The New York City Opera, located on 75 Broad Street in Manhattan, has been running its operas since 1944. It is now announcing its bankruptcy and will be closing. Earlier in the month, it was asking for $7 million dollars. Kickstarter, a company that raises funds for startups, set up a donation to raise $1 million of the $7 million that the New York City Opera needed. Unfortunately, it was only able to raise 1/3 of the $1 million they had intended when the donation time window closed. It has also asked Michael Bloomberg, our mayor, for funds. Even though he has been a huge supporter of the arts, he says that neither him nor the city will be contributing to Opera’s needs.
The Opera has been trying many ways to save money since it started struggling. In 2011, it moved from Lincoln Center to 75 Broad Street. It has also stopped guaranteeing salaries to its musicians and performers. Many are sad to see this Opera go, but unfortunately, it is not making enough profit to keep running its shows.
This goes back to the opening of the new opera of Anna Nicole Smith’s life, “Anna Nicole,” earlier in the month in that many people saw the opera as a way of trying to attract a younger audience. It was criticized and ultimately failed its goal of trying to revive the opera. It is sensible that the New York City Opera would try to present an opera that is somewhat relatable to the younger generations. Opera has been dying out as the years go by. Our generation knows little to nothing about opera, its music, and its performers.
Even though they are running out of funds, they should not shut down. They have been trying to provide inexpensive tickets to shows to the New York City community since they first began. Opera is also an art that needs to preserved, like any art in museums and galleries. There are many ways to express a moral or story. Dances and plays do not have to be the only way. Operas are still part of the art world and are important, especially for people who may not be as cultured, who need to be exposed to the arts. They might not have as much money and the New York City Opera may be the only one that is affordable for them.
In addition, European opera houses have also been trying to preserve their arts. However, they are being funded by public subsidies (Economist). Europeans appreciate art in different ways than Americans do. It might be the time to start appreciating art the same way they do because opera, like all art, is important to culture. We can tell a lot about a country’s culture through its art, but we certainly don’t want to give the image that Americans don’t care about art through eliminating one art form. Even though it seems a bit extreme to say “eliminating one art form,” it is unbelievable that a 70 year old opera house would close down due to lack of funding. It might mean that we are coming close to ridding ourselves of opera.
Sources:
Cooper, Michael. “New York City Opera Announces It Will Close.” ArtsBeat New York City Opera Announces It Will Close Comments. New York Times, 01 Oct. 2013. Web. 01 Oct. 2013. <http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/01/new-york-city-opera-announces-it-will-close/?ref=arts>.
Special Report. “Hands in Their Pockets.” Economist. N.p., n.d. Web. 1 Oct. 2013. <http://www.economist.com/node/739323>.
It’s unfortunate that the New York City Opera is closing its doors. With an uncertain economy, the arts are always in danger of suffering since people are not as willing to contribute out of their pockets. However, we must recognize the fact that opera does not cater to a wide audience since the younger generations are not as exposed to the art form. Instead, pop music and other kinds of mainstream media come to mind as the primary forms of art that they experience and accept. I think that for most young people, we only go to art museums because school work requires us to do so. Otherwise, going to art venues is an unfamiliar and almost alien experience.
I think that one of the best ways that we can save the art culture in New York is to give exposure to the arts early on in young children’s education. This way, they can develop a better sense and familiarity for opera, paintings, and other expressions of art. If art venues can better cater to the younger audience, then they can influence all audiences, especially those of the next generation.
It is very sad and unfortunate that the New York City Opera will be closing due to bankruptcy. In times of financial troubles, art is one of the hardest hit industries because it is a form of entertainment, not a necessity. If people are having trouble supporting themselves and their family, it is very unlikely that they will be willing to spend money to see an opera or any other form of art. Also, as you mentioned, the opera has trouble attracting the younger generation and that is a major cause of the opera’s gradual decline. Young people rarely go to operas or museums for their own leisure and are much more fascinated by pop stars, television shows, and video games for entertainment.
I agree with you that the opera is a vital part of the arts of New York and needs to be preserved. The major problem leading to the bankruptcy of many art institutions is the lack of demand for art by the younger generation. A possible way to preserve operas is to increase its exposure to younger audiences by making it a part of everyone’s education. This will not only preserve and popularize the arts, it will also make the younger generation more cultured. Another possible solution is to ask the government to help fund our country’s arts like many European governments do. For example, I heard that in the Netherlands, the government fund artists with supplies and gives them a base salary for them to continue producing artwork. I think that is a good way for us to preserve and continue artistic expression.
The closing of New York City Opera is likely to spark a debate on its implications for all other forms of art. It comes as an unwarranted surprise that an opera company functioning for seventy years has to draw its curtains, once and for all.
As I have said in a previous post, there has been a lack of financial resources in several sectors of business, but arts—that too in New York City—should not have to face the brunt of these circumstances. If we watch the opera shut down, are we not likely to watch other forms of art meet their untimely end as well?
Then again, are we going to support an art form that has lost its appeal and popularity among people? As a city, should we be resorting to different tactics to raise enough money for the New York City Opera? Similarly, should we let the government assume responsibility in this matter? Regardless of where one stands on the issue, one cannot deny that the primary responsible entity in this matter is the company itself.
The news of New York City Opera’s financial woes surfaced a while ago. As a result, producers and managers have sought new marketing strategies to appeal to the viewer’s interests. However, why would the company target young audience members in hopes of prospective growth when there are uncertain of their short-term survival? In other words, why was the opera based on Anna Nicole Smith’s life targeted towards the younger audience if donors and philanthropists tend to be the older, richer (or a little more financially stable), and more experienced members of the audience? Their approach to crisis management and policy making left me wondering about the soundness of their marketing strategy. Was this just an inopportune decision or a well-thought out approach that didn’t shape up the way it was intended?