Revisiting “Art Rebate” 1996

An Artist Looks At National Funding And Its Impact On Communities

Originally written and published in 1996
by Aida Mancillas*


In 1996 a group of neighbors gathered to talk about strategies for preserving the unique histories of some of North Park’s oldest residents. Many in the group were long time community residents and activists; some came as representatives of the adjacent neighborhoods of Burlingame and University Heights; others, were relative newcomers to the older, midtown neighborhood. Like the district at large we represented a variety of backgrounds, age groups, interests, and political and personal beliefs. Yet we came together to work toward a common goal: to strengthen the vitality of the North Park community of San Diego and encourage a renewal of civic life through preservation of our historic and cultural resources.
Present at the meeting was Mr. Ralph Lewin, at that time head of the San Diego office for the California Council for the Humanities, who gave us an overview of what the council does working in partnership with communities. There was a great deal of discussion that evening about how the arts and humanities could be utilized to bring the oral history of North Park to a community audience. The North Park oral history project might continue in the spirit of CCH’s successful “Searching for San Diego” project. That series recognized the need for San Diegans, often isolated from their neighbors, to get to know one another. Five selected neighborhoods participated in discussions led by humanities scholars, took history tours, shared foods and learned about the larger history of San Diego. A culminating public lecture by noted author N. Scott Momaday on “a sense of place” attracted 500 people. With the “Searching for San Diego” project serving as a possible model, ideas and examples were tossed around the Covington’s living room, generating both excitement and an awareness of the enormity of the work ahead. Still, we came away from that pleasant evening with a sense of what is possible and how the council might work with us to develop and fund a strong community project.
On any given day, throughout the nation in our common meeting spaces, thoughtful citizens meet to propose programs and events which address the needs of the community through the arts and humanities. In San Diego the results of those programs are all around us, thanks to the hard work of community members, artists, scholars, writers, librarians, dancers, museums and cultural centers, actors, business owners, poets, musicians and social service organizations. North Park has been blessed with neighbors who for many years have collected information on the history and architecture of the district, preserving what might have been lost and serving as informal resources and mentors for a new generation of residents. Many artists (both visual and performing), architects, and other design professionals now call North Park home, and we have begun to see the visual arts playing an important role in the revitalization of the community. Recent efforts to include public art in the North Park redevelopment plan, and to designate capital improvement projects as sites for public art have been successful. Artists, designers, and architects have been meeting and working informally or with community organizations to discuss ways of bringing back the commercial shopping district. One senses that the renaissance of North Park is just around the corner.
Community building through the arts and humanities is funded through a variety of formal and informal collaborative efforts. Residents might donate time and supplies for a community event, or they might appeal to community groups for funding. Often the city will provide matching grants for community projects, or a city department will undertake a local event. However, the bulk of the funding for these programs, nationally and locally, is generated by the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities, their financial assistance to the state art and humanities councils, and locally through grants to agencies like the City of San Diego Commission for Arts and Culture. In San Diego county the combined contribution of the NEA and NEH is approximately $2.2 million dollars. These dollars are matched by their recipients, and generate revenue for state and local government, as well as generating 3,000 full time employment positions in San Diego County in the visual arts alone.
Over the years the arts and humanities have proven themselves to be strong contributors to the local economy, providing not only opportunities for education and entertainment, but helping engender the success of other, non-arts related businesses. Local examples of this can be seen in the downtown Gaslamp Quarter, where a strong street culture has been sustained by the various theaters and performance halls located in the area. Not only does a visitor pay an admission fee to a performance or arts center, he or she will normally also pay for parking, for a good meal, perhaps dash into a boutique, and finish up with coffee and dessert. Federal and state arts money can generate resources far beyond individual or organizational grants, pushing money into the local economy.
In 1994 the NEH and CCH funded programs in education with grants to the Oceanside Unified School District and San Diego City Schools. Money went to San Diego State University for teacher training seminars in the humanities. CCH moneys also went to such diverse groups as the Japanese American Historical Society of San Diego, the San Diego Public Library, Centro Cultural de la Raza, the San Diego Museum of Man, and the Museum of Photographic Arts to name but a few. Locally the NEA and its state affiliate, the California Arts Council, supported programs in the city’s museums, performance halls and cultural centers, as well as local universities and public schools, and the city arts commission. Artist residency programs, funded through the CAC, have been responsible for after school arts programming throughout the city and county, programming for seniors, community center activities, poets in the schools, traveling storytellers, ethnic dance and musical performances, poetry readings, dance workshops and a myriad of other arts and humanities activities directly available to the community. Artists acting in partnership with communities have enriched the lives of thousands of urban and rural citizens since the inception of the NEA and NEH nearly 30 years ago.
