Great Art--Not So Fine

by Emmett Harris

The rise of the welfare-warfare state (or, more recently, the warfare-welfare state) in America brought with it many changes, not the least of which was the new role of “publicly” financed artisans.  All of the stories that recounted the woes of the starving artist were gradually erased from memory as budding sculptors and others among the aesthetic cognoscenti learned rapidly the art of chiseling their way into our collective wallet.  Great art, it seemed, required little more than a steady infusion of government largesse.  Thus, it shouldn’t have come as a shock to anyone that the local art community on Cape Cod, known for the undisputed greatness of its art, has been apoplectic at Massachusetts state budget cuts that threaten to eliminate 62 percent of its greatness. 

In fact, government-funded arts are so great, that were the state to cease supporting them, Massachusetts would suffer economically.  So goes the argument from Hunter O’Hanian, who in no way benefits from state matching grants, even though he happens to hold the positions of executive director at the Fine Arts Work Center and board member of Campus Provincetown.  “It [cutting funding] just flies in the face of reason,” he said, “when you look at the economic impact that the arts have in Massachusetts.”  In other words, the budget cuts are unpalettable.     

Art education would suffer as well.  Highlighting the seriousness of the situation is the prospect of students having to learn about planetary orbits from lowbrow textbooks.  This would supplant, according to Cape Cod Times staff writer, Jordana Haspel, the more artistic method of solar system discovery, which includes “standing up and spinning circles around the teacher to demonstrate [planetary motion]”--definitely worlds apart from textbook instruction.  The gravity of the situation is obvious. 

Another casualty of the budget cuts is Campus Provincetown.  Under this program, known as “get smART,” winter art classes for adults are subsidized by other adults who--would you believe--don’t have the luxury of taking an extended off-season vacation!  Yes, it’s the old plunder-thy-neighbor trick.  And though the ploy’s been used at least 99 times in the past, it somehow never seems to wear out its welcome.  Unfortunately for the “get smART” program, the old trick will have to survive under a new guise.  No more grants will be forthcoming.  “Get smART” has been told to get lost. 

Helping to make sure that the expropriations keep coming is Dan Hunter, executive director of Massachusetts Advocates for the Arts, Sciences, and Humanities, a.k.a. MAASH among the SAAB community.  With other public troughers only facing a 25 percent cut, he thinks what is being done to the arts is just plain unfair. Rather than slip from great to mediocre, which would surely happen at the proposed budget level, Dan believes artists could produce passable art at 75 percent of their current subsidy.  With that in mind, Mr. Hunter has taken his predatory ways on the road, seeking to roundup support from communities around the state. 

At the moment, things are looking good for the overburdened taxpayer.  Yet, Hunter’s plans should not be brushed aside.  Hunter aims to sketch a multibillion-dollar picture of lost tourism and jobs--a picture easy to visualize in a slumping economy.  By maintaining financial support for the arts, he’ll argue, legislators can take credit for heading off the impending disaster before it arrives.  And, since most elected officials are naturally inclined to spend other people’s money anyway, providing them with an excuse to continue the practice should prove to be quite effective.  

The unfolding drama has set up the conflict between predator and prey.  It’s an artistic story set on Cape Cod, but its message is universal.  Will the current system ever allow us to yell “Cut!”? 

October 4, 2002

discuss this column in the forum

Emmett Harris lives upwind of the Kennedys on Cape Cod. 

Emmett Harris Archive