VIEWPOINTS: Growing dangers to arts in the area

This past Sunday afternoon, the music group Crescendo presented a concert of 16th-century Spanish and Latin American early music in the beautifully restored Saint James Place in Great Barrington. The choice of repertoire and the team of international artists who performed were assembled by Crescendo’s excellent, long-term artistic director, the internationally trained musician, Connecticut resident Christine Gevert.

The audience members, who paid an average of $50 per ticket, were knowledgeable and appreciative of the high artistic level of the somewhat esoteric artistic offering. This event was typical of the artistic firmament in the Berkshire and Columbia County: high level, innovative, technically superb and professionally presented. The arts enrich the area with culture and ideas, provide an engine for tourism, and create a livable civil society.

However, there are some signs of danger ahead.

The Berkshires, and more recently Columbia County, possess the elements necessary to help create this livable civil society: suitable infrastructure, a critical mass of appreciative citizens, support from liberal governments, and stable leadership.  

The infrastructure development began over the last quarter century. State and local government, individual and foundation funding, and informed creative leadership led to turning a massive moribund factory in North Adams into MASS MoCA.  

Sometime later, the burnt-out shell of the Colonial Theatre in Pittsfield and the decrepit Mahaiwe in Great Barrington were both restored. 

Barrington Stage, Jacob’s Pillow, The Mount, and Shakespeare & Company, all with excellent leadership, boards, foundations, and government support, transformed and expanded the regional infrastructure for culture. 

The more established institutions, including The Clark, Norman Rockwell, and Tanglewood, have added exquisite arts infrastructure to the area. More recently, Art Omni and PS21 are leading the way in western Columbia County, adding venues for performances and artists. I am omitting many others simply because the examples are too numerous to cite. There are few geographic areas anywhere in the world with such a concentration of cultural facilities.

With new and restored facilities comes the demand for a higher level and volume of content. The number of performances and exhibitions, cutting edge, nationally and internationally recognized, popular and esoteric, that is being produced and presented in the region rivals any area outside of the major international centers of culture like New York City, Berlin, London, or Washington, D.C. As I witnessed last Sunday, culture in this region no longer exists just in the summer season.

That infrastructure and creative leadership have been nourished by patronage from many longtime residents (along with their foundations and legacies), and particularly forward-thinking state leadership, both in New York and Massachusetts, that believes in the responsibility of government to be an active participant in the arts.

Many other, more conservative state governments do not support the arts and are philosophically hostile toward creative types. The longtime liberal support of the two states contributes significantly to the artistic vitality of the region.

In these two states, we have surprisingly stable, professional leadership at the helm. While the rest of the U.S. cultural sector is in leadership turmoil, local institutions large and small, except for the Boston Symphony Orchestra, are led by a stable cadre of  artistic and managerial executives: the Norman Rockwell Museum, Close Encounters With Music, Barrington Stage, and many others have flourished under the long-term, excellent and steady leadership of their artistic and executive teams. Many, including The Mount, Shakespeare & Company, and Art Omi, can plan and build their stakeholder allegiance and attract international artists and content because of their leadership’s ingenuity, creativity, and stability.

Artistic vitality requires informed, generous audiences with the hunger for sophisticated artistic offerings and the resources to purchase tickets and make contributions. Remarkably, due to the pandemic and the ability to work remotely, many from the cultural hubs of Boston and New York who visited the area during the summer are now making their homes here permanently. 

My wife, a part-time artist, and I, a trained classical pianist, began visiting the Berkshires for culture 40 years ago. During the pandemic, like countless others, we gave up our New York residence and now live and work full-time here, with the opportunity during the year to attend Aston Magna, Close Encounters With Music, the changing exhibits at the Rockwell or The Clark, or that exquisite concert at Saint James Place last Sunday.

Both New York and Massachusetts remain liberal in philosophy, economically stable, and likely to continue to support the arts. The infrastructure continues to improve. For example, Jacob’s Pillow will open its new theater next year. As noted above, the necessarily sophisticated audiences and their support will likely not return to offices in New York or Boston any time soon.

So, what are the danger signs?

1. The pandemic has undoubtedly reduced live participation in the live arts across the United States. By nature, we require and thrive on the social interaction that comes with experiencing the arts in person together, yet audiences throughout the United States have been slow to return. Even with many outdoor venues, because our regional audiences are older, another severe pandemic outbreak could further reduce attendance and much-needed earned income. 
2. The increased cost of living, particularly housing in the region, combined with the torrid job market, are contributing factors to the inability of cultural institutions to hire and retain the kind of professional talent required to operate. The arts are competing with local businesses for everyone from maintenance and salespeople, to more specialized employees for stage management and production, marketing, and fundraising. These “behind the scenes” workers are critical to the operations, and the cultural institutions, large and small, are increasingly unable to attract and retain that talent.
3. More critically, the executive leadership of our institutions is underpaid, and for many, the level of salaries at the top is inhibiting the ability to attract other arts leaders. While the arts leadership is stable, as a group they are aging, and in most cases do not have the resources to retire comfortably. Combined with the fact that the national demand for leaders in the arts is at its highest, the region is vulnerable to losing some of our leaders to other parts of the country. Arts leaders traditionally have been among the major financial supporters of their institutions because they have been driven by a passion for the work rather than financial success. Market forces and the economy may change that. The difference between the average salary of arts leaders in the big cities and in the Berkshires represents a significant, long-term danger of losing that stability and incurring high additional costs when trying to replace those leaders.