• Kebo Drew

    This is true of San Francisco, San Antonio and other cities. It is a question of city government funneling tax funds into cultural organizations deemed “high art”, representing western European cultural forms (we’ll leave the discussion of ballet’s origins to the side for the moment) enjoyed by the elite, which are also losing audiences (see RAND, NEA, and many more studies), vs other art forms, some traditional and others not, which are deemed “less than” because they represent and are relevant to communities that are a part of demographic change. So where is the money going to go? To “big box” opera, ballet, symphony, museum, etc. to become more appealing and “diverse” (usually one off programs for so-called “underserved” populations)? Or to organizations that are run by, for and about the communities they serve, whether it’s through more “elite” art forms (Dance Theatre of Harlem comes to mind) or traditional (many pow wows) or other kinds of art? That is the issue at hand, always. And those organizations that pretend that art is somehow apolitical (the poem “apolitical intellecutals” by Otto Rene Castillo comes to mind) are making a political statement in and of themselves. They are also denying the power of art as “cultural resistance, cultural resilience, cultural renewal” its ability to address legacies of
    inequity, inequality and injustice” (QWOCMAP) and its role in social movements of the past 500 years, especially in this hemisphere. So where do we want our money to go?

    • Martin D Robbins

      The S in SCFD stands for science. Three of the Big 5 are science-based organizations. Many of the smaller organizations are also science not art based. Please do not further the myth that this is a

    • Kebo Drew

      Will refer people to Neil deGrasse Tyson on science and whether science-based organizations have learned to be relevant.