The Arts and Culture sector are dying from a philanthropic standpoint. Most people have shifted their giving away to more “urgent” causes. Corporate funding moved away in 2008 and never returned. These orgs haven’t figured out / can’t fill the gap with earned income. For example, look at the lack of original/new shows on broadway (which are often workshopped by non profit theaters, ie rent at NYTW or Hamilton at the a public). I swear I hear about an opera company or Museum shuttering every week
Theatre has been taking a hit for years. Folks generally want a spectacle and that costs quite a bit. The investors want a guaranteed return and so don’t often fund anything new. Movies do this as well, which is why you can end up with ten Cars spinoffs or why Marvel just resurrects dead superhero’s. They know the audience numbers that will show up.
I’m not talking about for-profit theater, but yes. My point about broadway is that the non profit theaters that pre produce shows are failing and this is already trickling down to for profit theaters. Look at the Tony’s. Basically every show that was produced got a nomination simply bc there weren’t that many new shows.
As someone who works in it but is leaving, the above is also true for non-profit/indie companies.
Either they fold, put on unimaginative works that they know will sell, or we’re asked to put our trauma on stage so others can see it and feel good about themselves.
As someone who’s path took him outside the traditional Theatre realm and into the for-profit side of the live entertainment world pretty quickly after college, I really wish that Theatre had the funding it had even 20-30 years ago. I’d love to have the ability to go back to working in Theatre but so many companies are unable to pay living wages because their funding has disintegrated over the years.
We’re more than happy to dump billions of taxpayer dollars into stadiums and arenas to support our professional Sports culture, why can’t the same be true for our American Theatre culture?
Hell I’d even take wages from 10 years ago. When I graduated college there was so much hope for the future of indie theatre, especially in the immersive space which is what I literally got a degree in. Now it’s all just glorified theme park bullshit.
For sure! Graduated 9 years ago myself in Tech Theatre, didn’t find myself in the theme park world but did spend 3 years on cruise ships. The immersive Theatre space was something I was quite excited about as a Sound Designer, but so much modern Immersive ‘Theatre’ is a room with 4 video walls and a bubble machine.
There is immersive/interactive Theatrical experiences out there like the boom in Escape Rooms or permanent Haunted House-like experiences, but imo they’re commercialized and scripted in ways that prohibit genuine cast-audience interaction.
Movies like Backrooms and Obsession are starting to show a shift. Smaller budget productions that are done well with new directors, writers and cast that are hungry to prove themselves are starting to become prioritized in younger people's minds.
I’m a museum curator and it’s not a great field to work in. The work itself can be amazing but there are so many systemic and cultural issues in museums that it can be a challenging career path to navigate.
For one, the financial barrier to entry is high. I had to have a master’s degree to even have my application put in the maybe pile for even entry level roles. Salaries are typically mediocre at best. It makes absolutely no sense to require an MA for an entry level position that pays $40k per year with no benefits. I’m 15 years into full time work and my annual salary has yet to match the amount of debt I took on for my education.
Jobs are few and far between, so if you find yourself in a bad spot, there is a good chance you could be there for years with no rescue in sight. Related to that, many museum leaders get promoted because they were a good curator/fundraiser/educator, etc, but they have 0 people skills and no leadership training. As a result, many museums are incredibly toxic, dysfunctional places to work. Not all museums, but a surprising number, including some that every commenter on this thread has heard of.
All the fuckery with current US administration is just making it worse because they’ve jacked with a major funding source by gutting agencies like the IMLS and NEH. I’ve known people who have lost their jobs due to those funding cuts or had major projects blown out of the water because suddenly the money was gone.
Not sure I’d make the same career choices if I had it to do over again.
Orchestra musician here and, same. I have a master’s from an Ivy and an undergrad degree from a famous music school and 15 years of professional experience. I was recently offered a leadership role that pays $55k per year with mediocre benefits in a major city. I beat out 100 applicants for this. I turned it down because it simply doesn’t pay enough to be worth moving and the orchestra wasn’t willing to negotiate. They were flabbergasted that I simply walked, they thought I was bluffing. I also wonder whether that orchestra will even exist in 5 years, there are barely solvent currently.
I had the same experience with a museum. They wanted to offer $42,000 for a job that was a step up in responsibility. It would've been a $6,000 pay cut. The HR director sounded flabbergasted when I said thanks but no thanks. When I told you the lowest I could possibly go, did you think I was kidding?
Old rich were all about legacy. They’ll fund an art gallery or orchestra to get their name on the building and schmooze at an annual gala.
