Context
The arts are “anything made by humans” (Richardson, 1999 p25) that involves skill in creating something “beautiful and/or emotionally moving in its form” and constructed within “a cultural context” (ibid). Berger (1972 p11) identified art as, “beauty, truth, genius, civilisation, form, status and taste”, therefore holding intrinsic and extrinsic value.
Bourdieu defines value or ‘capital’ as “vis insita; a force inscribed in objective or subjective structures, but also lex insita; the principle underlying the immanent regularities of the social world.” (1986, p241). Capital is an asset ‘materialised and embodied’ (ibid, p241) through various capital types. These ‘capitals’ include physical (goods, land); financial (wealth accumulation); social (connections); human (embodied knowledge and labour) and cultural (academic accumulation of culture). Artwork as Adorno (2001) had proclaimed regarding ‘Cultural Industry’ is produced with prescribed value, given by the societal structure, therefore, the value of the arts is bound to its impact.
The arts are forms of goods. Samuelson (1954) categorises ‘goods’ as either ‘private consumption goods’ which are goods transactional among individuals according to utility or as ‘collective consumption goods’ (commonly referred to as ‘public good’), goods commonly enjoyed with the acknowledgement that one’s consumption does not subtract from another’s consumption of such good. In relation to government support of the arts, a state’s degree of influence in the arts is parallel to its political suasion to what type of ‘goods’ the arts are. With socialism, for example, the arts have public influence and proclaimed value, seeing the arts as a ‘Public good’ with value to society as a bearer of knowledge and social cohesion. Its significance aligns with public goods such as security, water and common language. By contrast, liberalism sees art as a ‘private consumption good’ facilitated through ‘cultural industry’. Smith (1776) described the “invisible hand” as the ‘unintended promotion of public good, through the pursuit of one’s own interest’ (p421), with ‘intentional trade for the societal good, doing little to serve its aim’ (ibid, p421). Given such, marketisation contrary to direct support through the State is most effective in maximising societal good. Liberalism since the 1980s has held much political sway in western culture, leading to decreasing state funding for the arts, the “cosmopolitanism tensions between Mono-cultural policy and democracy” (Pratt, 2005 footnote13) and “Cool Capitalism”.
The Arts Value
An effect and impact tracking framework (Bamford 2006) categorises the types of value the arts can provide, and this provides the framework for assessing the degree of government support necessary to provide such value.
1. Personal
Personal value is the value of what makes us intrinsically human, often referred to as ‘Arts for Art’s sake’. Nietzsche contended that art was intrinsic and the true expression of one’s morality with “Art the highest task and the proper metaphysical activity of this life” (1872 p4).
Child psychology and art as therapy highlight the personal importance of the art. Berger stated that “Seeing comes before words. The child looks and recognizes before it can speak” (1972 p7). This declaring that sight is the most human form of communication, and thus the combination of one’s choice to look and art as an engagement with visual stimulus means that the arts are at the core to all we do.
Regards to government support personal value are hard to measure with “only prima facie case for corrective government action” (Throsby, 1994 p23). Therefore, government support of personal value tends to be expressed through assessable channels, such as arts education in schools and subsidised or free access to government-funded arts spaces, museums and public spaces art. Government support of the personal benefits of the arts tends to be concentrated in young children, with the exception of where the arts might be used for therapeutic purposes in health, justice and trauma areas.
2. Social
Kant defines art as “a kind of representation that is purposive in itself and, though without an end, nevertheless promotes the cultivation of the mental powers for sociable communication” (1790 section 44, 46). Art is social through forming the basis of symbolic communication. Furthermore, Habitus as space in which we interact socially and art ‘underlies individual tastes and gives them a particular social logic’ (Bourdieu, 1984. pix). We adjust our aesthetic preferences accordingly to expectations or the ‘social logic’. Art sits within this social dynamic as the critical communicator of taste and thus the paradigm social preferences.
