Reynold Levy, president of Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts, has an interesting take on the current climate for arts philanthropy: he thinks arts groups are enjoying a renaissance with donors.
That’s what he told Crain’s New York Business, anyway, which just published an article saying that arts philanthropy in the Big Apple is doing just fine, thank you, because it gets better press coverage than giving to social causes.
The last part, anecdotally, is true — but the first, the renaissance bit, clashes with what I’ve been hearing. True, I’ve been chatting about this with arts people from many cities, not just New York, but virtually everyone is telling me that gifts are down (as is earned revenue and, in most cases, attendance).
Crain’s Exhibit A: Everyone knows that David Koch gave $100 million to renovate (and name) the old New York State Theater at Lincoln Center, and that Stephen Schwarzman gave $100 million to the New York Public Library.
Crain’s Exhibit B: “when New York investment managers Fiona and Stanley Druckenmiller last year gave $100 million to NYU Langone Medical Center to establish a neuroscience unit, the donation failed to make headlines. And when the couple, who donate generously to organizations that fight poverty and cancer, turned up as the No. 1 giver of 2009 on The Chronicle of Philanthropy‘s annual list, many in the city’s nonprofit world wondered, “Who?” “
The article cites a few experts, and — sounding very much like the fundraiser he is — Levy (above) told Crain’s: “Universities are not tourist attractions; hospitals aren’t. The arts are a tourist attraction.” Donors want that recognition, and entrance to the club.
There’s a cloud in the story, though, which says that West coast tech-types would rather solve social problems than go to the ballet.
I say, to arts groups, use what you’ve got — if donors want publicity, you can always mention the Crain’s article. Here’s the link to it.