The Arts in the changing decade of the Seventies

Tonight we are going to review the decade of the 70s. Briefly and then discuss. How funding for the Arts has been changing during this period and how the arts have been organizing themselves to deal with the complications of our present society in any era. The arts are characterized by independence and diversity. They cannot really be boxed into neat time periods since the nature of the arts is to be constantly growing changing and regrouping. But in the turbulent decade of the 70s the arts were perhaps more diverse and quirky than usual. Every aspect of our society was being wrenched into new attitudes and the arts have been no exception. One of the major influences in this period which we should keep in mind throughout our discussions is a pervasive presence of television through which the arts

have invaded our lives to an extent undreamed of even 10 years ago. For example the Metropolitan Opera gives us live telecasts brilliantly staged and performed a theatrical treat that has become as routine to the current viewer as a Saturday afternoon radio broadcasts were to a previous generation Nuria m Baryshnikov have flashed across the TV screen repeatedly bringing the incredible excitement and discipline of the ballet to millions of viewers who have never seen dance from a seat in a theatre. In the early years of this century the great legend of the dancer nation ski was supported by a few black and white photographs. The excitement of the crowd pushing into the finite space of the theater is recalled today only by written description.

But nowadays no theatre space need be finite. We can see the performance here the bravos and clapping the TV audience is limitless. And today television brings the incandescent genius of Picasso right into our morning kitchens along with a cup of coffee and the news. Television also brought us during the 70s Archie Bunker. So the 70s. Had been a period of vastly increased accessibility to the art while unfolding history has battered us almost daily with one crisis after another throughout a world of increasing violence and disintegration. Briefly let us recall some of the events and trends of this decade to build a framework on which to place the arts developments our subsequent speakers will discuss. As the decade opened in 1970 we had

barely absorb the shock of the can't State campus shootings when almost exactly 10 years ago in August here in Madison on our campus we experienced the pre-dawn bombing of Sterling Hall. The explosion killed a young researcher and caused beste damage to the building from the tragedy came a winding down of the mob action aspects of the anti-Vietnam War movement. People were shocked to see where violence was leading. We discovered something that has been repeated with bitter regularity since that a few people were embracing violence for its own sake. The news continued grim in 1972 came the murder of the Israeli athletes in 1973. Watergate hearings and the bombing of Cambodia. In 1974 the fall of Richard Nixon in 75 the fall of South Vietnam and Cambodia. In

76 violence in South America in 78 the mass suicide in Guiana. In 79. The leak at Three Mile Island the rise of the Ayatollah Khamenei. And. The taking of the American hostages in Iran are right in the middle of the period. America pause for the bicentennial. And there were thousands of cheerful and positive reaffirmation of our faith in our 200 year old experiment in living in freedom and that the end of the decade. Pope Paul Pope John Paul the second visited America. And brought with him is a New York Times said a special grace. At the beginning of the 70s the emphasis was on youth. We were surrounded by the Woodstock Nation. Thirty four percent of the United States population was under 18. A statistic that has been retreating ever since. Young people then were saying

don't trust anyone over 30. But gradually through the decade came the realization that as Esquire magazine put it one of the god awful number of old people who will be around in a few years will be you. The instability of families became a major social problem with more and more one parent households drug use and abuse and increased alcoholism were major concerns in high schools and agencies to deal with these problems such as drug counseling clinics. And he talks of occasions centers were established. Statistics indicated that young people were becoming more sexually active in the early teens. The death rate for young Americans from 15 to 24 was much higher than in the 20 years previous. In a period when everyone else was giving up smoking at least a fourth of all teenagers started to smoke

all kinds of new approaches to living emerged. Jogging went from a health fad to an enormous industry which supported both doctors and fashion designers. People continued the 60s. Trend of speaking out. And making opinions heard. But now instead of sit ins and placards. We saw the growth of neighborhood associations special interest groups and national drives for new causes. There was a stubborn resistance to the proliferation of nuclear power and stubborn support for our fragile environment. The movement to end the ostracism of homosexuals emerged the celebration of self a kind of organized narcissism was tagged the me generation. And at the same time that we became the me generation our transportation patterns began to shift us to us.

