Visual Artists and Government Policy in the Netherlands

Le?nardo, Vol. 14, No.4, pp. 323-324, 1981 Printed in Great Britain 0024-094X/81/040323-02$02.00/0 Pergamon Press Ltd. VISUAL ARTISTS AND GOVERNMENT POLICY IN THE NETHERLANDS* Thea Van Velzen** I. INTRODUCTION In other countries the Dutch government art policy is regarded with surprise, often with admiration bordering on envy. A large number of visual artists, nearly 2700 at the end.of 1979,receivea regular, practically guaranteed, yearly Income in exchange for a proportion of their art~orks. While not providing a luxurious life-style, the policy does enable the artists to live and work. The policy of support of artists in the domain of the visual or plastic fine arts is officially a social program sponsored by the Ministry of Social Affairs. In addition, several ministries provide percentage schemes for adding artworks to public buildings, and the Ministry for Cultural Affairs provides grants to artists, scholarships for students, etc. Some art museums are supported by the Dutch government, but most museums of contemporary art are supported and operated bymunicipalgovernments. II. THE POSSIBILITIES AND LIMITATIONS OF GOVERNMENT POLICY I~ cultural policy, in general, and in art policy, in particular, governmental attention is directed to established institutions, such as schools, museums (particularly of old art) and those for the performing arts. There had been in the past no obligation felt by the country to support the visual arts in the way support is provided for education, the health services and public transport, and, as a matter offact, there are no institutions in whichvisual artists can come together as orchestra musicians do. The situation of visual artists is further aggravated by the difficulty of setting standards of artistic excellence.It is not enough to say that art is important because art is art. Its importance must be demonstrated on the basis of general social interests, such as public exhibitions and contributions of art to education, and be formulated into aims that are politically viable. The first policy adopted by the Dutch government is to aid individual artists by means of scholarships, grants (cost-of-living support) and provision of facilities. This policy is not easy to defend. Furthermore, the problems attendant to selecting recipients are extremely delicate. -Abridged version based on the text presented in English and in Italian in a catalogue of the same title published in 1980bythe Visual Arts Office for Abroad, P.O. Box 2242, lOOOCE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, for distribution at the 1980 Venice Biennial. --Director, Haags Gemeentemuseum, Stadhouderslaan 41, 2157 HV's-Gravenhage, The Netherlands. 323 The second policy adopted is to support the showing of artworks to the public. This policy is easier to implement and preferred by legislators. Under this policy, artworks can be purchased and commissioned in conjunction with the construction of public buildings on the basis of a percentage scheme. Subsidies can be made for the holding of public exhibitions and for purchasing and loaning artworks. Both these policies require the government to set standards for the quality and originality of artworks. Advisory bodies at national and municipal levels have been appointed to assist with this task. III. EARLY ART POLICY In 1935a mutual fund for artists was established with national and municipal governmental support. In 1949 this fund was expanded to include a scheme for purchasing works directly from artists. The scheme, known as the contraprestatie, was intended as a temporary measure reserved for artists in difficult financial circumstances . The scheme was put into practice with extreme caution, because there was a strong opinion that art was not a concern of the national government and that commerce, in even the sale of artworks, should not be interfered with. In the early 1950sthe percentage scheme was adopted for providingfunds for the adornment of newlyconstructed buildings of the government, which was later extended to includeschools, and it wasadopted bysomemunicipalities. The situation began to change noticeably in the early 196Os, due to special factors. The nation had recovered from the ravages of World War II and was starting to develop into a welfarestate with expanding socialsecurity and other state services. Not only the relationships between citizens and the national government changed but also those between various social groups. Among...