Respecting Your Audience Today Secures Your Value Tomorrow

 

This fictional scenario forms the plot of the French comedy "Yannick," directed by Quentin Dupieux. Through the protagonist Yannick, the film bluntly points out a significant problem in publicly funded theater scenes—not only in France but also elsewhere: a lack of respect for audience opinions and insufficient opportunities for participation. This needs urgent attention because participation is crucial for younger (potential) cultural audiences.

 

These transformative processes don't just exist on the big screen, nor can they be negotiated and resolved there. Therefore, the international symposium "Becoming Public!" provided valuable discourse, organized by the Institute for Cultural Policy at the University of Hildesheim. It was based on a multi-year research project funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG), "Equitable Participation in Publicly Funded Theaters: Theater Governance and Audience Development Strategies in Germany, France, and England," which provided the basis for the participants' discussions. Cultural policymakers, theater professionals, and researchers from England, France, and Germany collaborated to find answers to the following questions:

 

 

To better understand the audience crisis, comparing the three theater landscapes was particularly interesting and helpful. To ensure all participants were on the same page, Birgit Mandel and Maria Nesemann (the symposium organizers) presented the core findings of the DFG research project. The primary differences between the three countries lie in their knowledge of their audiences. For instance, English theaters are required by some funders to collect extensive audience data. The current funding strategy, "Let's Create," by Arts Council England follows a cultural democracy model: Instead of focusing solely on professional art, it fosters cultural creativity among the public and within communities. This approach also supports the shift from traditional audience development to modern audience engagement. The differences: While the former often markets a fixed program to various groups, the latter emphasizes the need to actively involve new target audiences and develop programs tailored to their interests.

 

With this strategy, England is seen as a pioneer in audience engagement in this tri-country comparison. According to Sara Jo Harrison (Arts Council England), cultural policy guidelines are crucial for implementing participation. Further prerequisites include training, which is standard for English cultural professionals. These aspects strengthen relationships with the audience in the long term, who feel more respected and valued. Treating visitors as partners and guests is crucial, and "hospitality" should become a new skill that defines a venue's service quality. Here, "Yannick" is an important lesson—when was the last time you were asked by those responsible how you felt about a cultural visit (aside from audience surveys)? Harrison also highlighted the need to break down biases that prevent people from attending the theater.

 

It was no surprise that Konrad Schmidt-Werthern (Head of the Cultural Department, Berlin) wanted to draw more inspiration from the English system, especially to improve community work and audience development in German theaters. In both Germany and France, theaters are only required to report their occupancy rates to funders. Information about audience composition and diversity is overlooked. This also affects attitudes, emphasized Francesca Poloniato-Maugein (Director of Le Merlan scène nationale de Marseille). To become more inclusive and promote participation, theater creators must listen to their teams, the local community, the audience, partners, and other stakeholders. Theater directors shouldn't overestimate themselves—they don't know everything, and certainly not better.

 

This humility, advocated by Harrison and Poloniato-Maugein, is crucial for theaters to make their offerings more accessible or open up to diverse cultural interests. The interactive polls during the symposium revealed how the participants viewed this issue. While most preferred the heavily subsidized German theater system over England's or France's (most participants were German), a vast majority still supported a more open German theater landscape: with greater participation, diversity on and off stage, and more innovative programming. However, a conflict remains between cultural policymakers and creators. Although many creators appear open to the public's interests, some worry about losing quality and significance if they develop "more entertaining" programs for broader audiences. This concern was evident in the final panel: those advocating for more participation guidelines, budget redistribution, and quality management faced resistance from proponents of the status quo. How fortunate for them that no "Yannick" was in the audience...

 

In all seriousness, this resistance becomes increasingly puzzling. The fear of losing relevance ignores that this is inevitable if fewer people attend theaters because fewer are interested. Moreover, this mindset is simply arrogant, denying the audience's ability to judge their own tastes. Additionally, this fear is shortsighted because it's not about "either" (serious, elite programming) "or" (more accessible, entertaining programming). Rather, it's about appealing to a variety of interests and shedding perceived authoritative standards—which don't exist because non-attendance is also a form of expression.

 

A legitimate concern is the increased production pressure that potentially accompanies a broader program. But must audience orientation mean more programs? It's more practical to follow Ben Wamsley's principle: "Do less but better." Wamsley, a British professor of Cultural Engagement (University of Leeds), highlighted the importance of prioritizing the quality of participation over the quantity of programs. The symposium also addressed the challenge of balancing increased theater access with maintaining necessary responsibilities: How much responsibility can theaters delegate, and how much should they retain? Each theater must answer this individually, drawing from comprehensive research on cultural, scientific, and political participation. Not all theatergoers want to be actively involved in production—many prefer passive participation, as the symposium demonstrated. Participation doesn't mean relinquishing responsibility but rather "sharing responsibility." The Contact Theater in England and the Maxim Gorki Theater in Germany showcased what happens when theaters implement this idea, successfully expanding their audience in terms of age and diversity.

 

Another concern hindering openness is the "right-wing threat through more cultural-political control," at least in Germany. In France and England, public funding is always tied to the requirement of maximum accessibility and compliance monitoring. In Germany, however, discussions about more cultural policy control are met with skepticism due to the country's dictatorial past, even though theaters would be required and supported to be more participation-oriented. A frequent argument at the symposium was that artistic freedom could be compromised, particularly if the far-right AfD party gains more influence. This risk needs to be taken seriously, but the current political climate is already influencing cultural policy. New management requirements wouldn't infringe on artistic freedom. Therefore, structures should be established that protect cultural institutions from political influence while safeguarding creative freedom and strengthening democracy.

 

 

"Becoming Public!" provided a deep exchange and underscored the necessity for closer collaboration between cultural policy and theater practitioners to foster participation and diversity. The symposium team also promoted networking through postcards, which had questions on the front and could be answered anonymously on the back before being sent to other participants. All sessions were conducted in English (except the final discussion) and simultaneously translated by the team between French and English (and vice versa) to ensure all participants could engage fully. Kudos!

 

The conference made it clear that despite the systemic differences among the three countries, the shared goal of a more open and inclusive theater landscape will be central to the future of public cultural funding. The interactive working groups contributed to this, allowing participants to address key questions, exchange ideas, and network. Hopefully, all this provided new, valuable insights and motivated participants to take action, embed the audience's value in the DNA of their theaters, overcome their fears, and explore new paths. It shouldn't have to take a hostage situation to reach this point...