreciation
and understanding of the government of its country’s art scene.

In countries which had been reliant on government funding that has been declining in recent years, art
institutions, organizations and artists increasingly turn to private support, such as businesses, to fill the gap.
Locally, however, these are wanting. The few businesses which do support the arts rarely do so progressively.
Caught both by habit and name branding, corporate participation in the arts consists mostly of company-
sponsored art competitions, some further marred by repetitive, folksy, nationalistic, value-oriented themes. Of
course, by “art” competition, it is nearly always going to be painting or two-dimensionally based.

The Struggle for Philippine Art details the reason for initiating the Art Association of the Philippines
competitions, first beginning in 1948, as being to improve the quality of art. In contemporary times, however,
most of these art contests do not seem to really do much in this aspect. Its effect instead has been to inspire
copycat painters rather than prestige, it has already become comic. How is this actually supporting or improving
the quality of art, particularly long term?

There is money hovering for the arts it seems and there are also decent intentions as well. These funds and
intentions need to be channeled in a way that meets the basic needs of the art scene and develops innovative
and challenging programs through a spirit of philanthropy, which is quite distinct from sponsorship. The latter
case is and would certainly still be welcome but again, it is a matter of having it in a proper conduit. It should
then also be professionally branded enough so that corporations are appropriately recognized and would thus
be encouraged to continue more progressive kinds of exchanges.

One example for private support may be in the form of bequests, given to museums here to upgrade their
facilities or to play a more active role in collecting art rather than awaiting donations. Another example would be
extensive travel grants and residencies for local artists and curators to exhibit abroad and to have foreign
counterparts visit as well. Even something such as funding overhead expenses for independent art spaces, as
mentioned earlier, would be a radical idea. There are many ways that others have surely already dreamt of.
These can be discussed in more detail another time.

I ended the first part of this article by saying “The international recognition of a country’s artists can really
sometimes be (only) as substantial as the budget it provides for it.” To this, as the title of the Ayala Museum
exhibition of Purita Kalaw-Ledesma’s collection underscores, I would add vision as well. Grounded in concrete
resources and a healthy sense of reality, an art scene can — and will — only progress as far as our vision can
take us.

***

Green Papaya is still looking for funds to cover the expenses incurred in their participation in the “No Soul for
Sale,” festival of independents. Contact greenpapayaartprojects@gmail.com for further information to help.
Their space is located at 41B T. Gener Street corner Kamuning Road, Quezon City; website
at http://greenpapayaprojects.org. The author may be reached at letterstolisa@gmail.com. Her art writings are
at http://writelisawrite.blogspot.com.

Site: http://magazine.iavm.org/article/five-trends-in-performing-arts-center-architectural-design/

The world of performing arts continues to evolve. Earlier this year, the National
Endowment for the Arts (NEA) released studies based on surveys carried out in 2012
stating that classical performing arts attendance—including opera, jazz, classical music,
ballet, musicals and plays—has steadily declined over the past two decades. We will
most likely continue to see a decline in audiences for the classical performing arts, and
an increase in attendance and revenue for popular music, contemporary entertainment,
and innovative live experiences.
With every show, contemporary live entertainment delivers an updated, but still unique,
experience. Operas of the 18th century are the Broadway shows of the 21st century.
Orchestras of the 1700s are the Thievery Corporation of today. Lillie Langtry is now
Lady Gaga.

Performing arts centers (PACs) must embrace the concept of popular entertainment
inside and outside of the audience chamber to keep audiences excited and engaged.

Audiences have changed. Naturally, contemporary entertainment attracts a

contemporary audience—a technology-driven generation with a new set of expectations
when it comes to a night at the theatre. Our patrons want a holistic experience.

To adapt to this changing landscape—and more importantly, keep theatre doors open
and performing arts alive—decision-makers are re-imagining the built environment
when designing PACs to accommodate contemporary popular entertainment.

Here are five trends we’ve noted and, in many cases, implemented into our own
projects.

TREND #1: Making a Night (and Day) of It With Better Food and Beverage
Offerings

Food culture in the U.S. has evolved, in a good way, over the past two decades. The
evolution has caught up to the performing arts, which are now placing a priority on the
integration of high quality food, drink, and dining experiences for audiences. This first
manifested in the offering of premium wines and liquors at PACs. The offering continued
to elevate with pre- and post-show dining, food, and drink experiences; wait service
within the audience chamber; and an increase in catered private receptions and VIP
events. A smattering of civic PACs have had restaurants or cafés in their building for a
while. Now this concept is moving into most civic PAC and university PAC design.

