Dan Eastmond

The arts need to be a little less indignant and a little more honest about funding

Last week, industry body UK Theatre reported that average theatre prices rose by more than five per cent across the UK, apparently to pick up the shortfall from funding cuts. It was an interesting read, but no great surprise.

While public funding of the arts comes from an admirable social and ethical place – that beauty, poetry, tolerance and a sense of collective purpose are worth spending a few quid on (well that’s my take on it at least) – there’s no question that it brings a good fistful of bad stuff with it.

A situation has developed, in the performing arts particularly, where tickets are routinely sold for considerably less than the cost of producing the show. If we paid performers, technicians and facilitators what they actually deserved the gap would be even greater. As a result, while attempting to ‘support’ the arts (as we currently know it), local authorities, national bodies and private sponsors have also unintentionally dug an ever deeper grave for it.

Pricing tickets to realistically reflect the costs of production is commercial suicide, so funding plugs the gap.

Get Britain's best politics newsletters

Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.

Already a subscriber? Log in

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in