Public Culture and the Public: a Review Article

DOI10.1177/106591298103400312
AuthorKevin V. Mulcahy
Date01 September 1981
Published date01 September 1981
Subject MatterArticles
PUBLIC
CULTURE
AND
THE
PUBLIC:
A
REVIEW
ARTICLE
KEVIN
V.
MULCAHY
Louisiana
State
University
Coming
to
Our
Senses:
The
Significance
of
the
Arts
for
American
Education.
By
The
Arts,
Education
and
Americans
Panel,
DAVID
ROCKEFELLER,
JR.,
Chairman.
(New
York:
McGraw-Hill,
1977)
Audience
Studies
of
the
Performing
Arts
and
Museums:
A
Critical
Review.
By
PAUL
DIMAG-
GIO,
MICHAEL
USEEM
AND
PAULA
BROWN.
(Washington,
D.C.:
National
En-
dowment
for
the
Arts,
1978)
The
Performing
Arts
and
American
Society.
Edited
by
W.
McNEIL
LOWRY.
(Englewood
Cliffs:
Prentice-Hall,
1978)
The
Ministry
of
Culture.
By
MICHAEL
M.
MOONEY.
(New
York:
Simon
and
Schuster,
1980)
The
Subsidized
Muse:
Public
Support
for
the
Arts
in
the
United
States.
By
DICK
NETZER.
(New
York:
Cambridge
University
Press,
1978)
Twigs for
an
Eagle’s
Nest:
Government
and
the
Arts,
1965-1978.
By
MICHAEL
STRAIGHT.
(Berkeley:
Devon
Books,
1979)
HERE
HAS
BEEN
a
veritable
explosion
of
literature
on
public
policy
and
the
t
arts
in
the
past
five
years.
While
the
effect
of
the
blasts
has
not
exactly
-A-
ignited
a
firestorm
of
interest
among
political
scientists,
students
of
public
policy-making
-
and
public
policy-makers
-
have
become
increasingly
aware
of
public
culture
as
a
political
and
administrative
issue.
What
is
perhaps
politically
most
significant
about
public
culture
is
the
speed
with
which
the
arts
have
become
en-
sconced
in
the
policy-making
process.
Less
than
twenty
years
ago
a
discussion
of
public
support
for
culture
would
have
been
conjectural
or
historical;
public
arts
agencies
today
are
institutionalized
dispensers
of
governmental
patronage.
What
was
once
done
by
churches
and
courts
is
now
done
by
administrative
agencies
in
both
the
United
States
and
Europe.
If
we
do
not
have
a
federal
&dquo;Department
of
Cultural
Affairs,&dquo;
our
network
of
arts
agencies
constitutes
a
cultural
establishment.
The
best-known
of
the
arts
agencies
is
the
National
Endowment
for
the
Arts
(NEA),
which
along
with
its
less-glamorous
sister
agency,
the
National
Endowment
for
the
Humanities
(NEH),
was
established
in
1965.
In
the
late
1960s,
Congress
established
the
Corporation
of
Public
Broadcasting
(CPB)
as
a
conduit
for
federal
funding
to
support
public
radio
and
television.
(CPB,
however,
is
prohibited
from
directly
producing
programming;
that
is
a
job
for
the
Public
Broadcasting
Service
and
its
member
stations.)
NEA,
NEH,
and
CPB
were
each
funded
at
about
$150
million
in
1980
and
together
make
up
the
bulk
of
the
cultural
establishment.
The
federal
government
is
also
involved
with
the
arts
through
lesser-known
agencies
such
as
the
Museum
Services
Institute;
various
programs
supported
by
the
Department
of
Education,
National
Park
Service
and
National
Science
Foundation;
works
commis-
sioned
for
public
buildings
by
the
General
Services
Administration;
the
museum
system
supported
by
the
Smithsonian
Institution;
the
National
Archives
and
Library
of
Congress;
and
the
overseas
cultural
exchanges
sponsored by
the
International
Communication
Agency.
Some
of
the
significance
of
public
involvement
on
artistic
production
can
be
seen
in
two
New
Yorker
cartoons.
One
of
a
few
years
ago
shows
a
writer
being
visited
by
one
of
the
Muses
who
whispers
apologetically;
&dquo;I
don’t
have
any
inspiration
today
but
NOTE:
I
am
indebted
to
my
colleagues
James
Bolner,
Cecil
Eubanks,
and
Adam
Hayward
for
their
help
in
the
preparations
of
this
essay.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT