Issue Details: First known date: 2020... 2020 The Economic Aesthetics of Three Regional, Unpaid-Led Theatre- Producing Companies
The material on this page is available to AustLit subscribers. If you are a subscriber or are from a subscribing organisation, please log in to gain full access. To explore options for subscribing to this unique teaching, research, and publishing resource for Australian culture and storytelling, please contact us or find out more.

AbstractHistoryArchive Description

'Specifically, the economic aesthetic of 'More art, less admin' will be seen in the expression of ACT members' hope and frustration that informed the decision to apply for government subsidy; the economic aesthetic of 'They're not volunteers' is the tension produced by 1812's commercial orientation with members' ambition, artistic dissatisfaction and desire for transformation; and finally, the economic aesthetic of 'The Stratford Experiment' is how CiA members' artistic aspiration is interwoven with authorial anxiety created by working within a private theatre's economy in a small town. [...] in this study members' willingness to do emotional labour on behalf of their company reflects a similar observation made by Hochschild, that emotional labour takes place because of the desire for 'competitive advantage' but also with the risk of 'burnout'.7 Hochschild argues that this is why feeling management is work worth paying for, but in this study emotional labour remains unremunerated. [...] in Hochschild's conception, to be paid or unpaid leads to different understandings of emotional management. ACT's economic aesthetic of 'More art, less admin' will describe how the decision to apply for government funding was influenced by hope for creative freedom from administrative and associated emotional labour, and will address frustration regarding regional equity.' (Publication abstract)

Publication Details of Only Known VersionEarliest 2 Known Versions of

  • Appears in:
    y separately published work icon Australasian Drama Studies Regional Theatre in Australia no. 77 October 2020 21039143 2020 periodical issue

    'The inquiry came on the back of an effective shutdown of most work in the creative sector as a result of social distancing restrictions and lockdowns imposed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in March, and of extensive debate about the Australian Government's reluctance to offer a dedicated financial support package to an industry that, by the government's own estimates, contributed $111.7 billion in 2016/17, or 6.4 per cent of GDP. The terms of reference for the inquiry appeared accordingly broad: 'The Committee will inquire into Australia's creative and cultural industries and institutions including, but not limited to, Indigenous, regional, rural and community based organisations'. More broadly, the frustrations of lockdown, a newfound capacity to work remotely, loss of income, and the more general reassessment of life choices and lifestyle that COVID-19 provoked all resulted in an unprecedented net population loss in Australia's big cities, with an October 2020 Ipsos poll finding that one in ten Melburnians were considering a move to regional Victoria. Meanwhile, among the very limited federal stimulus offered to the arts in the early months of the pandemic was a $27 million 'Targeted Support' package in April, which directed $10 million to the music industry, $7 million to Indigenous arts, and $10 million 'to help regional artists and organisations develop new work and explore new delivery models'. In short, while COVID-19 has arguably reconfigured the Australian arts landscape, and the ways in which we understand where arts happens, it also made visible changes that were already occurring, particularly outside major metropolitan centres. Recommendation 1 was that 'the Federal Government increase its investment in building enabling infrastructure to improve connectivity, key services and amenity through coordinated regional plans', while Recommendation 13 anticipated further work on 'the cultivation of social, cultural and community capital'.5 This initiative built in turn on existing trends. Australia's enormous size continues to present major practical challenges when it comes to touring on the one hand, or building and sustaining arts infrastructure on the other. [...]the high-profile shift in the funding narrative over 2020 towards the regions, as well as the obligatory pivot towards the digital environment, has not entirely done away with a metropolitan funding bias, which is most apparent in the fact that the city-based Major Performing Arts organisations receive a disproportionate amount of the federal funding pie.' (Editorial introduction)

    2020
    pg. 173-207, 381
Last amended 1 Feb 2021 16:14:42
X