JSquared2 said: "Dionysus3 said: "People use that word “entitled” as a pejorative, but you know what? Yes, we are entitled to it. Art belongs to all of us. Historically, theatre has been among the more accessible forms of art. It’s in the last 40 years, at least in the US, that this has really changed, and it’s a shame. Christ, in the 70s, you could see a Broadway matinee for less than a movie. The risk of something being bad is a lot easier to stomach for most people if the loss is 15 or 20 bucks, but when you pay 150 for Beetlejuice with its monumentally awful book, that’s less easy to take. A professional recording would still allow the production team to make money, and open interest to a wider audience. So I suppose I would ask why you believe there are people who live in Kansas or Mississippi or Oregon who don’t deserve to see shows?"
Your argument is ridiculous. Even if one buys your premise that everyone is "entitled" to Art, that does not mean that everyone is "entitled" to see a hot Broadway show from the 6th row aisle in the orchestra. Using your logic, since everyone is entitled to Food (which is a much more basic need than Art), then I should be able to walk into Per Se tonight and demand that they serve me their 10 course tasting menu on the house!
Further if you still believe it is your god given right to see Beetlejuice -- then you have the option of going to the theatre and purchasing a $40 (or whatever it costs) rush seat. "
I didn’t say anything about seeing a show from the orchestra. I said there should be professional recordings for people who can’t get to NYC (or even see a tour). The line to see The Mona Lisa at the Louvre is no less long because pictures of it are readily available. Broadway and the theatre in general has a horrible problem with elitism. We need more Jeremy O. Harrises making theatre accessible and far fewer Scott Rudins.
Sorry, we’re making theatre socialist in the new decade.