![\"FiveCandles\"](\"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/FiveCandles.jpg\")
During the month of August, Engaging Matters is republishing some of the most widely read articles from the five years this blog has been in existence.<\/p>\nDuring the month of August, Engaging Matters is republishing some of the most widely read articles from the five years this blog has been in existence.<\/p>\n
Several times I have suggested it\u2019s necessary to understand that some of our internal, somewhat coded language is off-putting to the world beyond our inner circles. \u201cArts for arts sake\u201d is one example. Art for Art\u2019s Sake? There\u2019s No Such Thing<\/a> (from early in 2012 and copied below) attempts to make the case that art is always about people. Follow up posts plowing similar ground are:<\/p>\n Art Is Not Fundamental ——————– So here is a bit of heresy for the New Year. A recent post by Clayton Lord on his blog New Beans, This Is Your Brain on Art (sizzle, sizzle)<\/a>, reminded me of my first exposure to the Rand Corporation\u2019s 2005 Gifts of the Muse<\/em> study<\/a>. A distinction was made there between instrumental and intrinsic benefits of the arts. I remember feeling a bit uncertain about its reasoning at the time. I\u2019ve remained so. Its central premise is that there are two kinds of benefits provided by the arts, intrinsic and instrumental. The latter have (and had) been highly touted as rationale for support for the arts, both public and private. The study claimed, rightly, that the instrumental benefits had been over-hyped at the expense of valuing the arts\u2019 intrinsic benefits. So far, so good, especially when one evaluates the two categories. (The following is excerpted from the Research Brief linked above.)<\/p>\n Instrumental benefits were identified as:<\/p>\n Intrinsic benefits were in three categories:<\/p>\n Where I had and have a question is what the fundamental<\/em> difference is between the two categories? In each, the arts do<\/em> things. They enhance or improve lives. They also overlap. For instance, how are \u201cbehavioral and attitudinal changes\u201d different from those listed as examples of\u00a0 \u201cgrowth in individual capacities\u201d or \u201csocial\u201d from \u201cbenefits that accrue largely to the public\u201d? Certainly, the economic and cognitive categories of instrumental benefits are outliers. They are the (relatively) new kids on the block for arts advocates and, particularly with economic benefits, were arguably the least unique to the arts. (How does the economic impact of the arts differ from\u2013how is it better than\u2013the economic impact of professional sports?)<\/p>\n But my point here is not a critique of the Rand report. It is simply a way in to the title of this post. What do we mean when we talk about \u201cart for art\u2019s sake\u201d? I harbor a suspicion that some of the enthusiasm for the Rand report was rooted in the arts community\u2019s preference for viewing the arts as transcendent experience. I do not differ. What concerns me is the fact that we can forget that the arts provide transcendent human<\/em> experience. In other words, the value of the arts is in the impact it has upon people. As I sometimes say, if art took place unobserved in the woods, would it still be art? (We will now let the aestheticians hold forth.)<\/p>\n I worry that \u201cart for art\u2019s sake\u201d sometimes leads us to believe that it is the art that is important, less than the impact the art has on people. It is the capacity for impact that led me to a career in the arts and it is a big piece of my commitment to engagement. As a result, I am uncomfortable with the \u201cart for art\u2019s sake\u201d argument. Give me \u201cart for people\u2019s sake\u201d any day. That is, in essence, what I see both instrumental and intrinsic benefits as supporting.<\/p>\n Engage!<\/p>\n Doug<\/p>\n Photo: Fifth Anniversary Highlights: Art for Art’s Sake?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":4603,"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":"Fifth Anniversary Highlights: Art for Art's Sake?","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[5],"tags":[12,13,23],"class_list":{"0":"post-4608","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-principles","8":"tag-arts","9":"tag-community-engagement","10":"tag-intrinsic","11":"entry"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/FiveCandles.jpg","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p1G6h9-1ck","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":4379,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/2016\/01\/art-for-arts-sake-revisited\/","url_meta":{"origin":4608,"position":0},"title":"Art for Art’s Sake Revisited","author":"Doug Borwick","date":"January 13, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Art for art's sake is a self-evident truth for all of us for whom it is self-evident. However, for the many who are not true believers the concept is either incomprehensible, off-putting, or both.","rel":"","context":"In "Principles"","block_context":{"text":"Principles","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/category\/principles\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"AfAS","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/AfAS.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/AfAS.jpg?resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/AfAS.jpg?resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/AfAS.jpg?resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":4402,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/2016\/01\/afas-follow-up\/","url_meta":{"origin":4608,"position":1},"title":"AfAS Follow Up","author":"Doug Borwick","date":"January 20, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Expansions, clarifications, further thoughts on Art for Art's Sake","rel":"","context":"In "Principles"","block_context":{"text":"Principles","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/category\/principles\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"AfAS","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/AfAS.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/AfAS.jpg?resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/AfAS.jpg?resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/AfAS.jpg?resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":1005,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/2012\/01\/art-for-arts-sake\/","url_meta":{"origin":4608,"position":2},"title":"Art for Art’s Sake? There’s No Such Thing","author":"Doug Borwick","date":"January 11, 2012","format":false,"excerpt":"So here is a bit of heresy for the New Year. A recent post by Clayton Lord on his blog New Beans, This Is Your Brain on Art (sizzle, sizzle), reminded me of my first exposure to the Rand Corporation's 2005 Gifts of the Muse study. A distinction was made\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\/01\/PaintBrushes.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":5720,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/2019\/10\/mission-creep\/","url_meta":{"origin":4608,"position":3},"title":"Mission Creep??!!","author":"Doug Borwick","date":"October 16, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"If connecting people with the arts represents \"mission creep\" for your organization, your organization needs to seriously re-examine it's mission.","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\/2019\/09\/Mission.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":2970,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/2013\/07\/benefits-of-the-arts\/","url_meta":{"origin":4608,"position":4},"title":"Benefits of the Arts","author":"Doug Borwick","date":"July 31, 2013","format":false,"excerpt":"One of the best things about blogging (especially in the summer when so many of my colleagues in academia are paying less attention) is the opportunity to experiment with ideas that are, shall we say, not fully baked. Careful (and long-time) readers of this blog may recall that in my\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Overview"","block_context":{"text":"Overview","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/category\/overview\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Half-Baked","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/06\/Half-Baked-300x243.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":1765,"url":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/2012\/06\/valuing-public-good\/","url_meta":{"origin":4608,"position":5},"title":"Valuing Public Good","author":"Doug Borwick","date":"June 27, 2012","format":false,"excerpt":"In preparing my last post [Structures and Models in Blogs, Oh My] about the recent discussions of structural and business models for arts organizations, I was gradually overcome with an uncomfortable sensation. The argument that the intrinsic benefits of the arts are undermined by the need to serve the public\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Overview"","block_context":{"text":"Overview","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/category\/overview\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4608","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=4608"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4608\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4643,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4608\/revisions\/4643"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4603"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4608"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4608"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/engage\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4608"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\n<\/a>Art for Arts Sake Revisited
\n<\/a>AfAS Follow Up<\/a><\/p>\n
\nArt for Art’s Sake: There’s No Such Thing<\/strong>
\n(from January 2012)<\/p>\n\n
\n
![\"Attribution\"](\"https:\/\/s.yimg.com\/pw\/images\/cc_icon_attribution_small.gif\" "\\"Attribution\\""){kind=icon}
![\"No](\"https:\/\/s.yimg.com\/pw\/images\/cc_icon_noderivs_small.gif\" "\\"No"){kind=icon}
<\/a><\/span> Some rights reserved<\/a> by torbakhopper<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"