Jake’s post goes on to develop (as you’d expect from him) a more nuanced thesis around the need for education and expanded horizons beyond the West End, but I wanted to take issue with this first part of his analysis, because for me it really doesn’t work. There are plenty of things that “young people” are willing to pay for which shouldn’t be considered elitist: a football match (£50), X Factor Live Tour ticket (£32), Justin Bieber in Birmingham (£49)… For crying out loud, the cheapest ticket to see JLS play in Bournemouth costs £28.50. Now surely nobody, just nobody, would consider JLS (playing Bournemouth) to be elitist just because it costs close to £30?
This is backed up by the evidence that reducing costs for young people (Cf. A Life Less Ordinary) doesn’t increase interest or attendance from more young people – just that the young people who go to see theatre anyway get to do it for a bit less (which is fine, but a separate point).
In any case, theatre (with £10 tickets available to anyone at a raft of the better theatres in the capital) is significantly more egalitarian for those of any ages than, for instance, football, music or comedy.
The real reason why more young people don’t go to the theatre (and I say this as a huge supporter of the artform) is that it’s often pretty hard work and can be quite uninteresting at times. We should remember that according to the Arts Council, only 23% of people go to the theatre as much as once a year – even amongst the adult population. Lack of interest in theatre is not confined to young people – it is, and will remain, a niche interest.
The realistic aim should not be to move this number to 100% but ensure that those, particularly those young people who have an interest in theatre, aren’t priced out (as perhaps they are in New York with the astronomical ticket prices there) – but I don’t believe £35 seats are a barrier to youth interest in theatre any more than £28.50 tickets are to youth interest in JLS.
Without knowing exactly what age group Jake is referring to in his piece it is safe to say that it is rarely young people themselves who are paying £30 for a ticket to see JLS or £50 to go to a football match but rather it will be their parents. As you rightly state theatre is a niche interest so to compare the three things is not giving theatre a fair playing field, we cannot under estimate at all the importance of making theatre more accessible to those under 26 and one of the main things we can do is make it affordable. Reducing costs absolutely does increase interest and attendance and to use A Night Less Ordinary as a sole example of it not working is not a balanced argument. To also say theatre is hard work and uninteresting does great discredit for some of the fantastic work being made by companies in the subsidised sector, more and more of whom are reaching out to a younger and more diverse audiences.
I’m all for increasing access, I just don’t believe it’s cost that’s driving the “accessibility” factor given it’s so much cheaper than so many other kinds of entertainment. Make theatre more attractive in other ways and people will meet the cost.