Sunday, March 15, 2009

Stimulating Arts and Minds

Gosh. I thought I was done tirading about supporting the arts, and could go back to talking about what matters: futurism and Clay Aiken.

The Washington Post this morning carries an editorial by David A. Fahrenthold, entitled "Very Clever. But Is It a Stimulus?" Don't get me wrong - I don't automatically think anyone asking practical questions is a jackasss.

In fact, Fahrenthold does a good job at illustrating the main concerns that people have about investing any money into the arts: what's in it for us? What's the payoff? And how will artists really use the money? (And will I approve?)

He asked a poet how she would spend the money, and unfortunately the answer was a little self-absorbed: she'd buy more notebooks and spend more time on her poems. Fahrenthold goes on to lament:
But it's unclear what kind of ripples she would create in the broader economy. ...And if you think that there's a big commercial market for good poetry -- dense, crystalline stuff that gives up its meaning only with time, like the bitter juice that seeps from a grated onion . . . then you are unaware that the No. 1 song in the country recently was Kelly Clarkson's "My Life Would Suck Without You."

BIG opportunity missed here by Fahrenthold, his poet interviewee, and arts supporters in general. If the government is going to put strings on its "investment" in artists, instead of demanding "Tell us how many jobs you'll create and convince me your art is worthwhile," it should be demanding that the artist take a week and go teach a workshop in a school where arts funding was cut.

It isn't fair to blame it all on the success of Kelly Clarkson's current pop trifle. I guess you could applaud the stimulus she's giving the dying record and radio industry. But it's sort of like giving CPR to a corpse. There's more than the economy that needs stimulating.

Showing young people that there are higher forms of expression is an investment in a future of not just better art, but better minds. We're not necessarily teaching them to be artists, but to be thinkers and creators. It stops the decay of moribund minds, which don't just wither from neglect, but turn toxic if we let it happen.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Your suggestion is a common sense approach that "spreads the wealth" so to speak.

Ashes said...

Hosaa, I'm really enjoying your articles, this one would be a great Editorial.

Thanks