Government support of socially valued arts initiatives is vast, with criteria commonly prioritizing social value highest as a valid reason to support art. Government funding aims to democratize the arts through inclusivity, supporting the micro-habitus of certain social groupings to balance support for the arts. Government funding of the arts disrupts the natural social logic creating homogeneity[6]. Government support of the arts must serve to redress social underrepresentation to help mitigate homogenizing consequences.
3. Cultural
Pluto defines art as “representational (or mimetic as in Pluto’s Republic)” (Hofstadter 1954. p5). The arts are a symbolic measure of expression, communication and remembrance, in other words, culture. According to Bourdieu, the arts have conclusive cultural value as, “the distinctive forms of knowledge and ability one acquires” (1984 pviii). The State apparatus has traditionally supported culture through the arts, with the institutionalisation of cultural celebrations such as museums. It is, however, ideological what culture is presented. The more the State supports the arts, the closer aligned artworks are with politics as a cultural agent of the State apparatus. Becker (1982) stated that external financial support of art can dictate the nature of the work produced, ‘in line with what the giver considers art’(p3).
In Mexico, Diego Riviera was commissioned to produce works reflecting the ‘spirit of Mexico’ - to define a socialist identity away from colonial Spain and the Dictatorship of Porfirio. In doing so, Riviera established the Muralist movement creating patriot public pieces altering the identity of the nation as a political statement. This illustrates the power and politicisation of the arts in curating a new cultural identity. A damaging use of cultural homogenization is emphasized in government funding of the arts in Nazi Germany. Cultural funding increased the power of the arts in the persuasion of beliefs and behaviours through the façade of cultural celebration and social cohesion. Williams argues that advertising is “the official art of modern capitalist society” (1980 p421). Artworks in commercialization work to alter from individual expression to a self-reflection of the consumer, changing the value in which the arts provide, with ideology rather the guide of its value.
Whether funding is ‘good’ for the arts as a cultural agent is questionable. Throsby argues that “market participants hold considerable power. It is not surprising that markets for artworks can show evidence of information asymmetry” (1994 p6). The State is as a powerful actor influencing this pendulum and therefore, government funding should focus support on that which is underrepresented to maintain the balance of cultural influence.
4. Educational
Education is the directing of experiences valued within society, further, the arts are a practice which naturally derives from experience and therefore education incorporates the arts. Art is an output of one’s aesthetics and creativity created through experience, aesthetics for one is seen by Kant (1770) as “Subjected by feelings of pleasure and pain, through which our imagination distinguishes what is beautiful or not through measuring satisfaction” (pp 43-52). Dewey (1934) views creativity as an ‘impulse’ derived from ‘an experience’ as a response to a need to interact with an environment. Such ‘Impulse’ creates the medium for creativity, and in order to cultivate creativity, one must nurture artistic experiences.
Creativity and aesthetics are of value in relation to all other value forms as a critical skill in creating and converting capital across all practices from the visual arts to mathematics to marketing. Creativity and aesthetics are best nurtured within the broad practices of art as it is the natural and most comprehensible manifestation to all. Therefore, the government should support both education in the arts and education through the arts within government funding schooling. In this context, the arts are a tool in creative skill development which are of value to society. Conclusively, the arts as education should receive government support but must maintain playfulness and individual exploration to mitigate homogenization.
5. Ethical
“To enjoy the arts” has been since 1945 considered a Human Right, therefore it is argued the State must ethically provide support of the arts. Ethical funding of the arts may assist an individual’s wellbeing, health and societal engagement. An extreme case of a State’s ethical neglect of the value of the arts was evident in Romanian orphanages in the 1970s. In Romania, 170,000 orphans were discovered crammed into 700 institutions. They were deprived of all beyond the essentials and labour due to pro-natal policies. The results were astonishing regarding a child’s development, with the deprivation of social, creative and emotional needs leading to physiological damage (Sonuga-Barke 2020). Sadly, the Romanian case provides empirical evidence that government policy cannot neglect the importance the arts provides for health and wellbeing. Cohler (1987) argues that the government should support the arts as, ‘children facing adversity are resilient and cope with an innate ego-strength, Creative ability and increased personal and physical attractiveness’.
