Customer Reviews

Arts, Inc.: How Greed and Neglect Have Destroyed Our Cultural Rights

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

It's amazing that we've made it all the way into the 21st century without anyone attempting to write about the condition of the entire U.S. arts system and how it connects - or doesn't connect - with the public interest. But Bill Ivey has done it in Arts, Inc., a comprehensive and very readable look at how market forces and an inattentive government have allowed our culture to drift away from public purposes. Ivey is convinced that we can enhance quality of life for all Americans if we assert his six "cultural rights," and I tend to agree. Although I wish the author had spent more time on specific art forms like theater and the art gallery scene, Arts, Inc. includes plenty of eye-popping examples of how we've got things wrong. The book defines a whole new arena for public policy and goes beyond complaining about what we haven't done with art and art making to paint a picture of how a vibrant cultural life can give the U.S. a high quality of life in the coming post-consumerist age.

Arts, Inc. is a very good book and probably the only one out there that explores the position of the arts--fine, popular, folk, commercial, and non-profit--in the United States. Whether one agrees with Bill Ivey's framing of the American arts scene in terms of "rights" or not, the book raises a set of issues that need to be discussed by citizens as well as members of government (who never seem to engage the arts seriously except when it comes to playing football with the NEA). Each right really focuses on a separate issue, and while there is inevitably some overlap between them, the book is not one idea endlessly repeated. The book reads extremely well and is filled with a good number of compelling examples of why the arts are in peril in the United States today. What is perhaps fundamental in Ivey's take on the arts is that they have a great potential to enhance the quality of life of ordinary Americans--both as art producers and consumers--and this potential is squandered because the arts have been totally left to market forces without any consideration of their relevance to the well being of the nation and its citizenry.

Bill Ivey is an important voice in the national conversation on arts policy. In 'Arts, Inc.' and in his leadership in general, Ivey pursues tough questions that others are trying to ignore, or that powerful lobbyists have been able to silence. His rhetoric is a bit extreme for me, but the issues he discusses and his illustration of the facts far outweigh that in this book. Anyone interested in cultural policy, including those whose lives are affected by it (i.e. everyone) should read this book. It can serve as an introduction into the problems the next generation of Americans will have to face as we determine the course we want our cultural rights to take, but it is also useful for those who already have a firm grounding in issues of arts policy and want a thoughtful look at the current state of affairs.

I gave it 4 instead of 5 stars only because at times, I thought his tone was too passionate and polarizing, at least more than something I would write. But honestly, he's probably got the tone we need to take if we actually want to mobilize people to care about these issues and understand why they affect everyone.

Bill Ivey covers an enormous amount of arts terrain in this thought provoking book. Anyone involved with the arts rarely considers all the facets of the arts and the way in which they intertwine. Ivey, from his unique perspective as former NEA Chairman, is in the position to inform and to a slightly lesser degree offer solutions to some of the larger problems to how greed and neglect have destroyed our cultural rights.

As a music educator, I found his assessment of the historical hierarchical structure of music valuing on target, but felt he could have acknowledged the more recent progress in multicultural music education. The National Association for Music Education developed national standards in the 1990's that have largely been adopted by the states. As written, these national standards have proven to be a vehicle to promote all types of established cultural traditions in music. The correct argument he makes in Arts, Inc. that music education is about "band and choir", is a practice that is slowly changing.

In March I attended the Symposium called "The Importance and Value of Art in Health Care". One of the best speakers was Bill Ivey. Since he was such a good speaker I figured he would be a good writer so I ordered the book he just wrote : Arts, Inc.: How Greed and Neglect Have Destroyed Our Cultural Rights

Conclusion: I disagree with his argument that the government needs to do more to protect the Arts. The book is well written and interesting to read, but I just don't agree with the premise.

The crux of his argument is that he arts need the advocacy of government to protect us from the greed of big business. I just can't accept that. The digital era is starting to liberate artists from being dependent on big business.

Most artists these days have websites to reach the public directly. They don't need the government for that.

Artists now have the tools to produce their own finished product without having to rely on a big studio. Musicians can record and distribute their own CDs. Digital tools (cameras, printers, high-speed Internet) have allowed me to run a thriving art business in a remote rural area.

I would argue that the Arts in America are stronger now than they have ever been. One reason for that is that our government for the most part stays out of the way. If we want to ensure that the Arts in America continues to thrive we just need to be sure the government does nothing other than assure artistic freedom.

Note: when I first wrote this review I gave it two-stars, but that is not fair. The writing is clear, the argument is interesting. Just because I don't agree does not justify such a low rating. I would like to raise this to 4-stars. I tried to revise the post can couldn't.