Up, Up, and Away? Not So Fast!

Money is one factor keeping artists stuck on their home turf, funders and foundation reps agree. But it's by no means the only one.

By Celia Wren

McDonald's golden arches loom on streets around the planet. Hollywood makes much of its money overseas. People are probably talking about "Jersey Shore" in Timbuktu. By contrast, America's not-for-profit theatre travels in a more modest way across the globe.

Are there barriers keeping the field from developing a more robust international presence? If so, could artists and companies vault over these barriers? On the occasion of this American Theatre special issue focused on internationalism, the magazine asked these questions of some individuals with interest in, and expert knowledge of, international engagement and America's funding landscape.

According to some of these interviewees, the topic of international cultural exchange—the kind of activity that might include, say, a U.S. theatre troupe performing on another continent—has gained a little additional currency in recent years.

"In terms of international engagement—there is a hint of renewed interest," says Alan W. Cooper, executive director of the Mid Atlantic Arts Foundation, which supports that region's arts resources as well as promoting wider access to regional, national and world art and artists.

Barbara Lanciers, program officer for the Trust for Mutual Understanding, which supports the international travel component of cultural and environmental exchanges involving Russia and Central and Eastern Europe, also sees the topic rising on the radar of artists and funders. "People are talking more and more about this," she says, referring to questions about "cultural diplomacy—and what does that mean, especially in a time that feels so unsettled? What are cultural ambassadors, cultural diplomats?" And "what is the larger investigation" of ideas and issues that an artist might launch by working in a different country?

One factor that has seemingly helped the cultural-exchange conversation gather steam has been the work of the Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, which in April 2010 issued a 90-page report titled "Promoting Public and Private Reinvestment in Cultural Exchange–Based Diplomacy." (The study is available for download here.) Authored by the foundation's president, Margaret C. Ayers, and based on extensive analysis of data and many interviews and consultations, the study examines what it calls the "numerous financial, political, cultural and logistical barriers" to international exchange, recounting how the end of the Cold War, and the economic climate of the early 1990s, led to "massive disinvestment in public diplomacy"—including arts-based diplomacy—by the American government. While the 2001 terrorist attacks did prompt Congress to increase support of cultural agencies and cultural programs at the State Department, the pendulum has not swung fully back, the report recounts.

The report also perceives a dip in international arts and cultural exchange activity in the foundation world between 2003 and 2008. (Corporate grant-making may be harder to track.) "Inadequate direct financial support for cultural exchange has reduced our nation's noncommercial artistic presence in the world to the detriment of American artists trying to find performance opportunities abroad" and the detriment "of cultural exchange-based diplomacy that might enhance our global image," the study states.

Advocating for a shift in the status quo, the report makes a forceful case that cultural exchange activities can enhance America's reputation abroad, promote global understanding and benefit U.S. business. The professionals interviewed for this article echoed some of these conclusions, while remarking on other advantages of American artists' ventures abroad.

Performing overseas can be "an important endeavor for artists at every stage—emerging, mid-career and well-established," notes Pennie Ojeda, director of international activities at the National Endowment for the Arts. "It's invaluable for their own creative development to see how other audiences respond to their work," she elaborates, pointing out that an overseas project may also prompt stimulating cross-cultural discussions. "And then, of course," she adds, "in today's global environment, it's beneficial for audiences around the world to have a sense of cultural expression in the U.S. beyond what might be available in the commercial marketplace and the media."

"Arts are an incredibly special and effective way of communicating across borders, beyond the limitations of different languages. They help overcome difference," says Marjorie Ames, director of the Cultural Programs Division at the U.S. Department of State's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs.

"Artists are creatures who are always looking for that dialogue—for that communion," observes Lanciers. "And to be in communion with something or someone, or some place, that is new to you, that is different from you, that is different from your own experience, will only enrich your own work, and will cause you to be able to take your own work to a new and exciting, and sometimes extremely surprising, place."

Of course, it can be far easier to talk about international cultural exchange than to engage in it. A variety of issues may complicate American thespians' globe-trotting ambitions. Just finding the money is a huge challenge, of course—no surprise to anyone who has read the Robert Sterling Clark Foundation report.

