The Fine Arts
Survive Without Public Funding?
By Daniel Muniz

Did art ever exist before the advent of public funding?

Oftentimes, the advocates of the arts give the impression that fine art did not exist prior to federal funding or at least by some kind of assistance at the state and local level.

Before television, art did flourish for centuries but times have changed and so have the tastes of people.

And today, museums, galleries, symphonies, and other groups contend that they cannot operate on revenues solely generated from their patrons. And admittedly, it is not for lack of trying to raise money. Art is in abundant supply but the demand for it is practically miniscule. Economically, there just isn’t enough interest for the arts to sustain a vibrant art culture. As a result, many organizations have resorted to novel marketing schemes in an attempt to influence and or at least retain their diminishing supporters but the allure of popular culture still deflates enthusiasm for the arts.

Inevitably, the easiest and most effective source of revenues for these outfits has been for them to reach directly into your wallet for your tax dollars in the guise of public funding. The rationale is simple. If the public refuses to either buy enough tickets or donate money why not take it away from the general population in the form of taxes.

Naturally, these entitlements arouse controversy especially when the public finds out where its tax dollars are being spent. Certain expenditures are definitely worthwhile while others draw the ire of critics who assert that the public is wasting its tax money on garbage.

But then again, one man's garbage is another man's art.

However, one man's tax dollar is not necessarily another man's entitlement.

Can art survive without the government subsidizing its finances?

One particular art group has succeeded where other organizations have failed. In fact, this organization may have been a victim of its own success.

The city of San Antonio by far has the two of the most popular tourist destinations in Texas; the Alamo and the Riverwalk. But both of those sites are cultural in nature rather than rooted in the arts.

Now enter the First Friday Art Walk commonly and aptly known as First Friday. It is a monthly event on the first Friday of every month, which now draws art lovers by the thousands.

Nearly a decade ago, south of downtown, First Friday was formed to promote the artists and the area businesses as well as the nearby historic neighborhood known as the King William District. At the time, the First Friday sponsors could not afford to advertise so they simply showcased their work during the evenings of the first Friday of every month and made it open to the public.

As time passed, this monthly event began to generate enormous interest to the eclectic shops, galleries, and eating establishments of the area.

In addition, many art receptions during the First Friday event began to hand out free beer and wine in order to encourage more art enthusiasts to peruse their exhibits. The event became a hit with the crowds.

After a while, success fed on success.

Consequently, more area businesses began catering to the ever-growing crowds and soon the streets were laden with vendors hawking jewelry, collectibles, and just about any kind of art imaginable. Musicians such as drum circles began thudding their way into the streets.

And it didn’t take long for many neighborhood blocks to be inundated with art patrons parking their cars often miles away. Loud and boisterous throngs of people, many of them getting younger and younger spilled in and out of First Friday with many of them brazenly carrying around their open containers of alcohol.

Eventually, First Friday hit critical mass.

Critics and art purists charged that First Friday is fueled by alcohol instead of the passion of the arts. It was now easy to spot plenty of people hanging out just drinking beer and partying instead of enjoying the funky shops and eclectic exhibit halls. Also, the local bars began to provide an outlet for people who were more interested in partying instead of soaking up the talent of the local artisans.

Area residents who once welcomed the event were now furious. Heavy traffic congested the streets with many car stereos blaring out thumping basses late into the night. And numerous drunk people, male and female, didn’t mind relieving themselves in people's front yards or on street corners. Consequently, the trash and litter from the partying began to make quite a nuisance for neighborhood inhabitants.

In addition, the monthly event was now beginning to make demands on city services such as extra police patrols and police presence for the ever-growing crowds. And to add insult to injury, First Friday was not making any kind of direct contribution to the city budget as in the form of a special tax district even though it would soon require more city resources.

Naturally, complaints reached the ears of the San Antonio City Council.

City Council slapped new restrictions regarding the public consumption of alcohol and began dispatching additional police to enforce the restrictions and to maintain more crowd control.

The sponsors of First Friday, the local artisans and most importantly, the area businesses did not want the city to scare away the art lovers. The art aficionados also did not want a heavy police presence to impact their holistic art experience. And the partygoers did not exactly want the police poking around at the revelry either.

Now here is the real question.

Can alcohol destroy this blossoming art event or is art simply maturing into a different type of venue? Can beer and wine peacefully coexist with the arts? What about mixed drinks too?

Puritanical art lovers are scandalized that people want to mix beer with art. To them, the value of art is diluted because of the consumption of alcohol. What would be wrong with big corporate sponsors whose industry happens to be alcohol underwriting the local symphony or galleries?

After all, these cash-strapped outfits need an infusion of private money although they would not get anything for free. Sponsors need to hawk their wares such as their beer or wine coolers and they need. And they need people to consume their products at the events they sponsor.

And quite a few other venues already offer alcohol at their events.

Professional sports will always continue cater to those who want to consume alcoholic beverages and that in no way diminishes the value of the sport being played. Oftentimes, alcoholic beverage vendors even sponsor quite a few sporting events.

Granted, there are rare exceptions like the NBA brawl during the Detroit Pistons and Indiana Pacers game where several players got into altercations with belligerent and drunken fans. And yes, alcohol played a major role in the fracas.