Patron expectations have been raised by the higher quality foods being offered at
restaurants. The foodie movement is being supported in PACs with the inclusion of
spaces specifically designed for these offering—prep or full-service kitchens, coolers
and freezers, serving ware storage and cleaning equipment, and foodservice staff
support areas. Some PACs have their food branded by star chefs and, in some cases,
prepared by star chefs themselves. This level of high quality enhances the patron
experience and ups the patron expectation. PACs are keeping up.

One of the early adopters of this trend was Cobb Energy Center in Atlanta, Georgia, a
venue that hosts a variety of events, from Broadway to ballet, and offers a
comprehensive menu of seasonal, contemporary cuisine. Its in-house, full-service
kitchen gives them the flexibility to customize menus for executive luncheons, corporate
meetings, receptions, and other special events.

Adding food service opens the doors to new opportunities for daytime patronage as
well. The design for Lubbock’s upcoming Buddy Holly Hall includes a bistro café
adjacent to the rehearsal room block of the building. During the day, the center’s
rehearsal space will be used for children’s dance classes, making the bistro the perfect
spot for parents to grab a bite while their children are in class or rehearsal.

The food and beverage trend impacts the audience chamber, as well. Patrons expect to
bring beverages—and sometimes food—into the audience chamber to enjoy during a
performance. Most theatres do not have any means of holding beverage containers, so
they currently require the audience to hold cups with tight-fitting “sippy” lids to avoid the
big spills. A better accommodation could be some form of cup-holders for the seats.

Trend #1, Question of the Day: Cup holders on the back of the row in front of you or in
the armrest or on the standard of the chair you’re sitting in?

TREND #2: Creating a More Social Experience in the Chamber and Beyond

With contemporary entertainment comes a new kind of audience experience. During

classical performances of the past, theatre attendees took their seats and quietly
enjoyed the show. Things have changed. No longer are audiences glued to their seats
until intermission.They now have the freedom to move about, dance, and socialize—
from the lobby into the performance room—beverage in hand.

One simple way PACs are fostering this dynamic, fluid environment is by adding social-
friendly seating such as couches, booths, and box suites with room for food and
beverages, inside and outside of the chamber. The Howard Theatre in Washington,
D.C., did just that with its major renovation in 2012 by adding booth seating, tables, and
couches to the balcony, where beverages are permitted during select performances.
The Kessler Theatre, a renovated historic theatre in Dallas, Texas, and The Joint at
Hard Rock Las Vegas are mixed-use venues with versatile performance spaces, private
suites, and reserved galleries. With oversized furniture, private bars, and plenty of room
for a buffet, these exclusive areas create premium audience seating areas and can
easily accommodate special private events, and yes, even allow talking and tweeting
during the event.

This trend goes beyond the audience chamber, as well. Private meet-and-greet areas
with lounge-type seating are being worked into out-of-the way corners of lobbies so
patrons can relax and socialize in semi-privacy before, during, and after the show.
These areas provide opportunities for small groups of audience members to cluster to
enjoy a premium social experience away from the crowd while staying connected to the
event through audio/video monitors. These gathering clusters are also supplemental
revenue streams for PACs. Many venues are now utilizing these compartmentalized
lounge areas within the lobbies for pre-show receptions and private parties. These
areas are a prime opportunity for businesses and other small groups to sponsor vibrant
special events. Simply creating an out-of-the-way area and adding a private bar with
catered light-bites can easily create a VIP vibe and an unforgettable night.

Trend #2, Question of the Day: Where do you want to place the Twitter and Instagram
seating section?

TREND #3: Convertible Audience Floors for More Versatility and Flexibility

The term “popular entertainment” encompasses myriad performances—from Broadway

musicals, comedy acts, pops symphonies, and jazz concerts to lecture series and more.
Each of these shows comes with its own individual artistic character, production design,
and now, seating configuration.

In order to host more shows, both classical and contemporary, as well as to

accommodate each of these shows’ individual needs, many venues are incorporating
convertible audience floor systems into theatre design. This provides enough flexibility
to host a variety of events, plus it gives audiences a unique experience each time they
visit.

Nashville’s Schermerhorn Symphony Center convertible floor can accommodate just

about any kind of performance, whether it calls for theatre-style seating for a classical
concert or flat-floor cabaret-style seating for an intimate jazz show. The venue’s
motorized chair-wagon system neatly tucks rows of theatre seats into a storage space
that hides below the surface of the flat-floor of the audience chamber.

