Cultural commitments: rethinking arts funding policy

Afterimage, Jan-Feb, 1996 by Ann Lee Morgan

Arts advocates can only feel sadness at what is happening, and not least because of the loss of vital funds. Even more disheartening is the realization that the arts are being wiped off the national agenda. By contrast, the NEA was founded on widely held, positive beliefs about the arts: that they are a mark of civilization, a source of pride for the citizens of a nation and a responsibility worthy of public support. "We stand," wrote presidential candidate John F. Kennedy in 1960, "on the verge of a period of sustained cultural brilliance."(1) Was he right? Has America's cultural moment come and gone? Or does it yet lay before us?

These larger questions haunt four recently published books discussed here: Art Lessons: Learning from the Rise and Fall of Public Arts Funding (1995), Arts in Crisis: The National Endowment for the Arts versus America (1994), The Arts in the World Economy: Public Policy and Private Philanthropy for a Global Cultural Community (1994), and America's Commitment to Culture: Government and the Arts (1995). Appearing in the wake of one tumultuous arts-related crisis after another, these publications are to varying degrees shaped by raucous debates over public funding. The authors fret about the well-being of the arts even as they search for answers to questions about what went wrong, whether the current outcome could or should have been avoided and what can be done now.

Joseph Wesley Zeigler's Arts in Crisis: The National Endowment for the Arts versus America is the only book devoted specifically to the NEA, as opposed to public arts funding in general. An independent arts consultant, Zeigler tells a straightforward story emphasizing the controversial years since 1989. Writer Garrison Keillor provides a delightful foreword, "Thanks for Attacking the NEA," adapted from remarks he delivered at a 1990 Senate subcommittee hearing. Among other important points, he drolly observes: "The Endowment has changed the way we think about the arts. Today, no American family can be secure against the danger that one of its children may decide to become an artist."(2)

Zeigler begins with a brief history of federal arts policy before the 1960s, followed by an overview of the NEA'S founding and subsequent history through the 1980s. He then recounts in greater detail what has happened since the current crisis began with the hullabaloo over Andres Serrano's photograph, Piss Christ (1987). Subsequent controversies, most notably over Robert Mapplethorpe and the so-called NEA Four (Karen Finley, John Fleck, Holly Hughes and Tim Miller), are also recounted, as is the unwilling departure of hapless John Frohnmayer, NEA chair from 1989 to early 1992. Confirmed to his post just after the names Serrano and Mapplethorpe had become household words, Frohnmayer lacked the political sensitivities, art-world experience and sense of history required for success in directing the agency. A caretaker acting chair, Anne-Imelda Radice, did her best to resolve the controversy, but the Endowment remained without a clear direction or policy for handling such crises. After the 1992 election, in which Bill Clinton received strong support from the arts community, the administration was expected to provide new leadership to turn the situation around, but Alexander was not nominated to the NEA chair until months later. Arts supporters were further dispirited by Leon Panetta's suggestion early in 1993, as director of the Office of Management and Budget, that the NEA be "defunded" as a cost-saving measure.(3) Zeigler does a fine job of connecting the NEA narrative to significant factors in the larger political context of recent years. Among these are the religious right, the political agendas of members of Congress, the limited response of arts advocacy organizations, free speech issues and media coverage as they affect the arts.

In two final chapters Zeigler examines "what the story means, and its deeper significance for American life," emphasizing his theme that in politics, "balance" is most important. No policy, he points out, can succeed if competing interests are not acknowledged. In addition, Zeigler specifically examines the "censorship" issue involved in denying grants, the advisability of continuing programs that fund individual artists, the inherent potential conflict of purpose within the NEA mandate between serving the arts and serving the public and proposals for financing the arts in the future. Although Zeigler finds fault, he concludes: "the NEA has been a noble, honorable, and effective supporter of the arts .... Any civilized nation should have a national government that recognizes the importance and value of the arts, and helps to pay their way."(4)

As the most prominent component of federal arts funding, the NEA is very nearly the exclusive subject of Alice Goldfarb Marquis's Art Lessons: Learning from the Rise and Fall of Public Arts Funding. A lengthier book than Zeigler's, it covers the history of the NEA in considerable detail, including but not emphasizing the recent controversies. The two books differ in tone and perspective. Zeigler is much more objective as he clearly and thoughtfully addresses the tempestuous events that have bedeviled the recent NEA. The reader may or may not agree with assessments and recommendations made in the final two chapters, but the logical exploration of the issues makes it possible to learn much from his analysis. In contrast to Zeigler's conclusions, Marquis advocates that the NEA be abolished. Although historian and journalist Marquis would support some forms of public funding, by contrast she seems determined on almost every page to expose the NEA's worthlessness as a federal agency and the ineptitude of its staff and supporters. Her negative attitude so permeates her recounting of the NEA's history that she undermines her credibility. This is a loss, for the book reflects much research and puts forth many valid criticisms, and in fact incorporates a more detailed and current account of the NEA than is available elsewhere.