Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×

44th US President - Arts & Culture Policy?


Recommended Posts

Wikipedia puts the date of SLC going coed at 1968 and Rahm's birth as (late) November 1959, so it had been coed for quite a while already when he arrived.

Editing to add: The college's homepage has a little boast for its alum.

Edited by carbro
Link to post

I just caught an item on Nightline -- a 2005 charity roast in which Sen. Obama notes the usefulness of ballet training in Rahm's political career: "He learned to leap, he learned to spin, and he learned to splay his feet to the left and to the right so no one knows which direction he's heading in."

All you future politicians, take heed.

Link to post
I just caught an item on Nightline -- a 2005 charity roast in which Sen. Obama notes the usefulness of ballet training in Rahm's political career: "He learned to leap, he learned to spin, and he learned to splay his feet to the left and to the right so no one knows which direction he's heading in."

I wish I could remember the other dance references during the roast, but I was laughing too hard at all the other lines. The whole roast can be seen here on C-Span.

Link to post
I am TRULY looking forward to the return to US touring for the National Ballet of Cuba. I was there for those precious-few performances ca-1978. It would be great if Mme Alonso could be welcomed back to her US home during her lifetime.

Thanks Natalia for those welcoming words to my homeland company.

Link to post
I just caught an item on Nightline -- a 2005 charity roast in which Sen. Obama notes the usefulness of ballet training in Rahm's political career: "He learned to leap, he learned to spin, and he learned to splay his feet to the left and to the right so no one knows which direction he's heading in."

MSNBC just showed a clip from the roast, with Obama saying that Emanuel trained in ballet and "was the first to adopt Machiaveli's The Prince for dance. It was an intriguing piece; as you can imagine, there were a lot of kicks below the waist." :pinch:

Link to post
I just caught an item on Nightline -- a 2005 charity roast in which Sen. Obama notes the usefulness of ballet training in Rahm's political career: "He learned to leap, he learned to spin, and he learned to splay his feet to the left and to the right so no one knows which direction he's heading in."

MSNBC just showed a clip from the roast, with Obama saying that Emanuel trained in ballet and "was the first to adopt Machiaveli's The Prince for dance. It was an intriguing piece; as you can imagine, there were a lot of kicks below the waist." :pinch:

Oh dear lord.

Link to post
I just caught an item on Nightline -- a 2005 charity roast in which Sen. Obama notes the usefulness of ballet training in Rahm's political career: "He learned to leap, he learned to spin, and he learned to splay his feet to the left and to the right so no one knows which direction he's heading in."

MSNBC just showed a clip from the roast, with Obama saying that Emanuel trained in ballet and "was the first to adopt Machiaveli's The Prince for dance. It was an intriguing piece; as you can imagine, there were a lot of kicks below the waist." :wink:

A President who reads! Who uses ballet metaphors. Who reads Machiavelli!!! It all sounds suspiciously "elitest" to me. :pinch:
Link to post
I don't know how to confirm this, but I have been told that both of his daughters are enrolled in ballet classes.

During the primaries Obama mentioned on the Letterman show that he would be attending his daughter's ballet recital.

Link to post
I just caught an item on Nightline -- a 2005 charity roast in which Sen. Obama notes the usefulness of ballet training in Rahm's political career: "He learned to leap, he learned to spin, and he learned to splay his feet to the left and to the right so no one knows which direction he's heading in."

MSNBC just showed a clip from the roast, with Obama saying that Emanuel trained in ballet and "was the first to adopt Machiaveli's The Prince for dance. It was an intriguing piece; as you can imagine, there were a lot of kicks below the waist." :wink:

A President who reads! Who uses ballet metaphors. Who reads Machiavelli!!! It all sounds suspiciously "elitest" to me. :pinch:

Machiavelli's "The Prince" !. Wow, wow, wow,,,A favorite Castro's. I hope a different understanding of its whole concept, seriously...

Link to post
I just caught an item on Nightline -- a 2005 charity roast in which Sen. Obama notes the usefulness of ballet training in Rahm's political career: "He learned to leap, he learned to spin, and he learned to splay his feet to the left and to the right so no one knows which direction he's heading in."