But the brawl itself was the result of poor crowd control.

If violence does ever mar First Friday, it too will probably be the result of poor crowd control. But almost every city and town has big public events in which great quantities of alcohol are consumed. It is up to the event planners to anticipate how to control any unruly patrons.

A local municipality should not have to cover the tab for events like First Friday since many such boisterous events elsewhere pay their own way.

The critics have a valid point on this one.

Unfortunately, the city of San Antonio has to pick up the tab for more resources to dedicate to crowd control at First Friday. Even though the taxpayers are not getting directly soaked for paying for somebody else’s art exhibit, city resources are being utilized and First Friday ought to pick up the tab.

There are exceptions across the country but those exceptions are really more of seed money to help a recurring event get off the ground. Here, First Friday has to toss a bone to the critics and become completely self-sufficient as are the numerous celebrations and festivals across the country. They have to be willing to pay for the security and the crowd control themselves instead of relying on the city to do it for them.

But like every football and baseball stadium and basketball arena already pays for their own security and crowd control so this is just simply and overhead expense.

And being self-sufficient will satisfy the fiscal critics and may even garner their support if economic benefit is positive
The next bone that First Friday has to toss is that they do not have a visible high profile charitable causing in which they are extolling its virtues.

Big public events such as festivals or fairs almost always have some kind of charitable cause that some of the proceeds are going to. In many ways, this helps justify the beer drinking, revelry, and debauchery if some of the money is going to a good cause.

Again, First Friday is at fault. Although the local artisans and the area businesses benefit, there is no gallery, symphony, or high profile organization that is a monetary beneficiary of this monthly event that can generate a public relations boon.

The university I graduated from has a huge annual event, the Oyster Bake that generates millions of dollars. It is one of the biggest events of Fiesta week in San Antonio.

Yes, there is plenty of intoxication involved on the university grounds.

And yes, I have seen the cops drag away plenty of unruly dunk people.

I am certain that the Oyster Bake resulted in some debauchery that occurred later on in the night.

And I am also sure that the priests and brothers who run the university are not exactly thrilled with dissolution that happens every year because of the Oyster Bake but it does raise millions of dollars for scholarships. Although I have never personally benefited from a scholarship and even to this day I am still paying off my student loans but I know the scholarships have helped a few of my classmates.

As a result, First Friday is going to have throw the critics a bone on this one as so many other events have done.

A warm and fuzzy charity is the best way for First Friday to insulate itself against criticism.

Every year there is plenty of drunkenness and lewdness occurring at my alma mater but the priests and brothers can always claim that the proceeds go to a very good cause, which is helping needy and deserving students get a college education.

And there are plenty of other celebrations and festivals involving the consumption of copious quantities of alcohol always have some sort of egalitarian cause that financially benefits from the event.

Events that do not involve alcohol like beauty pageants such as Miss America and others do more than occupy prime time TV slots with beautiful women prancing around in swimsuits. Pageants finance scholarships for women, which is an effective insulation against hard-nosed critics who argue that these spectacles are nothing more than eye candy for the viewing public. In the end, charities do overcome the faultfinders.

Finally, the biggest obstacle that First Friday must overcome would be the puritanical advocate for the arts and culture. For them, there is no bone to toss except for lengthy persuasion.

Such advocates frown upon a patron holding a cup of beer in front of a dinosaur exhibit or gazing at a sculpture.

But beer and wine ought to be viewed as a component of the art or cultural experience, not the experience itself.

When I go to the SBC Center to watch the Spurs whip up on the Lakers, the game is the experience and the cup of beer that I am holding in my hand is merely a component of that experience. Although I do thoroughly enjoy the beer while watching the game, the beer is not the experience. Unless of course the Spurs have their heads up an athletic sock and can't find the right side of a barn with perimeter shooting, then maybe the beer is the only positive experience I can get from watching such a game.

But that viewpoint ought to be no different for galleries, museums, symphony halls, or any other venue of the arts.

I have to admit that the first time I went to First Friday, I was not particularly impressed with their art receptions and exhibits. Although I entered the event with an open mind, I found much of the art too funky and too eclectic for my tastes. However, a few beers later as well as enjoying some of the complimentary wine, I did have a change of heart.

And after a few more margaritas, I realized that I might have been a bit too critical and judgmental. Although I initially felt that some of the exhibits may have been a bit unrefined and coarse, I never imagined that many of the local artisans had so much calenture and munificence emanating from their work. A couple of beers later I concluded that I truly enjoyed the ambiance and atmosphere of First Friday and I have been a supporter ever since.

Personally, I have never purchased anything from First Friday and I have never seen anyone lugging around a sculpture or painting a couple of miles to the trunk of his or her car. Incidentally, all I have ever bought is beer and margaritas (since the only cash I take with me is beer money).

But ultimately, First Friday has clearly demonstrated that art and culture can co-exist with beer and wine. The taxpayer does not need to subsidize art because there is a public willing to finance the art experience but only in the proper setting. And perhaps this is the maturation that art needs to not only survive but to prosper.

Any opinions or views expressed herein belong solely to the author and does not represent any employer, organization, political party, governmental agency, or any other entity and do not necessarily reflect the views of the site owner or its participants.