Well, now that we’ve got a crazy-liberal jihadist in the White House (just kidding, we love our new Messiah), some folks say that the arts need their own economic recovery plan. The only problem we see with this is that we’ve had twenty years of Republicans arguing that the arts are evil, evil things that don’t deserve government support–even if it’s for something as innocuous as Sesame Street, so the idea of creating a government post for the arts seems like the kind of thing John Boehner can make a press conference about. After all, do you know who has arts ministries? Europe, that’s who.
The New York Times talks to arts leaders about what the Obama administration can do:
Americans for the Arts has proposed appointing a senior-level administration official with an arts portfolio, along the lines of Leonard Garment of the Nixon administration, August Heckscher under John F. Kennedy or Roger L. Stevens under Lyndon B. Johnson. “Someone to connect the dots,” Mr. Lynch said. “We don’t have that right now.”
But what arts executives are most eager for, they say, is additional direct financing and a president who sends the message that art is important.
…
Funds for the N.E.A. have declined to $145 million in fiscal year 2009 from $176 million in 1992. Representative Louise M. Slaughter, a New York Democrat who is co-chairwoman of the Congressional Arts Caucus, said she would seek more in the next fiscal year. “I’m more encouraged than I’ve been in a very long time,” she said of Mr. Obama. “He has said many times how important the arts are to him.”
Smokey Martini
… and Canada, too. Let’s not forget the neighbours to the north! In any case, now that Jesse Helms has passed – you know, the meanie who started the whole NEA fiasco – people might be more likely to support a prospect like this. Then again, with the poor economic crisis, I’m sure there will be those who will argue ad infinitum that the arts are – and indeed always will be – a tremendous waste of taxpayers’ money. I’m interested to see how this plays out, if it does at all…
RichardR
When Boehner has his press conference denouncing this idea (bigger government, arts=homosexuals, arts=Europe, arts=democrats) he needs to explain that artful tan he perpetually sports.
Seriously, a Secretary for Arts and Culture is a great idea, but likely way down on the current agenda.
Another great idea would be to make the NEA a real endowment, even with some private money, so federally originating arts policy and funding wouldn’t be susceptible to conservative demagoguery. Such funding might be subject to economic downturns like the current one, in which arts organizations, like all non-profits, are beginning to really struggle. But at least it wouldn’t be subject to the Jesse Helmses.
sam
WHY do we need a MiniArt? There’s SO MUCH ART going on right now all over the country, supported by a mixture of private and pre-existing public infrastructure. According to the NEA, America has more artists than it has doctors or lawyers, and almost as many as it has active-duty servicepeople.
Not only is a MiniArt unnecessary, it’s downright pernicious. Remember Giuliani flipping his shit (see what I did there?) about the poo-covered Madonna painting a few years back? You forget that the gov’t exists at the whim of 51% of the people. You don’t want people who voted Yes on 8 picking and choosing what art gets made and what doesn’t.
Adam
I don’t think an “Arts Czar” would be deciding what got made and what didn’t (at least as far as censorship goes). While the NEA and other major arts financiers tend to get behind bland art, that’s usually just because they’re run by older people. (Sorry to be ageist, but it’s true.) Also, a Republican administration in the future is more likely to remove the post altogether than appoint a meany who hates on poo paintings.
An Arts Czar would be making sure arts funding was strong and being distributed in a way that satisfied the major sectors of the arts world. I think it’s a fine idea, especially because the state to state support for artists is uneven at best. (I live in Pennsylvania, and there are much smaller states with fewer big cities that have infinitely better arts funding opportunities.)
Also, I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make with the “more artists than doctors and lawyers” thing. An Arts Czar isn’t out there to increase the numbers of artists, just the number of funded ones – a concern doctors and lawyers tend not to have because there’s an established system that rewards those who go to school and then practice. (Not saying that artists should get hired by firms for getting an MFA and passing an “arts test.” Just that a go-to place for funding would be nice.)
