one percent -- but who’s counting

Most would agree that one percent of the population controlling fifty percent of the wealth leads to unfortunate outcomes for everyone else, and there are significant, rational reasons why, plus lots of evidence. All progressives know the drill. Actually such imbalances don’t benefit anyone entirely, since some humanity must be lost looking out through bullet-proof glass, just guessing. Anyway, that’s a conversation about the distribution of money and here we care more about art. 

So what percentage do you suppose feels the benefit of NEA largesse? Now, of course, its administrators claim paternal concern for everyone, determined to lift the eyes of pagan sports lovers to finer aspirations, so how’s that been going for ya? Contemporary art will never appeal to the masses, either over their heads or below their attention spans, either way, it’s a small audience that actually tunes in. Are they superior intellectually, but of course, but more than that, they’re totally up to date, in good standing with an international elite, even if a grad student living in a rented flat with posters on the wall. The ultra rich will be on board, simply attracted by the notion of exclusion, and they don’t really care what it looks like.

It never turns out well, a small percentage of the population determining priorities, values, and goals for everybody. Incentives quickly turn rancid and myopic self-interest leads to abuse -- it’s built in. I don’t know the numbers but have noticed signs. Progressive non-profit galleries are spooky quiet during the week, the person on desk duty seems startled when you enter, and the museum at the U is newly admission-free so they don’t have to report meager door revenues. Awards and notoriety require peer group certification, a case of career ticket-punchers recognizing their own. Could the same crew sipping wine at all the openings represent one percent of the population hereabouts, maybe one percent of one percent, and not sure they ever buy art, in any case.

No need to despair, just pivot in place and rebel against the machine that made you, oh arts councils everywhere. Change today. Serve the population, instead of seeking the approval of cultural overlords doling out the grant money from on high. Resist selecting art for your galleries as though you were giving grades for a mid-term review over at the school. Doing so limits your penetration into your community and stifles your impact. It erodes your relevance even as you wheedle for more public money. Present instead thematic exhibitions with enough direct, accessible representation to be appealing to the people who help you pave the parking lot, who cover your overhead. Give up your pretense of elevating taste, that sacred mission, and seek compromise with a community ready to embrace area art production, with an active interest in independent studios and in need of public gallery space to become familiar their own artists.