Gasoline moved from about that from around 25 cents a gallon to a dollar more than a dollar. Here in Madison today. There are said to be four bikes for every three cars and more bike paths are being planned in the nation than freeways buses became more available and the use increased. There was renewed interest in rail road use. But while driving became more costly. And oil shortages threatened people continued the shift from urban centers into small towns and country living. There was a clear sense for the need for the security of the land. The 70s was a decade for women. The art historian Lyndon Auckland asked her now famous question. Why have there been no great women artists. The question has been resonating in the art world ever since. And Gloria Steinem points out today that every major issue

raised by the women's movement in the early part of the period now has major support in public opinion polls Congress even ordered the United States Military Academy at West Point to start enrolling women as cadets. This was also the decade of the hanging plants greenery which used to be placed on the floor or window ledges are taught for a discrete accent in a corner now hung from the ceiling leading to all kinds of unexpected confrontations in the dark. Fashions in food and drink changed. Eating out at fast food restaurants and drive ins increased in popularity but the pizzas hamburgers and fried chicken had to compete with a new enthusiasm for gourmet cooking at home. Everybody was drinking wine ethnic restaurants became almost a national

obsession. Fashions in clothes reflected American life styles both traditional and alternative with emphasis on self-expression jeans remained universally with us but began to sport high fashion labels. And in 1970. When we started this decade skirts were high and hair was long. The far out look of the 60s was still prevalent. But moving through the decade there were many short lived trends clunky grandma's shoes dazzling disco styles polyester easy care clothes string bikinis. Gradually women's clothes became simpler and more business like. As women move more into the mainstream of office employment inflation affected return to more classic and long lasting styles. In fact inflation affected

everything in the decade as we changed from a world of abundance to a world of shortages. By 1973 international population growth and industrial development began to out run the world's accessible easily accessible natural resources leading to shortages and rising prices. We shifted our buying decisions the economics reporter Jane Bryant Quinn explained that we are demanding more services which require personal attention and do not lend themselves to mass production which is a key to a high standard of living. Many of these service economy items such as eating out in ethnic restaurants or college education for the children. Or Family Vacations. Have been bought by the wife's second income. Ms Quinn added that indexed salary increases whether in

labor union negotiations or the federal service. With each employment group trying to grab an income advantage for themselves has added to inflation pressures. So has the increased number of non-workers such as people on retirement. In fact according to one national study in marketing news last September permanent impermanent inflation has been the most influential factor of the decade. More pervasive than social technical or political factors. Education has been struggling with changing age populations and scarcities the elementary school enrollment which peaked in 1969 reaches its height its College High next year. Meantime. As the population of younger children has gradually diminished. Elementary schools the country over have closed or consolidated frequently

with bitter neighborhood protests in colleges and universities. The liberal arts are fighting back. Core curriculum as are being developed that reflect the changes in career goals that mark many lives today. Older people are returning to school. And education has been totally unable to handle the word scourges of our time. The phrases have a nice day and you know. Along with changing customs violence stresses on our freedoms at home and abroad and growing recognition of the rights of all minorities. We have also been experiencing for the past 20 years or so a great change in attitude toward the arts in our society. We talked a lot in the 60s about the cultural explosion. But in my opinion it was the 70s it completed the change in public appreciation for the arts as a

function of a total society. The funding process was rather radically modified partly by the pressures of inflation partly by the availability of public funding on federal state and community levels and the focus of arts organizations shifted also from self-supporting and frequently self serving institutions to activities strongly based in communities activities which represented the ethnic diversity of our society which was increasingly searching for its racial and historical roots. We recognized that in a highly mechanized and technological world there must be more sophisticated delivery systems to bring the artist and the public together. Improved management of arts institutions has resulted. In a complex and mobile society. There is little opportunity for any artist regardless of his

or her genius to reach and communicate with an audience without some management help. It may be a sad commentary on our over organized society that we depend so heavily on the publice of the handout for both information and opinion. But it is a true one. It puts a special burden for integrity on arts management. At first in this decade we put a heavy emphasis on the arts as good for business as a panacea for social unrest and an aid to national unity. By the end of the period we had begun to recognize more frankly their intrinsic importance to the growth and health of the human spirit. We are openly recognizing the need to nurture artists provide them with a place to offer the creative product whether finished or in progress. We are supporting as a