MSNBC just showed a clip from the roast, with Obama saying that Emanuel trained in ballet and "was the first to adopt Machiaveli's The Prince for dance. It was an intriguing piece; as you can imagine, there were a lot of kicks below the waist." :wink:

A President who reads! Who uses ballet metaphors. Who reads Machiavelli!!! It all sounds suspiciously "elitest" to me. :pinch:

Machiavelli's "The Prince" !. Wow, wow, wow,,,A favorite Castro's. I hope a different understanding of its whole concept, seriously...

Oh, no, they've all read that one, even if they haven't. Maybe Carter didn't read it, but the rest did, or got someone else to, e.g., in the outgoing administration, it's almost unimaginable that Cheney hasn't many dog-eared copies of that, as well as maybe even some German tomes, and inform on Marx as well. I'd be startled if Obama hadn't read Machiavelli and much else, and mainly think we'll begin to see a culture that is more like the big ferment that ended with the 70s, and that I'd given up on. Everything points to a less superficial attitude to almost everything--more substantial, less virtual--so that will include art and culture, which has had some great moments since the beginning of the 80s, but a dreadful general collapse IMO.

Link to post

Many children, usually daughters, natch, of yuppie families do take ballet lessons at one point or another. Chelsea Clinton studied ballet for some years and is still active on its behalf.

And of course, there's Ron Reagan.

Link to post

Thanks, Old Fashioned. I knew things were bad, but I admit that I responded with :flowers: when I read that the annual budget for the National Endowment for the Arts here in the U.S. is $144.7 million. The annual budget of the Ministry of Culture in France (a country with about 1/5 the population of the U.S.) is $3.75 billion. i realize that much of the French budge goes to administrative costs ... but, nevertheless .... it's a staggering example of different priorities.

What do you think? Given that Obama has inherited an economic catastrophe and world-wide money crisis, what in specific terms should he do to "stimulate the economy" in the area of the arts?

Link to post

With some voices calling for big, new public works programs, I hope someone remembers the legacy, which remains so rich, of the WPA. Locally, New York City has long regarded its arts as an important part of its economic engine. It's difficult, though, when one faced with large budget deficits to maintain generous cultural appropriations if it means taking from our hospitals, schools or uniformed services.

Link to post

Thanks for the link, Old Fashioned. Good to hear from you. I'm sure the Administration will do something for the arts, but I fear in the current environment - the news gets worse every day - it will be low on the list of priorities.

Symbolic gestures can help too, of course. I don't think that his fabled White House concert netted that many new listeners for Pablo Casals, but I'm sure it made him and musicians feel good (and their listeners also). President Kennedy's public commitment to high culture was a Good Thing even if he was also looking to put some gloss on his administration and his own taste leaned toward show tunes.

Link to post

Does anyone know about what the average taxes are people pay in, say, France, as opposed to the US?

I have the impression that at least those who earn fairly well pay more taxes here (Germany) than in the US, and that tax money also goes to things such as theaters, etc.

I have nothing against taxes, especially if they are used for things more than just weapons....

-d-

Link to post

A bit of good news: http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/...illion-for-nea/

Let's see if it will make it through the Senate (apparently it's not included in the Senate version?). It may ultimately get pulled out or reduced to appease the opposition. Even with this addition, it's still far less than the budget that the Ministry of Culture in France gets, as someone pointed out earlier. But it's still something.

Symbolic gestures may be all that's left. The new administration's Social Secretary Desiree Rogers mentioned redecorating the White House to represent a broader range of American culture. I was somewhat disheartened that the Inaugural Concert and Inauguration didn't include a wider range of musicians and singers outside the mainstream. After years of country music stars, I was hoping this president would bring in some jazz musicians (I know he listens to some of the giants like Miles and 'Trane). After all, many had campaigned and performed on his behalf. I would have loved to see Dianne Reeves. I realize every move can't please everybody, but the concert could have been better. :dunno:

Link to post
Does anyone know about what the average taxes are people pay in, say, France, as opposed to the US?

