Americans for the Arts

There is generally a perception that the arts are a progressive, forward-thinking sector. The attention to racial equity by many arts and cultural institutions may contribute to this. However, in local, state, and federal arts agencies, we’re often bound to the policies and practices largely created and upheld by white people—and far from progressive.

While working in the public sector for much of my arts administration career, I have been complicit in adhering to largely inequitable practices—especially when it comes to grant funding. And while my fellow public sector arts administrators and I get excited by moving the needle—even just a little—to make our policies and practices more equitable, we’re still not addressing the core structures that created these inequities in the first place. We focus our attention on moving the needle within these structures, but hasn’t history shown us that these structures don’t (and won’t) work to get us to a more equitable reality?

A typically fundamental part of working at a state arts agency involves grant administration, with review panelists coming together to adjudicate grant applications. During a recent grant review panel I facilitated, one of the panelists shared a quote to set the tone to some of our discussion:

“Radical simply means ‘grasping things at the root’.” —Dr. Angela Davis

Though this quote was shared with the intention of rethinking how we were reviewing concepts presented in our grant applications, it resonated with other feelings I’ve had toward my work, and broadly with government arts funding. There are so many root issues that cause inequities in funding the arts and cultural sector, but instead of changing those root issues, we’re merely adding Band-Aids to gaping wounds. As creatives, we’re usually thinking “outside the box.” And even when we’re good at thinking outside the box, the problem is that we’re still working within the box. Why aren’t we examining where these boxes are coming from?

If the public sector arts field were truly committed to changing, a short history lesson to see how our policies and practices contribute to inequities today is recommended. Legacy policies like threshold funding based on revenue; historical funding practices (funding based on an organization’s history of receiving funding from an agency); required matching funds; written grant applications; imbalance of project vs. general operating funding; only (or predominantly) funding incorporated non-profit organizations; deadlines; and third-party data reporting requirements are structures supporting white-created systems that maintain this box we’re thinking outside of, but working within. We need to reevaluate the root of our systems if we’re going to make meaningful change.

So, in shaping the future of arts sector, specifically the public sector, what policies and practices should we examine, indigenize, and radicalize? My answer would be all of them. Even the practice of requiring grantees to send “thank you” letters to their elected representatives. I’m all for demonstrations of gratitude, but doesn’t this seem a little patronizing and patriarchal?

Amidst our over-worked, under-paid, creative, public service selves, I hope we can make some time for deep reflection, and start grasping some of our deep-seated issues at the root. Because there’s no time like the present, and actions speak louder than words.

This post is part of the Own Your Past, Shape Your Future blog salon.