nation. Art galleries dance studio spaces opera houses theaters concert halls outdoor areas new publications. We have seen new institutions like the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington D.C. grow and flourish. Changing the cultural habits of a city and reaching out with influences all over the nation. We have hundreds of new and refurbished art centers. In America. Theatres music halls galleries studios all purpose spaces. All of these must be heated lighted and managed. We depend on thousands of personal agents concert and lecture managements road salesmen advance persons to bring us the artist product. We must have highly trained technicians to design and execute productions lighting sets and costumes. It all takes money lots of it and organization and that's where we're going to start our

exploration of the arts in the changing decade of the 70s. This evening. With me on the platform. Tonight are tool friends Virginia white and Bill Dawson. Whose work take them into daily contact with the problems of funding and organization. William Dawson will talk to us first about the growth of Arts associations during the 70s. Dr. Dawson is the executive director of the Association of College University and community arts administrators an international group based here in Madison. He spent 10 years as director of the Wisconsin union theater on this campus and before that he was a professor of speech and theater at the University of Wisconsin Stevens Point. He has been involved with the performing arts as a teacher director performer all his life under his direction the AC

U.S.A. has become one of the most influential and broadly based organizations in our nation. He has often called the Congress as an expert witness and was much involved with the public input on the recent change in car in a copyright laws which have had such an effect on the rights of artists. He is also a brand new author co-author of marketing the arts which was just published and I'm sure he'll be glad to tell you about that too. Dr. Dawson. You OK thank you fan. Oh. It's almost. Scary in some ways too to think back 10 years ago. And really 15 years ago to the things that were occurring in our society as Phan described them. There are some of

you here tonight who went through those trials and tribulations on this campus. At the same time that I did and will be for them. And it's always difficult to look back on those and try to place the arts in perspective. Ten years ago. When you really think of it it was a period of relative ease for the Arts in this country. There was no great boom in the arts. True as fan mentioned there had been the number of articles published and the number of people espousing the cultural explosion in the mid 60s and there was those of us who said well I'm not really sure that there was a cultural explosion. True there were a number of new arts organizations a number of new things happening in the arts but there was no real significant change in the patterns of going or participating on the part of American people. The early 70s were still. Kind of a period of.

Relatively cautiously easing one's way in to what was happening at that point. That didn't seem to be any really dominant needs those events that had occurred on campuses and in communities and in the cities of our country continued to exist. They can continue to thrive. And they were thriving for the most part financially as well as in those people who are participating in them. It didn't really seem in the very early years of the decade that there was a great visibility of new artists new performing groups new trends. And so I think that what was stated in the in the middle 60s really was an overrated statement. In 1970 if my memory serves me correctly the NEA National Endowment for the Arts was five years old it was still a child the fledgling in our society. The state arts agency movement in this country was really brand new just

beginning and those state arts agencies were receiving a pittance of support from their state budgets they were having relatively little influence at that time on state arts activities. There wasn't really that much happening. What today is the burgeoning. Community Arts Movement was still being born at that time. True there were some communities that had been in existence for a number of years but it was a relatively youthful movement. It had not given not had had not gained a real roots it had not gained a real impetus. It did not have much influence at that particular point. And while there were more artists. Looking for work. Well. Artists were always kind of looking for work and there were always more actors than there were jobs and there were

always more musicians and there were opportunities and more visual artists than there were sales to be made and so on and so forth. It really was up in my estimation at least at the beginning of the 70s or relatively quiet time. And then and it's very difficult for me to try and remember all of this and related because so much happened in a very short period of time I would say that. That short span of peace and quiet at least on the artistic front continued until roughly. One thousand seventy three. And suddenly in 1972 and 73 there began to be a number of events which were beyond the control of those people who were administering the arts and really beyond the control of those people who were participating in the arts either actively as artists or as amateurs OSHA's the occupational safe. I can remember that they had the exact

