Rant 7: Golf, Casinos, Zoos and Museums

you are here: art talk > webzine > rant 7: golf, casinos, zoos and museums

Sign up for Axis news

Sign up to receive e-bulletins from Axis.

Rant 7: Golf, Casinos, Zoos and Museums

In the midst of a global recession what part do the arts play in our economies? Do governments value the artistic sector enough to include it in ‘economic stimulus’ packages? President Obama’s promise to the arts looked shaky for a while but a last minute reprieve saw $50 million dollars going to preserve arts jobs in the US. Does the difficulty in even getting such a paltry amount set a precedent for an attitude towards art and culture in a recession?

Contributed by: Josie Faure Walker

The views expressed in the rant are those of Josie Faure Walker and forum contributors and unless specifically stated are not those of Axis. See Axis terms of use

Public Art Survey (Hanley, Stoke on Trent), 2008
Stephen Sharp Public Art Survey (Hanley, Stoke on Trent), 2008
view more details

The $787bn American Recovery and Reinvestment Act signed by President Obama on 17th February is hoped to soothe the economic crisis in the US. A proposed $50m was allocated to theatres, museums, art centres, casinos, zoos and golf courses, and on the 10th February the House of Representatives found the group a low priority and removed the allocated funds. Lumped in with leisure activities, the arts funding was claimed by Arizona Senator John McCain to be 'unnecessary spending that will not do anything to stimulate the economy.' It was a worrying first hiccup in the enormous expectation piled upon Obama’s presidency, and looked like non profit organizations would get no financial support at all from the bill.

Infuriated Americans for the Arts claimed in an advertising backlash that arts organisations accounted for 4.3% of all American businesses and 5.7 million jobs. Although impressive, the figures in fact prove that the money in question would only break down to around £6 per person involved. Yet the issue seems to be less about money than a recognition of the arts’ throw of influence. After much chatter and debate, in the end a committee decided to allocate $50m to the National Endowment of the Arts and $25m for the Smithsonian.

Soon after the bill was amended and signed, the New York Post stupidly ran a cartoon by Sean Delonas showing the shooting of a vicious chimp with the caption 'they'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill'. Because it appeared to depict Obama, accusations of racism were raised and sharp commentators attacked its publication whilst others seemed confused.

Unsurprisingly the NY Post made a withering snot-faced apology, which deservedly gained its own commentary. Whilst enforcing censorship is a slippery slope and to be avoided at all costs, the public maiming of idiotic offenders thankfully takes care of itself.

 

add a new commentadd a new comment
Post #1
Posted on 25 February 2009
I would say that economics comes second and as a result of the wider cultural impact of the arts, which is being widely neglected. President Obama, needs to acknowledge--in his former campaign aim of re-establishing the US' credibility in the context of the world--that we are not only impacting domestic and foreign economic conditions, but that we could also make a greater cultural contribution within and outside of our borders, if given the needed financial support.

Posted by
Sam Kastin
Post #2
Posted on 26 February 2009
I wonder how much of the 50 mil will actually go to the arts; the bulk of it, little doubt, going to the casinos. It's funny, I recall all these artists, such as Paul Auster, going on about how much arts and culture had suffered under Bush and their optimism at 'change'. I guess it's not going to improve any time soon. Poor form on not extending it to strip joints- table dancers could probably do with the cash more than any of us (certainly more so than your average golfer).

Posted by
Josie Faure
Post #3
Posted on 27 February 2009 as a reply to #2
No, this money is all going to the arts, not even a scrap to the artiest casinos or golf courses masquerading as cultural venues - it's 100% pure. Still breaks down small though.

Post #4
Posted on 27 February 2009 as a reply to #3
So the new Obama/ Cromwell roundhead brigade is already making an impact - where best to keep the wider population happy than to start off with arts cutbacks? But perhaps it will also have the effect of sorting out the wood from the chaff - pushing artists and the arts back to some genuine ground breaking creativity once freed from the trappings of celebrity and bling? Re cultural tourism the wealthy traveller may choose to abandon the quick fix/ loss guaranteed casino holidays of the past and instead opt to travel pilgrim- style to the enriching and enobling art galleries of New York, the Museums of Paris or get their much needed spiritual kicks from Umbrian tours to look at the paintings of Pierro Della Franscesca? The wealthier so called 'art lovers' of the world might actually start dumbing up again? Museums and galleries might be valued more highly if they were to open for a few less days a week than they have been - rationing culture might bring unforseen bonuses?


Axis logo
Copyright Axis 1999-2013 unless stated otherwise. No reproduction of text or media without written permission. For terms and conditions visit www.axisweb.org/copyright.