OPINION: Clark's H. Gene Biby Responds

Dear Mr. Zschomler,

I read with great interest your August 29th blog posting entitled "OPINION: It is a Dark Time for SW Washington Theater" (http://swwastar.blogspot.com/2013/08/opinion-it-is-dark-time-for-sw.html), in which you criticize Serendipity Players and Clark College Theater for our production offerings that are "darker, [more] deviant and dirtier" than you would otherwise prefer and in which you insinuate that Tony Broom and I are pushing an agenda that Vancouver residents should find offensive.

I find the sentiment expressed in your opinion piece curious for several reasons. First, while I certainly understand your concern over the marketability of particular works, I would remind you that Clark College Theatre has an educational mission beyond appealing to largest possible paying audience in the community. Its principal mission is to prepare students aspiring to careers in the performing arts, and it would be an egregious omission to shrink from the type of material that is presented regularly in the popular venues of most major American cities. It also has a mission to expose the general student population to contemporary cultural and political issues, to initiate dialog about these topics, and to acknowledge the diversity of our student population.

Second, while I whole-heartedly agree that family-friendly theater should constitute a substantial portion of the theater offerings in any community, it would seem that even by your own recognition, the Vancouver area has a healthy assortment of such offerings. In the opening paragraph of your essay, you congratulate Love Street Playhouse, Magenta Theater, CYT, MPAA and Journey for their family-friendly productions. This leaves the impression that you are troubled not so much by the unavailability of family-friendly shows, but rather the availability of challenging works that are appropriate for mature audiences. It therefore seems that your true desire is a form of censorship. This impression is reinforced by your choice of words -- "deviant" and "agenda", for example – which seem designed to provoke outrage against certain elements of the community that you personally find offensive.

Third, the pieces that Clark College Theater has produced under my direction have been principally award-winning works or works nominated for prestigious awards. Rent, based on Puccini's opera La bohème, won the Pulitzer Prize for Drama, and the original Broadway production won four Tony awards and was nominated for several others. Rabbit Hole won the Pulitzer Prize for Drama. The Broadway production of The 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee won two Tony awards and was nominated for three others. The original Broadway production of Reasons to be Pretty was nominated for three Tony awards. Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf is one of the most influential modern American plays, winning a Tony Award for Best Play, and considered for the Pulitzer Prize for Drama. Both Rent andWho's Afraid of Virginia Woolf have been made into extremely successful films. Thus, the selections made by Clark College Theater under my direction consist primarily of well-known and well-respected works, "deviant" only the estimation of an ideologue with an "agenda".

Finally, I note with some bemusement that you wish that I would "go away" and are therefore disappointed that my tenure case is approaching. If I were a less generous soul, I would view this statement as somewhat of a veiled threat; but I trust that you are aware of the general support I have from the Clark College administration, and that you offer your criticism only in the most Christian open-hearted spirit.

I can’t prevent you from attending our productions and continuing to review our work, but I would ask you whether it serves either one of us if you cannot conduct your reviews in a frame of mind that is free from bias and preconceived notions about what cultural offerings are appropriate for southwest Washington. Consequently, I would hope that the next time you sit in our theater, you do so only with an open mind and willingness to grapple with the serious questions we intend our productions to provoke.

Sincerely,

H. Gene Biby
Clark College
Theater Program Director

OPINION: It is a Dark Time for SW Washington Theater

First of all, I would like to commend Love Street Playhouse and Magenta Theater for continuing to offer highly entertaining, family friendly theater. I would also recognize CYT, MPAA and Journey for their missions and the family friendly musicals they produce.

With that said, I believe times are darkening for SW Washington theater scene. Several theaters (Clark and Serendipity come to mind) have chosen to offer "edgier" material and have ceased producing musicals.

I, for one, find this both disturbing and disappointing. I am sure many of you are with me in this sentiment. 

It is not that I feel there isn't a place for darker, deviant and dirtier drama; I just don't think Vancouver desires a steady diet of that kind of thing. And I don't think it will sustain tickets in this market.

"Fair is foul, and foul is fair"

I have been informed that many of Clark's long-time season ticket holders are not happy with the direction that Gene Biby has taken the college's theater department and that some have even walked out. I have also heard that he thinks this will turn around as he presents plays that will attract more of the student population (rather than the gray haired supporters). Probably not.

While this is hearsay [anonymous sources], I daresay that Vancouver theater goers are, perhaps, more conservative than Biby thinks they are. Those of the liberal ilk in this neck of the woods just aren't the theater going kind. Personally, I'd like to see Biby go away, but since he's up for tenure this September it likely won't happen. I hate to see him tear down what Dan Anderson took so long to build from nothing. You can't make us swallow what we think smells bad.

