Thanks Scott. Such a great (and juicy) question. Are/were the tradeoffs of the nonprofit model worth it? Yes, no, and maybe.
On the "yes, it's worth it" side is the breadth and depth and diversity and geographic availability of creative practice we have because of the nonprofit structure in the arts. I'm confident that our creative/cultural life across America would be vastly smaller, more densely packed in urban centers, and less diverse (I will grant you that it STILL needs to be much more diverse…but that's a different question).
Arena Stage was attempting to build a theater practice that was DIFFERENT than New York's commercial theater scene – more time for rehearsal, more focus on risk taking and new work, more opportunity to build a consistent company of actors. Doing so in an earned-revenue-only world is difficult (not impossible). Again, it could work in dense, affluent, urban centers. But even there, it's sketchy.
On the "no, it's not worth it" side, there are MANY creative endeavors that were and are ill suited to the nonprofit structure, that would/could be more nimble and risk-taking if they AVOIDED the wealth/power/donor structures and their baggage. The danger here, though, is that such endeavors would rely on inequitable pay, inconsistent employment, and deep personal risk (again, we could argue that even the nonprofit model has given us those things…it's complicated).
I'd also suggest there's some useful discussion on the distinction between the actual nonprofit structure and our conventions/traditions of the nonprofit structure. They are not the same. A nonprofit only needs three people on the board. It doesn't need to grow year-over-year. It doesn't have to take money (earned or contributed) that distorts or constrains its purpose. There are certainly tidal forces at play, but we can choose to swim against them (it's exhausting).
As for "maybe," I believe that creative human expression and experience deserve the widest array of structures, systems, and resource opportunities we can muster – private (for-profit), public (government), and plural (nonprofit, cooperative, mutual aid, informal, and social movements). All of those systems have benefits and challenges. Best we can manage is to be thoughtful and attentive when choosing a path, and in noticing if that path is leading us where we want to go.
Thanks Scott. Such a great (and juicy) question. Are/were the tradeoffs of the nonprofit model worth it? Yes, no, and maybe.
On the "yes, it's worth it" side is the breadth and depth and diversity and geographic availability of creative practice we have because of the nonprofit structure in the arts. I'm confident that our creative/cultural life across America would be vastly smaller, more densely packed in urban centers, and less diverse (I will grant you that it STILL needs to be much more diverse…but that's a different question).
Arena Stage was attempting to build a theater practice that was DIFFERENT than New York's commercial theater scene – more time for rehearsal, more focus on risk taking and new work, more opportunity to build a consistent company of actors. Doing so in an earned-revenue-only world is difficult (not impossible). Again, it could work in dense, affluent, urban centers. But even there, it's sketchy.
On the "no, it's not worth it" side, there are MANY creative endeavors that were and are ill suited to the nonprofit structure, that would/could be more nimble and risk-taking if they AVOIDED the wealth/power/donor structures and their baggage. The danger here, though, is that such endeavors would rely on inequitable pay, inconsistent employment, and deep personal risk (again, we could argue that even the nonprofit model has given us those things…it's complicated).
I'd also suggest there's some useful discussion on the distinction between the actual nonprofit structure and our conventions/traditions of the nonprofit structure. They are not the same. A nonprofit only needs three people on the board. It doesn't need to grow year-over-year. It doesn't have to take money (earned or contributed) that distorts or constrains its purpose. There are certainly tidal forces at play, but we can choose to swim against them (it's exhausting).
As for "maybe," I believe that creative human expression and experience deserve the widest array of structures, systems, and resource opportunities we can muster – private (for-profit), public (government), and plural (nonprofit, cooperative, mutual aid, informal, and social movements). All of those systems have benefits and challenges. Best we can manage is to be thoughtful and attentive when choosing a path, and in noticing if that path is leading us where we want to go.