会计与问责:NEA如何资助舞蹈

IF 0.1 3区 艺术学 0 DANCE
Colleen Hooper
{"title":"会计与问责:NEA如何资助舞蹈","authors":"Colleen Hooper","doi":"10.1080/01472526.2022.2110633","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Funding Bodies by Sarah Wilbur does the important work of unpacking how dance funding flowed from the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) between 1965 and 2016. Wilbur explicates the behind-the-scenes functioning of the NEA to reveal the human negotiations and the affective dimensions of distributing funding on behalf of the federal government. Meticulously researched, this book is a carefully constructed narrative of how the NEA supported concert dance as “an endowed professional ideal” (p. 29). While documenting fifty years of NEA history, Wilbur engages with current debates about establishing meaningful cultural equity in the performing arts. Wilbur unveils the past machinations of the NEA and invites readers to reimagine what the NEA could represent moving forward. Throughout this book, Wilbur reconstructs the NEA’s dance funding paradigm on the basis of extensive archival analysis and insights from her anonymized informants. She reveals how the NEA’s institutional support incorporated racial, class-based, and regional biases. She eloquently describes the NEA’s initial 1965 “distribution system” that prioritized ballet and modern dance forms and favored white, urban, and wealthy grantees (p. 32). She further expounds upon attempts to make the NEA more equitable, highlighting the efforts of Vantile Whitfield, the founding director of Expansion Arts. Wilbur describes Whitfield’s advocacy for artists of color, emphasizing that “African, Latin, Asian, and Native American arts organizers had long been delivering cultural excellence through organizational logics that simply didn’t fit the existing paradigm” (p. 75). The regional bias present in NEA funding is discussed at length, and the disproportionate representation of grantees from New York City is illustrated through quantitative and qualitative evidence and a colloquial description of the “New York dance Mafia” that often dominated NEA panel reviews (p. 130). The mechanisms that supported dance touring were","PeriodicalId":42141,"journal":{"name":"DANCE CHRONICLE","volume":"45 1","pages":"250 - 253"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accounting and Accountability: How the NEA Funded Dance\",\"authors\":\"Colleen Hooper\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/01472526.2022.2110633\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Funding Bodies by Sarah Wilbur does the important work of unpacking how dance funding flowed from the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) between 1965 and 2016. Wilbur explicates the behind-the-scenes functioning of the NEA to reveal the human negotiations and the affective dimensions of distributing funding on behalf of the federal government. Meticulously researched, this book is a carefully constructed narrative of how the NEA supported concert dance as “an endowed professional ideal” (p. 29). While documenting fifty years of NEA history, Wilbur engages with current debates about establishing meaningful cultural equity in the performing arts. Wilbur unveils the past machinations of the NEA and invites readers to reimagine what the NEA could represent moving forward. Throughout this book, Wilbur reconstructs the NEA’s dance funding paradigm on the basis of extensive archival analysis and insights from her anonymized informants. She reveals how the NEA’s institutional support incorporated racial, class-based, and regional biases. She eloquently describes the NEA’s initial 1965 “distribution system” that prioritized ballet and modern dance forms and favored white, urban, and wealthy grantees (p. 32). She further expounds upon attempts to make the NEA more equitable, highlighting the efforts of Vantile Whitfield, the founding director of Expansion Arts. Wilbur describes Whitfield’s advocacy for artists of color, emphasizing that “African, Latin, Asian, and Native American arts organizers had long been delivering cultural excellence through organizational logics that simply didn’t fit the existing paradigm” (p. 75). The regional bias present in NEA funding is discussed at length, and the disproportionate representation of grantees from New York City is illustrated through quantitative and qualitative evidence and a colloquial description of the “New York dance Mafia” that often dominated NEA panel reviews (p. 130). The mechanisms that supported dance touring were\",\"PeriodicalId\":42141,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"DANCE CHRONICLE\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"250 - 253\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"DANCE CHRONICLE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/01472526.2022.2110633\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"艺术学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"DANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DANCE CHRONICLE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01472526.2022.2110633","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"DANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

莎拉·威尔伯(Sarah Wilbur)的《资助机构》(Funding Bodies)做了一项重要的工作,揭示了1965年至2016年间国家艺术基金会(NEA)的舞蹈资金是如何流动的。威尔伯阐述了国家能源局的幕后运作,以揭示人类谈判和代表联邦政府分配资金的情感层面。经过仔细研究,这本书是一本精心构建的叙事书,讲述了NEA如何支持音乐会舞蹈作为“一种天赋的职业理想”(第29页)。在记录NEA五十年历史的同时,威尔伯参与了当前关于在表演艺术中建立有意义的文化公平的辩论。威尔伯揭示了国家能源局过去的阴谋,并邀请读者重新想象国家能源局在前进中可以代表什么。在整本书中,威尔伯在广泛的档案分析和匿名线人的见解的基础上,重建了NEA的舞蹈资助模式。她揭示了国家教育局的制度支持是如何融入种族、阶级和地区偏见的。她雄辩地描述了国家教育局1965年最初的“分配制度”,该制度优先考虑芭蕾舞和现代舞蹈形式,并青睐白人、城市和富裕的受赠人(第32页)。她进一步阐述了使国家教育局更加公平的尝试,强调了拓展艺术的创始总监Vantile Whitfield的努力。威尔伯描述了惠特菲尔德对有色人种艺术家的倡导,强调“非洲、拉丁、亚洲和美洲原住民的艺术组织者长期以来一直通过根本不符合现有范式的组织逻辑来提供卓越的文化”(第75页)。详细讨论了NEA资助中存在的区域偏见,并通过定量和定性证据以及对“纽约舞蹈黑手党”的口语描述说明了纽约市受赠人的不成比例的代表性,“纽约舞蹈黑帮”经常主导NEA小组审查(第130页)。支持舞蹈巡回演出的机制是
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Accounting and Accountability: How the NEA Funded Dance
Funding Bodies by Sarah Wilbur does the important work of unpacking how dance funding flowed from the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) between 1965 and 2016. Wilbur explicates the behind-the-scenes functioning of the NEA to reveal the human negotiations and the affective dimensions of distributing funding on behalf of the federal government. Meticulously researched, this book is a carefully constructed narrative of how the NEA supported concert dance as “an endowed professional ideal” (p. 29). While documenting fifty years of NEA history, Wilbur engages with current debates about establishing meaningful cultural equity in the performing arts. Wilbur unveils the past machinations of the NEA and invites readers to reimagine what the NEA could represent moving forward. Throughout this book, Wilbur reconstructs the NEA’s dance funding paradigm on the basis of extensive archival analysis and insights from her anonymized informants. She reveals how the NEA’s institutional support incorporated racial, class-based, and regional biases. She eloquently describes the NEA’s initial 1965 “distribution system” that prioritized ballet and modern dance forms and favored white, urban, and wealthy grantees (p. 32). She further expounds upon attempts to make the NEA more equitable, highlighting the efforts of Vantile Whitfield, the founding director of Expansion Arts. Wilbur describes Whitfield’s advocacy for artists of color, emphasizing that “African, Latin, Asian, and Native American arts organizers had long been delivering cultural excellence through organizational logics that simply didn’t fit the existing paradigm” (p. 75). The regional bias present in NEA funding is discussed at length, and the disproportionate representation of grantees from New York City is illustrated through quantitative and qualitative evidence and a colloquial description of the “New York dance Mafia” that often dominated NEA panel reviews (p. 130). The mechanisms that supported dance touring were
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: For dance scholars, professors, practitioners, and aficionados, Dance Chronicle is indispensable for keeping up with the rapidly changing field of dance studies. Dance Chronicle publishes research on a wide variety of Western and non-Western forms, including classical, avant-garde, and popular genres, often in connection with the related arts: music, literature, visual arts, theatre, and film. Our purview encompasses research rooted in humanities-based paradigms: historical, theoretical, aesthetic, ethnographic, and multi-modal inquiries into dance as art and/or cultural practice. Offering the best from both established and emerging dance scholars, Dance Chronicle is an ideal resource for those who love dance, past and present. Recently, Dance Chronicle has featured special issues on visual arts and dance, literature and dance, music and dance, dance criticism, preserving dance as a living legacy, dancing identity in diaspora, choreographers at the cutting edge, Martha Graham, women choreographers in ballet, and ballet in a global world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信