I read recently that Molly Smith will be retiring from her position as the 25-year artistic director of Arena Stage in Washington, D.C. Molly is as liberal as they get in many ways, as am I.
Many years ago, at a meeting about producing new plays, I listened to her process of development and asked a simple question.
“If you were presented an excellent, unproduced work — all the boxes checked about style, substance, character development, stimulation, depth, entertainment, dramatic arc, and all the rest — and the message of the play ran counter to your politics, would you produce it anyway?”
“I’ve never seen one,” she replied. Those in the room laughed.
I was disappointed by her snark, pat response.
If theaters and other arts organizations continue to self-acclaim as champions of free speech — and they do — then does it behoove them to produce works that reveal the ugliness (if that’s how you perceive it) of America as well as the good?
Or does that cross some barrier?
No pun intended.
But what would happen, o open-minded arts leader, if someone painted a portrait that celebrated the insurrectionists as “freedom fighters?” After all, that’s what they were told they were doing, right?
Pretty extreme (to be sure), but don’t immediately shut down the conversation. That’s what an ayatollah would do, isn’t it?
An ayatollah told some guy to stab Salman Rushdie in the neck while he was speaking at a nonprofit institution whose website honors cross-religious thought (albeit through a Christian lens):
“At Chautauqua, religious faith is perceived, interpreted, and experienced as central to the understanding and expression of our social and cultural values. Chautauqua is a community that is open to all with a wide variety of services of worship and programs that express the Institution’s Christian heritage and its interfaith commitment.”
The First Amendment.
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
— Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Do you know the 5 freedoms specifically described in the First Amendment of the Constitution? Most Americans don’t. It’s such a short amendment and pretty darn clear. It’s sad — and at the same time, interesting — to have seen it throttled into a disfigured, mutilated, chaotic mess.
Here’s the whole 45-word thing:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The US can’t have a national religion. They can’t deny someone’s right to speak. The press can’t be encumbered from reporting. They can’t stop people from peaceably assembling (“peaceably” being the only adverb in the text, which might mean that it was added at the end of the word-crafting process to prevent, I don’t know, insurrections). And if they’re screwed over by the government, they can petition for compensation. Some people call that “reparations.”
Pretty simple, even now. Although it must be said that the Supreme Court has ruled that money is an extension of speech and corporations are people (Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission).
I don’t know. The way I see it, money doesn’t speak and it isn’t free.
Illogical somersaults seem to define the actions of the Supreme Court, especially lately.
Your nonprofit arts organization’s responsibilities.
Your company, because it is the community who allowed you to have — and offer — all those tax benefits, has but one responsibility: to eliminate or mitigate a problem in your community.
That’s it. You can choose to complicate the matter by bringing in your company’s rights (it is a person, after all…see above). Or you can complicate the matter by choosing to do what you want to do, rather than doing what you have to do. You can even lie about it and say that the community has a societal need for your personal brand of art. Lying is perfectly legal unless you’re under oath.
But if you go the First Amendment route, just know that people have a right to say whatever they want. They might be wrong. You might be wrong. That’s immaterial.
So if you receive a well-crafted play or work of art that checks all the boxes but offers an idea with which you don’t abide, will you present it? What if you thought you’d be mitigating that societal need by doing so? I suppose you don’t have to, but would your standing as a nonprofit take a hit if you didn’t? Even if no one knew it crossed your desk?
You’d know, of course.
And that’s the beauty of the First Amendment. It’s neither left nor right; right nor wrong. Be careful, however, when you advocate “freedom of speech,” if you concurrently censor someone else’s opinion by banning them.
Based in Kirkland, Washington, Alan Harrison is a writer and speaker specializing in nonprofit organizations, strategy, the arts, and life politics. His columns appear regularly in major publications. Contact him directly at alan@501c3.guru.
If you’re feeling generous or inspired, just click on the coffee cup above. You don’t have to, of course, but if you can afford it and find some value here, please provide the desperate need for caffeine.
Alan is always looking for good opportunities to write and consult for nonprofits that need a hand. And, of course, that elusive Perfect Opportunity™.
BIG NEWS: Alan’s new book, “Scene Change: Why Nonprofit Arts Organization Must Stop Producing Art and Start Producing Impact” will be published within the next eleven months by Changemakers Books. Stay tuned for information on how you can buy a copy.
Leave a Reply