{"id":281,"date":"2011-09-17T09:03:15","date_gmt":"2011-09-17T13:03:15","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/?p=281"},"modified":"2019-11-07T17:14:39","modified_gmt":"2019-11-07T22:14:39","slug":"public-value-public-funds","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/2011\/09\/public-value-public-funds\/","title":{"rendered":"Public Value, Public Funds"},"content":{"rendered":"

Fear and trembling I have. Yes.<\/em>
\nTalk of public funding for the arts. Happy no one will be.<\/em>
\nBe afraid. Be very afraid.<\/em><\/p>\n

\"\"

Image credits below<\/p><\/div>\n

Some time ago, Kelly Kleiman wrote a blog post for the Stanford Social Innovation Review that I only recently discovered: Second (and Third) Thoughts about Public Funding for the Arts<\/a>. It has the entertainment value of presenting some pretty controversial (in the arts community) ideas, and it has the benefit of saying some things about which we need to think deeply. Ms. Kleiman also nails the unhelpful nature of much public discourse on the subject:<\/p>\n

The conversation about public funding for the arts has for 30 years been a clash between the Jets of \u201cWe\u2019re artists!\u00a0 Art is important so if you challenge the value of anything we create you\u2019re a boob and a censor and a miser!\u201d and the Sharks of \u201cWe\u2019re ordinary people!\u00a0 We don\u2019t want our tax money spent on things we don\u2019t grasp or approve of so that over-educated sissies can avoid getting jobs!\u201d\u00a0 Needless to say, this has not been a very productive debate, unless by \u201cproductive\u201d you mean \u201cof hysteria and hostility.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

A fairly astute (and, again, entertaining) assessment.<\/p>\n

The central premise of the post is as follows: “[B]rethren in the arts community: stop talking about public funding for the arts as if the point were for the public to support YOU.\u00a0 No one cares about you.\u00a0 What we care about as a society is US, and how exposure to what you do will improve us.” Not a word minced there, eh? If I might be permitted to translate a bit, her point is that the public is demanding to be shown the public value that justifies public funding of the arts. It is a demand based on the fact that, by and large, they don’t see it. If that’s the case, and it’s hard to argue to the contrary, it’s not an unreasonable request. (For the record, there are several items of her analysis with which I would quarrel but those are not at issue here.)<\/p>\n

It should come as no surprise whatsoever to anyone who has read even one of my posts that my solution to this situation is for the arts world to get serious about engaging with communities and create value in people’s lives that makes them plea for more. I believe any other approach is doomed to fail or doomed to minuscule success. Others believe to the contrary. I understand that. But here’s my reasoning. (And forgive me, but I’m going to be quoting myself. You know, the book<\/a> . . . .)<\/p>\n

There are elements of the public policy realm that are referred to as the \u201cthird rail,\u201d meaning that no politician can threaten them without fear of instantaneous political death. For the last half century, Social Security has been one such inviolable institution. In contrast, public support of the arts has been a \u201cfirst rail,\u201d one that is among the easiest and first attacked in the political arena. . . .<\/p>\n

Arts delivery systems in the U.S.\u00a0 have reflected the separation between the arts community and the broad population found in those systems\u2019 European roots. As a result, the perceived public value of the arts (as viewed by the electorate) has been minimal. There is therefore little motivation to initiate or expand support for the arts. . . .<\/p>\n

Inside the arts world, there is a tendency to see the lack of political viability as a simple marketing problem: people are insufficiently aware of the public value of the arts; if communication strategies were more robust, the problem would be solved. There is, no doubt, a germ of truth in that assessment. However, the problem runs deeper. There is no conspiracy afoot to hide the arts\u2019 value from the populace. The simple truth is that in general, with significant and glorious exceptions, average citizens are aware of little direct personal benefit from the reflective arts<\/a>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Limited public funding of the arts in the U.S. is a factor of the country’s social, economic, and political history. It’s not simply that arts funding today is a forgotten category that might be expanded if it had greater support from a few key decision-makers, from the top down. Opposing such funding has proven to be an invaluable “issue of first resort” for politicians wanting to hone their populist credentials. In other words, the political infrastructure is not neutral. It’s currently stacked against<\/em> the arts. Without large<\/strong> numbers of people having newly transformative experiences with the arts, the political capital available is insufficient to support significant improvement in public funding or, more generally, public policy for the arts. Such change has got to come from the grassroots up. And it is the arts community’s job (who else is going to take it on?) to make it happen if it is to happen. The arts world must commit itself to making public value tangible in the lives of many. To me, belief in any other path to broad public support is the result of magical thinking. That doesn’t mean there is no other way. I simply cannot see it.<\/p>\n

