As part of a blog discussion on ArtsJournal called “Lead or Follow,” Seattle Opera Executive Director Kelly Tweedale and ArtsJournal founder Doug McLennan offer critiques on how engagement is viewed at arts institutions. “I think arts organizations and the arts sector at large throw around the term ‘audience engagement’ quite irresponsibly,” writes Tweedale on January 23, “using it as the new buzz word that makes us feel like we are doing something. … If we can create memorable experiences once we get a new audience member in the theater, how come we struggle to get more people to give the arts a try unless we hold each person’s hand and talk them through it? Perhaps what we really mean when we say ‘engagement’ is that we are looking for evidence that new audiences won’t have to be cajoled or bribed to give arts experiences a try and that we will learn how to empower our fan base to be our biggest advocates.” On January 25, McLennan writes, “Engagement seems more often to be used as a tool to sell art as a product rather than as an intrinsic part of the art process. That’s fine, but it seems to me that looking at it this way misses the potential power of engagement. If ‘engagement’ is merely a better way to get data about what your audience thinks about you, then it’s rather self-serving (and ultimately unsuccessful). Relationships that are too self-serving are difficult to sustain.” The discussion continues through Friday (1/27) at artsjournal.com
Posted January 26, 2012
