We have two choices (not necessarily exclusive) in facing the federal and states’ budget prognosis for arts, culture, museums, heritage, humanities, historic preservation, cultural resources and allied causes that range from public broadcasting to education to job corps. 1) We can write and call our legislators and do the best job of advocacy the field has ever demonstrated. 2) We can lay the groundwork for the future infrastructure of what I call the creative-cultural sector.
We must do both. We can no longer afford to just advocate. But when we do advocate, it has to be around a much larger cause. (More on that, below.)
There are two strategies required to lay the groundwork for a new future. We need to act on both. 1) We must become a unified sector. 2) We need to propose and advocate for an entirely new, unified funding approach that advances the entire sector as fundamentally valued by our economy and society.
To be a unified sector, we have to really and truly get past the distrust and the sometime-backstabbing that has kept this from happening over and over. The for-profit creative sector has to embrace the nonprofit sector and be in, one for all and all for one, and the non-profits have to sit by side with profitable and unruly creatives whose needs and priorities may be at odds with their own. On the nonprofit site, the historic preservation and heritage folks and the arts, museums, and humanities folks all have to look each other in the eye and pledge – and demonstrate – solidarity. No end runs. No peeling off to find safe havens elsewhere.
Then, we need to put forward radical, energizing ideas on how to reshape our creative-cultural funding infrastructure. The Department of Transportation has recently put forward a streamlining of 55 different programs into 5. We’re the creative thinkers: can’t we put forward a model that re-engineers our creative-cultural sectors’ funding in a similarly bold way? Why not go to Washington with a new approach in hand?
Now, on advocacy. It made me pause when I heard this week that the White House has proposed that arts and history be joined together in something called “Effective Teaching and Learning for Well Rounded Education.” Most people in our field have an immediate and angry response to this, feeling it prospectively marginalizes both arts and history in learning and in our society’s related view of their importance. It may be a semantics thing, even a small signal. But it may also point to the alliance we must form between arts, history, culture and heritage to preserve their importance in education and to preserve their value with the public at large.
Where will the leadership come for this to happen? The creative-cultural sector’s current splinters each have their own leadership and structures. It doesn’t seem like there is a lot of trust or common cause between them. Many leaders and agencies around the country are also (perhaps wisely) sitting as far below the radar as they can, hoping to go unnoticed in the current and projected budgetary mess. Perhaps this is a time for some of America’s leading foundations and private sector leaders to join together in a pledge to build a new creative-cultural infrastructure keyed to our 21st century, and then to bring their recommendations to the White House.
Where ever you are, we need you.