With proper planning and automated lifts, it only takes a small crew and a few hours to
completely transform Dallas’ Wyly Theatre to accommodate multiple performances,
including traditional proscenium, variable thrust, and open flat-floor/ballroom
configurations.

At the push of a button, and some moving of portable stairs, San Antonio’s new Tobin
Center for the Performing Arts utilizes an automated system to completely change from
theatre-style to flat-floor in just a few hours. Rows of fixed theatre seats in the orchestra
section are mounted on lift-and-rotate mechanisms that literally flip the seats into
storage beneath what becomes the even floor on top. Attendees at the 2016
IAVM Performing Arts Managers Conference planned for March 7-9 should see the floor
conversion during the conference.

This level of versatility can allow venues to rent their theatre for two, and even three,
events per day. Imagine running a children’s play with theatre seating in the morning, an
art exhibit on a flat floor during the afternoon, and finally, a jazz show with cabaret
seating that very same evening. The possibilities are ever expanding.

Trend #3, Question of the Day: Will the crew be upset if we book seven shows, all with
different set-ups, over three consecutive days?

TREND #4: Light and Video Animation Onto Interior and Exterior Architecture

Contemporary audiences expect more than just a performance—from the moment they
walk onto the venue grounds until they leave the parking lot or the train station. To
facilitate an immersive and visually stimulating experience, PACs are utilizing a full
range of architecturally harmonized technologies to place animation and light onto the
interior surfaces, as well as the facilities’ exterior façade: animated architecture—
arguably the most exciting and affordable current trend.

Advancements in LED technology have granted theatres more creativity and

customization through video and even the simple use of light. For example, in lieu of a
traditional house drape, Dallas City Performance Hall has an LED main curtain that is
used as a kinetic palette for commissioned electronic video art and is simply
experienced as an architectural feature of the facility. Additionally, color-changing RGB
LED lights illuminate the walls and ceilings throughout the house, creating a distinct,
dynamic environment for each performance.

During its 2004 renovation, a colorful lighting design was integrated into the architecture
of Devos Performance Hall, a 2,400-seat theatre in Grand Rapids, Michigan. By adding
floor-to-ceiling, easily controllable, color-changing lighting to the 60-foot-tall perimeter
walls, the space now feels more intimate and warming. It brings life to the gray walls
and further connects seating tiers to one another, as well as to the stage. The Tobin
Center went further, 10 years later, with color changing balcony faces that make the
balcony appear fluid and change with the mood of the moment.

The New World Symphony Center in Miami Beach has incorporated one of the largest
permanently established projection surfaces in North America into its architecture.
During their outdoor WALLCASTTMconcerts, The New World Center projects video art,
films, and live broadcasts of events happening inside the hall onto a 7,000-square-foot
exterior wall that audiences can enjoy free of charge.
The New World Center has implemented video projection inside the house, too. On
select nights, the venue turns into a late-night lounge that gives audiences the
opportunity to experience contemporary classical music in a modern way. New World
Symphony musicians perform alongside DJ-spun electronic music, while lighting and
video projections are cast upon the interior walls to create an experimental,
underground atmosphere.

Expect to see much, much more animated architecture in many different forms. Many
projects are now in development that will have animated architecture integral to the
building design, both interior and exterior.

Trend #4, Question of the Day: How can we give these walls their own personality using
just light?

TREND #5: Audience Immersion

To engage contemporary audiences on an even higher level, shows are rapidly

becoming multi-sensory, multi-directional, surround experiences. Through video, sound,
special effects, scenery, and positioning of actors, patrons are being placed IN the show
and becoming immersed through touch, sight, sound, smell, and even taste.
(Think Once on Broadway.) A major U.S. entertainment company has been exciting
their audiences’ five senses for years at their theme parks in California and Florida.

Historically, the actor/musician/dancer—the story teller—has been the focus for the
audience. When the audience becomes the story, the audience shares the focus and
helps tell the story. The story moves from the stage into the audience chamber. Our
prediction is that the audience will be in productions in the future; perhaps be the
productions of the future.

Sleep No More, in New York, is an interactive, site-specific production that has been
running since 2011. Audiences walk at their own pace over the five floors of the “set.”
The audience is encouraged to interact with the environment and the props—pick them
up, touch them, read them—and, to a certain extent, interact with the actors. The
audience enters the show and becomes a part of the show at the end of the evening’s
performance.

