Yes on that Secretary of Culture, please, already.

In our class last week we discussed whether the US should have a Secretary of Culture. I wrote briefly on this topic in my blog for the International Communications class in Nov. 2010. http://icgroupfour.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2010-11-03T19%3A00%3A00-07%3A00&max-results=7

Here is an excerpt: Probably the most effective way to build soft power would be for the US government to truly provide funding for the arts in the education system, in grants, for international exchanges, and for the State Department. And to have a cabinet member - Secretary of Culture, as many have suggested. The State Department does fund a number of artistic and educational exchanges, but it does not receive enough funding. If Diplomacy is going to shift to include more non-state actors, then non-state actors who create the tools of public diplomacy (music, dance, film, other media) need to be supported and valued as not just as creators of products of commercial enterprise, but also as part of our diplomatic and public policy planning. (But, then that would shake up the the WTO debate about how to have media and other cultural products considered with the same laws as other products.)

I went to the North Carolina School of the Arts in the early 1990s to study European classical piano performance. This was during the Jesse Helms (NC Senator at the time) near slashing of NEA funding and the first Gulf War. I remember in particular one huge poster with replications of statues (the David), which Helms had identified as pornographic, hanging in our commons area as a protest to his policies. I also participated in organizing a protest against the first gulf war, which culminated in Bread and Circus like puppet creations to take to the DC march. There were many discussions on campus about the lack of value placed in the arts and anxiety about how to get funding in the future, as well as the roles artists play in raising political awareness in the public sphere for international events and policies.

After class discussion, I put out an email to some of my friends from this school, as well as film-makers in LA to get their opinions on having a Secretary of Culture in the US and how that would affect the image of the US abroad (and domestically, because after all PD shouldn’t PD also be internal in scope?), as well as how they think it would affect art production and value.

One of my film director friend’s in LA sent me this link to one of his friend’s blogs. I think he makes a good point about how important it is to foster creativity in order to, among other things, remain competitive economically.

http://richarddemato.posterous.com/why-isnt-there-a-department-of-creativity-in

This is a website devoted to developing future Christian leaders in the US. It is interesting to read how the author takes this idea and promotes Christian patrons of the arts, kind of goes back to the earlier European model, where artists were either supported by the church or by individual patrons. Considering how strong the base of Christian based voters is, I thought this was important to include in this post.

http://www.cardus.ca/comment/article/1130

Lee Rosenbaum of “culture grrr” vehemently opposes having a secretary of culture because she thinks it would negatively affect creativity.

http://www.artsjournal.com/culturegrrl/2009/01/in_defense_of_disorderly_cultu.html

If we follow Christopher Paul’s prescription for a whole of government approach to public diplomacy, we acknowledge that the US government is constantly communicating and shaping how US culture is disseminated. Even the choice to not have a Secretary of Culture shapes how US culture is perceived and distributed internationally. I don’t think that having a ministry of culture would take over the private market approach to the arts, which is so established anyway. I do think that sending a message to not only international publics, but also our internal public, that creativity is valued and supported is vital for not only PD, but also our ability to innovate and compete in the international markets.

It was interesting that someone in class mentioned that maybe she would want to support taxes going to the arts, but that maybe a neighbor would not. My reaction is that we all don’t support everything that our lawmakers decide to do with our tax dollars, but this doesn’t prevent us from having Secretaries that oversee those activities we may not agree with. I think that having a Secretary of Culture would not take away from how art is currently produced or discount the commodity side of the arts. Instead, I think it would strengthen our ability to support artists and creative endeavors, whether these messages are effective PD technique consistently or not.