And is there really “SO much art”? If there is, it’s mostly mediocre. It’s either a) financed by the artist, which means the person had lots of money to begin with, doesn’t need funding, and isn’t trying very hard, or b) made by somebody who is living on Ramen noodles to keep on living (and is making art that’s not as good as it could be because they can’t afford materials or take time away from working).
greybat
Here’s the petion link:
http://www.petiononline.com/esnyc/petition.html>
This is a good time to get the ball rolling, since we have a civilized man in office, and culture is getting creamed by the recession right now.
It may take years to get the Ministry built up, but we at least have four to get it started.
Besides, aren’t we all getting tired of stale, corporate art?
greybat
Wrong link! Sorry, it’s
petitiononline.com/esnyc/petition.html>
John from England(used to be just John but there are other John's)
Oh damn.
You guys SERIOUSLY don’t already have this???
Well, I guess you make so much money from Wars that arts is little money!
But lemme tell you something. I’m in the arts in the UK and we look at a lot of your arts initiatives and research papers….you guys are good…
What a waste..
The creative industries brings billions to the UK economy (games,media etc)…
Oh and it also helps and supports people tonnes.
ven.a.papi
Let us not forget also that the U.S. neighbor to the south, Mexico, has a large, forceful governmental apparatus set up to address the arts involved in everything from funding symphonies, opera companies, art museums and films to direct assistance to young, career-level and retiring artists.
I think that the United States has had and continues to have a vital and wonderful arts scene. However, the government continues to relegate the arts to a sort of impractical fancy that has little to do with the rest of society instead of realizing that art is a pillar of society that helps it conceive of itself and grow through beauty and harmony.
This is unfortunate. Even if it is as simple as providing direct assistance to young, struggling artists that have the support and approval of respected members of the arts communities to working with other international artist exchange programs – there is so much more that the U.S. government could accomplish with just a little more attention and money spent in that direction.
The United States has in fact been defined in large part by the work of the artists it has produced – whether Americans know it or not. We should honor their contribution to the nation by helping create a future for the talented young men and women that come as well older artists who dedicated their lives to a fairly non-lucrative profession to make our nation and the world a more beautiful place to live in.
Cheers for bringing this up.
James Young
Mexico City
Vito
You stooges. Why should my money be thrown in a big pot so that others can decide what kind of ‘art’ to create? If you want to support poo smeared Madonnas or pickled, bifurcated sharks as art, go for it. Just use your own money and resources, not mine.
Dismantle the NEA and stop the insanity.
greybat
@ven.a.papi: Comparing your gracefully worded message to Vito’s angry scrawl pretty much sums up the need for more Art, more music, and more literary funding.
His is the sort of neanderthal attitude that pretty much sums up the conservative mantra toward the Arts.
Me
I think it is a wast of taxpayer money. I’m an artist myself and in this economic climate, it makes no sense. The Obama administration doesn’t need a “we can print more, right?” approach to budget woes, it needs to cut spending. Not add to it.
ven.a.papi
How can you seriously call it a “wast (sic) of taxpayer money” to send a financially disadvantaged young person abroad to have the chance to meet and work with other artists around the world or help recognized, talented artists be able to devote more time to their work until they are able to establish their career – all for what would amount to less than a five-spot in taxes per year per person for most people (adding about $300 million for the arts would be adding about 0.015% to the budget, or for someone paying $30,000 in taxes a year about $4.50).
The fact that people are so ready to spend money on bombs and prisons but so terrified of making life more livable through supporting the arts is disturbing in the least.
Call me crazy, but it seems to me that being against such modest support is tantamount to being against making our society more thoughtful, more articulate and more mindful of the world around us. I suppose it should come as no surprise then that if this was the right’s plan all along, sadly it appears to be working.
$5 people. Give it up.
Darth Chaos
Let’s call this what it REALLY is: a modern-day “Ministry of Truth” which would be nothing more than the government arm of big corporate media. Obama and his cronies are nothing but corporate fascists just like Bush 2, Clinton, Bush 1, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, LBJ, Hoover, and FDR. It’s the same thing year in and year out. I’ll sum it up like this: No matter how many times you polish a turd, it’s still a turd.