Changes in the Nature of the NEA.

 

One of the areas where I would like to see change as a result of the new presidential administration is in federal support and funding for the arts, and namely a reform in the way the National Endowment for the Arts supports individual artists and new, modern art. The NEA is, in my estimation, very conservative in its support for the arts, and also very reticent to go out on a limb and support individual artists or galleries and museums that push the envelope of art. This can be traced back to the controversies surrounding Robert Mapplethorpe’s exhibition at Cincinnati’s Contemporary Arts Center in the early 1990s, Andres Serrano’s Piss Christ from 1989 and the NEA Four, whose NEA review panel-approved grants were vetoed under questionable circumstances.

 

While in my mind there could never be too much funding for the arts in this country, the government has actually done well to keep NEA funding intact in the face of conservative Republicans who want to eliminate the program altogether. Although we may never reach the peak funding level of $176 million as it was in the early 1990s, George Bush did sign into law H.R. 2764, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 which included $144.7 million for the National Endowment for the Arts—the highest level of NEA funding since 1995.

 

I don’t necessarily know how President Obama could rectify this situation, nor do I think it should be a priority of his in light of the other national issues he must face early in his presidency. What I would like to see is the appointment of a minister of the arts, or another figurehead that could advocate on behalf of artists and arts groups. What I would like to see is the support of artists and museums, detached from any moral or religious oversight that has been the norm for the past 20 years. The controversies surrounding the artists mentioned above arose when Senators such as Al D’Amato and Jesse Helms were unable to separate the artists’ freedom of expression and right to artistic statement from their own conservative views about religion and sexuality. In addition, the Republican majority Congress led by Newt Gingrich in the mid-90s also created a climate where the NEA was discouraged from supporting  individual artists or any controversial material in fear of losing its funding. Ideally over the next few years, NEA funding will remain the same or increase, but more importantly relax its practices to allow individuals and galleries to present art, music and dance free from institutional censorship, about which the public can create its own informed decisions and opinions.