Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Does the NEA still matter?
Steppenwolf Theatre Company Blog: "Rocco Landesman, the new chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts, has little patience for the disdain with which some politicians still seem to view the organization."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Obviously the kind of theater that the NEA funds is under debate, but I think that the NEA most definitely matters. Not only does the government supporting theater make a statement to the community, but as long as the NEA is granting theater that is trying to change the community, it matters. As far as the type of theater that the NEA should be funding, "profane" vs. "educational", I would hope for a mix of both. Push the envelope, but do it in a way that will educate society.
i think that any theater program should be funded no mater what. even though what they are working on is not what every one world would agey with. and with the way the economy is the government should continue to fund the NEA and then the NEA will continue to fund the things that they believe in. the type of shows that they funned should then grow and possible become more accepted in the art world and then they might be come comen place. so the government should give the NEA more funding
Certainly the NEA matters! Any organization that gives financial support to the arts, regardless of where the money goes, is significant. The debate here seems to be whether we should be spending the money in order to make art more accessible or should we be using it to develop new and influential works. While it pains me to say so, since the NEA is essentially a government organization, I think the money should be used more towards accessibility, with a certain percentage being set aside for development. Government arts programs inherently have an educational component to them and I think this money is most effectively spent making theatre available to as many people as possible, especially students.
Any group with pockets as deep as the NEA has enough influence to either encourage or stifle a lot of artistic expression, depending on how they distribute what they have. They have to walk a fine line between what the more conservative will accept as not being offensive and what the more liberal will agree is actually artistic, and in doing so they will almost certainly offend both sides as often as they please them. If they only give the money to the inoffensive then they're probably not encouraging much that's new, if they pushing too far then the conservatives will push to cut the NEA funding.
As long as there is public funding for the Arts, there is going to have to be censorship. unless if it's your money, people aren't going to want to pay for something that is going to offend them and give others a voice. I'm sorry but, that's just the way it is. However, i believe that at least for now, there should still be a public program to fund the Arts.
Post a Comment