I have the impression that at least those who earn fairly well pay more taxes here (Germany) than in the US, and that tax money also goes to things such as theaters, etc.

I have nothing against taxes, especially if they are used for things more than just weapons....

-d-

Actually I think the comparison would be a bit difficult to do, as there are a lot of different taxes and they depend a lot on people's situation (e.g. how much they earn, whether they own a home, in which town they live, etc.): for example, I think that I've read that on the average, the income tax often is lower in France than in the US (in the French system, taxes generally are much lower for the people who have children, for example, so a lot of families pay no income tax or very little, and also a lot of children-related expenses can be deduced from one's taxes), on the other hand the taxes on gasoline are much, much higher, also the VAT is quite high, there are some indirect taxes ("cotisations sociales") which are used for the state health care and pension system, there are some local taxes which vary a lot depending on the city, etc. So I guess a comparison would be difficult.

In terms of public money spent for culture, the budget of the ministery of Culture is quite high, on the other hand private sponsorship probably is much lower than in the US (there isn't much of a tradition of philanthropy, and not many foundations.... And most wealthy people would probably be more likely to spend their money buying paintings or sculptures or restoring old monuments rather than sponsoring performing arts...)

Link to post

I agree that it's almost impossible to compare tax systems -- without a lot of variables, adjustments and footnotes, at least. In the U.S. this is compounded by significant variations among the tax systems of the 50 states.

I checked my handly Pocket World in Figures (2008), published by The Economist. They did not even attempt to compile an international comparison of taxation.

In support of Estelle's point about the ratio of state versus private spending on the arts, here's something from an Economist article published in 2001:

In America, the arts are—and always have been—almost wholly privately funded. Supporters of the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) occasionally suggest that the American government's support for the arts is embarrassingly meagre—pointing out, for example, that the shipping costs for Operation Desert Storm alone could have funded the NEA for more than a century. But the absence of state intervention, combined with a helpful tax regime, are what have made the arts in America so self-reliant.

This is also the reason why the culture of philanthropy—with its rich trustees, its giving circles, its endowment funds and its professional fund-raising advisers—is so strong there. Generous donors who become trustees of arts or other non-profit organisations are expected to work in America by giving more money themselves, roping in their friends and buying whole tables at benefit evenings, all in a spirit of what is often described in philanthropic circles as “Give, get, or get off.”

Europeans, who are accustomed to a different way of supporting the arts, may find this bewildering and even crass. But they are getting used to it. Accurate figures on the scale and growth of non-state funding for the arts in Europe are still hard to get, but anecdotal evidence suggests that fund-raising is expanding. Moreover, it is developing according to a recognisable pattern: state subsidies are cut back and are replaced by corporate sponsorship, which in turn gives way, to a greater or lesser degree, to private funding. In some places, private giving is growing much faster than corporate sponsorship.

I suspect we would do better in the U.S. pushing for more spending on arts education than for subsidies to arts organizations.

Link to post

Here's what Senator McCaskill has to say on the subject:

We do need to look at the safety net side of the stimulus bill that can get into the economy quickly. But we can't right every wrong in terms of programs we support in the stimulus bill. And the other thing is, whether it is the National Endowment of the Arts or some of the STD funding or contraceptive funding, all we did was just tee up ammunition for the other side to tear this thing down. And I would like to think we are smarter than that. I'm hopeful on the Senate side we will be smarter than that.
Link to post

That means they’re going to cave, probably. It’s not impossible that there will be meaningful funding in the future, but the same objections can quite easily be raised again. The point McCaskill and her allegedly smarter colleagues are missing is that funding to arts organizations and individuals can and does put people to work or keep them gainfully employed. (This also applies to some of the other items you quote her as mentioning, but that’s a discussion for another board.) The Federal Arts Project was part of Roosevelt’s WPA and thousands of talented artists went to work on paintings and murals, mostly in government buildings, to cite only one example. We are also talking about a very small amount of money, in relative terms, that can be put to use quickly and productively. She's wrong on policy (and wrong on tactics, too, but that again is a subject for another board).

Thanks for keeping us updated, Old Fashioned.

Link to post
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...