Work break. Sort of.

Words I would like never to have to respond to again, in current order of loathing: "economic vitality," "diversity/inclusivity," "the underserved," "takeaways," "deliverables."

I am not at all opposed to the concepts underlying these terms. (For example, the arts do contribute economically to their communities.) I am, however, hugely opposed to the idea that in order to merit funding as a performing artist, I must somehow discern and then provide to funders information on the ethnicity, sexual orientation, and income level of every audience member I attract. I am even more opposed to the idea that art deserves funding only when people with certain targeted characteristics (whatever they are) encounter it.

I am truly in favor of finding ways to increase accessibility to the arts, but audience demographics are not a path TO artistic excellence. It works the other way around: if I make truly great art, more people of all types will be interested in coming to see it. But it shouldn't be my job to determine if my audiences match your desired target characteristics.

My "deliverable" is a performance. Your "takeaway" requires you to show up and see my work and then make your own decision about its worth. That job can't be outsourced. Funders, please stop putting pressure on your grantees to run Gallup polls on every audience. Try seeing our work instead.

In case you can't tell, I hate grant final-reports season. Six down, two to go...end of rant.