Farewell Mapplethorpe, Hello Shakespeare (Roger Kimball on NEA, the W. way)

National Review Online ^ | January 29, 2004 | Roger Kimball

[NutCrackerBoy]

Farewell Mapplethorpe, Hello Shakespeare
The NEA, the W. way.

By Roger Kimball

Under normal circumstances, the White House announcement that the president was seeking a big budget increase for the National Endowment for the Arts might have been grounds for dismay. Pronounce the acronym "NEA," and most people think Robert Mapplethorpe, photographs of crucifixes floating in urine, and performance artists prancing about naked, smeared with chocolate, and skirling about the evils of patriarchy.

Thanks, but no thanks.

But things have changed, and changed for the better at the NEA. The reason can be summed up in two trochees: Dana Gioia, the distinguished poet and critic who is the Endowment's new chairman.

Within a matter of months, Mr. Gioia has transformed that moribund institution into a vibrant force for the preservation and transmission of artistic culture. He has cut out the cutting edge and put back the art. Instead of supporting repellent "transgressive" freaks, he has instituted an important new program to bring Shakespeare to communities across America. And by Shakespeare I mean Shakespeare, not some PoMo rendition that portrays Hamlet in drag or sets A Midsummer Night's Dream in a concentration camp. (Check the website www.shakespeareinamericancommunities.org for more information.)

Mr. Gioia is moving on other fronts as well. He has hired a number of able deputies who care about art and understand that what the public wants is more access to good art — opera, poetry, theater, literature — not greater exposure to social pathology dressed up as art. After a couple of decades of cultural schizophrenia, the NEA has become a clear-sighted, robust institution intent on bringing important art to the American people.

It's quite odd, really. People keep telling us — that is, professors and CNN commentators and Hollywood actors keep telling us — how very stupid President Bush is. Yet everywhere one looks he is supporting some of the most intelligent and dynamic people ever to occupy their cultural posts. Dana Gioia at the NEA, his counterpart Bruce Cole at the National Endowment for the Humanities, Leon Kass and his panel of distinguished scientists and philosophers at the President's Council on Bioethics (see their website www.bioethics.gov to get a sense of the good work they are doing on clarifying the enormous moral issues surrounding the debate over biotechnology). The Left keeps screaming about how dim George Bush is, but in the meantime, he has illuminated one area of public life after another with immensely talented and articulate people.

There is plenty of room for debate about whether and to what extent government should be directly involved in funding culture. But there can be no argument that if we are going have public support of the arts, it should be done in an enlightened and life-affirming way. This is the George Bush approach to cultural reinvigoration. Conservatives — by which term I mean people who are interested in conserving what is best from the past — should applaud his efforts. After years in the wilderness, the NEA has finally come home.

— Roger Kimball is managing editor of The New Criterion and author of Art's Prospect: The Challenge of Tradition in an Age of Celebrity.

[reelfoot]

So, the White House thinks its OK to confiscate taxpayer money for the "Arts" so long as the work product doesn't offend middle America? They miss the point--federal government support for the "Arts" is wrong in principle because it is unconstitutional. It is also wasteful. Why should taxpayers be forced to support ballet, symphonies, etc.? NASCAR makes it without government subsidies; why shouldn't the "Arts"?

[gov_bean_ counter]

No. At least we know the accompanying anlysis will be solid. He borrows that too.

[spodefly]

The debate has shifted from how best to have a federal government managed according to Conservative Constitutional principles, to a debate over how Republicans administer socialist programs.

Apparently Bush has placed some well thought of people in charge of the socialist programs, so now it's OK to up their budgets.

[genghis]

There is a lot of wisdom on the board today.
Bush should make Freerebuplic budget director.

[NutCrackerBoy]

I don't know how many votes GWB thought this would buy him but I'm getting very disenchanted with my president. He's either taking the conservative vote for granted or decided he doesn't need it.

I'm a major BushBot, but I acknowledge that your sentiment is inescapable. True conservative principles should continue to be voiced, developed, argued over, studied; the more the better. I can only say that this NEA thing is entirely analogous to Faith Based Initiative, which I support whole-heartedly. It is even more so from a PR point-of-view.

Based on this move, I think there is good reason to expect that NEA is safe from a takeover by arch-liberals in the forseeable future. What do you expect would happen if W moved to abolish the NEA?

