Don wrote a great article about how theater artists' assumptions about the relationship between money and art often don't make sense (and sometimes work against them).
Everything he says makes perfect sense to me. Then again, I'm not a Theater Person. I'm just someone who wants to stage weird experimental plays. I really don't know why I want to do this other than a craving for mystery and intimacy. In a sense, I'm the ultimate amateur. I write plays because I'm enamored with the process*.
But - and this is somewhat ironic - it often seems that a lot of Theater People don't want people like me involved in the actual making of a show. Sure, I'd be allowed to usher people to their seats or work the box office. I'd definitely be welcome to help strike. But writing the play? Designing something? Even - gasp! - acting? No need to apply. I'll have to go through the "proper channels".
IOW, doing something I don't want to do at greatly reduced pay so I can, perhaps, sometimes in the distant future, have a sliver of a chance at doing what I really want to do.
Anybody else notice the irony in this?
*I enjoy the process of transformation. The act of change - in all its forms - is a source of (often morbid) fascination to me. Babies growing in the womb, werewolves changing, rotting fruit, turds turning to dirt, seeds becoming trees, decaying carcasses, fluffy clouds to rain clouds, coccoon to butterfly, etc.