Once I was asked to imagine a world where the arts ceased to exist. At first, I pictured museums without paintings and sculptures, and craft stores closed down -- every art material abandoned. Then I imagined myself in high school or college without a band to play in. I thought about never seeing the innumerable theater productions I have greatly enjoyed in my life. And the memory of every poem, short story and novel I had ever read briefly vanished from my mind.
Not only for myself, but for many others, the arts entail much more than just specific displays of aesthetic beauty. The arts are an experience which, unlike so many other things in life, can be enjoyed by anyone, at any time, and almost anywhere. However, many aspects of the arts which make them so positive for me, could not be as successful, or even exist, without federal government funding.
Not only do the arts create entertainment for millions of Americans through theater, museums and more, but they provide jobs and promote creativity across the nation. Despite arguments against it, I think that federal government funding for the arts is an asset that our nation can't afford to lose.
I've heard the taxpayers argument that government funding for the arts is just another way of robbing the American people of their hard-earned money. I remember holding that view myself not too long ago. But according to a survey done by the National Assembly of Local Arts Agencies, federal support for the arts worked out to be less than $0.65 per American in 1995. Also, a study done by the New Jersey State Council on the Arts (NJSCA) in Trenton noted that just in New Jersey, visitors to arts events, spend an average of $17.71 over and above the cost of admissions at gift shops, on transportation, in restaurants and more.
If the American people are willing to spend money on the extras of attending arts events, I don't see why it wouldn't be valuable to charge a little extra in taxes so that these events could be held in the first place.
But before we can understand why government funding for the arts is so important, perhaps it is appropriate to understand why the so-called arts are worthy of funding in the first place.
Can you imagine any aspect of life where the arts do not play a part? I'm sure most people at least enjoy going to New York to see Broadway plays such as "Phantom of the Opera" and "Les Miserables". This is the arts.
The arts encompass almost everything from movies to advertising. But more importantly, I believe that the arts improve education by supplementing knowledge (don't students seem to learn more by seeing pictures in class textbooks?), improving analytical thinking and motivation, inspiring teamwork and even boosting creative self-esteem in students.
In fact, in 1992, the American Council for the Arts conducted a poll which showed that some 90 percent (of people interviewed) felt that the arts are an essential part of education and development, and that an overwhelming majority of Americans believe that the arts should be a regular, required part of the school curriculum.
Another report from the NJSCA says that even technology turns to the arts for innovation and inspiration. For example, the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), a federal agency which funds a number of arts councils in the nation, uses the media to deliver an important message about American culture, creativity and innovation to an international audience through the export of copyrightable materials: movies, television, literature, music recordings and software.
Finally, the arts create jobs. In 1995, the NJSCA found that jobs in the non-profit arts industry represent 1 percent of the entire U.S. work force. As long as we continue to support the arts, more jobs will be created, whether its through the building of more theaters and museums or simply more recognition of artists (50,000 professional artists live in New Jersey alone).
Therefore, I think that federal government support for the arts is a valuable investment. Unfortunately, some people don't agree. In 1995, with a House-Senate conference committee agreeing to slash the budget of the NEA by 40 percent, we saw a drastic step towards ending government support for the arts altogether. On the other hand, I believe that Angie Carpenter, sponsor of a resolution to restore Suffolk County's (Long Island) arts funding to its 1995 level, has a good point when she says that even if you hated the arts, its the kind of thing you have to support to keep our nation economically viable.
In other words, not only is funding for the arts good for the sake of promoting the arts in our nation, but it is also good for the economy and the well-being of our government because it provides standards of excellence for artists and arts organizations to strive for, according to an NJSCA report.
The main way that government funds the arts is through grants and special programs for artists and arts organizations. Grants, according to Nina Stack, the Communications Director of the NJSCA, serve as a seal of approval from the government and help in the fundraising and attraction of audiences for arts events. Without these grants, many non-profit arts organizations might not get the public response that they do with the help of the grants.
Stack describes how such grants work at the McCarter Theater in Princeton, New Jersey. Grants from the government allow for McCarter to present shows and programs for almost half the price that they would be in some other theaters. A more reasonable price allows for a larger audience, so more people can enjoy the arts. Basically, federal support ensures broad access to the arts for all citizens, Stack said. So, next time you attend a theater event at a reduced price, remember that it could be federal support which makes that possible.
Also, with the help of federal grants, Stack said, comes extensive programs on public arts with commission for artists. Some of these programs include placing artists in schools and offering training in many areas of the arts. Mini-grants are also offered in such programs. One such program that the NJSCA offers is called Mini-Grants for Teachers and Artists to Develop Model Projects, in which the NJSCA provides up to $1,000 to support innovative projects in schools that demonstrate new and better ways of improving arts literacy among students.
Our job is to make sure that quality arts are available (to anyone who is interested in having a career in, or simply enjoying the arts), Stack said.
Despite opposing views, I believe that the arts are an important area in our society which should be protected. Without the help of the government, we could be doing some serious damage to our nation's creative future. Before we make the mistake of cutting down on funding for the arts, I think we need to imagine that world without them again: a boring, colorless, silent landscape where creativity ceases to exist.
Copyright 1997 Anna Lisa Babino. All Rights Reserved.