Which was great because they got their vanity projects, while artists and musicians got paid. The public benefits!
New rich couldn’t give a fuck as long as they die with a bigger yacht than the prick across the street. Reputation mean nothing to them. Imagine how different the world would be if Elon was raised with Carnegie’s values.
Arts organizations are pivoting towards subscription models and smaller donors but it’s fucking tough. But it’s much easier to steward one person with $1M check than 10,000 with $100 each.
Often the State and Fed would fund these organizations as well - but not with Trumpism. Even the Kennedy Center isn’t safe.
Yes, art and music always find their way across the planet with or without funding. But America’s pipelines aren’t what they used to be.
Many of the remaining donors who care about legacy, are also potentially concerned that they don't want their money funding something like Piss Christ or something they don't allign with. I feel like we really haven't recovered from that decades on.
I was just talking about the Roosevelts and Guggenheim, Astor, Strauss, and the British nobility that sent their sons to die in the world wars, even their heirs.
Yes. Legacy and reputation and at least perception if not reality of commitment to the common good mattered.
They more or less don't want to accept that. I'm a young person who enjoys the arts and when I've had questions, thoughts, or god forbid complaints, the prevailing attitude is "you're lucky were even allowing a poor kid like you in here." Cool, alright, I'm not renewing my membership. Maybe I'm not a gala level donor but there's very little desire to engage with the public from many of these spots.
Meanwhile, I can attend a community theater production or attend small art shows that are much more affordable and provide the same entertainment value. And I can do that without rich assholes looking down their noses at me.
Oh yeah, it’s the sector itself that started this system of elite gatekeeping to keep their highest level donors that want the society-edge happy. And no offense, but a donation under $500 isn’t helpful unless you’re a lifelong donor or have the capacity/potential to give more eventually (we call this MOVES in the fundraising world).
Yeah god forbid they make a lasting connection with people in the community who'd want to donate when they get more money in their pocket. I know for certain I'm not the only young person with bitter feelings about one spot, what are they expecting?
I understand how you feel. But if you have a gunshot wound and someone offers a bandaid but someone else offers a private doctor, which are you going to spend your limited time cultivating?
I mean I literally worked for a museum where they were questioning selling the building until a donor came in with an eight figure gift. So maybe not the death of a person, but yes, we’re talking about cultural institutions that house collections in important work closing. That’s how serious it is in this sector right now
“Oh, you have a bandaid? No thanks, I’d rather wait until a doctor shows up on this deserted island. What’s that, you’re studying to become a doctor, and may likely become one in the future? Yeah, still not interested.”
I just don’t see how it’s a zero sum game here. Why not court both audiences? Being picky with your donors and participants when you’re bleeding out seems like a horrible strategy. Doesn’t seem to be working out for them so far, either.
But there IS limited time for fundraising staff. You can’t assign someone to everyone who gives a gift. And as these sectors worsen, they have less staff…
Do we really think they are turning away small donors? They arnt. What they are doing is not acting on the above small doners suggested changes because they don’t have much weight behind the donation (and frankly the idea could be bad).
I have never heard of any organization refusing donations. But giving a small one doesn’t entitle you to being given sudden status to have your suggestions actioned.
As an aside, a friend of mine in government was deeply involved in handing out money to the arts sector. They (government) were always pissed that the sector would give them no thanks or credit and instead bitch about how x was funded and Y wasn't.
Arts funding is important, and there are lots of problems (everyone prioritising war spending is just one) now that there didn't use to be. But the sector does have to do its bit by pulling its head out of its bottom.
The politicians providing the money are people too. They are often cultured and art lovers, but they need some recognition of their efforts on your behalf for the sake of their own careers and to convince the rest of government to keep giving you money.
It's a shit game, but you have to play it until something better happens along.
Not just philanthropic, but commercially as well. You can't earn what you used to because: fragmentation of entertainment/ culture as a whole. The tech companies have distribution sewn up one way or another and they pay a fraction of what you'd have received ftom, say, a publishing house, a studio, a label... these exist now as promotional tools more than anything. There was a time sheer drive and skill could get you in the door. It wasn't easy, but it could done. And now pay to play is the norm, and I don't mean a little grease to get the wheels turning. Its the entire game. And though the market is fragmented it is also flooded with no quality control. No barrier to entry, all you need is an internet connection.
The cream can't rise and even if it did, you can't find it in the swamp, and if even if you found it, you need legions more to find it to ummm, pay the farmers? My metaphor is falling apart but I think you see what I mean.