Furthermore, Tony Broom and the board of Serendipity have also regularly chosen material that offends and they, too, have had walk outs. Some of their productions have not been well attended (and they only have forty seats) and they wonder why. It certainly isn't for lack of quality or talent!

I Tell You Why

If a theater company wants to sell tickets they must, at least to some degree, sell out on their agenda. All profitable theater companies know that if you want to keep your doors open you offer what the public wants three times out of four. The fourth show you can produce "for the sake of your art" (or your agenda) if you're willing to take the hit at the box office.

Finally, we all know that musicals are expensive to produce. But we also know that people love them (I do). Why? I think that we love to come away from the theater with a song in our heart and joy in our soul. We want to feel good and musicals supply that. We go to escape the grit and grim we must endure around us.

Theater companies do tend to come and go here (regardless of their offering) and I believe we are going to see a few more disappear before long. I know this is partly because the City and public at large aren't that big on the performing arts. Which is all the more reason to make sure we are appealing to those that do.

By Gregory E. Zschomler

OPINION: Slocum Struggles for Survival

Slocum Player's new location in uptown
Vancouver. Photo by Ruth Zschomler.

It has come to my attention that the Slocum Players (formerly the Slocum House Theater) continue to struggle toward their resurrection. As you will recall the company had no choice but to vacate their long term home at the Slocum House in Esther short Park after city officials, who own the building, significantly raised their rent. (See related story here.) A move which in the least was a blow to the arts in Vancouver and a greed-driven, heartless, money-grabbing play; at the most a derisive and calculated attack on the arts and a stupid action.

Now that Slocum has endeavored to “pull itself up by its britches” and reinvent itself elsewhere—in uptown’s former Sassy Dress Shop turned, for a time, into Ape Over Music—as The Slocum Players at Sassy Ape Theater, the city continues to thwart their efforts.

Slocum had hoped to open the theater by August’s end and yet that time has come and gone by over a month. It seems they can’t get an occupancy permit from the city. This is not an uncommon struggle for small non-profits moving into older buildings due to newer and more strangling codes. However, it causes one to wonder if the city has a vendetta against such entities and even Slocum in particular. They were, after all, quite vocal about the city’s heartless decision to take from the company and the public the timeless gem that had graced the community for so long.

Indeed, it is my opinion (as well as the opinion of many others in the arts community) that the city (as well as the local newspaper for that matter) does not support the arts and may even be hostile towards them—especially the performing arts and the non-profit sector of said arts in particular. 

After all, non-profits, including churches, do not contribute to the tax base as do business enterprises for which the city seems to bend over backwards. (Having worked with a number of churches and non-profits on building and remodel projects I have seen this over and over again.)

However, though these small, non-profit ventures may not pay certain taxes, they are what makes a community livable. 

They contribute to the culture, the lifestyle and the happiness of the people—making them want to move into and stay in a community. (Anyone who’s played SimCity knows this fact.) The arts in particular add a great deal to the quality of life.

And as for how they affect a city’s income: When an arts patron goes out on the town for an evening of entertainment, they often have dinner out before or a few drinks after. They also, due to those evil meters, may have to pay for parking (or, if not, pay a ticket) to support the city’s coffers (that do not in turn contribute to the arts). People who live in Vancouver will stay in Vancouver to be entertained if the entertainment is there.

Our city’s council members are supposed to be, you’d think, the brightest and best; people who make decisions based on the will and good of the populace. But, well, that doesn't seem to be the case.

Incidentally, according to a source, Mayor Tim Leavitt was personally and directly contacted by phone and invited to come to Slocum’s recent fundraiser at Latte Da, but declined saying, “I think I’ll stay at home.” I know that mayors have way too much to do and all, but you’d think a brief appearance might show a little support. So, what about a shun? Not many of the city’s council members would do differently.

Finally, I note (somewhat on the side) that this same city council recently voted to ban the discharge of fireworks on every day but the 4^th of July. Not only does the sale of fireworks support the work of area non-profits (coincidence?) but the move, ironically, takes away the traditional freedom to exercise and celebrate freedom on a day set aside to celebrate freedom.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Therefore, I urge you to make your voice and your vote be heard. Vote out those incumbents who have voted against the arts and non-profits and livability and freedom. Vote in those who will bring back the life these organizations bring to our city.

And, if you can, contribute to the livelihood of your local theater—especially Slocum in its time of need. Perhaps you, your business, or theater, can make a contribution.

Related article.

By Gregory E. Zschomler