The Brattleboro daily reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1913-1955, 1922-08-15
TUESDAY. AUGUST Is, 1922.
CHAUTAUQUA.

BrattleborO, it seems, was not the /
only town in which Chautauqua had its |
troubles. Morrisville, Stowe, Bethel. |
Rochester and other places had similar
experiences. Many people are quick to |
assume that folks are getting tired of |
Chautauqua, and this possibly is true, |
although on the other hand it may be |
said that this has been a poor season for |
outdoor entertainments of all sorts.
The real trouble with Chautauuua.
however, is not with its programs, which
are good on the average and never vuI- |
gar or degrading, but with its methods
of financing. 1t claims-and offers evil
dence in support-that it is operating
on cost-only basis, and when fault is
found with its business scheme it blandly
replies that it is not business venture
but a philanthropy
Skepticism of this statement is gen
eral, and the attitude of the skeptics is
fairly and clearly set forth in the fol-
lowing editorial from the Randolph
Herald and News:
They do not see why big concern
should BE- in business for It's health and
/ they question the whole situation. They
| wonder why Chautauqua with all the
advantage that the name implies, doesn't
i come along on the same basis that other
-trayel1ng entertainments do. either max
+! ing their own local arrangements or by
! contract for fixed sum. and taking
| their own chances of success or failure
i or giving local guarantors the same
] chance who have faith enough in their
/ drawing power to warrant contracting
/ for their appearance We believe there
4 arr r1aqr ffEf hot IL,
! chance of getting Chautauqua on either
/ basis.
Instead, Chautauqua has a business
/ arrangement by which it pledges local
i guarantors to the raising of a definite
/ sum, either by sale of tickets or going
! into their own pockets, or both 1t
works this shrewdly, relying on the we'll
4 known disposition of many people to help
i along what seems to be a worthy enter
i prise and of others to sign because
| others have. 1t takes advantage of the
! psychological situation existing when
one Chautauqua is in full blast to nail
! the guarantorS for the next one. 1t has
/ skilled promoters along to push this
/ through. Once hooked the community
+, finds 1T hard to secure release.
The guarantors become not only propa-
i gandists for the Chautauqua, but from
| their own financial interests very active
workers in the sale of tickets. Many
people purchase them out of personal re-
| gard for individual guarantors at their
! insistent solicitation. 1t all works for
| the swelling of the fund that finally goes
| to Chautauqua, which usually takes all
that is raised and some also out of the
pockets of those who have put in much
i hard work besides.
We like Chautauqua. but frankly we
don't like the Chautauqua business plan
| They sell a year ahead a program that
| nobody. not even themselves. know what
/ il will contain, on a guaranteed basis of
their own fixing, SO adjusted that while
! the local hackers stand to lose, their
prospects of gain are substantially nil.
! Chautauqua always sets the guaranty so
high that it is only by a most general
| response in the community that it can
be met In addition to the fixed sum
| representing sale of season tickets. Chau-
tauqua scoops in all of the single per-
| Torrance admissions.
We would much prefer to see Chau-
| tauqua take its stand as pure business
enterprise and make its appeal for sup
| port on a basis of its own merit as other
things do. instead of coming in the role
of an uplifter. We have an idea that if
communities were to turn down the pres
ent scheme instead of being easy, there
would follow a different plan And we
do not believe Chautauqua would sink
to a lower plane or be less sought after.
Those at the head of it have hit upon n
shrewd method of working the public and
making a certainty out of an uncer-
tainty. Most of us would like to do
business on the Chautauqua basis, and