Replies

Please reconsider these totally ill-tempered remarks.

I spent 2 terms on the peer review board of the Wisconsin State Art Board, which is the way the money gets doled out.

Each peer reviewer is selected/nominated from their area by people who live there. Most are wealthy, politically connected folks w/o a real job. I was the only working artist in the bunch for 4 years. I may have been the only one who worked at anything for income, as well.

Months before the actual decision making, we each got a huge black binder or two filled w/the applications. We had to read these and be totally familiar with them.

Each grant is brought up for discussion and any work product is then shown. The work product was up on the screen or on the tape until 3 members had said "1", then "2" and finally *3*. Some awful examples lasted a full 5 seconds. We then voted...and since it has been 20 years, I cannot recall if it was secret voting or not. It may have been a show of hands.

Hardly any money went to individuals. Most of the grants went to organizations. Then those organizations (ballet/symphony/museums/ethnic cuture presenters)hold their events, exhibitions, etc and the program will say it was presented w/help from the NEA.

Wisconsin had $300k, total the years I served. I complained that it mostly went to the organizations, all of whom have endowments and charge admission. I was ignored and told "It is legal". I saw not one *perverted* presentation. Yeah, I know about Mapplethorpe and the dung Madonna, but those are the ones that get the money in the large urban areas and they get the press.

Laura Bush, to her credit, has made sure this year's grants are earmarked for Western Civilization's culture/American heritage arts.

I have a lot of problems w/the Arts Board and the NEA, but it mostly because it has drifted away from excellance and heritage. THAT is the fault totally of the universities. And, since I was in art school at a Landgrant school in the 60s, I can tell you that was the result mostly of the Vietnam War and the fact that a C in an art school or College of Art course could cause a male student to lose his place and his deferment. So the standards were totally thrown away between 1962 and 1966. Since the female students bitched, the new lack of rules applied to them, as well.

Today, there is movement in art back toward excellance. A website named Art Renewal Center (searchable) is an example.
Laura Bush is trying to restore some excellance to our culture.

Please, preface your bitter remarks w/the fact that you have no idea of what is really happening in the arts or in the NEA.

I do not recall the destruction of the NEA as a Bush platform plank in 2000. That is just another projection of the kooks.

My husband and I have always supported ourselves w/the creation of craftwork. We have never gotten a grant. I am not in favor of the NEA. But, since it cannot just be done away with, since it was brought into existence by Congress and since Congress is not going to vote it out of existence because that gores the oxen of every museum, symphony and ballet in the nation, the next best thing is to place limits on it. These are the same kind of limits placed on the Department of Education via the NCLB accountability act.

If you cannot destroy something you don't like, the next best thing is to change it to better mirror ones' values. This is taking the Progressive, Gramscian agenda and turning against itself.

I wish you could appreciate the long view being taken by this administration. I know you can't, or won't and that is a shame because this tack is what is going to result eventually in something much closer to what you may be able to support. It may not be your idea of perfection, but there are almost 300M of us and all those over 18 get a vote.

Universal sufferage wasn't in the original Constitution either, so I suppose you are not in favor of it.