Savings Souls

99 has done another great post talking about how sports have been able to make themselves part of the fabric of mainstream American culture in a way that the arts have not. (h/t to Thomas Cott for bringing it to people's attention.)

In many ways I love the sports comparison, but there is a vital difference between the two that we should discuss.  So let's do that and then I'll offer a different industry that I think the arts could learn from.

Part of what sports offer to us is a clear outcome.

I know, for a fact that the Chicago Bears beat the Seattle Seahawks last Sunday 25-19.  This is our starting point.  If I'm talking about the game with anyone in the world, we all can agree on who won the game and who lost.

Now what we can debate in the sports world, and debate endlessly, is why certain things happened during the game and how those things could impact the next game.  We can talk about whether the Bears need to run the ball more effectively, or whether the Seahawks have a viable backup quarterback in Seneca Wallace.

But when I call my friend to discuss those things, we both know the context of the discussion.  The Bears won.  The Seahawks lost.  Both teams are trying to do the same thing, win the Super Bowl. 

Now imagine if I called my friend and we first had to discuss whether the Bears won or lost, or the standards for winning or losing, or whether winning or losing was important in the first place.

Then we would have the arts.  Thousands of organizations.  Thousands of individual goals.  No clear standards by which to judge success or failure.

This is why it's hard for "the arts" to have a huge national profile.  It's far too complex an organism for that.

This isn't a good thing, or a bad thing.  It's just how it is.

But I do think there is an industry far closer to ours that we can learn a lot from. 

Church.

-----------------------------------------

Thousands of churches.  Some big.  Many small.  More opening up every day.  Just like the arts.

Hundreds of variations of religious doctrine.  Just like there are endless variations on artistic styles.

And also like the arts, the end purpose of a church is difficult to define.  Is it to save souls?  Make people better?  Avoid damnation?  It all depends on who you ask.

Most churches even have a performance element, better known as the Sunday sermon.

So what does a good church (emphasis on the good) do that we can learn from?

-----------------------------

When you talk to a leader who runs a church that is really working well, that leader gives most of the credit for that to his/her congregation.

Essentially, a church is only as strong as the community they serve.

It's the community that provide the bulk of the money, bodies and other resources they need to get things done.

Not the government.

Not some foundation.

Not a corporation.

A church lives or dies based on how well they serve a selected community.

Hold that thought for a second and let's move on.

----------------------

Think about the church leader doing a sermon for let's say 2,500 people.

The leader has the spotlight, the audience, the platform.  It's a lot like an actor doing a particularly good part of a play.

But here's what the good church leader gets that some of us in the arts can't grasp yet.

That spotlight he gets on Sunday, has to be earned.

When is that spotlight earned?

Monday through Saturday.

It's earned when they teach classes in their community center, or stand by the side of a dying parishoner, or offer marriage counseling, etc.

They understand that if they don't do those things then the sermon (the performance) doesn't really matter much.

------------------------------

In the arts we are great at Sunday.  We are great at the sermon.  We know how to perform.

But all too often we disappear Monday through Saturday.

We treat outreach - real sustained outreach - as something to think about every once in a while . . . as something we do in between the "real work" of performing.

But outreach . . . the work of connecting our art to communities in creative and effective ways . . . IS THE WHOLE DAMN SHOW.

There is nothing else.

This is particularly true for emerging organizations that don't have the history and artistic reputation to stand on yet.

------------------------------

All arts organization are service organizations.  That's what a wise man shared with me and it's the gospel truth.

So go serve somebody.  Be creative.  Think of ways to add relevance and context to work you are sharing with them.  Think of ways of adding their own creative urges with your own.

If you do that, if you effectively serve a community, then in return they will give you your Sunday.  They will give you the platform you crave.  They will fill your seats and donate to your annual fund.

If not then you'll be like all the rest, screaming at the top of your lungs and wondering why nobody hears you.

I'll say it again.

