Number Four: A reason to be angry

I have started this post four times now. I have had so much to share and I haven’t known where or how to start, but I have calmed down a bit, and I think I am ready.

I have been angry.

"Kids will leave their mark, with or without the arts."
This image was to advocate the importance of art education
by the Arizona Arts Commission.

Deciding whether or not government support for the arts is a good idea or even necessary has always been an interesting yet frustrating argument for me. To be honest, I usually find myself advocating against government support of the arts. This stems from a very overbearing belief of mine that government support for the arts runs synonymous with censoring them. As I mentioned in my second post, government officials often feel that they are held responsible for what artists produce with taxpayers' money.

To be clear, I think it is all well and good that people believe the government should support the arts in this country; however I do not believe that the government has ever been able to accept the implications of supporting artists.

Throughout our nation’s history our government and their constituents (myself included) have struggled to really define the role that the Fine Arts play in our society. Most arts organizations are classified as 501 (c ) 3 charitable corporations, this is literally defined as an organization that provides a service to the public that the government does not provide. As charitable corporations: arts organizations receive a tax break and are allowed to receive contributions from individuals who may then deduct those contributions from their federal income tax.  Pretty sweet right?

The problem with this is that new start-up organizations often need seed money or organizations that have been around for a while cannot seem to cover the less glamorous overhead costs. Donors do not want to give money so that arts organizations can keep their lights on, they want to donate to a cause that will somehow validate them as an individual, which is fair.

This is where the government comes in. Who else could be burdened with the responsibility to fund unglamorous projects or projects that truly enhance society (example: bringing arts service organizations to inner city youth)?

See? It really does make sense for the government to invest in the arts.

The problem with playing the funding game with the government is pure politics (no pun intended). Government officials have a responsibility to their constituents and they do not want to be known as the person who cut healthcare funding in order to keep the arts commission in business. Sadly, arts funding in this country accounts for a fraction of a percent of most governmental budgets (in FY10 the budget of the NEA is a very modest $160 million, which equates to about $0.50 an individual). Thus cutting arts spending rarely saves a large amount of money.

My main issue with the propositions of budget dismantling and in some cases a complete obliteration of state arts commissions (Kansas) is that it alters the public’s perception of the Fine Arts. By providing funding to the arts the government has more or less created a stamp of approval (albeit small). This validation shows citizens that the arts are really worth investing in and the arts are necessary in our society. Budget cuts are a necessary evil, especially in hard times; however failing to provide any funding or just shutting down a state’s arts commission sends a message that cannot be taken back.

As long as art advocates do not wager an argument that relies on art for art’s sake, we have a chance. Politicians are not looking for a warm story that really changed a life, they are looking to see what is in it for them.  Examples of such arguments are as follows:

• The arts create jobs, thus, they can be used as an economic stimulus. Over time the arts have even been proven to economically rejuvenate cities (see: North Adams, MA).
• The arts preserve culture and heritage. People often think that culture and heritage live in the art of the past, but practicing artists create new parts of our culture and heritage every day.
• The arts can be used as a device to drive down crime rates through inner city programs.

The issues surrounding government funding are often misunderstood. Funding for the arts is necessary. Who funds the arts is up for discussion. My personal concern is the public’s perception of the arts in response to extreme changes in funding. If people stop believing in the arts we will no longer have anything to wager. 

An Adventure in Education, Technology, and the Arts, Pt 1

Restroom Stall Conversations

It is hard to imagine why it took me so long to realize that I had the resources right in front of me this entire time. I am a term employee at the School of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. Don't be fooled. This is not my first rodeo. This is actually my second time working as the Graduate Admissions Assistant. I mainly process applications; however a considerable amount of my time is spent organizing portfolios. For this reason my exposure to technology, education and the arts has been almost exclusively administrative--facilitating the processes that eventually lead to creating art (whether it be with technology or not).

I have been grappling with the topic of the arts, education, and technology since my last post because it appears that my fellow conversants are more interested in discussing the creation of art through the use of technology. Today I finally realized that everything I needed to really explore this topic more was all around me. After a series of conversations I was given a list of faculty who would shed light on the processes of using technology to create art. 


Although my "research" has only just started I have come to a few conclusions or have at least I have found myself gravitating toward certain ideas. Initially I thought that using technology in the process of producing art would some how compromise the artist--bringing to question, "Where is the hand of the artist in the work?" While it could be argued that a certain amount of control is lost when creating art with technology it was pointed out to me that my generation and anyone younger would be more comfortable with using technology as a means to produce art simply because it is natural. Thus, in a sense creating art by means of technology is only natural in this era because that is what we surround ourselves with. 