The show Fuerza Bruta, and De La Guarda before it, are high-energy shows that take
place on every surface of the theatre—the walls, in the middle of the audience, even
overhead in a pool of water viewed through a transparent ceiling. The audience is
literally in the middle of the action; the audience helps to tell the story. These totally
immersive shows embrace the audience by placing the audience in the same
environment as the actor by being around the audience rather than just in front of the
audience. The audience experiences the same feelings and senses as the actor.

How should our PAC’s road houses and multipurpose rooms, as 50- to 100-year
buildings, be planned and designed to accommodate yet unknown production effects
like, oh say, a volcanic eruption in the second act of a show yet to be written? Our
buildings of the future will have to support immersing the audience so they feel the
building shake violently, the concussion of the explosion, the smell of sulfur in the air,
the after-rain falling from overhead followed by volcanic ash covering the entire
audience chamber. Our PAC will also have to support the spectacularly immersive show
moving out by 2 a.m. in time for an 8 a.m. crew call to set the stage for the symphony
the next night.

Facility flexibility remains the key to accommodating audience immersion in productions.

This must be done without every new or renovated theatre costing an exorbitant amount
of money to construct “flexibility” or becoming a heartless box with no character.
Immersive road houses and multipurpose theatres must accommodate popular, high-
energy shows through technology and flexibility without turning their architectural backs
on the classical arts. It is our belief that the above trends support, even create, audience
immersion and aid in development of younger audiences for the classical arts.

Trend #5, Question of the Day: How are we going to get all that wet ash out of here in
time for the symphony tonight?

Whether theatres are hosting a show for one night, a week, or several months,
architectural designs for performing arts centers must holistically embrace the new
popular entertainment experiences and the new breed of audiences that are here now
and here to come.

Site: http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/10/26/dublin-planning-new-cultural-arts-center-with-
theatre/

DUBLIN — The city is looking into developing a cultural arts center with a 200-
seat theater to provide a place for local artists and students to create, learn
about, display and perform art and music.

With few places in town to highlight the arts, city officials say they are considering
overhauling the bottom floor of the Civic Center police services building for a
12,000-square-foot arts center when the police department relocates in the next
two years or so.

City recreation and cultural offices would be placed in the second floor of the
building.
“We would gut the first floor to create space for cultural arts,” said Linda Smith,
an assistant city manager. “Our city parks and recreation master plan envisioned
the need for the project, and now we’re looking at how to do it.”

A city report describes the plan as a “hub for Dublin’s arts community with
specialized places for advanced students and hobbyist artists of various
disciplines to take class, practice and create.”

The center also would become a destination for plays and other performances,
exhibits, and special accounts, according to the report.

The police services building is at 100 Civic Center Plaza off Dublin Boulevard
near Hopyard Boulevard.

It’s too early to say when the project would begin, but the city on Oct. 20
advertised to get proposals from architects to prepare a preliminary design and
develop preliminary costs. The City Council is expected to select an architect at
its meeting on Dec. 19.

The center would include a small performing arts theater with about 200 seats for
drama, music or dance groups. Community arts or drama groups might be most
appropriate for the so-called black box theater, officials said.

“It would be an intimate venue for performances,” Smith said. Currently, the city
has a historic barn called the Sunday School Barn where plays can be staged in
Dublin’s historic parks and museum area.

The city previously had been looking at providing space for an art gallery, but a
consultant advised doing the small theater instead, Smith added.

In addition to the theater, a city consultant has recommended that the cultural
arts center include two music studios, two art studios, a dance studio, teen arts
space, digital production studio, piano keyboard labor, and box office.

If funding allowed, optional options for the center could include a small store,
care and kiln room, the report says.