Knowledge gaps are another problem, says the Mid Atlantic Arts Foundation's Cooper. Artists may not be au courant with the international opportunities that are available, for instance, while a lack of knowledge about, say, relevant tax-law realities may scare off artists who do score invitations to perform abroad. "Education about touring abroad would be of real value to artists, so that they know how to identify and manage the engagements that they're able to secure," Cooper says. The creation of informational clearinghouses and other "knowledge-based networks," perhaps by arts service organizations, would be another step in the right direction, he thinks.

Another difficulty, he posits, is the fact that "on a number of fronts, the U.S. doesn't have the platforms that allow for promotion of our work abroad, or the platforms that allow people from abroad to see our work." Cooper points to the Philadelphia Live Arts Festival and Philly Fringe as one such platform that does exist—the Mid Atlantic Arts Foundation has given the festival modest support to enable international presenters to see work there. But it could be valuable for America to have still more multi-artist showcases. "We've got to develop ways for people from abroad to see American work," Cooper believes.

Some of the other issues hampering America's theatrical export business may be aspects of the art world's perennial struggles.

"Something that unfortunately artists constantly have to fight against is the overpowering notion of art as something that's frivolous, or merely for entertainment, or on the fringes of society, as opposed to really integral to society," observes Lanciers. "That's a very long battle that we've been fighting. And if you have the arts being viewed as something on the fringes, then international exchange—that may seem even more on the fringes."

Other challenges may relate to the specifics of the theatre business. In an interview, the Robert Sterling Clark Foundation's Ayers postulated that Actors' Equity work rules make it difficult for interested parties to produce or present American theatre work overseas. As a result, she says, "Our theatre companies haven't developed networks and contacts that would advance international touring."

In response, Actors' Equity spokesperson Maria Somma noted in an e-mail: "The salaries, benefits, etc., that Actors' Equity has negotiated in our contracts are traditionally higher than those in the U.K. and Europe. In addition, we don't allow non-pros to tour in an Equity production. So while we will always negotiate a contract for travel abroad, and some contracts allow it as a right (Production, LORT, for example), the economic conditions may make it hard."

Other challenges to U.S. theatrical undertakings abroad could relate to the intrinsic nature of the art form. Language plays a significant role in many plays—potentially making them less attractive to foreign markets than dance or music works that face no language barriers. But this problem may not be insurmountable: Some international venues have supertitle capabilities; many foreign theatregoers speak English. And U.S. artists can make language-rich works more accessible by developing and distributing explanatory materials in the audience's native tongue.

"Creating contextual materials is often very important," says Olga Garay, executive director of the City of Los Angeles Department of Cultural Affairs, which has an initiative supporting international cultural exchange. A former arts program director for the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, Garay also observes that "in many countries there is more openness to seeing work in a language other than the native language."

Garay does point out that design elements like sets can in some cases make a theatre piece an expensive touring proposition—an issue perhaps less likely to beset travel-hungry musicians and dancers. "I've been to plays in the United States where they have a kitchen [on stage] and you're, like, 'I wish I had that kitchen!'" she notes wryly.

The solution, she thinks, is for theatre artists to factor any international-performance hankerings into their artistic vision very early on. "Is production value only, or principally, determined by your set—or is it the amount of rehearsal time that you allow your artists?" she asks, offering a theoretical example. "If touring is really going to be a consideration, you have to take all those disparate elements into account and figure out where your emphasis and investment needs to be."

In short, Garay argues, "It's really about envisioning yourself as an international player—not just waiting for someone to come and say, 'Oh, I choose you!' but making opportunities happen for yourself and your company and your colleagues."

Other interviewees also remarked on the importance of taking travel goals into account early in the artistic process. The NEA's Ojeda says an artist may want to approach a work differently—direct it differently, say—if it's destined for presentation abroad. And even before that, the artist should start with a little soul-searching.

"It's really important for artists to think about why they want to go abroad—what's the aim, what's their intent?" she says. "Is it a revenue source? Is it because the individual or company has a personal connection to a particular country that they want to explore or develop? Is there some kind of institutional connection that's important to them, a university, a cultural center?" The answers to those questions will affect how the artist "can go about trying to make it happen."

Lanciers sounds a comparable note when she talks about the kind of work that the Trust for Mutual Understanding likes to support: art that is conceived from the get-go as "a larger investigation" between artists in different countries. "We fund exchanges, and we like to take a look at what happens when two artists or two ensembles work together in a deeper dialogue...So it's a little bit less about 'I'm taking my company to Prague for three evenings,' and more about, 'Who will you meet there? Who will you talk to? Who will you really click with? What will you talk about? And what will the ideas that float up to the surface be? And what is the work that will come out of that?'"

