Trouble for CanStage, Trouble for Toronto?

Posted by Graeme
Filed in Theatre
February 14, 2008

Berkeley%20Theatre.jpgIt's one week to the day since the axe fell at the Canadian Stage Company: nine employees gone in the face of a $694,000 two season loss and a total debt load of $1 million. Bad, if not catastrophic, news for CanStage. But does the plight of Toronto's largest non-profit theatre say anything about the state of theatre in Toronto?

Probably. And the the prognosis isn't altogether promising.

So how does it happen? How does a theatre company with a 50 year history lose hundreds of thousands of dollars in two years? The answer, I think, has to do with a kind of identity crisis. Sure, there are a host of external factors. September 11th, SARS and a strong Canadian dollar have wiped out much of the American audience that used to drive big-budget shows in the city. But CanStage seems to not really know what it is anymore. Just look at this season's offerings: of the eight shows, five are by American authors. One is a 26 year-old musical based on a 48 year-old movie. Another is an adaptation of a Stephen King novel. The rest, while interesting, don't fit together. It's a long walk from the brutal darkness of Martin McDonagh's The Pillowman to a musical inspired by Jerry Lee Lewis. It's a scattershot slate of plays, one that leaves Toronto theatregoers a little confused.

CanStage's 2007-08 season seemed calculated to appeal to the widest possible audience and take a stab at Mirvish Production's dominance of the 'big show' market. And if there's anything close to an inviolable law in Toronto theatre, it's this: you can't out-Mirvish Mirvish. Even Mirvish can't out-Mirvish Mirvish, as demonstrated by a spate of ambitious but flawed projects. Lord of the Rings. The Musical. That's all I'm saying.

Leave the Les Miz and Phantom remounts to the Princess of Wales and Royal Alex. Concentrate on putting together an artisticly coherent season that appeals to the small, but loyal, theatre crowd in Toronto. It's a formula that continues to work well for the Tarragon and Factory Theatres, and something Canstage seems to have forgotten.

Nevertheless, as Toronto's biggest non-profit, CanStage is a barometer for Toronto's entire theatre community. Weakness there points to weakness everywhere. I'd tend to be a little more cheery about the Toronto theatre scene if CanStage was an isolated case. But last year, once-venerable Theatre Passe Muraille needed a $1.2 million bailout from the City of Toronto to ward of its creditors. And CanStage is going a similar route, asking the city to act as a guarantor on its $800,000 line of credit. Torontonians love their theatre, but not when it adds another liability to the city's already razor-thin financial margins. The city simply doesn't have the capability to carry its theatres, and milking City Hall is not a viable funding strategy.

Without putting too fine a point on it, the lesson of CanStage seems to be this: it's hard to produce theatre in Toronto, and it's probably going to get harder. To survive, careful artistic and financial planning is needed. And one key question needs to be asked: "what do we offer Toronto audiences that no one else can?" Currently, CanStage is creatively stuck somewhere between Dirty Dancing and The Farm Show, between the glitz of Mirvish and the artistic verve of Passe Muraille. Unless CanStage decides what it wants to be, it will be difficult to survive their present financial straits. And if they fold, it will be a serious blow to theatre in our city and a disturbing portent of things to come.

Photo: CanStage's Berkeley Street Theatre. Courtesy of the Canadian Stage Company.

Jerrold on February 14, 2008 at 12:27 PM

Re: your point about the tourism lull:

2007 was reported to be a record year for tourism in Toronto (based on hotel occupancy data) - Globe and Mail, Feb2008.

megan on February 14, 2008 at 5:05 PM

It's a bit scary when something that feels like such an institution is struggling. I'm very curious to see what will come out of this, and I think you're exactly right when you say that a city bail out is not the answer. It's the whole bandaid theory...

Benc7 on February 15, 2008 at 12:43 AM

I'm not that worried; Canadian Stage will re-focus on its identity again. Theatre groups are like people and this one is having a mid-life crisis. What we need are GOOD Canadian playwrights to be given a chance to show how GOOD they can be. Tarragon does it, Soulpepper does it, Factory does it, Buddies in Bad Times does it, so does (on occasion) the maligned Mirvish Company. Canadian Stage used to and will again.

chickenvandoodle on February 15, 2008 at 6:27 PM

It's not in Mirvish's mandate to produce Canadian theatre. If that were the case, he'd turn into not-for-profit. I think arts people need to accept the fact that David Mirvish is a COMMERCIAL producer and that we should not expect him to be producing Canadian theatre. We keep complaining about commercial producers, but since when is it their obligation to be producing commercially unappealing Canadian theatre? Do you really think our city's theatre scene would be where it is now had it not been for the big blockbuster musicals? Our theatre scene is saturated enough with Canadian playwrights.

Let's stop complaining, people. We have the works of Canadian playwrights being produced all the time. Do the Factory, Tarragon, Passe Muraille theatres ring a bell? We just need to get off our high horse and actually attend those plays instead of waiting for them to be produced at The Canadian Stage Company or the Royal Alexandra Theatre, since that's what everybody thinks will validate Canadian plays.

It's a vicious circle. Torontonians are looking for quality theatre, but yet they won't even support their own indie theatres where new works are being produced. As a result, the indie theatres get poorer and run into bigger deficits, and smaller resources for nurturing and producing playwrights. And we all wonder why we're not getting 'better' plays?

Sheesh.

Add a Comment

Name: Email: URL:
Comment: