Neoliberalism and Art Institutions

[Jimmie Higgins]

Broad Collection may borrow prestige from MOCA (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/culture/la-et-cm-broad-moca-notebook-20120918,0,6015450.story)

Interesting look at some of the manuvering and relationship beteen nomially public art institutions and eliete investors.

I don't know much about the world of "high art" but I'm curious what people think about this. I can't believe, as argued in this article, that it's solely about turing a buck on his privite art collection - though no doubt that is probably a big part in why the people who work for him buy the art for him that they do. But I think it may come from an actual desire to legitimize himself through the arts and because of his position and ideology it's probably like: sure I want to help art, and the best way to do that is to make sure that there is no public burocracy in the way and I have as much control as possible in shaping art museums in LA.

Anyway, in case anyone doesn't think there's an ideological bent to this, he also invests just as much if not more in charterizing LA public schools.

L.A. charter schools are investment grade to Broad (http://articles.latimes.com/2007/may/24/local/me-broad24)

[Regicollis]

Patronising the arts have always been used by the elite to demonstrate its wealth and power. The mechanism today is exactly the same as when a medieval nobleman would donate a stained glass window to a church.

Firstly supporting the arts demonstrates that you have a substantiable surplus since you can spend it on art. It also demonstrates that you are not some sort of barbarian but that you actually have some culture which again helps you rise in social standing.

A lot of good and valuable art has been and is been provided by rich benefactors. For instance the Carlsberg brewery is one of the main supporter of the arts in its homeland and donates lots of artworks to public spaces like schools or hospitals.

However the capitalist class patronising the arts also demonstrates their power and privilege. Why should a small elite of rich people decide over the arts? Why do they have a special right to decide how funds for the arts is used? In a just society the resources allocated to the arts would be distributed according to more democratic ideals which in turn would lead to more diversity.

[pluckedflowers]

You may find this (http://www.amazon.com/Privatising-Culture-Chin-Tao-Wu/dp/1859844723) worth checking out.