Securing a preliminary design and cost estimate would assist the city in lining up
funding. One source would be developer fees that the city collects and sets
asides for arts and cultural projects.
DAVAO City Mayor Sara Duterte-Carpio issued an executive order reconstituting the
membership of the Davao City Culture and Arts Council, providing for its power and
functions and for other purposes. The Executive Order 37, Series of 2017, was signed by
Duterte-Carpio last October 9 to support the City Council approved resolution No. 03546
series of 2014 and City Ordinance No 194-04 providing for, among others, the creation of
Davao City Culture and Arts Council. "There is a need to reconstitute the membership of
the Davao City Culture and Arts Council so that it may commence to discharge its powers
and functions in accordance with the provisions of the aforementioned ordinance," Duterte-
Carpio said. Section 1 of the E.O. read that members of the Council shall be chaired by the
city mayor or her duly appointed representative as chairperson. It also read that the city
mayor will appoint a private sector representative to sit as her co-chairperson. City Council
Committee chair on Education, Science and Technology, City Council Committee on chair
on Tourism and Beautification, City Planning and Development Officer (CPDO), arts
community representative, culture committee representative, academic community
representative, and business sector representative will sit as council members. Duties and
functions of the Council in accordance with the Section 7 of City Ordinance No. 1
include planning and promotion of cultural and artistic activities in the community
The
with the end view of establishing a Davao City Cultural Center of Mindanao.
council is also tasked to conduct a coordinated and collaborative
planning for the city cultural development program with
stakeholders to ensure a unified direction of activities with
consideration for local needs and priorities, thereby creating an
environment of meaningful exchange and mutual support among its members. Part
also of the council's mandate is to stimulate and implement artistic activities by encouraging
collaboration of activities, respecting individual choices, of expression and autonomy of
each sector in planning and implementing their activities, and encourage artistic freedom in
their articulations of social realities and priorities in their genres. Davao City Culture and
Arts Council was also tasked to develop linkages with national and international
institutions such as the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP), the National
Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA), and other similar networks, agencies,
and foundations which will support the activities of the council. They are also to
preserve and promote the traditional arts of Davao City by enhancing public
knowledge of the rich folk traditions of the indigenous communities by
acknowledging the significance of creative expressions as reflections of our
cultural heritage, and develop a program for local artists through training,
apprenticeships, grants, and the promotion of their works and encourage
their freedom of creative expressions. All expenses necessary and incidental to
the effective implementation of the operations shall be charged to funds made
available through the Annual Budget or the Supplemental Budget.

Read more: http://www.sunstar.com.ph/davao/local-news/2017/10/18/davao-city-culture-

arts-body-reconstituted-569984
Follow us: @sunstaronline on Twitter | SunStar Philippines on Facebook

City Culture and Arts

Council formed
Posted on October 16, 2017 by Yas D. Ocampo

MAYOR Sara Duterte-Carpio has signed an Executive Order creating the Davao City Culture and
Arts Council (DCAC).

The Mayor signed EO 37, which reconstitutes the membership of the DCAC.

The EO is based on a 2014 resolution and ordinance creating the body.

The DCAC comprises the Mayor as chair, a private sector representative to be appointed by the
mayor, and representatives from the city council committee on education and arts and culture, as well
as committee of tourism, and representatives of the City Planning and Development Office as well as
the City Tourism Office.

The council will also have representatives coming from the arts and culture community, the
academic sector, and the business sector.

According to the EO, the DCAC has the following functions:

- plan and promote cultural and artistic activities in the community with the end view of establishing
a Davao City Cultural Center of Mindanao;

- conduct planning with stakeholders to unify direction of activities;

- encourage the production of artistic activities and encourage collaboration, respecting individual
choices of expression and autonomy of each sector in planning and implementing their activities;

- link up with the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP), the National Commission for Culture and
the Arts (NCCA), and other supporting agencies;

- and preserve and promote the traditional arts of Davao City, among others.

The EO also tasks the body to develop a program for local artists through trainings, apprenticeships,
grants, and the promotion of their works and encourage their freedom of creative expressions.
http://mindanaotimes.net/city-culture-and-arts-council-formed/
There is also a specialized form of fine art, in which the artists perform their work
live to an audience. This is called performance art. Most performance art also
involves some form of plastic art, perhaps in the creation of props. Dance was
often referred to as a plastic artduring the Modern dance era.[3][3]
(STURGIS, 2016)

One of the main projects of the NCCA is to create a council for the culture and the
arts which will enable the NCCA to efficiently and effectively provide the right
programs and the best grants for the Local Government Unit. Pableo mentioned
that for the past months he has spent time to talk to the Regional Development
Council to make this happen. Recently he also discussed possible project
assistance with Davao City Anti-Drug Abuse Council (CADAC) for one of its
rehabilitation programs is art; they wanted to give support in terms of art materials
and trainings for art therapy. It is still in discussion because they wanted to ensure
that everything will go smoothly.

http://edgedavao.net/the-big-news/2017/07/25/ncaa-open-entries-culture-arts-tilt/

http://artfacts.australiacouncil.gov.au/visual-arts/participation/