6. Economic
The economic argument is that funding the arts, builds creativity and future skills. Hobbes once stated “To avoid the excuses of not finding employment. There must be such laws that encourage all manners of arts” (1651 p227). Art is the key to social mobility. One study found that “low-income students do better in arts-rich as opposed to arts-poor schools” (Catterall, 2009 p1) and the enjoyment of the arts can offer economic opportunities for arts producers. Florida (2005) argued that “Art Districts” created by the “creative class” financially develop an area by diversifying the economy and bringing a plethora of industry, attracted by the lifestyle offerings the arts provide. Support in-kind through legislation and tax-breaks facilitate the development of art-districts. By contrast, it is argued that government funding of the arts may have led to social exclusion through gentrification and “Art-washing”.
Fundamentally should a government offer support to arts which has an economic output? No. Commercially viable arts organisation should aim to be sustainable and independent. According to Seaman (1981), ‘Only upon market failure should government intervention be warranted’ and even if then government funded, there must be other benefits such as personal, social or cultural value.
7. Catalytic
Catalytic impact relates to what society would lose if the arts are not funded. The arts can have life-changing possibilities. The creativity arts practice facilitates is primordial in the development of catalytic change, which without support may be missed. For example, Leonardo Da Vinci, without his creativity through arts during the Renaissance, would not have conceptualised the advancements made without creative experimentation. A contemporary example would be the “Billie Elliot Effect” where without government arts support the talent would not have been discovered. Governments should, therefore, support the arts as a way to encourage and facilitate open discussions of complex and/or imaginative concepts through the medium of art, as a facilitator of advancement and excellence.
8. Negative loss
Negative loss refers to the idea that if the arts are not funded there may be costly consequences. The theory is that without government-supported arts, society would be worse off. This concurs with the so-called ‘Broken windows theory’ within criminology, which argues that neighbourhoods left to degrade (illustrated through the number of broken windows) represent a cycle of neglect and as a result the self-fulfilling prophecy becoming cultural. Kelling (1997) argued that governments through neighbourhood upkeep can reduce levels of criminality and risk upon police offices, as well as increase community cohesion and pride. Art through creating aesthetic value is part of the fix to the ‘broken windows dilemma’, by increasing people’s sense of self-value. What might happen if you do not fund the arts may provide a powerful argument for government support of the arts as a facilitator of lowering criminality, depression and fear, through breaking the cycle of deprivation.
Conclusion
Arts provide good to society. Government support is a necessity for many arts programmes providing a range of positive effects and impacts. Continued support of the arts is important, but ‘Government funding often clouded as public arts expenditures often reflect private gains accruing to the median voter group’ (Seaman 1981 p1), illustrating the arts as apparatus in upholding ideology. Governments must, therefore, take a data-driven approach in targeting arts funding the underrepresented and by devolving decision-making to the community and individual which it aims to support.
image source: https://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/blog/how-arts-can-help-improve-your-mental-health
Bibliography
Adorno, T.W (2001). “The culture industry: Selected essays on mass culture”. Psychology Press.
Bamford, A and Glinkowski, P (2006). “Impact Evaluation of Wider Opportunities Programme in Music at Key Stage Two.” The Federation of Music Services. Available at: http://www.lancsngfl.ac.uk/curriculum/music/download/file/Wider%20Opportunities/Wow%20Its%20Music%20Excecutive%20Summary.pdf (Accessed 25th March 2020)
Baumol, W (2020). “Application of welfare economics to the arts”. In Handbook of Cultural Economics, Third Edition. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Becker, H.S (1982). Art worlds: updated and expanded. University of California Press 2008.
Berger, J (1972). “Ways of Seeing”. London, Penguin.
Bourdieu, P (1984). “Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste”. Harvard university press.
