The other night I sat down to an art film whose protagonist, a sentient robot, the only one remaining of his kind, was charged with cleaning a waste strewn deserted earth so that humanity may one day recolonize its toxic surface. The film follows the robot on a heroic journey into space chasing after his love interest, a female robot of superior design, after she has successfully fulfilled her directive to recover evidence of a habitable planet. His voyage quickly takes him aboard a spaceship, which could serve symbolically as Noah’s Ark, where he discovers what is left of humanity drifting endlessly through space. Drowned in mass commercialism due to the extremes of materialism, they are content to laze about transported by automatic motorized recliners, consuming liquid meals from fast food cups which has over hundreds of years evolved their bodies into obese gelatinous masses. The film concludes as the “Ark” lands safely on Earth and humanity, casting aside the technology that had enslaved them for over seven hundred years, rediscovers their lost connection to each other and to nature.

Garnering over thirty-five awards internationally and heralded by critics of both fine and popular film art, this film bridges the gap between the two very separate forms. It may surprise you as it did me that the company responsible for such an effective work of art is the Disney owned Pixar, and the film of which I speak is WALL-E.

Richard Corliss of Time named WALL-E as his favorite film of 2008 noting the film succeeded in “connect[ing] with a huge audience,” and it “evoke[d] the splendor of the movie past.”¹ [1] The film was interpreted as tackling a topical, ecologically minded agenda, [2] though Todd McCarthy of Variety said it did so with “a lightness of touch that granted the viewer the ability to accept or ignore the message.”[3] Therein lies the true success of the film in that it appeals to a broad spectrum of consumers.

Success like this doesn’t happen arbitrarily. The producers of WALL-E needed to have a concrete grasp on thematic content and the impact it might have on an audience. Understanding the material inside and out allowed them to make the film accessible enough without losing its depth and poignancy. They needed to know the rules of convention before they could break them. Like the producers of WALL-E, arts managers need to be cognizant of the content of their programming. This should not be left to chance or to the sometimes eccentric whims of an artistic director. I am in no way suggesting that arts managers take on the role of an artistic director or limit the extent of their artistic expression. However, they most definitely need to be included in programmatic decision-making if arts organizations are to reach the broadest audience possible. Arts managers bring to the table not only a myriad of indispensable tools and statistical data but many times years of insight into audience taste and preference.

The author of a recent article from the LA Times highlighted a growing industry-wide concern that audiences of the fine arts are aging and shrinking at an ever-increasing rate, which is driving up the median age of attendees. She also points out, as Teresa Eyring, Executive Director of Theatre Communications Group, brings to her attention, “…it’s always been gray.” [5] This suggests a three-fold focus for arts managers. First, that we should not only further cultivate our relationships with current patrons who tend to be more affluent and mature in age and taste, but if this group is ever present as suggested, then we should create solutions to actively seek and welcome new entrants into it. Second, much industry-wide attention should be given to the ever hard to engage demographic of adults in their 20s and 30s, some of which may have never been exposed to arts-education programs in school. Finally, that we need to develop new ways to reach youth by developing programs that not only educate but that cultivate a lifelong interest in the arts. One way we can begin to accomplish all three means is by, as mentioned above, paying closer attention to our programming content while creating and offering accessible and captivating art that is relevant to the people we are serving. Campaigns and programs can also be tailored to the specific needs of each of these groups. Membership programs are effective ways to attract young patrons offering special ticket prices, social gatherings and special performances. They offer twenty and thirty somethings a chance to convene with other like-minded individuals and provide an opportunity for an organization to develop relationships, which may lead to future support once these patrons become more financially and professionally secure.

In summary, both arts managers and art organizations need to look to the intrinsic benefits of arts experiences, both in the collection of qualitative data relating to these experiences and its usage in programmatic decision-making. People are looking for meaning in dark times. We as an industry need to concern ourselves with how we are fulfilling the lives of our audiences and how we transform individuals and communities. Organizations that build a sense of community will find that patrons are more willing to stick around if they feel they are a part of a family, which is a basic human need. We have a responsibility to civilization to provide a strengthened cultural repository in order to record humanity’s collective struggles and joys for future generations and to offer hope to current generations that we are not here by chance and that there is purpose to existence.

¹ “Top 10 Movies”. Time. 2008-12-09. http://www.time.com/time/specials/2008/top10/article/0,30583,1855948_1863826_1863827,00.html#. Retrieved on 2008-12-09.

Bibliography

1. ^ “Top 10 Movies”. Time. 2008-12-09.

http://www.time.com/time/specials/2008/top10/article/0,30583,1855948_1863826_1863827,00.html#. Retrieved on 2009-03-04.

  2. ^ a b “WALL-E Movie Reviews”. Rotten Tomatoes.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/wall_e/?critic=creamcrop. Retrieved on 2009-03-04.

  3. ^ a b Todd McCarthy (2008-06-26). “WALL-E Review”. Variety.

  http://www.variety.com/VE1117937536.html. Retrieved on 2009-03-04.

4. Kotler, Scheff, Standing Room Only, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.1997.

© 2009 Curtis Stedge