There. That’s what I believe. It feels good to have that off my chest. I’m not arrogant enough (despite what some might think) to believe that what I believe is True. It’s simply what I believe.<\/p>\n

I will now climb in to bed, pull the covers up over my head, and try not to take the responses too personally. By the way, since I’ve exhausted myself with this, we are foregoing a cool example this time.<\/p>\n

Engage!<\/p>\n

Doug<\/p>\n

‘The Bluestar sorcerer image was made by Thomas Abrahamsson’
\nhttp:\/\/thomas.elfwood.com\/Bluestar-the-sorcerer.3284411.html<\/a> \"\"<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Fear and trembling I have. Yes. Talk of public funding for the arts. Happy no one will be. Be afraid. Be very afraid. Some time ago, Kelly Kleiman wrote a blog post for the Stanford Social Innovation Review that I only recently discovered: Second (and Third) Thoughts about Public Funding for the Arts. It has […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-281","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-principles","7":"entry","8":"has-post-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p1G6h9-4x","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":3559,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/2014\/05\/plan-b\/","url_meta":{"origin":281,"position":0},"title":"Plan B","author":"Doug Borwick","date":"May 14, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Plan B-From England, Making arts funding cuts \"politically dangerous or, even better, unthinkable.\"","rel":"","context":"In "Principles"","block_context":{"text":"Principles","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/category\/principles\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/04\/PlanB-e1397574267805.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/04\/PlanB-e1397574267805.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/04\/PlanB-e1397574267805.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x"},"classes":[]},{"id":3169,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/2013\/10\/magical-thinking\/","url_meta":{"origin":281,"position":1},"title":"Magical Thinking","author":"Doug Borwick","date":"October 30, 2013","format":false,"excerpt":"In discussion of the need for change in the arts industry, I am often met with responses that can only be classified as magical thinking. Such comments generally fall into one of two categories. The first holds that, while serious problems exist, all will be well if someone else does\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Overview"","block_context":{"text":"Overview","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/category\/overview\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"MagicWand","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/09\/MagicWand-300x225.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":5002,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/2017\/08\/storm-brewing\/","url_meta":{"origin":281,"position":2},"title":"Storm Brewing","author":"Doug Borwick","date":"August 23, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Another shot in the public policy wars about funding inequity in the arts.","rel":"","context":"In "Principles"","block_context":{"text":"Principles","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/category\/principles\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/07\/StormBrewing-300x200.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":5396,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/2018\/09\/targets-and-timeframes\/","url_meta":{"origin":281,"position":3},"title":"Targets and Timeframes","author":"Doug Borwick","date":"September 26, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"To be sustainable, community engagement must benefit the arts organization in tangible ways. To be supported institutionally, the path to ticket sales, funding, and public policy must be articulated and tracked.","rel":"","context":"In "The Practice of Engagement"","block_context":{"text":"The Practice of Engagement","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/category\/the-practice-of-engagement\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/TargetWithArrows-225x300.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":3736,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/2014\/09\/the-visible-hand\/","url_meta":{"origin":281,"position":4},"title":"The Visible Hand","author":"Doug Borwick","date":"September 10, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Unlike the gradual shifts from economic and social changes, the transformation in public policy resulting from demographic shifts in the voting populace will soon become an avalanche.","rel":"","context":"In "Overview"","block_context":{"text":"Overview","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/category\/overview\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Hand","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/07\/Hand.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":2166,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/2012\/11\/public-benefit\/","url_meta":{"origin":281,"position":5},"title":"Public Benefit","author":"Doug Borwick","date":"November 10, 2012","format":false,"excerpt":"Public benefit (or one of many closely related concepts) is becoming an increasingly important element in rating grant applications and in assessing the value of arts organizations to their communities. As I discovered in my recent work on a grant review panel for Cuyahoga Arts and Culture, there needs to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Overview"","block_context":{"text":"Overview","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/category\/overview\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/11\/GettysburgAddress-183x300.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/281","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=281"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/281\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5778,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/281\/revisions\/5778"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=281"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=281"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=281"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}