names as safe healthy. You know we you know we mean you want to be healthy. All right. That suddenly appeared on the scene and suddenly those of us who were administering halls or theaters were faced with tremendous science lot of legislative mandates that said you must you must you must and we had to do this and we had to have bells ringing we had to have the. Clappers on people's toes if they were going to walk backwards and so on and so forth. From 1900 to on. Roughly. We faced an onslaught of macro environmental. Problems over which we had absolutely no concern. Osho was perhaps the first. One thousand seventy three in one thousand seventy four. The first energy crisis hit us and I can still remember calling emergency meetings and in New York City. Of all of the affected groups. To say what do we do about this and writing emergency letters and sending telegrams to the various Cabinet officers and Congress

saying you cannot do. You must not do. You will not do. It cetera et cetera et cetera. 5 0 4. Which is the key where it way of our saying provisions for the handicapped and their admission to the arts not only physical admission to the halls in which the arts are performed or in which arts activities take place but admission to the actual programme content. And that meant suddenly we were confronted with how do we bring. Deaf people into a performance and allow them to hear. How do we sign performances. How do we provide the blind. With equal opportunity to participate in the arts activity. Fan referred to the copyright law and no one had in previous years denied that the creative artist. Was to be given he is just right. He is honest due for the creation of his or her

work particularly in the musical field. But suddenly those organizations and institutions that had been exempt from the law. Were confronted with it. Made liable to pay the royalty fees and it was another of those elements that suddenly said The world is changing. There are some other things I suppose increase minority actions. No question about it. That this played a great part in activities that were taking place on campuses in communities in state legislation in federal legislation. And it was saying to us we have to do some different things in the arts than we have been doing previously. Development of new cultural centers and cities both large and small. Are growing recognition as fan alluded to earlier of the arts being good business and communities and suddenly you began to find arts centers or performing arts centers appearing around the country in cities that previously had not given much thought to them.

There was the overrated equation of the arts. And the quality of life. And we all knew that the quality of life would be enhanced tremendously if only the arts were given their just due. Never mind that people were saying the same thing about the air that we breathe and the water we drink in the soil in which we walk and on which we live. The arts of course are most important for the quality of life and it was an issue with which arts administrators have to be confronted. All of the environmental issues. If you get right down to it you think back and still are. Associating themselves with the arts and the arts became a form of environmental expression. And the arts became during the entire decade really a form of expression for almost every concern whether it be social political and environmental whatever. And the arts became associated with them and suddenly were a kind of spokes person for. The causes for

which various groups of thought talked discussed. In the course of all this who was to manage It was supposed to handle all of this arts activity. Who was supposed to oversee it to administer it to coordinate all of these things. Now there were some exceptional people. The leader of this forum is one to which he is one to whom I will refer. We're exceptional. And we're able to cope with these kinds of things to meet these tests and these challenges but for the most part. This is. A personal observation obviously arts administrators up to this time had really grown up by the seat of their pants in the business. We had no real skills. We had grown up in the arts in many instances or we had come from fairly related fields. We may have had. An innate and instinctive business sense method of organising of organizing

but for the most part we were not trained in any way to deal with the sudden influx of problems with which we were faced. All of us up. More than ever before skills were being demanded. On our part for which we had no background. It didn't make any difference whether you were running a museum or performing arts center or whether you were an orchestra manager. The manager of a theatre company or whatever. Suddenly we were being confronted with terms. Like long range planning mission statements goals and objectives. Now what were these things because we never confronted those before really. If somebody asked us a purpose. Well we wrote out a purpose. We defined ourselves described ourselves but only in the most general terms no one had ever really pinned us down to the wall and said. For whom do you exist for what purpose do you exist. What is it that you are going to do and when and how long is

ago. When will you do it how long will it take you how much money does it really take. Terms like zero based budgeting. Not to anyone who had come out of a theatre background as a head we knew how to budget things. No question about that. But zero based budgeting. Accrual accounting. What was this. It was a new world and for most of the people who were in the arts it was exactly that an entirely new world. And then suddenly with all of these demands placed upon us. And I suppose it seems only natural knowing our kind of society came a kind of geometric explosion of artists seeking creative opportunities the opportunity to express themselves. Regardless of the genre in which they performed or were seen. Suddenly there was this explosion of community arts councils.