In recent years the NEA and NEH, as well as the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the Institute for Museum Services, have come under increasing attack from individuals and political groups whose vision of the American experience represents a rigid and narrow ideology. Calling for the elimination of these organizations, the opponents of the NEA and NEH (as well as CPB and IMS) label them elitist, frivolous, an affront to the Constitution, dangerous, and representing values outside mainstream America. The so called “cultural war” that began in earnest during the last presidential election (Bush/Reagan/Buchanon on to today's shock jocks and Bush/Cheney) threatens to rob communities not only of the cultural and educational resources which are our common national heritage, but also of the tools by which we may build and strengthen our communities.
Much has been written recently about the few cases of funding for “controversial” art and the inclusion of the historic and literary contributions of minority groups in suggested teaching guides. The debate is bitter, laced with acrimony, and ultimately destructive to our national cohesiveness and well being. The NEA has, in its thirty year history, funded thousands of well received programs, artist/community partnerships, institutions, and special projects. The NEH has expanded our knowledge of the history and literature which is uniquely American. Yet momentum is gaining to seriously decrease or deny funding to our national cultural administrative organizations. To advocate elimination of the institutions which help us preserve and disseminate our complex common cultural heritage, simply because there is some aspect of their funding with which we disagree, is more than “throwing out the baby with the bath water;” it is throwing out the sink, the plumbing, the bathroom and burning down the house!
As a representative of the arts, I am often pressed with protests by community members (as well as friends and family) about “controversial art,” such as the recent piece done by a local artist in which he gave away ten dollar bills to undocumented workers. The issue of illegal immigration is a serious one here on the border. Good people find themselves on different sides of the problem, confronted with the enormous complexity of the economics driving the problem, with issues of human rights and equity, with dwindling state resources, and national fears about race and class. The “Art Rebate” piece failed to raise any of these essential questions. In fact, it never intended to do so. Instead, it was designed to gain maximum exposure for the artist, which it accomplished quite neatly. National opponents of arts and humanities funding seized upon this work as yet another example of art which was outside “mainstream” American values, clamoring for the elimination of the National Endowment for the Arts which indirectly gave a small grant (around $750.00 ) to the artist, David Avalos through the San Diego Museum of Contemporary Art. The ruckus raised allowed a number of local and national politicians to increase their public exposure, as artist institution, and radio shock jocks gave interviews and made pronouncements designed for their media “soundbite” qualities rather than a calm assessment of the merits and weaknesses of the work itself. The distinction between an artist bent on achieving notoriety and public figures eager to stand in front of the media to denounce artists was a slim one indeed. In such cases artists and politicians prove to be two sides of the same coin.
We are fortunate indeed to live in a country where the free exchange of ideas and opinions has been the very foundation of our national structure. Freedom, however, carries with it responsibility; to be careful and reasoned in our public discourse. The “us vs. them” mentality which pervades our national dialogue continues to erode America’s most cherished values: democracy, consensus, tolerance and diversity. Ideas in the public sphere are meant to be tested; to challenge our preconceptions at times; to generate better, more comprehensive ideas; or perhaps, ultimately, confirm our long held beliefs. “Art Rebate” failed as a generator of ideas. Its concept and execution were slim, and many in the arts community refused to defend it, seeing it as exploitive of the lives of the people it purported to illuminate. It hardly deserved the attention it garnered and certainly should not have posed any destabilizing effect on the NEA. Without the superheated rhetoric of the “cultural war” that seems to have taken possession of our national discourse, “Art Rebate” would have suffered the fate of other poor artworks: it would have sunk into oblivion.
It is clear that public funding for the arts, humanities, public broadcasting and museums cannot survive in the present atmosphere of intolerance. The repercussions of the constant assault on the arts and humanities can only result in a tepid, homogeneous version of the arts and arts programming, as artists and organizations shy away from the challenging, the experimental, the overlooked and, yes, even the outrageous. The arts and humanities are, at their best, a deeper look into the everyday; a search for connections among disparate ideas, realities, objects or media; a presentation of some small truth meant to illuminate; a recitation of joy and beauty; a presentation of life’s pain; an agent of empowerment and community building.
The arts and humanities are not about mass entertainment, yet they are also not elitist. Last year more people attended galleries, museums, the opera, symphony, dance performances, lectures, cultural arts festivals, jazz festivals, and other arts related events than voted in the last election. The New York Times recently reported that in 1992, 41% of the American population attended a live performance or exhibition at least once, while in the same year only 37% of the public attended a sports event.
Individual Americans pay 67 cents and 70 cents per year, respectively, to the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities for their funding. The annual budgets of each of these organizations is less than what the country spends on military marching bands. Indeed, the total yearly budget for the National Endowment for the Humanities is less than the allotment for the Marine Corps Band. Every nickel funded on the state and local level is matched by local contribution or volunteer service. With all the discussion about “privatization” and “paying your own way,” the arts and humanities are a shining example of the impact of responsible government funding on the quality of American life.
As North Park residents look around their neighborhood and meet with new and old neighbors alike, they will discover the many efforts underway to rebuild our community. These efforts include not only the physical and economic restoration of our residential and commercial areas, but also the sense of public life. The arts and humanities are a useful and necessary tool which can be applied to this restoration process. In our collective work we will need the assistance of programs like the National Endowment for the Arts, and the National Endowment for the Humanities. Their support is vital to the people of North Park, and Americans across the country, to claim the intellectual and cultural heritage which is uniquely ours.


