Can Rochester be a “City of the Arts”? Should it be? Is it already?
Do we even know what a City of the Arts is?
A discussion about Rochester and the arts has been brewing for months, spurred in part by the deliberations over Midtown’s Parcel 5. But the issue is much larger than a proposal for a single new building. And fortunately, last week a discussion on the broader issue started to take shape. As City Council member Elaine Spaull puts it: What does it take to be a real City of the Arts?
City Council’s Arts and Culture Committee, which Spaull chairs, invited representatives of a variety of local arts organizations to attend a meeting to talk about their individual needs and the needs of the larger arts community. A good number of them showed up – Geva, the Eastman School, Downstairs Cabaret, Rochester City Ballet, the Rochester Latino Theater, the Jazz Festival, The Strong, RBTL, WXXI, and others – and they were just a fraction of Rochester’s deep, diverse arts community.
The discussion, which lasted about an hour and a half, was pretty freewheeling, touching on everything from the need for additional performance space for small arts groups to the struggle to attract younger audiences. The big common thread, though, was a plea for help: money and advocacy. And there was a lot of support for strengthening the non-profit Arts and Cultural Council, which has been on life-support for months but now, fortunately, is rebuilding.
In conversations in the days following the meeting, both Eastman School dean Jamal Rossi and Geva artistic director Mark Cuddy agreed: A strong Arts and Cultural Council is crucial. So is local government support, for the Arts and Cultural Council and for the arts as a whole – “not only with words but financially,” Rossi said.
Some cities have set up ways to provide regular funding for the arts – requiring 1 percent of publicly funded new construction and development to be set aside for the arts, for instance.
Mark Cuddy also brought up another idea raised at the Council committee meeting: an arts master plan. And he referred me to Boston’s 10-year arts and culture master plan, called Boston Creates.
Boston’s plan has five “broad goals,” said a Boston Globe report published when Boston Creates was announced last year: “creating ‘fertile ground’ for the arts in Boston, keeping artists in the city, integrating the arts into ‘all aspects of city life,’ collaboration among a variety of institutions, and promotion of cultural opportunities in historically underserved communities.”
Among the initiatives proposed under those broad goals: a percent-for-art program that would use public money to help fund public art; creating affordable housing for low-income artists; increasing city funding for the arts; making space available in underused buildings for small arts groups; and providing funding to boost arts education in public schools.
Boston’s non-profit community foundation was partnering with two private foundations to provide grants to small dance and theater companies.
Rochester’s arts and artists need similar support. The arts can’t support themselves. We’ve said for years that we’re a City of the Arts, and I think we have the ingredients to be one. Discussing this with me earlier this week, Heidi Zimmer-Meyer, president of the Rochester Downtown Development Corporation, said Rochester is fortunate in having a “constellation of unique venues, each with its own personality.” We also have a constellation of unique arts offerings, each with its own personality, drawing its own audience.
But to really be a City of the Arts will take more than words, more than buildings, large and small – as important as buildings are. Rochester will have to adopt a philosophy similar to Boston’s – and find the public and private money to make it a reality.
Last week’s City Council committee meeting could be a start – if public officials and arts groups are willing to follow through.
This article appears in Sep 13-19, 2017.
If we can dream it and believe it, we can achieve it. If this is what we want, why not? The problem is we are small thinkers here and we have no leadership to inspire the populace. (are you listening Lovely and Cheryl)?
Let’s be honest. The title “City of the Arts” is nothing more than a hyperbolic PR catch phrase. The equivalent of the claim of offering “world class service” which so many companies have adopted. So if Rochester wants to self-anoint itself as such a city, then by all means do so. (It’s certainly better than the slogan, “We #ROC” dreamed up by the Chamber of Commerce.)
But personally, rather then trying to appear higher on the cultural list, I’d rather see Rochester work to be lower on the lists for number of citizens being shot, number of children living in poverty, and number of students failing to graduate.
Not long ago, someone felt that Rochester needed to have a fast ferry in order to become a “Gateway City”.
Now, we feel compelled to build a huge downtown theater so we can call ourselves a “City of the Arts”.
Maybe we should just refer to ourselves as the “City that builds expensive projects that ultimately fail, costing taxpayers millions of dollars that they don’t have”.
THE PRICE for “the arts” MUST COME DOWN. “The arts” come with an extravagant price tag inherently limiting attendance to high brow elitists who are able to afford the ticket prices and excludes those economically challenged families and those on fixed incomes from all walks of life. Becoming a “City of the Arts” means, to me, promoting participation and access to a much wider audience, broadening exposure which could result in raising the level of civility for all. Additionally, our mid-sized region is already challenged by fractured attendance at too many concurrent competing events.
My wife and I enjoy going to GEVA and The Eastman Theatre to see the RPO a few times every year. But that doesn’t mean I would agree that we should have a mandatory 1% come off the top for the arts with any building project in Rochester. Last week you states “Poverty, home ownership, unemployment, student achievement are all worse for people of color”. Isn’t addressing that financially more important than the arts? You also mention we need to “create more affordable housing for low-income artists”. That tells me we have too many artists in this town. Simple supply and demand. Instead of constantly finding ways to spend other people’s money, how about telling all these artists to treat it as a hobby until they make it big, and get a good job. I understand that people become artists for the love of it. But maybe they should think of the financial consequences of going down that path. Get a business degree instead. Then the supply of artists will go down, and those left will be able to flourish. You also mention that “The arts can’t support themselves. We said for years that we’re a City of the Arts”. Who’s we? And if the Arts can’t support themselves, maybe they shouldn’t be here. Just like the Fast Ferry which someone already mentioned. Why do people push for things where there isn’t demand to support it? Why doesn’t Wegmans build a store at the end of everyone’s street? It would benefit so many people as each store would be far less crowded, and we could all walk to the store. Supply and demand……And please don’t compare us to Boston where there are far more millionaires than there are in Rochester. Also salaries are 25-35% higher.
“…the life of the arts, far from being an interruption, a distraction, in the life of a nation, is very close to the center of a nation’s purpose – and is a test of the quality of a nation’s civilization.” -JFK, 1962-
John Quincy Adams called on Congress to promote ”the cultivation and encouragement of the mechanic and of the elegant arts, the advancement of literature, and the progress of the sciences.”
George Washington, in his first address to Congress, implored them that “there is nothing which can better deserve your patronage than the promotion of science and literature.”
The notion of reducing the arts in our society to a mere calculation of supply versus demand is appalling.
Mark-I do respect your opinion, but famous quotes don’t help come up with a solution of how and who should be paying for it. I’m tired of things being subsidized by the masses. If you feel so strongly about the Arts, instead of quotes, tell us what you would do to make it a viable business. Please don’t misunderstand me, I too like the Arts as I mentioned before. I just think generating more revenue to cover expenses is the way to go.