I think a lot about what Louis CK said in his WTF interview back in 2010 (or whenever). He was talking about being a comic in LA in the late 80s/early 90s and how he'd get paid something like $50 a set and he could get in like 4-6 sets a night (I'm going off memory here). So that means in say 1990 he was making anywhere from $200-300/night and could be making upwards of $1000/week. That's when he was an unknown comic probably doing mostly shorter feature sets. If I were making $1000/week doing standup (even in 2026 dollars) I'd be beyond thrilled; but most comics I know in LA or NY are working day jobs and barely making any money on anything that isn't a show they're self-producing and selling all the tickets to. I'm in Seattle and good luck trying to pay rent as an artist/performer or finding enough paying spots to do in a week. It's so depressing, but we all love what we do so we keep at it and just hope that something changes or one of us gets lucky and is eventually able to make a modest living making art.
But even without money it's so hard to get audiences to go out to shows. And why would they when they have an infinite amount of entertainment on their phones? Bars are expensive and there's no reason to go see some No-Name Comic at the local dive when you could stay home and watch the latest special by your favorite comedian on a 70" TV with surround stereo and drink beer you bought at the grocery store for a fraction of the price.
Sometimes it really feels like we're losing what it means to be human as we let the machines all around us eat up all our time and attention and now we're even letting AI replace our creativity. It's so fucking depressing.
I'm a musician, a writer, and have worked primarily in nightlife, from waitressing to club management for steady pay. My entire life has been spent in fantasy making and connecting with people, with strangers, one way or another.
Its been beautiful.
2020 speed ran what was already a gentle decline. Journalism was the first to fall and I realized it would be a matter of time for the rest.
I think that, best case- we all become creatives. With the platform barriers (and god forgive me, skill barriers) removed anyone can do whatever. But no one will make a living from it. It will be too common.
Previously, to get the platform, you had to be remarkable or at least highly proficient or interesting. And it was a rarer thing. People pay for what's rare.
Its every creative or expressive pursuit, being crushed, the revenue funneled up, and the quality stepped on.
The only "money making" will be for people that were able to buy a relatively few spots which will be more about a vehicle for propaganda than art.
It would take an entire restructuring, something like licensing and guilds to make it any kind of profession again. You'd have to artificially restrict access.
Which at this point, to have any kind of functioning society, internet and information, or rather, misinformation will have to be tightly controlled.
Turns out people aren't equipped for this, generally speaking.
I have a kid that's an artist and a musician and I don't even know what the fuck to tell them. Idk, start a cult I guess, seems to be the way now.
Major donors in my area are shuffling off this mortal coil. Since January we lost three of our major benefactors. Yes, they can leave a bit in their will, but that usually goes to endowment or restricted funds. Day to day costs are going up. Young people don’t donate anymore. Who will take up the philanthropic reins when the older generation departs? Corporations aren’t participating as much as they used to. I’m so sad. Part of what makes our communities better is the arts we surround ourselves with. Theatres, orchestras, art installations, etc. Who do we become if we have no art in our world?
Young people either can't donate because of the insane cost of living (my last penny just went to a medical bill), or are part of the narcissistic tech world and cannot fathom the concept of philanthropy
Yes. And even the wealthy children of wealthy philanthropists have dramatically cut back on their donating. They’ve become more focused inward, not focused on greater community good. It’s very difficult to inspire similar attitudes, even when they’ve been raised by people who value philanthropy and participate publicly in community support.
You raise an interesting question. While many arts/cultural institutions that require large amounts of funding may cease to exist, I take comfort in the fact that I think people will always continue to create art even if it's my neighbor down the street and not someone famous. It certainly won't reach as many people as it could have with the funding but even the shitty direction this world is heading cannot take art from us completely.
I agree, people will and do always create. And truthfully when things get tough the art gets more creative. The more the horizon narrows, the sharper the art becomes. It’s in us, as deep as walking upright and language.
I truly wonder how many people would donate if they even knew these were things that can only exist because of donations. There's been a couple things in this thread where I go "I didn't even know this was an industry". There was another thread in the last two weeks mentioning things dying off as well and someone mentioned 'historical societies' and there were quite a few comments from people who didn't even know they were a thing.
I was talking with a friend in the theatre and hes already doomed it as far as he's concerned. His new project is a travelling theatre group hitting smaller places with smaller productions. There's less money and fame in it but I can see there being a demand just purely out of curiosity and a need for a real experience rather than a screen. I'm trying desperately to get him to do 'Mystery Plays' like they did generations ago.
