Size Doesn’t Matter: Why Festivalgoers Should Think Smaller
I read an annotated printing of Jarry's Ubu Roi a good several years ago and it really made me think about the notion of the spectacle; festivals, at their heart, are spectacular (albeit usually more in terms of nature than content, though ymmv), and while I think reducing the scale would certainly benefit them in turns of making fiscal sense - which would be nice as it's good that artists, crew, vendors, et al. should be compensated adequately for what they do - the inherent nature of a spectacle is that it's unnatural and bloated. What would a festival be if it wasn't idiotic and impractical? Sane. And if it were sane, would it still be a spectacle? It'd just be a concert at that point, and we certainly have enough of those.
I'm not totally sure what - or if - I'm arguing against or for here, but these are the sort of events I'd never attend unless I was working at one in some capacity, so I'm probably not too equipped to weigh-in. A lot of people find this sort of thing fun and I wouldn't want to rob them of that, and I wonder if there's a way to keep things responsible without diluting the scale and impact that makes them such happenings.