đźš˝ How can we fix the concert peeing experience (but not really)
Required reading:
Tanya seems like an amazing employee, let alone one of the best ushers in the game.
Yet, something about this article bugs me — aren’t we just admitting that there’s a problem? The anxiety that everyone feels trying to get to the bathroom, bathrooms that are too small, a whole list of tips at the bottom of the article, etc. This feels like we’re celebrating one of the best band-aid solutions out there. And don’t get me wrong — she deserves all of the praise in the world and then some.
But shouldn’t we be trying to solve the problems? Why are we held to a 20 minute intermission — another 5 minutes won’t make anyone’s night too late, and it would be an IMMENSE ease on the staff. Why don’t more shows include a second intermission, precisely for this purpose? Why aren’t there, in the words of the The Old Vic, MORE LOOS?
As live events have become more experiential in their focus (drinks and dining becoming a larger and larger presence, in this case), doesn’t the rest of the industry need to adapt?
Everyone is a board member.
Okay, follow me along on this one:
If we (the arts producing & presenting community) are relying on our audiences to support us (which, duh), don’t we want to do everything in our power to make their time more enjoyable?
Imagine that every audience member got the “Board Member” treatment — don’t you think that you would convert more of them into donors, or at least multi-ticket buyers? If anyone got preferential seating, drink vouchers, VIP parking, yadda-yadda-yadda, you know they’d have a better time and, hopefully, return!
Also, isn’t there some unsaid part of the argument that says that it’s the right thing to do? Sure you want people to enjoy something because it will benefit you in the end, but also because people should enjoy the arts!
Great, so now what?
So, we want to treat everybody well — what a novel concept! What’s next?
Well, we start by offering them things. Really anything we think will make their time at the concert/play/performance more enjoyable. We won’t know what these are until we try and fail. Some of them come naturally and make sense (snacks, for example — having concessions available for purchase is basically a must in today’s performing arts environment) while others may take a little bit of creativity (do audiences need a specific lounge where they can watch football games and catch up on scores during intermission? The Cleveland Symphony thinks so, so maybe?)
Let’s say we went with the more common option — concessions! We’ve contracted a caterer or concessions company, built out the infrastructure, acquired the liquor license, hooray! Now, pre-show drinks and snacks are easy — you open at a reasonable time (my venue is 2 hours before curtain), giving people plenty of time to come by and enjoy (and pee).
But intermission is where this starts to get tricky…
Why stop?
Why even have an intermission? Wouldn’t it be easier to just run a show straight down? Everyone would go home half an hour earlier, concessions could break down at curtain (assuming they don’t stick around for post-show cocktails) and the audience never has to leave their seat.
A. It’s a nice gesture to give the audience a break! This can come in the form of a physical break from sitting to stand up and stretch, a mental break from the action on stage (allowing them to suspend their suspension of disbelief, in the words of Patrice Pavis), or an emotional break from the guest next to them who keeps gasping/talking/crinkling wrappers/tweeting.
B. The production needs it! Set & costume changes, musician breaks, dramatic cliffhangers. None of these would be possible in live events without a pause.
C. Everyone needs to pee! It’s highly likely that venues would see a decrease in pre-show drink sales is audiences knew that they wouldn’t have a chance to pee. Since so many guests are concerned about missing parts of the performance, no one would want to chance needing a mid-act break to empty the tank.
It’s this last point I’d like to stall on for a bit — there are some easy arguments against this, the laziest of which reverts back to movie theaters. Why don’t movies have an intermission anymore (anymore?!) if it’s such a good policy?
Well, for one, there is certainly less of a risk in missing a minute of a movie nowadays, given that everything will be available eventually on DVD/Netflix/HBO Max/Disney+/Amazon Prime/Apple TV+/ you get the point. Plus, courageous souls have actually gone through and created this app(which I will let speak for itself).
Additionally, theater owners were concerned about guests jumping from theater to theater, endlessly seeing only the first half of movies before going to “pee”.
But we’re getting off track.
Dear god, are you still reading this? Well, if you just joined in (some how…), let’s recap:
- Treat people well — it’s the right thing to do, and you may even create some repeat customers/donors.
- Give them stuff — after ensuring the quality of your main product (theater music, dance, etc.) offer your guests other amenities in the interest of keeping them happy.
- If you serve it, they will pee — intermission is crucial to give people breaks, but also so that they can relieve themselves.
With me so far? Okay, fantastic — because here is where we pivot back to Tanya.
Tanya!
So, Tanya obviously knows all of this — she is working her ass off at Hamilton trying to keep those wild Philadelphians happy. But, why aren’t we making it easier? Not just for her — in fact, she doesn’t need the help — but for everyone else in the industry. Not every venue is lucky enough to have a Tanya (and, if this article gains any traction, I’m sure every venue is going to wish they were), but it really shouldn’t be the responsibility of one person who doesn’t have the letters “CEO” in their title to ensure that everyone is happy all the time always.
So how do we fix it?
Well, I don’t know.
I know you slogged through this stupid, stream of consciousness writing exercise to get to the part where I tell you how to make your #frontofhousedreams come true, but I have no idea.
I can identify some problems:
- Not enough toilets
- Inadequate signage
- Not enough staff
- Too short an intermission
Some of these are easily fixable (again, see: Old Vic), but some are more difficult, and I’m sure this doesn’t even begin to scartch the surface.
So what what the point of this?
We should celebrate Tanya — she (from this article) appears to be an AMAZING employee, ambassador, and all around human being. And we need incredible employees — the arts couldn’t happen without them. But we can’t base industries and experiences on them. What happens if Tanya is sick one day? Or gets stuck in traffic? Or finally books the Broadway contract she deserves? Does everyone’s experience diminish? Sure — that’s what happens when you lose a great employee. But should the trains stop running? Should satisfaction decline? Should people not know when to pee?
Solve the problems. Don’t just hire amazing employees to band aid them.