Big Time

There is nothing wrong with being relatively small.  There is no shame in being a theatre that has an impact in a few neighborhoods.  There is no shame in being an artist with a cult following.

But here's the thing . . .

Being big also has it's advantages.

Large scale.

Large impact.

Large revenue generation.

In the arts we love the myth of the small.  We assume that small arts organizations are all "scrappy" and "innovative."  If you're an organization (or individual artist) with some resources, then you must be "corporate" and "bloated" and "scared of change."

The reality is that the culture you create has little to do with the resources you have. 

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

The challenge we all face is the challenge of getting people to pay attention.  Ideas that live in obscurity tend to die.

Small visions, small goals, small ideas . . . all those things tend to get sucked up into the void of things competing for attention.

If you want people to pay attention you'll have to go big.

Probably bigger then you're going now.

Probably bigger then you think is reasonable.

Comments

[Don Hall]

Adam,

I love it when you make big money generation a virtue in a society being destroyed by those who think the same.

Wal Mart has the same talking points about small goals vs. big goals, too. So does General Electric. And the Koch Brothers.

NOW why don't you talk a little bit about the compromises made in order to go big - in voice, in payment to artists, in script choice. THEN we can combine these two thoughts and it makes it less self justification and more like an actual point of view.