The inequality between the culture managed by the state and the culture sustained by private individuals is increasingly evident.
While public entities have financial guarantees, independent cultural agents face daily the challenge of selling tickets, ensuring the stability of work teams, maintaining infrastructure, as well as preserving historic buildings to continue working for culture.
In addition, obstacles are coming from programmers that hinder or even censor projects, making the tours more complicated and preventing the shows from reaching the entire population.
Few know that the funds of the PRR do not contemplate private companies operating in the cultural sector. A glaring example is the Tivoli Theatre: a building classified as a monument of public interest but without access to any support program for its maintenance.
This year, marked by several elections, brings a new obstacle: the state itself (through parties, municipal councils and parish joints) becomes the largest competitor of theatres and showrooms, by offering free political events. Meanwhile, private companies remain at a disadvantage.
In the face of this scenario, we remain working and selling tickets, because the only real support we have is that of the public.
To obtain some kind of official support, it is necessary to frame the culture as an economic or tourist factor. Today, opening a meeting centre or a hotel is easier than opening a theatre. Often, the only viable solution is to submit cultural projects as part of tourist ventures, such as hotels that happen to include a theatre for meetings and cultural activities.
The rooms need help to keep up. Private programming should be self-sustaining, but without showrooms, there are no shows.
Paul Dias
Director-General of the UAU and Administrator of the Tivoli Theatre
Follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Youtube, and TikTok and see the exclusive content for social networks.