The first challenge that was brought to light when creating "media art" was affordability. This was actually during a conversation with a professor in the video editing lab, James Dingle. He explained that while students can create many things while they were pursuing their degree they struggled outside of school because they didn't have access to the equipment or software that they needed to create their art. Second, artists and students alike are faced with the challenge of staying relevant in the ever-changing realm of technology, and after creating media art where does one exhibit it? Most galleries are not equipped for high tech installations nor are they keen on nontraditional exhibitions. This issue will probably evolve with time though as video art is cited as a backlash against traditional gallery exhibitions. Other challenges included the tools and skills required to harness technology. James admitted that technology is such a large world that students and artists can get lost trying to decide what tools to use, how to use them, and where to start. "Freedom is powerful," he said, but it is easy to get lost. 


We briefly touched on the question, "What is art?" and the separation between Fine Art and entertainment and how do you separate them on the Internet (and if you need to). The most interesting concept that James brought to my attention was how do artists formulate their own ideas when they have access to so many others instantly on the Internet (think Google). Technology makes connecting and networking so easy; however it also makes it incredibly difficult to stand out because you are surrounded by so many others. And if it so easy to create then how is it art? 


The final subject we covered was copyright and fair use. In my background I have usually encountered these issues from the administrative (read: rule enforcers) perspective. Legal issues aren't something that usually covered in art school, and I have always felt that they should... until today. Prior to today's discussion I had viewed artists who use other's work as feeling a sense of entitlement to things on the Internet; however James pointed out that very few people who he works with or his students create art to sell it, thus, in a sense they weren't hurting the "copyright owner" by using an image as part of a larger work. He also cited that most of his students most likely view things like Google Image as a platform that provides tools to help produce larger works. He used Cliff Evans' work as an example. He creates on art by using the Internet and hundreds of images. 


Wow. Can you believe that people were willing to just drop what they were doing and talk to me about the arts, education and technology? I was, but I think that if a random person came to me expressing an interest in what I was passionate about I would probably do the same. Aren't passionate people awesome? 


More to come, just you wait ;)

What I am really thinking about..

I can't believe that it is already February! I guess time flies when you are constantly digging yourself out of the snow! This week it was actually colder in my home state of Texas than it was in Boston... that was a little bit difficult to hear because I am really looking forward to my week-long visit at the end of February.


I will be traveling to Austin, Texas, to speak at a symposium at my alma mater at the end of the month and I am both excited and nervous! I was invited to speak almost two years ago by one of my favorite former professors who is actually organizing the entire event also known as the Brown Symposium. This year's theme is, "Think, Converse, Act: The Salon and Its Histories." A really great post about what the Symposium's Director means when referring to salon culture can be found here. The symposium itself will feature three lectures on salon history by scholars and three moderated conversations "among professionally and ideologically far-flung individuals about important but elusive disciplinary intersections in today’s world: (1) art, science, and religion; (2) education, technology, and the arts; and (3) ethics, the arts, and public policy. (quoted from the Brown Symposium homepage)" I will take part in the last two conversations happening on February 24 and 25. 

I find the prospect of speaking about education, technology, and the arts to be challenging as there are a few approaches that one can take. I think that technology has constantly challenged the way that artists create and audiences experience; however I believe that the changes that we are seeing are more widespread than we have ever before seen.  Technology does provide useful tools and resources to build a new knowledge base for arts education, but I think that it comes at a very high price. The movement toward technology is expensive and in many cases institutions wish to “upgrade” but arts organization rarely have the resources necessary to do so and maintain said technology. Web based technology, like social networking, provide an easy way artists and arts organizations to share their work and events. Any type of technological tool also requires a certain amount of training and time, and the time spent maintaining social networks makes them just as much of a burden of anything else…. Even if they don’t cost money! 


Speaking about ethics, the arts, and public policy is also a little challenging but for different reasons. Many of the challenges that the arts experience are due to things that have happened in the past. I think that the controversies that were spun out of control during the late twentieth century really shaped the way that the American public values art and sadly it is the root of what has become the struggle for the arts in this country.  The tensions between the government and the funding of public arts projects or even funding arts education in the public school systems are sadly all related. Government funding for the arts in the post modern era has become a conflict of interest as the government does not want to be held accountable for what an artist creates. 


All of these issues have been mulling around in my mind for the last year and a half because it is at the center of arts administration. The most challenging aspect of preparing for this symposium is deciding where I stand on issues. In most cases I find myself somewhere in the middle... I guess we will see where I end up after loads more reading and a bit more time! 




Have a great week!

A transitional semester

Hello and welcome to my blog!

I am going to use this blog first to document my transitional semester in preparation for my move back to the Lone Star State, and second to document my experience during my internship/fellowship next fall.

My husband and I moved to Boston shortly after I was accepted to the BU Arts Administration program about a year and half ago. Since then we have braved our first and second winter (however I am unsure as to when the second will end!), mastered the infamous Boston mass-transit system, and have been faced with the very temperamental job market more times than we would like to admit. We have come to love the city; however we miss our families and the cheap cost of living in the South, so we are going to make the big move... again!

I look forward to sharing more about my adventure with you and showing you lots of pictures of my cats.... because they are really cute!

Also, if you are having a bad day you should check out this video!

Have a great weekend!