This article has a lot to say about the need for a new way of economic thinking. Two of the ideas it discusses--a focus on maintenance over consumption, and on more community-oriented living--led me to reflect on my decades-old fascination with American theatre and, specifically, with America's theatres.
I've been an advocate of saving historic theatres and reusing them for the performing arts ever since I went to my first Broadway show, "Butley," at the Morosco Theatre on Broadway (on West 45th Street, to be precise--"Broadway" being more a designation of theatre capacity rather than location). The play was, for me, merely okay, except that it did give me a chance to see (and later meet) the great Alan Bates. But what was more lasting, as it turns out, was the impression that the theatre itself, with its amazing intimacy and exquisite architecture left on me. Even more impressive was the fact that I was sitting in the same theatre where "Death of a Salesman," among other great plays, had premiered many years before.
When I learned, several months later, about plans to tear down the Morosco and two other theatres (the Helen Hayes and the Bijou) as part of a plan to build what is now the Marriott Marquis Hotel, I couldn't believe it. How could anyone tear down at theatre, and others like it, with so much beauty and history attached to it, simply for another hotel? And this was being done in the name of "saving the theatre district." Right. As someone wrote in The New York Times, this idea was akin to saving Manhattan with an H-bomb.
As it turned out, the destruction of all three theatres (and two former theatres, the Astor and the Victoria) served as the catalyst for a broader, nationwide movement in favor of saving and reusing historic theatres, one that included the landmarking of most, if not all, of the remaining Broadway theatres. So at least they did not die in vain. But die they did--and, with them, a large piece of the history of the American theatre.
For me, the historic nature of older theatres (and even some younger ones) has always been the most important reason for saving them. I take a back seat to no one in admiring their unique architecture. But, as has often been proven in restoration efforts, architecture can be replicated or repaired. A historic site, on the other hand, is only a historic site as long as it exists essentially the same way as when history was made there. When a theatre is torn down, or (almost as bad) "adaptively re-used" to such an extent that it no longer has any theatrical elements, the site can no longer be said to be historic. Often, a justification for denying landmark or historic status to a structure is found in the fact that most of the original structure has been lost or destroyed.
There is now, however, a third reason to think about more aggressive efforts to save historic theatres, one that can accomplish the goals of architectural and historic preservationists alike. That reason is also a reason for saving other historic structures, as well as some less historic ones: the need for a new economy, one that is based on the maintenance and reuse of existing resources, and a social/residential structure that is less isolated and more community-oriented. Our economy is sluggish and shrinking in no small part because it is built around a philosophy of endless consumption of infinite resources.
We all want to pretend that the frontier hasn't closed. Physically, it has. But, to the extent that the ultimate frontier is our willing to adapt and overcome the challenges at hand, the frontier will never close. And, to adapt and overcome our current challenges, we must be willing to come together and find new ways to live within the limits of our planet. In there own way, historic theatres offer opportunities to do both: to come together, and to find new ways to preserve our existing resources and rebuild our existing communities.
So, how about it? Mr. President, and everyone else, here's where you can start building a sustainable, people-first economy: SAVE OUR THEATRES!
AND DO IT NOW!
No comments:
Post a Comment