What were they what were these new creature whose that suddenly appeared on the scene and began to insist upon certain governmental kinds of funding certain recognitions certain voices in the activities that were going on around the country. All of a sudden the league of Mayors became vitally interested in the arts and began issuing all kinds of policy statements about how good they were for the community the welfare of the nation. So on and so forth. Suddenly there was an increased funding of the arts at all levels federal state community no question about it the arts were on the move. And I really say that about 1975. Was the turning point for what we've seen occurring in the last five years and what we probably will continue to see more than anything else it occurs to me.

Is that while there was a great deal of growth in organized arts activity in terms of more symphony orchestras more. Smaller museums opening in terms of more theater companies the greatest level of arts activity in this country began to occur at the participatory level and it is at that level that I still continue to see the burgeoning of growth in the decade to come. Because I think there will be a shrinkage probably in that so I'm obviously digressing for a moment. I think there's going to be a shrinkage of some of the other kinds of organized activity that we've noted in the past. But people's hunger. For being able to express themselves artistically is going to continue to grow. And we have only begun to see the beginning of that movement. Typical is the person who says. I want to see if I can do it myself. I want to see if I can do it as

well as us and we're talking now about people who are not trained artistically who do not attend art schools universities colleges take formal courses or training. We're talking about the person at the grassroots level who really is insisting now that he or she wants to participate in the arts wants to express him or herself as actively as one possibly can. At any rate. I think that what we have seen since 1905 is people wanting more opportunities to both do. And see and hear. What I'm trying to suggest I guess. Is that there was for a time. Beginning in one thousand 73 to 74 really culminating in 75 a kind of chaotic growth. There was no organization there was no scheme there was no plan. Suddenly everything was happening.

And no one could really explain why it was just there. Not being a trained sociologist or that kind of critic of our society I'm hard pressed to explain the reason so I won't bother trying. All I know is that it did happen. And all of a sudden we found ourselves with a number of different kinds of arts organizations in existence as if they had suddenly popped out of the ground like mushrooms overnight and suddenly we had a tremendous influx of newly born. Arts administrators who came from heaven knows where. But for one reason or another they had been placed into administrative positions and carrying those responsibilities. We also had. What I have to refer to optimistically as hopefully reborn again. Arts administrators who are about to learn new skills and no less than. Reborn Christians. There was a real need for those older and arts administrators to learn some new skills instead of trying to get

by on what had always worked for them in the past. Thus came the growth in national arts organizations and arts associations. Basically in response to a need for new services to develop new networks of information. New sources of research. New training sessions workshop. Training all kinds of training materials. In short. What happened was. That there was a need for and a response made to organize the arts in this country. The success of it is something else. We won't I won't comment on that. If one looks at the purposes of these organizations. Whether they represent special interest such as the American Symphony Orchestra League theatre Communications Group or the American Association for museums or whether you look at national organizations which will

with a much broader constituency such as AC U.S.A. American Council for the Arts. Or others. The language in which they used to describe themselves is much the same. To serve as a coordinating research to serve as coordinating research. And as an educational agency dot dot dot to serve as a national resource center and service organization to provide a central coordinating and research agency to promote the encouragement and advancement of the arts to enhance the growth and development of the arts. And so on and so on and so on. There is really little in the in the verbiage. That distinguishes one from another. Some became highly specialized such as volunteer lawyers for the Arts. And obviously their purpose was to provide legal assistance to eligible artists and arts organizations. Dot dot dot. But fundamentally the growth in the

burgeoning of Arts associations of a national nature. From 1975 on has been in almost incredible. In terms of the ability to to document it to account for it. But fundamentally. They came into existence to provide services to their members whether those be individual artists. Presenting organizations. Produce in organizations or whatever. I want even begin to hazard a guess at how many exist at the present moment because each month. We literally read about a new organization being formed. That will serve someone's special purposes. Now at the same time there have been existing organizations some of longstanding. AC U.S.A. I was one of those incidentally. What

is interesting to note. Is that as the change in the environment in the NT and in the society occurred and is the change in the needs of people who are involved in the arts changed some of these organizations simply did not they remain social clubs. Or. Private clubs in a sense. Social outlets. Opportunities to get together once a year or perhaps more boards of directors who are essentially inbred. And maintain themselves from year to year. And who saw themselves as serving no other purpose than really to get together and then. And this is editorial mill. There's no question about it. To monitor and to influence. Legislation in this country regarding the arts a.

