I have always been hesitant to write a blog. Somehow, it seems self-indulgent to assume anyone is interested in what I think about day-by-day. But enough people have asked me to consider writing about my experiences and my observations about arts management that I have decided to take the plunge. Please let me know if my musings are interesting or irrelevant.

I have been interested the past two weeks by the debates over whether not-for-profit organizations should be allowed to compete with for-profit productions at the Tony Awards. I understand the complaints of for-profit producers – if not-for-profit organizations get subsidized by their donors, and do not need to return a profit on investment, they are at a distinct advantage.

And yet, I am struck by the number of not-for-profit arts organizations that do not take exploit this advantage – they play it safe and act like for-profit producers.

We in the not-for-profit realm should be willing to take greater risks – with difficult material, larger productions, ensemble casting, etc. It is how we justify our subsidies.

Two years ago, we created a new production of Mame at the Kennedy Center. Critics were divided on the production but I thought it was great. Several for-profit producers came to see the show and explored bringing it to Broadway. One producer took a great deal of time to evaluate the prospect and decided our production – with 24 members in the orchestra, 39 in the cast, 18 dressers and on and on – it was simply too big to move to Broadway.

Everyone in the cast and on my staff was deflated. I was disappointed as well.

But I was also proud – we had produced a work that was too expensive for the for-profit theater. We were justifying our subsidy.