Is “controversy” a dirty word for arts institutions?

Last Wednesday NCAC and the Vera List Center for Art and Politics at The New School were joined by Bill Ivey, Beka Economopoulos, Magdalena Sawon, Nato Thompson, Martha Wilson, and moderator Laura Flanders of GritTV, to discuss public funding of the arts, free speech and self-censorship, and the impact of the Decency Clause. (Check out their bios here.)

In an interview with Laura Flanders just prior to the panel, NCAC Director of Programs Svetlana Mintcheva explained how arts institutions have increasingly perceived controversy as “a dirty word,” for fear that controversy over artwork would result in funding being eliminated. You can watch Laura Flanders’ interview with Bill Ivey and Svetlana Mintcheva on GritTV , here:

The panel, “Survival vs. Autonomy: Public Funding of the Arts, Free Speech and Self-Censorship,” began with a discussion about how the boundaries of the permissible have changed over the last 20 years. According to Bill Ivey, if the NEA would implement the actual words of the Decency Clause in its most literal sense – which was to ensure that

artistic excellence and artistic merit are the criteria by which [grant] applicants are judged, taking into consideration general standards of decency and respect for the diverse beliefs and values of the American public

– good change could actually come into effect [emphasis added]. Instead, art has become politicized. Ivey later reminded us, “As annoying as the Culture Wars were, at least we were having national conversations and they weren’t commodified.”

Among the topics discussed, Flanders asked, “Is it even good to have government funding?” But the panelists appeared disenchanted by the idea. “I’m too old and wise to ask for it because it would be a wasted effort,” says Postmasters Gallery owner Magda Sowan. Martha Wilson of Franklin Furnace noted the irony in that it’s easier to obtain funding to preserve slides of Karen Finley’s groundbreaking performance than it would be to fund the same performance today.

So what do we do?

Art should be smarter, said Beka Economopolus, and Nato Thompson pushed for creating artistic infrastructures that are community-based, such as FEAST. But the real issue, Ivey said, is that “policy engages culture piecemeal,” and the architecture of the current cultural political system “stands in the way of creating legitimate artwork.” A new kind of government agency, he recommended, should focus on the architecture of a more unified system but “keep its hands off [artistic] content.”

Want to hear more? Come tomorrow, Wednesday Sept 22 at 6:30 for a second panel and Monday, Sept 27 at 6:30 for the film screening.

About Blog of the National Coalition Against Censorship

Blogging Censorship is where National Coalition Against Censorship staff weigh in on the censorship issues on their minds.
This entry was posted in Teresa Koberstein: Author and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Is “controversy” a dirty word for arts institutions?

  1. My work was censored this summer @ the 17th Annual Lipinsky Jewish Arts Festival in San Diego where I was invited to participate by the producer Todd Salovey. I don’t know what to do about it. Any suggestions

  2. Hi Rivian,

    Send NCAC an email and let us know what happened: http://ncac.org/contact-us. I hope we can help.

    cheers!
    Teresa

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s