The truth is. That. The change that has been and is taking place in this country is not recognized by all of those arts associations. And some of them are doomed to ultimate extinction. Fortunately editorial comment. There are those who have been formed to lobby only for special interests. The Association of American museums obviously could care little. Or nothing about the rest of the arts condition in this country and they have lobbied extensively and successfully to have a line item created in the federal budget. Creating the museum Services Act which assures them of additional funding beyond the provinces of the National Endowment for the Arts. There are others still forming. Who will represent their special interests as well. Each month seems to bring news of some new beginning. How are they funded. Well some are self-sustaining from membership dues from fees. Many

more receive government help. The fact that government whether at the federal or state level. Recognizes and gives them help does indicate the recognition on their parts that these organizations are necessary that there is a need for order. That there is a need for the kind of services that can be provided. If if there is one final thing that I would say about arts or associations and organizations in this country. There are many kinds. I think that. Those that are really dominant in the in the field today those that will continue to exist are those that are going to provide the best service to the membership and to the arts generally. There are others are that are going to fade. There are others that will appear. If we say that there are strong national arts organizations exist in this country.

Then I think that they are strong and their strength is represented or measured. Only by the quality of service. Which they provide. And this is fairly general and I recognize this. So that I hope in maybe a question and answer period we can get into some more specifics. Thank you. The only. Thank you Bill. Very interesting. Our next speaker is Virginia P. White who is a writer. Lecturer and editor who has been working with sponsored research and fund raising for many years. She is presently the editor of grants magazine and the author of a new book grants for the Arts. Published this spring by plenum press in 1975 she wrote grants how to find out about

them and what to do next which was an is very popular with everyone puzzled by this complicated field. Incidentally you may would like to take a look at either of those books. They are available at the table in the rear for your perusal. This is why it is a faculty member of the New School for Social Research and formerly head of the office of sponsored research at the City University of New York. Prior to that she was associated with the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars at the Smithsonian Institution. She was director of operations for the Salk Institute in California and worked with the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee. She will discuss for us foundations and corporate funding for the Arts. This is why. Thank you thank you.

It is not only appropriate to discuss foundation and corporation funding for the arts together. It is almost impossible to separate them. Foundation board members are very often Corp executives. Many business leaders manage small foundations without a professional staff. And there is a free and continuing flow of information between the foundation and the corporation communities to properly assess and understand what happened in these two sectors in the 1970s we must take note of what went on in the 60s in that decade arts support was focused on the art forms on the perpetuation of major institutions. And in spite of the radicalism and social upheaval of that time the approach was still predominantly traditional. In 1970 the Smithsonian Institution mounted

an exhibition of the work of black artists which evoked a good deal of surprised comment surprise that they really were black artists and surprise that the work of blacks would be singled out for an exhibition. The Whitney exhibition of women artists that created an uproar of sorts was still several years away. When we look back at the 70s it is clear that foundation and corporate support for the Arts in that decade was characterized by changes in these specific ways. There was a turnabout in the amount of support as the large foundations reduced their arts programs smaller foundations and corporations increased too. There was a marked shift in the focus of support the emphasis rather than being on the development of art forms was

placed on access to the hour by all segments of the population. And three there was a greater emphasis on results a demand for accountability and for a demonstration of a real return on the investment. New criteria were introduced such as the economic affects of an arts festival. The effects on specific populations such as the aging the handicapped prisoners ethnic minorities and children. Let us look now at the foundations the large foundations lost heavily in the 1974 market decline some of them as much as 50 percent of the market value of their assets. This caused a cutback in all programs. The Ford Foundation that had reached the level of Grant. Grant making for all programs of over three hundred fifty million dollars a year at one time made grants in

1979 of less than one third of that. And there are arts programs have suffered heavily. The Rockefeller Brothers Fund one of the major supporters of the arts began in the late 70s to reduce their arts program. And the indications are that this trend will continue. But on the other hand many smaller and middle size foundations have entered the arts field making funding more accessible to small arts organizations than ever before. Statistics compiled by the foundation's center of grants in the amount of $5000 or more indicate that 85 percent of foundation giving for the Arts goes to the state within which the foundation is located. One of the explanations for the entry of smaller foundations into the arts is that it is possible to make a difference with a relatively small amount of money.