Go serve somebody.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments

[twitter.com/halcyonjenn]

Amen! I actually think this is the most brilliant blog post of yours that I have read. 2 points to add: 1) Theatre started in the church... so I think it's fitting that church be the closest comparison, although until now I've never heard anyone make it... 2) Even after you GET to the pulpit on Sunday, you need to RE-EARN your spot on Monday through Saturday... many people (in both the Arts world AND the Church world) think that once they get there, they can relax and let someone else do the work...

I do use sports analogies a lot, though (thanks to Dad for that!), in my directing... it's amazing how clear-cut athletes objectives are, and how many times what an actor needs to focus on is "getting the ball down the field" or "protecting the goal."

[Adam]

Thanks Jenn. And you are absolutely right that the spotlight has to be continously earned. Your reputation can only get you so far.

[Chris Casquilho]

A friend of mine also commented on a major difference between sports and performing arts - namely, the perception that one's attendance at a sporting event could effect the outcome (which is not determined in advance). If you cheer harder - you might help your team win. Whether this is BS or not is beside the point. You know for certain when you enter a theatre that for 99% of all performances you watch, the outcome is a given whether you "participate" or not. If Claudius rounded up a bunch of rowdy hooligans to cheer on Laertes and throw stuff at Hamlet, Laertes would still lose. But if you can get seats behind the goal posts with a bunch of foam-wiener waggling maniacs and you all wiggle your foam wieners really hard when the kicker tries for the winning field goal..well...you might just have an effect. And if the kick is good - what more impetus do you need to go and wiggle an even bigger foam wiener even harder the next time?

[Benjamin Brownson]

I forwarded this post to my dad, who's been a pastor my whole life at a few different churches. Some really great thoughts and ideas. I've long been fascinated by the relationship between theatre and religion (it was the inspiration for and a significant focus of my masters thesis) and growing up as a preacher's kid I witnessed the theatrical elements inherent in the workings of a church, and it's great to see some of the connections highlighted. I think Jenn makes some great points too...

[Scott Walters]

Well done. Absolutely.

[Eric S. Kildow]

I have to voice my wholehearted agreement along with the others in terms of the working model.

However, the other question involved is what form of outreach is it that a theatre should consider? What would the arts equivalent of a dying parishioner be, precisely?

[Jennifer Wright Cook]

Thank you! I am late for my gospel choir rehearsal as I type this but I am very intrigued by this excellent post.

There is something else too that both the arts and church have the potential for I think: transformation. In their best case scenarios you the "congregant" have an opportunity to have your heart unfurl, your brain teased and your senses tickled. Church also, for alot of folks, has the guilt factor deeply embedded in it. Arts attendance does not (except the guilt of our friends whose shows we have to see). Lastly, the fear of death runs so strong in many folks and that fear often attaches to church/God as well. Perhaps if arts attendance had a fear of death capacity attached?

Kudos to the reminder as well that the arts in their DNA come from ritual participation (and not the more usual version today of spectatorship at the proscenium temple of adoration).

Church is ritual as well. And humans dig rituals! Many of most favorite art events have some level of participation - Bat Sheva comes forcefully to mind! They got us dancing on stage and in the audience! Brilliant.

THANK YOU again. More to think on. (oh, and as the ED of an arts service org, yes, GO SERVE! What that means exactly, tbd.)

[Darrell Grant]

Wow,

I am completely in agreement and very appreciative of your post. I'm looking forward to discussing it with the students in our music program. A great direction to move into our preparation of artists for lives in music.

[Dave Charest]

Couldn't agree more with this post.

It's the same for any business. It's about building community. Meeting the community where they are and serving their needs. As you mention, the byproduct of this is people supporting your work.

The struggle comes in when we think it's all about the show we put on. But that's only part of the equation. The work you do when a show isn't on, is what adds up to making your organization grow.

Rally your community around a single idea. Look for ways to part of the lives of your audience. Help them achieve what they want. In turn they will help you.