For instance, she says, the Trust supported Performance Space 122 when it brought Reggie Watts, Reid Farrington and Temporary Distortion to the Contemporary Drama Festival in Budapest this past December as part of the P.S.122 Global initiative. In addition to the performances, audience talkbacks, local radio interviews and training/process workshops were conducted with interested local artists, students and audience members, and Watts taught a music-making workshop for young Roma students. It all contributed to sparking a broader conversation, Lanciers says.

If factoring international scope into a work's very fabric is one key to securing a global forum, conceptual suppleness is another.

International cultural exchange "really takes flexibility and an openness to working with other people—to working under a variety of different circumstances—to going outside of your comfort zone," says the State Department's Ames, noting that strong communication skills and "curiosity about the world" are also crucial, since cultural diplomacy is "about creating dialogue. It's about being open to receiving as well as sharing." She recommends that theatre folk interested in overseas performance also consider "contributing in a variety of different ways to the international theatre scene"—hosting an international artist in the U.S., for instance.

Garay, too, emphasizes the importance of thinking outside the box. "You can't just talk about touring, because that limits opportunities," she says. "You have to really talk about the full gamut of what possibilities exist internationally. It might be an extended residency, where you're working with local artists; it might be a commission that a presenter in Europe is interested in...It might be that two companies, one from abroad and one from here, decide that they're going to collaborate on a piece."

Janet Brown, executive director of the national association Grantmakers in the Arts, says that, while it can be tough to find funding for straightforward touring and other traditional arrangements, "there are many, many funders who fund in underserved and third-world countries who are discovering that the arts and cultural communication are advantageous to their work, because they induce trust and a shared understanding." Rather than, say, just distributing pamphlets telling people in a community to get vaccinated at a clinic, an organization might start by sharing a performance with the community. "We do what people do in the arts—connecting on an emotional level; then the work becomes easier," Brown says.

"It's certainly not saying, 'We're taking the major cultural institutions in the United States and we're plopping them into the great halls of the rest of the world,'" she adds. "It's different—but I think it's a great opportunity for artists, especially those artists who are concerned about social justice and underserved communities."

Openness to possibilities is all the more important since, as Ojeda observes, international arts initiatives can begin as simple encounters between people. Two artists from different countries might meet, strike up a friendship and pay informal visits to each other's home turf. "From that, projects grow," Ojeda says.

When an undertaking has reached a more formal stage, and it's time to raise money, she notes—once again touching on the flexible-thinking motif—"There may be ways to raise money for an international engagement that are a little bit different than a development person might do for a regular season. It takes more research and more time. Corporate support may be a possibility, if there is a U.S. company that has interest in the country that the artist wants to go to, or has been invited to. I often encourage people to check with their state government economic development offices, or their city development offices, to see what kind of international commerce is going on between their city and other parts of the world, because that could be a lead to funding."

Although economic times are tight, she notes, one positive development has been the advent of new media avenues—Skype, for instance—that facilitate connections across the globe. "With technology, people are connecting with colleagues around the world in ways we never imagined," she says. "And so, while on one hand it looks like a bleak situation, it's really not, because there is international exchange going on—on a grassroots level—that doesn't appear on the radar."

Garay, too, sounds a relatively optimistic note on the new-media front. "The more that artists are involved in dialogues about international work, the more likely it is that they will actually benefit from it," she says. "Putting yourself out there, and being part of the discussion, and making yourself available in establishing relationships—in many ways, now it's easier than ever, because of social media opportunities that exist today that weren't around even 10 years ago. So making that a part of your aesthetic—part of your goals—is the first step."

The prospect of taking even a first step toward an international presence might be daunting, but it could be well worth it.

"Performances in another country—or collaboration with a company abroad—is going to always take more time than you had anticipated, more money than you had expected," Ojeda says. "But it will be rewarding and professionally satisfying. The connections that the artists make—with audiences or artists from abroad—seem to erase that terrible memory of all the time spent trying to raise money."

Critic and arts reporter Celia Wren is a former managing editor of this magazine.

blog comments powered by Disqus

View our comments policy