One of the lessons learned from the 1960s was that it takes an inexhaustible amount of money to deal with problems of disease problems poverty decaying cities and a hugh nation of the younger generation projects in those areas demand a commitment over long periods of time and massive sums of money. On the other hand support of a struggling Dance Company Theatre group or an arts festival can yield results that are immediately desirable within a community. It takes a relatively small amount of money to support the education of a young artist. Along with this consciousness that a small amount of money could make a difference in the community came the realization that it was possible to affect the lives of special populations through support of the arts. A project designed to advance the cause of a minority group through education or social welfare was too large an undertaking for most foundation.

But an arts program to involve the handicapped the elderly or other special groups was within the capability of almost every foundation and those arts organizations that perceive this were able to find more support for their activities. Television as was mentioned earlier did more than anything else in the 1970s to make the arts available to the general population. TV programs funded by foundations corporations and government agencies brought dance opera painting sculpture and even some funny orchestra music into the living rooms throughout the country. As a result local and regional interest in and knowledge of the arts spread and more arts groups were formed. As was also mentioned earlier even in very small towns. Opportunities to support the arts at a very modest level proliferated. The demand for

results was enhanced by the Tax Reform Act of 1969 which affected foundations beginning in 1970 in numerous ways. Some good and some not so good. One of the things this legislation did was to force foundations to give thought to the final outcome of the projects they supported. Prior to that many foundations made grants and seem to forget about them. Their identification with the projects was often minor in some cases they did not even follow up to the extent of demanding a final report. The 1969 legislation changed that by making foundations accountable for the results of their benefactions. This aroused some objections on the part of grantees who had heretofore expected to receive a check from the foundation and hear little or nothing else from them. Now foundations were demanding a good deal more accountability.

And in the arts they are looking beyond the cultural aspects and are concerned also with the social and economic impact of the projects they fund. This has made foundations supported organizations much more conscious of the importance of designing their programs well and of properly administering the funds at their disposal. A major development in the 1970s mentioned by both of the people who spoke before me has been the girls in management expertise of arts organizations and the demand for better administration arts administration has become a significant professional field and several universities have inaugurated graduate programs for training in that area as a direct result of the demands on the part of makers for better fiscal management. What about

corporations. The major phenomenon in support for the arts in the decade of the 70s occurred in the business community. The Business Committee for the arts which was established in 1967 reported that 16 million dollars was given by corporations for the Arts in 1970. The figures for 1979 are just out and the astonishing amount is four hundred and thirty six million dollars. Nearly half a billion dollars. To put this into perspective we might recall that the program budgeted for the National Endowment for the Arts the entire nation for 1980 is approximately one hundred and fifteen million dollars. And to put it in even more dramatic perspective we you may recall that until 1935 corporations in this country were legally

forbidden to give money to charitable causes including the arts in 1881. A Massachusetts court concluded that the Old Colony railway exceeded its corporate authority in underwriting the cost of a music festival to be performed along the right avoid. Legislation was passed in 1935 that allowed corporations to contribute to charitable causes but it was not tested in the courts until 1953 when a peace miss Corp. a peace Smith corporation's gift of fifteen hundred dollars to Princeton University was challenge and uphill in a ruling now referred to as the Magna Carta of corporate giving. That was less than 30 years ago. Corporate philanthropy reached new heights in the 1970s and the Business Committee for the Arts estimated estimates that more than 12 percent of

it goes to the arts. Foundations are reported by the American Association of fund raising Council to give about 10 percent of their funds to the humanities. They don't separate out the arts and it is likely that the arts get approximately 5 or 6 percent of foundation funds. Access has always