I was looking at the New Play Data i posted over here again and i was just thinking about compensation issues and... well.. how across-the-board, our compensation model is totally nuts. We've already talked about the difficulties for actors and directors who want to make a living, but let's hone in on a few statistics from that earlier post:
-- Roughly 3% of income is from royalties
-- Playwright system of remuneration i.e. the royalty mechanism does not work
-- Commissions? Playwrights consider them a mixed bag. Why?
-- Avg. commission amount = $3-4K
-- Takes 6 months-2 years to write a play (if you took one year to write a play at $4K, you'd be making $333.33 off writing that play)
-- Theater gets to hold onto it for up to several years even if they don't produce it, keeping playwright from making additional $$$ off of it.
When you put it that way... how are writers supposed to earn money anyway? The two big things that we're told are going to be their sources of income (commissions and royalties) are in fact a very, very small percentage of their earnings.
The scary part, as the folks at Playscripts would attest, is that playwrights haven't received much of a raise in about fifty years. That's a good place to start the conversation.
Posted by: 99 | June 10, 2009 at 01:32 PM
To clarify 99 above, he's referring to this article:
http://www.playscripts.com/raisethewage/
Amateur royalties had been depressed at $50/performance for 40 years; however in the three years since that essay was written, we've seen an increase across almost all play publishers to $75/performance! The article is a must-read.
Posted by: Mark | June 10, 2009 at 02:07 PM
Seems to go back to the problem of non-profit theater operating on a commercial model that you have highlighted before. Dollars valued over process.
Posted by: pmull | June 10, 2009 at 02:07 PM
Not to be glib, but one look at Tyler Perry's balance sheets suggests an alternate model.
Posted by: Eric Ziegenhagen | June 10, 2009 at 03:38 PM
What would happen if the amateur royalties flat fee was scrapped in favor of percentage of box-office gross with a guaranteed minimum?
It's kind of silly to make a distinction between professional and amateur productions in licensing if it costs playwrights bread.
Posted by: Tony | June 10, 2009 at 03:45 PM
Actually, it's hard to be polite about this subject.
When I lived in DC, a managing director I was close to said he ALWAYS wrote the smallest check to the playwright. Electricians -- everyone -- made more.
What other art form goes to a group of people for their core texts and then treats them with such disrespect?
I frankly don't know why any of the playwrights I know (myself included) still write plays.
Maybe theatre will end up like opera -- with a closed canon of classics that people come to see new interpretations of. I'm not sure that this would be a bad thing ...
Posted by: cnw | June 10, 2009 at 04:34 PM
I have a scheme that answers this question on my blog. It's sort of a far-fetched hypothetical answer, but I think it might work... take a look:
http://culturefuture.blogspot.com/2009/06/publicly-traded-patronage.html
Posted by: Guy Yedwab | June 12, 2009 at 12:35 PM
I mean, what are other sources of income? I'm trying to figure that out now. Grants? Awards? This is why so many head to TV and Film. You know how much you can get for one TV script?
Posted by: Adam | June 12, 2009 at 12:42 PM