On Thu, 25 Jul 2013, Ubiquitous wrote:
> Of course, back in the early 1990s the National Endowment for the Arts
> generously funded this kind of cutting-edge art. It's just another
> example of how America is falling behind its neighbor to the north.
>
>
SInce it's at a Fringe Festival, chances are really good they don't get
funding. At that level it's rare, the best a performer can hope for is
some small companies who will pay for ads in the program. Or, that time
one troupe got sponsorship from Planned Parenthood.
Don't confuse, as one "family value type" group did in 2000, that if the
actual festival gets funding, that means there is funding for this art.
Fringe Festivals by definition (other than that one in NY City that
somehow gets around it) are unjuried, "selection" is by the first entries
in, or sometimes by lottery. The actual festival has no say in the art.
Another way of looking at it is that a Fringe Festival really isn't a
festival, it provides infrastructure (venues, the technicians, a box
office, and some general promotion) that is subcontracted by the artists.
After all, the money from ticket sales goes directly to the artist, and
the artists are responsible for promoting their show. If you don't
promote, you can pretty much guarantee that there'll be no audience, and
thus no money from tickets.
One is curious about who went to this show, did they not get enough
informatin ahead of time, or what? It's usually the reverse, sex or
something 'scandalous" is implied ahead of time, but in reality the show
is fairly timid. That's part of the ongoing debate about Fringe
Festivals, are the artists going for the tame in order to get the
audience?
Michael