Three words you don't generally hear from a critic: 'I was wrong'
by Kelly Kleiman | Nov. 21, 2011
. . . but, before you get all excited, I'm not talking about critical judgments I've offered on shows. Rather, I was wrong about what arguments people find persuasive when they're considering the value of public funding for the arts. At a recent forum, I argued that once we talk about the arts in terms of the jobs they create and the economic development they spur, we've lost the argument, because weapons manufacturing creates more jobs and spurs more economic development (as do most other forms of economic activity--just think about how badly-paid artists are before you announce that the arts are an engine of prosperity!). But, as is often the case, I mistook my own critical assessment for what other people would think. In a recent posting (skip over the part about Mitt Romney), You've Cott Mail drew attention to a two-year-old report from the Fine Arts Fund of Cincinnati making the case that most people find the economic argument compelling. More important, that argument---crass as it may seem---helps foster a shared sense of responsibility for the arts, a sense that they belong to everyone. And that, of course, is the consummation for which all of us in the arts devoutly wish.
While the argument won't persuade people like me who think it's an inherent conflict of interest for artists (whose job is to de-stabilize society) to take money from the government (whose job is to stabilize it), it may well persuade people whose view of public funding for the arts is that it's all very well but a luxury we can't afford right this minute. Moreover, that "shared sense of responsibility" may light a fire under the people whom I propose as replacements for government funding, namely, generous individuals who appreciate the importance of all you de-stabiliziers out there.
And the moral of the story is, don't imagine that what you think (however unimpeachably accurate!) is what everybody thinks. You may be in touch with the zeitgeist, and then again you may be shouting down an empty corridor. Gentles, pardon.
Onstage/Backstage is a blog featuring theater news, interviews, performances and criticism in Chicago. The blog features Chicago theater writers Jonathan Abarbanel, Kelly Kleiman and Laura Molzahn.
Like WBEZ on Facebook
- $7.3 million OKed for downtown ‘bus rapid transit’
- Board votes unanimously to close, restaff schools
- East Germany and Krypton Come to Chicago
- Report: McCarthy knew of NYPD Muslim spy program in NJ
- Video: White Mystery performs Take A Walk on Sound Opinions
- Chicago names schools to be closed, phased out
- CPS let building go to pot before ‘turnaround’?
- Morning News Update: Monday Jan. 7
- $7.3 million OKed for downtown ‘bus rapid transit’
- Announcing my duet with the reanimated corpse of Osama bin Laden
- Chicago wraps up the first set of meetings to map out the 2012 cultural plan
- After bringing youth to gang’s turf, cops won’t face charges
- Album review: Lana Del Rey, ‘Born to Die’ (Interscope)
- Board votes unanimously to close, restaff schools
- Critics slam Illinois lottery ticket sales
- Did CPS let building go to pot before ‘turnaround’?
- Dorothy Brown and Rick Munoz fling insults in Cook County Clerk of Court debate
- $7.3 million OKed for downtown ‘bus rapid transit’
- Jacques Brownson, architect of Daley Center and 55 E. Jackson building dies at 88
- Lost on the Dan Ryan
- Album reviews: Sleigh Bells and Cloud Nothings
- An interview with Steve Edwards
- Baby boomers most at-risk for hepatitis C as deaths rise
- Board votes unanimously to close, restaff schools
WBEZ Twitter Feed
-
Permit needed for South Side gun range http://t.co/cWaMSdXG15 hours 44 min ago











Comments
I say "Damn the arts!" to the to the deepest of Hell. Why? Because when one speaks of "the arts" one is not speaking of "art" at all. Indeed, the terms are polar opposites. "The arts" equal the Group-Think of schools, teachers, communities, committees, seminars, fundraisers, book clubs, the lentil-eating NPR crowd, etc. "Art" equals -- well, everything in opposition to Group-Think. Individual talent carries the day, sometimes borderline cranks, and today we mark the passing of such an individual, Shelagh Delaney. A one-hit wonder, yes, but what a hit it was:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/2011/nov/21/shelagh-delaney
Mr. Studd, As is often the case, I don't understand either the argument you're making or the distinction on which it rests. "The arts" describes a range of both individual and collective accomplishments (a painter; a ballet company) in a range of media; we could talk about "art" instead but that might suggest the subject was visual art only. And the subject of how they/it gets paid for remains important, whether those to be paid are individual artists or troupes that create works of art.
And by the way, your praise of Shelagh Delaney is particularly ironic in this context because her work was performed in a state-subsidized theatrical community. Just like there's no such thing as a billionaire who made his money all on his own (see Elizabeth Warren's observation about the value of roads, public education and the rule of law), there's no such thing as an artist whose individual achievement truly stands apart from the rest of society.