Prague Theater Owners And Actors Are Parasites

Owners and actors working for many Prague theaters will protest in the streets against the new rules according to which they receive grants and subsidies from the City of Prague.

Let’s compare: during its sixteen years of existence the Ta Fantastika theater [warning: background music]   got ZERO crowns in subsidies because it is a private institution that the owner found in order to make money, not to cry for subsidies and demand them from the City of Prague, i.e. from taxpayers who do not even like theater.

Meanwhile, there are theaters, like Na Fidlovacce, that receive approximately nine million a year. Theater owners and administrators who cry for more money claim they have been doing the high culture, while those theater owners who have their commercial projects have been doing the mass culture.

The weepers claim that they should represent the so-called public service purposes [for which they should receive subsidies], because they present plays that they know commercial theaters would not present because they know beforehand that the plays would not be commercially successful.

Most Czech columnists who write about culture claim [quote via Aktualne.cz news server]: every developed culture nation shall diferentiate: there are theaters that represent continuity and provide self-reflection for individuals and the society as such, because THIS is the purpose of culture. And reasonable support for this segment of culture should go without saying…

I beg to differ. The aforementioned purpose can be well represented by commercial theaters, too. What gives the right to the aforementioned weepers to say: We are the ones who should be allowed to try less hard to make money because the City of Prague will subsidize us…?