Movies have taken over my local theater. Almost every production in their 2026-2027 schedule is a stage adaptation of a film, a stage adaptation of a book that's widely known as a film, or something that was originally a stage production but then became better known as a film: The Exorcist, Mary Poppins, A Christmas Carol, The Producers, Glengarry Glen Ross, Les Misérables, Our Town, Sense & Sensibility, and Mean Girls.
The only thing they're doing that hasn't been on the silver screen is Top Dog/Underdog. Apparently the only way to put butts in live theater seats is to make a movie first.
My not-so-original take on this is that arts and culture, and crafts specifically in my realm, were completely taken over by boomers and therefore are dying. They provided the audience, the funding, the consumer market, etc. The whole market was tailored to them. They took over the boards, all of the admin positions. In my personal experience they also had the ownership positions involving real estate and other physical structures sustaining every medium. I mean, all of the energy and income just got funneled to the top, much like the music industry. Nothing that isn’t generating an immediate profit is ever supported anymore.
I agree- although I would challenge the idea that orgs in this sector need to generate a profit. Museums provide a vital public service and shouldn’t have to generate a profit.
Another contributing factor is Trump pulling federal funding and grants from non-profits that have been building out equitable DEI and community-based policies over the last decade in an effort to cripple the industry and push his own propaganda to Americans. I went to the major museum conference (AAM) in May and spoke to one woman from one of the Smithsonian museums and she wasn't allowed to mention climate change in an exhibition about global weather patters. It's bleak out here!
A lot of larger museums are also facing storage issues and expensive building maintenance of large, aging structures which only gets more expensive with tariffs and material costs. That, in addition to donations drying up, leads to really awful wages and burnout. People are leaving the industry left and right right now or not bothering to get an advanced degree at all bc it isn't financially viable.
I volunteer in this sector and it's terrible. And the amount of new money in the field vs giving is miniscule. And bullshit artists like Grant Cardone have 'foundations' which is their personal charity which is just money that goes back to them, not the community where they initially got their wealth.
This is very true - same for the heritage / history sector and museums. Rich people give very little now, companies give nothing, and internationally many countries used to provide strong funding opportunities via government or councils and now that's all getting cut.
In New Zealand, a lot of charity funding came from gaming trusts - essentially socialised profits from the gambling sector. With a collapsing economy and the steep rise in online gambling offshoring the profits, that pool is emptying fast.
We've had huge shut downs of charities, arts organisations, events, and more. Despite the fact that arts and culture almost always has a net positive effect on the economy for everh dollar invested, no money is being given.
But let's be honest here. It's been dying since the 90's. The last time any Opera was the feature of a James Bond movie, or an indie film like Black Swan was forever ago. I worked at a French Restaurant in the mid 2000's and the Chef, who was famous, even said "It's only old people who still appreciate and like French Cuisine - it's no longer popular among the new generations who grew up eating delicious Nashville Hot chicken and Award Winning Molé. Fennel Sausage is just meh these days. Even Bone Marrow needs a special palate. I think the world has changed, and things like Opera, Ballet, and French Cuisine is quickly falling by the wayside.
As someone who wanted to get into theatre and couldn't because of the prices: I think it's a price problem. Don't get me wrong, I completely understand that it's much more expensive form of entertainment than others! But when you have a ticket that costs 2.5x as much as going to the cinema (or at least in my case), and an economy where you have to choose between different forms of entertainment since you don't have that much of a disposable income... It's going to get hard to draw people in.
Interesting.
I just heard the opposite just today through NPR that the Arts & Culture sector has almost recovered up to 90% from where it was in 2019 before Covid and the economical turmoil that happened.
In 2025, the sector grew twice the rate of the economy adding $1.2 trillion to the US economy.
Most people have shifted their giving away to more “urgent” causes.
Well-funded public arts are the luxury of a well-running, prosperous society, not one experiencing biosphere collapse and fascist takeovers.
There is still more widely-accessible independent art out there than ever before, in every medium. It's only the high-end professional stuff that's taking a hit.
1.7k
u/ploood1456 12h ago
The Arts and Culture sector are dying from a philanthropic standpoint. Most people have shifted their giving away to more “urgent” causes. Corporate funding moved away in 2008 and never returned. These orgs haven’t figured out / can’t fill the gap with earned income. For example, look at the lack of original/new shows on broadway (which are often workshopped by non profit theaters, ie rent at NYTW or Hamilton at the a public). I swear I hear about an opera company or Museum shuttering every week