-
On the Home Front
- Wesleyan University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
On the Home Front The Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts sits securely on the banks of the Potomac-a landmark in our nation's capital. Inside its grand facade a bustle of intense activity continues from morning to midnight. Visitors from all over the world tour its five theaters, gift shops, and grand foyers. People of all ages attend formal and informalperformances, and a wide range of music, dance, and theater is available on a year-round basis. Today, we take the Kennedy Center for granted, but it took many years for Congress to be convinced that Americans needed a national cultural center. In September 1958, when the 85th Congress passed Public Law 85-874, "provid[ing] for a National Cultural Center which will be constructed with funds raised by voluntary contributions, on a site made available in the District of ~dlumbia,"B major victory was won for domestic support of the arts. After President Kennedy was killed, this center was renamed the John F, Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. There is a direct correlation between the international exchange program initiated by Eisenhower in 1954 and the domestic arts support enacted into law only four years later. Companion measures to provide for the erection of a National Cultural Center were first introduced in the Senate in February 1958 by Senator J. William Fulbright, Democrat from Arkansas, and in the House by Representative Frank Thompson, Jr., Democrat from New Jersey. The original wording made it very clear that this center represented a continuation of the idea of the arts as a diplomatic tool: This Act is intended to strengthen the ties which unite the United States with other nations and to assist in the further growth and development of friendly, sympathetic, and peaceful relations between the United States and the other nations of the world by demonstrating the cultural interests and achievements of the people of the United States. This is particularly necessary at this time when the Soviet Union and other totalitarian nations are spending vast sums for the arts in an attempt to lead the peoples of the world to believe that those countries produce civilization's best efforts in the fine arts. It is demonstrably true that wars begin in the minds of men and that it is in the minds of men that the defenses of peace must be constructed .' Testifying in April 1958 before the Senate's Committee on Public Works and the Subcommittee on Public Buildings and Grounds, Senator 128 / O N T H E H O M E F R O N T Fulbright made a direct connection between the arts and foreign relations. In his extensive testimony, he emphasized his conviction, as a longtime member of the Committee on Foreign Relations, that we had created an extremely negative impression abroad because Washington was the only national capital without a center for the performing arts. In support of his argument, Fulbright cited the recent international Tchaikovsky competition held in Moscow, and the fact that a twentythree -year-old American pianist, Van Cliburn, had won the $6,250 first prize. The reaction in Moscow to Cliburn was double-edged; the Russians loved his virtuosity but were appalled that he was virtually unknown in America. The same was true of another American competitor , Daniel Pollack, who had won ninth place. Fulbright made a strong plea for America's support of the performing arts both overseas and at home: The great virtue of the performing arts is that they do transcend the barriers of language. When Mr. Van Cliburn went to Moscow, of course, he didn't need to speak Russian to make an impression. I recently read a story that the New York City Ballet was in Tokyo and received an unprecedented ovation from the Japanese. When you consider what difficulty our diplomats and politicians have in communicating with the Russians , this ought to be very impressive; at least our musicians can gain a favorable response from these people; and this is not only with regard to our antagonists, that is, the Russians, but this is particularly important with regard to the uncommitted countries, countries like India, Burma, Indonesia, and any of the countries in Latin America, who are now trying to evaluate as best they can the relative merits of this country, the western civilization, and the Russians....In recent hearings before the Committee on Foreign Relations, I have taken occasion to ask nearly every important witness-many of them experts in the...