* Aida Mancillas is a public artist living and working in San Diego.

March 5, 1996

The importance of Elitism in the Arts (and why everyday folks should demand it)

By Aida Mancillas

Those of us who advocate for the arts here in San Diego and elsewhere have not been exactly candid with the powers who shape the budgets we live and die by, or the average citizen who wants to know where his or her tax dollars are going, why his trees aren’t trimmed, and why the potholes in front of her house remain unfilled.

We arts advocates have made a good case for why the arts are an economic engine; why visitors stay in San Diego longer and spend more money when they are also drawn to arts & culture experiences when they visit here. We do it by hiding, however, the fact that we ARE elitist. We do sometimes give off the sense that WE know what’s best, with an artspeak that can seem dense or undecipherable. The general public can only react to this with anger. “You think I’m not as smart as you,” is how it goes. Or worse, “you’re trying to pull a fast one.” No one wants to feel this disrespect, even if it’s unintended. Being a populist is a much easier position. You get to be the “good guy: non- threatening and unobtrusive like everyone else.

So, in the interest of plain speak, WE IN THE ARTS ARE ELITIST, or more accurately we have a high level of expertise that comes via years of training and practice and it’s important that we maintain that level of what is erroneously characterized as excluding or exclusive.. Here’s why:

In any given arena, from the arts to sports, to medicine, engineering, or any professional field, we owe it to ourselves, our city and our region to demand excellence, practice it, and reject mediocrity. There is enough that is mediocre to bury our vibrancy as an innovative, inspiring, risk-taking city, region and environment.

I want to be able to sit in the Encanto, or Scripps Ranch, or San Ysidro, or North Park, or Golden Hill or Barrio Logan library or rec. center and find myself in conversation with the next Maya Angelou, Sandra Cisneros, Pablo Neruda, James Baldwin, Spike Lee, Sydney Bechet, Paul Robeson, Wilfredo Lam, and a host of other great Americans that open us to a wider and deeper experience of American life and life in general. The arts provide the place for the exchange to happen and we need that meeting ground so that new understanding and arts and culture forms can take shape. I want and need the excellence of these new artists-becoming. We all need them to help us shape our collective American experience; something that brings us together as one people rather than separated as The Blue States' people and The Red States' people. The arts are one of the few things that can do this. Just recall the genius of Maya Angelou and her presidential inaugural poem. Who didn’t feel the power of that brief address, or more collectively American at its end?

In those libraries and coffee shops or houses where young people gather they are throwing each other soft looks, risking asking about what the other is working on, what music they’re listening to. Next thing you know there is a connection, and lumpia and collard greens and menudo get tossed together. Who knew it would be so unexpectedly delicious, or at least complex and interesting? Let us support that American genius for innovation, observation, and “why not” can- do attitude. Let’s support curiosity and freedom by claiming our own elitism and supporting everyone’s right to the finest arts & culture we can provide or produce.

Aida Mancillas
April 16, 2007