[XRdsRev]

Actually one big subsidy that Nascar and other similar entities recieve is related off-site highway and road improvement. When a track is built, there are road improvements that must be made both locally and sometime regionally to handle the much larger flow of traffic. These road improvements are paid for by the taxpayers and often run in the millions of $$$ for a single venue. I know of at least 1 proposed Nascar track that was not built because the State & County involved demanded that the track pay the full of the cost of off site road improvements. The Nascar people refused to do it.

[11th_VA]

Et Tu Dubya?

[NutCrackerBoy]

The debate has shifted from how best to have a federal government managed according to Conservative Constitutional principles, to a debate over how Republicans administer socialist programs.

Apparently Bush has placed some well thought of people in charge of the socialist programs, so now it's OK to up their budgets.

What you say is correct, but I can't tell whether you are entirely disgusted by it or not.

[summer]

FYI, from

re: ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE ARTS

"The arts are a vitally important economic industry, generating revenue, creating jobs and developing communities. Several resources below offer substantial research findings on the arts and economic development, from statewide economic impact studies to national reports."

National Studies

Arts & Economic Prosperity: The Economic Impact of Nonprofit Arts Organizations and Their Audiences, released in 2002, is the most comprehensive economic impact study of the nonprofit arts industry ever conducted. It is based on surveys of 3,000 nonprofit arts organizations and more than 40,000 attendees at arts events in 91 cities in 33 states, plus the District of Columbia. Several Florida communities are included in this report.

According to the report, America's nonprofit arts industry generates:

--$134 billion in economic activity every year, including $24.4 billion in federal, state, and local tax revenues.

CLICK HERE for more info.

[NietzschesJoker]

"Why should taxpayers be forced to support ballet, symphonies, etc.? NASCAR makes it without government subsidies; why shouldn't the "Arts"?"

Simply, because the arts couldn't make it without them. I work for one America's big-five orchestras, and we've run deficits in two of the past three years, with another projected for this fiscal year. It's not mismanagement - people just aren't showing up. We're facing increased competition from the myriad forms of entertainment on which people can spend their disposible income. With the dumbing-down of society plaguing this country, the fine arts are losing.

[George W. Bush]

We could get all this NEA stuff cheaper if we'd hire only illegal aliens to work in them.

Or we could just outsource them to India or China.

[George W. Bush]

I work for one America's big-five orchestras, and we've run deficits in two of the past three years, with another projected for this fiscal year. It's not mismanagement - people just aren't showing up.

So, if NASCAR or wrasslin' declines in attendance and becomes unprofitable, they should also be subsidized by (borrowed) tax dollars?

The arts originally were the popular entertainment of their times and were subsidized by wealthy private patrons.

Bush will not get a single liberal or swing voter on this. He does make his base mad.

Bush wants to do this and doesn't really care what conservative voters think of it. The conclusion seems pretty inescapable.

[reelfoot]

"Simply, because the arts couldn't make it without them."

So, if NASCAR loses audience, and runs a deficit, taxpayers who are not interested in NASCAR should be fleeced to subsidize those people who do want to go to the races? It is immoral to expropriate the wealth of one person to subsidize a second person's entertainment.

[The Old Hoosier]

Mr. Gioia won't be around to control the NEA forever. Probably not even in 2005.

[Spok]

"What do you expect would happen if W moved to abolish the NEA?"

He'd get my respect back.
I have voted Republican in every presidential election since 1972 and this is the first time I've had doubts. If GWB abandons the Second Amendment, I may sit this one out.

[NutCrackerBoy]

Something like funding NASCAR can be a "loss leader". Let's say a city or state spends some taxpayer money to build the infrastructure that enables them to operate. The local economy gets a big shot in the arm.

[Wolfie]

I guess if big, unconstitutional government programs come with a conservative flavor, then they're A-OK. But we already knew that, didn't we?

[Little Ray]

Don't see anything in the Constitution about promoting the Arts or subsidizing artistes, but if it is going to be spent, it might as well be spent this way.

[Califelephant]

Money

Money, the long green,
cash, stash, rhino, jack
or just plain dough.

Chock it up, fork it over,
shell it out. Watch it
burn holes through pockets.

To be made of it! To have it
to burn! Greenbacks, double eagles,
megabucks and Ginnie Maes.

It greases the palm, feathers a nest,
holds heads above water,
makes both ends meet.

Money breeds money.
Gathering interest, compounding daily.
Always in circulation.

Money. You don't know where it's been,
but you put it where your mouth is.
And it talks.

Dana Gioia