Despite subsidy cuts, the show must go on

Late in 2006, the Hungarian government announced that funding for the 13 Budapest theaters it supported would face cuts of perhaps more than a whopping HUF1 billion (zł.15.6 million). On top of the heart-stopping "billion," outrage and shock were the reactions from theater managers who realized that up to 75 percent of their much-needed funds would instantly dry up, necessitating a ticket-price rise of up to 100 percent and probably resulting in the closure of a great number of playhouses. After all, the total operating budget of the 13 theaters in 2005 was HUF8.6 billion (zł.134 million), of which less than HUF3 billion (zł.46 million) comes from private sponsorship and ticket sales.

The theaters in question are some of Budapest's most renowned tourist sites and venues important to the history of European theater: The list includes the Katona József Színház Vígszínház, the Operettszínház, the Radnóti Színház, the Bábszínház and the Kolibri Színház. Another seven theaters depend solely on funding from the city and municipal governments in the capital. These seven figure to be the most affected by budget cuts.

Nonsensical and absurd

One of the most outspoken critics of the budgetary measures was Új Szinpád's artistic director István Márta. "If the city took HUF1 billion," he explained, "this represents about 70 percent of the government's entire subsidy. Should this happen, this could well bring about the closure of Budapest theaters. To think that no money would be available for shows after June is nonsensical and absurd."

The proposed budget cuts were subsequently reduced to HUF700 (zł.10.91) million in January, then to HUF438 (zł.6.82) million in February. Last month, budget cuts were finalized, and government officials announced that the final figure to be trimmed from the theater-subsidy budget was just HUF216 (zł.3.38) million, a cut representing about 12 percent of funding.

To put some numbers in perspective, Györgyi Kovács, financial director at Új Szinpád, provided the example of the theater's recent production of Moliżre's "The Miser." For this show, the entire budget was some HUF9 (zł.0.14) million. From this amount came the salaries for 15 actors, Ukrainian director Sergei Masloboyschikov (including travel, room and board), an interpreter, and all staff. Add in set pieces (amounting to HUF1 million [zł.15,600]) and period clothing (which typically costs HUF100,000 [zł.1,600]) for some idea of what a large-scale Budapest theater company is up against.

The system itself

What do these cuts mean? Says dramaturge Gergely Nagy, "[The cuts] highlight that the cultural institutional system is unsustainable in this form - which has remained almost unchanged since 1989 - while the cultural market has changed a lot."

Nagy believes the system needs a revamp, from providing more support to smaller theaters to giving discounts on prices to students. From the large-scale repertory side, Kovács opines that "the whole system should be changed." Indeed, most in the business agree that the system could do with an essentially complete makeover, but few have advanced a viable system to do so.

The play may be the thing, but money raises the curtain. Heading into what appears to be the final scene of the current theater system here, only one thing is for certain. As Kovács puts it, next year inevitably "there will be less and less money, so we will have the same problem."

David Landry

This story is an edited verion of a story published by Budapest Business Journal