Bourdieu, P (1986). “The Forms of Capital”. Pp. 241-258 in Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, edited by J. G. Richardson. New York: Greenwood Press.
Catterall, J (2009). “Doing Well and Doing Good by Doing Art: The Effects of Education in the Visual and Performing Arts on the Achievements and Values of Young Adults”. Los Angeles/London: Imagination Group/IGroup Books.
Cohler, B.J. (1987). “The invulnerable child”. Guilford Press.
Dewey, J (1934). “Art as experience”. New York: Minton, Balch, and Company.
Dewey, J (1910). “How We Think”. Boston: D-C Health.
Florida, R., 2005. “Cities and the creative class”. Routledge.
Hobbes, T. (1651) “Leviathan”. Oxford Blackwell 46
Hofstadter, A and Kuhns, R (1954). “Philosophies of Art & Beauty”: Selected Readings in Aesthetics from Plato to Heidegger. The University of Oxford Press.
Lewis J (1990). “Art, Culture and Enterprise: The Politics of Art and the Cultural Industries”. London: Routledge
Kant, I (1790). “Kant's Critique of judgement”. Createspace Independent Publishing Platform.
Kelling, G (1997). “Fixing broken windows: Restoring order and reducing crime in our communities”. Simon and Schuster.
McGuigan, J (2009). “Cool Capitalism”. London: Pluto Press.
Neitzche, F. (1872) “The Birth of Tragedy from the Spirit of Music”. Available at: http://www.russoeconomics.altervista.org/Nietzsche.pdf [Accessed 02/05/2020]
Pratt, A (2005). “Cultural industries and public policy”. International journal of cultural policy, 11 (1). pp. 31-44.
Richardson, D. (1999). “The Concept of Art”. Australian Art Education 21(3): 24-27.
Samuelson, P. (1954). “The pure theory of public expenditure”. The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 387-389.
Seaman, B (1981). “Economic Theory and the Positive Economics of Arts Financing”. The American Economic Review, Vol. 71, No. 2, Papers and Proceedings of the Ninety-Third Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association, pp. 335- 340. American Economic Association
Shneiderman, B (2019). “Leonardo da Vinci showed how art can advance scientific progress”. https://qz.com/quartzy/1595802/leonardo-da-vinci-showed-how-art-can-advance-scientific-progress/
Smith, A., (1776). “The Wealth of Nations”.
Sonuga-Barke, E. (2020). “Early childhood deprivation is associated with alterations in adult brain structure despite subsequent environmental enrichment”. New York: Columbia University Press.
Silva, K (2014). “Romania’s lost generation: Inside the iron curtain”. Available at: https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/allinthemind/inside-the-iron-curtain%E2%80%99s-orphanages/5543388 [Accessed 30/04/2020]
Throsby, D (1994). “The Production and Consumption of the Arts: A View of Cultural Economics”. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 1-29 Published by: American Economic Association
United Nations (1948). “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)”. Available at: file:///C:/eng.pdf [Accessed 23/04/2020]
Williams, R (1980). “Advertising: The magic system. In Problems in Materialism and Culture”. London: Verso, 170–195.
[1]With modernism, came the industrialisation and commodification of the arts-work under the umbrella term ‘cultural industry’.
[2]Merchandise or possessions.
[3]The title of the 2009 book by Jim McGuigan. It encapsulates the trend towards a commercially viable and populist arts, amplifying aesthetic value in creation of economic value.
[4]http://www.lancsngfl.ac.uk/curriculum/music/download/file/Wider%20Opportunities/Wow%20Its%20Music%20Excecutive%20Summary.pdf
[5] accepted as correct until proved otherwise
[6]Homogeneity means the state in which all are of the same kind.
[7] https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/allinthemind/inside-the-iron-curtain%E2%80%99s-orphanages/5543388
[8]Government policy designed to increase birth/fertility rate in specify area.
[9] https://www.pnas.org/content/117/1/641
[10]Using art as façade for social cleansing and gentrification. https://www.artsprofessional.co.uk/magazine/good-read/artwashing