One thing that was great about the Soviet Union is just how much effort the state put in to popularize some of the canons of Western classical arts. From ballet to opera to orchestra, classical arts, within the limited, non-political forms, thrived even in the remotest parts of the USSR, helping to spread their reach and training a cadre of excellent performers, who found ready audiences among the urban elites, who had little alternatives for entertainment.
That tradition is well-reflected in Tashkent, where the National Ballet performs nightly at its dedicated, absolutely gorgeous theater. Even on a 6:30pm performance, the theater was completely full, most of locals, sprinkled with some foreign tourists, ready to cheer on the performers putting on their takes of Western and local classics. The performance met with frequent applause and whistles from an audience that genuinely enjoy the performance for the beauty of the performance.
One factor that helps to maintain the popularity of ballet, for instance, is the cheap price. The cheapest balcony seat only costs little more than 2 USD, and even the best front row seating goes for less than 10. Even for locals averaging 100 USD of income per month, once-a-month at the ballet is definitely an affordable outing for a date or the whole family. Even teenaged groups of friends can be frequently found in the audience, clapping along to the best parts.
The financial accessibility of the best ballet troupe of the country to the general populace helps to keep the show running in Uzbekistan, when ballet (and other classical art forms) have become more and more of a niche entertainment form in many other countries. Whereas ballet in the West are enjoyed by wealthy older people in nice suits and dresses, even in the beautiful colonial interior of the Tashkent ballet theater, T-shirts and jeans of teenagers are perfectly acceptable.
The result is a divergence of perception of the classical arts between the people of the former USSR as compared to the rest of the world. While people in the West head to ballet and opera donned in their best evening gowns and suits to enjoy performances that are supposedly only understood and enjoyed by the sophisticated and culturally educated elites, out here in Central Asia, evening the youths, with little background in these topics, have a very good chance to be in the audience on the cheap.
Such populist take on the classical arts help them survive much better in the former communist bloc than they do elsewhere. While ballet and opera are becoming niche markets in the West, where they are only taken up by the most traditional oriented and artistically interested, they remain a popular form of past time, just like watching a movie in the cinema, for the residents of Tashkent. As classical arts become less popular in the West, they remain grounded in the general populace here.
The example of Tashkent ballet, thus, offers a good way to protect cultural traditions that are disappearing. But making them cheap and accessible, yet stylish enough even for the social elite, classical performances can attract more popular interest by giving even the underclass an opportunity to experience that the very rich enjoys. By deliberately making the classical arts classless in audience, their elitist connotations are removed and allow for more popular, sustained uptake.
The capitalist world creates demand through market segmentation, pricing certain goods high to maintain their exclusivity and accessibility to only a few well-paying customers. This can be a good business decision in the short term. When the elite customers become a dying breed, however, the elitist imaged created before works against the product. For something as priceless as the classical arts, keeping them alive should not be solely trusted to the private market. The former Soviet model, of subsidizing their performances for the benefit of a large classless audience, could offer a way for the classics' future survival.
Comments
Post a Comment