WPA Post #3 - The Theater Project

Another of my Artists With Warren posts:

I have a friend with fairly conservative views. She wouldn't say so, but it just happens that most of her opinions sound like Ronald Reagan's ca. 1979. Whenever we discuss anything- healthcare, social security, education - she has one statement she thinks is an argument stopper (it is, but not for the reason she thinks): "Whatever the government gives you, the government can take away." I can't believe how silly that argument is. I also can't believe how widespread it is. Of course the government can take it away. So can a corporation, or any other entity that gives you something. They can take your job, your house, steal your pension... without government, in fact, they can take away your clean water and air. I've never understood this mindset. There are people who profoundly distrust the government, yet will blithely hand over practically anything to a corporation. It's a mentality that gets up in arms when the government suggests hospitals share medical records more easily, and yet thinks its perfectly fine when corporations take away your right to sue, your freedom of speech and right to assemble (try protesting in a shopping mall- arguably the commons of the 21st century).

I'd like to start a discussion regarding the advisability of government funding for the arts. I'm not talking about the NEA or the NEH, which are small potatoes compared to the WPA. I'm talking about the government as a massive patron of the arts; a patron on a scale only seen once in this country. I'm bringing this up now, because this is a post on the shortest lived, most controversial, and certainly the most fascinating division of Federal Project Number One: The Federal Theater Project.

Live theater was in trouble before the Depression. You could go see a movie for a fraction of the cost of seeing a play. Radio was free. In addition, both of these media could reach the entire nation at once with a handful of talent. Harry Hopkins felt theater was necessary for a vital community. He hired Hallie Flanagan, a theater professor who had also studied government sponsored theater abroad. He said, in his usual dry way, "I don't know why I still hang on to the idea that unemployed actors get just as hungry as anybody else." He asked her to provide "a free, adult, uncensored theater," and she set out to do just that.

The FTP was set up in 1935 in order to provide employment for actors, directors, stagehands, lighting technicians, seamstresses and many others. There were artists designing scenery and posters. Composers writing scores. Folks manning the box office. In addition, it had a bureau set up for research. The bureau consulted with the regional directors, as well as wrote and translated plays. It was a huge undertaking. It encompassed drama, circuses (no animals), radio, dance, and children's plays, among other forms. Its theater productions were estimated to have played to 30 million people.

As I mentioned, the FTP was controversial. Its plays (all approved by the leadership) were decidedly modern and leftist, such as The Cradle Will Rock, It Can't Happen Here, Revolt of the Beavers, and The Sun Rises in the West. These covered such topics as corporate greed, the rise of Fascism, workers revolting (ok, that one sounds a little heavy-handed and on the nose - until you find out its a children's play; then it just sounds scary as hell), and the Okie migration.

A hugely popular section which caused a lot of complaints was the Living Newspaper. These were plays based on current events. It consisted of such titles as Triple-A Plowed Under, about the plight of Dustbowl farmers; Power, which extolled the New Deal, and specifically the TVA and Rural Electrification Act;  One Third of a Nation, which was about slum housing and took its title from a phrase in FDR's Second Inaugural; and Spirochete, which I'm pretty sure I would have stayed home from.

Another wildly successful division was the Negro Theater Unit. Considering the era we're talking about, you might be surprised to learn this was not a product of segregation. Hallie Flanagan expressly forbade segregation in the FTP. A project manager in Dallas was fired when he tried to segregate black and white theater technicians on a railway car. A white assistant director in a project was pulled because "he was unable to work amicably" with black artists. This unit was set up specifically to showcase underrepresented African-American actors, artists, and playwrights. These units were mixed, and sometimes worked in conjunction with other units. This, along with the leftist slant of many of the works, eventually became too much for the House Committee on Un-American Activities, then led by a Texas Congressman, Martin Dies. They pulled funding for the FTP, saying "racial equality forms a vital part of the Communist dictatorship and practices."

However, in its short life, the FTP employed thousands, touched millions, brought live theater about timely topics all across America, and left a legacy that was felt for decades. While racism and reaction led to its untimely demise, it showed that not only government funding, but actual management of arts organizations can work, and work well. There was no censorship. It became a force for social change and education. It established or furthered the careers of a great many people who went on to become well known artists. In addition, its presence did not prevent private funding or patronship of the arts. There are arguments to be made both pro and con regarding government involvement in the arts, but in my opinion, it is no worse, and probably better, than just leaving it to the whims of commerce.

Besides- when America is functioning as it should, we ARE the government.