PRIVATE MONEY and PERSONAL INFLUENCE
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
8 AFTERIMAGE/January 1987 PRIVATE MONEY AND MARITA STURKEN There are few names in the Western world that evoke as weighty an image as the name Rockefeller. Power, prestige, philanthropy, cultural imperialism, and the old-boy network all come to mind. This name sums up the raw power of capitalism before the days of government regulation, antitrust laws, and income tax . To most ofthe U .S. public, it represents an extended, family-based power structure of phenomenal influence. The Rockefeller Foundation, while no longer a family institution, symbolizes the power invested in those who choose to use their wealth to effect change in the world. Like many private foundations, it was founded as a means of promoting change with and establishing a beneficent image for a newly amassed fortune; it was also an attempt to change the reputation of "tainted money" that had plagued the Rockefeller fortune. From its inception, it was a globally conceived organization, begun with $100 million from John D . Rockefeller Sr. i n 1913' and aimed at establishing a last- ing role for the Rockefeller fortune. The foundation was the brainchild of Rockefeller's trusted manager Frederick T. Gates. Of the foundation, Gates wrote: I trembled as I witnessed the unreasoning popularresentment at Mr. Rockefeller's riches, to the mass of people, a national menace. It was not, however, the unreasoning public prejudiceof hisvastfortunethat chiefly troubled me. Was ittobe handed on to posterityas other great fortunes have been handed down by their possessors, with scandal- ous results to their descendants and powerful tendencies to social demoralization? Media Arts Center Conference Steering I saw no other course but for Mr. Rockefeller and his Committee meets at Minnewaska in 1979, with (from left to right) Alan Jacobs, Howard Klein, Robert son to form a series of great corporate philanthropies for forwarding Sitton, and Robert Haller. Photo by Amy Greenfield . civilization in all its elements in this land and in all lands: philan- thropies, if possible, limitless in time and amount, broad in scope, and self-perpetuating .2 This fervor and sense of mission (Gates was a former Baptist minister) instigated what would soon become one of the most powerful philanthropies of this century, now with assets of Howard Klein and the over $1 .3 billion. The foundation was set up in part as an extension of the ideas behind the Rockefeller Institute of Medical Research (now Rockefeller University), where scientists were conduct- Rockefeller Foundation's ing research that would provide the expertise behind public health programs throughout the world. The foundation's reputation stems from its massive programs to combat malaria and yellow fever and to promote the "green revolu- funding of the media arts tion" of cultivating high-yield wheat, corn, and rice in the third world. It was in this context-of an institution that could almost progress of a field from its infancy to a more established com- single-handedly eradicate diseases in certain areas and or- munity, but also the approach and philosophy of one man to chestrate huge agricultural programs-that an arts program the field as a whole. Klein left the foundation in October 1986, was begun at the Rockefeller Foundation. The foundation and his departure marks the end not only of a particular era at had previously awarded grants in the arts to select institu- the Rockefeller Foundation, but also of an era of a specific tions, but the formalization of an arts program did not take kind of funding philosophy, in which a single individual dic- place until 1963.3 Conceived as a program in "cultural de- tates the direction and intent of the grants awarded, with a pri- velopment," it was also initiated as a response to a general mary belief in providing for the needs of the individual artist . expansion in the arts in the early 1960s, symbolized by the building of Lincoln Center in New York City (a project realized The Rockefeller Foundation is structured into six pro- grams: with the considerable involvement of and funds provided by Agricultural Sciences, Arts and Humanities, Equal John D. Rockefeller III). Opportunity, Health Sciences, International Relations, and While the sciences will always predominate at the founda- Population Sciences, as well as a Special Interests and Ex- tion, funding of the arts has had a wide-ranging impact. The plorations fund for proposals that are not covered precisely by these arts program gradually developed into a multidisciplinary pro- categories . In 1985, these programs dispensed gram that supports both institutions and individual artists in close to $43 million in grants, of which $7.4 million (14.6%) music, dance, theater, literature, video, film, and the visual was in the arts and humanities program. The foundation has a arts . Although it increasingly channels its funds through arts self-perpetuating board of trustees of some 20 members organizations and via panels, the arts program has been (until 1981 it had at least one Rockefeller family member), who elect the ideologically geared since its inception toward the funding of foundation's president, currently Richard individual artists, a doctrine that evokes the philosophy of the Lyman. two men who have directed the program, Norman Lloyd and The arts program, which was a separate program from Howard Klein, both avant-garde musicians themselves . In 1973 to 1983 and is now combined with the humanities pro- the world of arts funding, the Rockefeller name embodies gram, has dispensed an average of $3 million annually . It is not prestige as well as a certain mythology. Money from the divided into specific disciplines, although it has been Rockefeller Foundation is a ticket to other funding pos- structured (with humanities) along certain vague, yet control- ling sibilities and acts as a stamp of approval in the art world. guidelines : support forthe creative person; strengthening The Rockefeller Foundation began funding the media arts secondary school education through the arts and humanities; in the mid-1960s enhancing the American public's understanding of interna- . In a field that receives little supportfrom the Brice Howard (left) and Paul Kaufman of the National Center for Ex- art market, the role of this foundation has been incalculable . tional affairs through the arts and humanities; and forging periments in Television (NCET) in 1971 . Photo by Richard Bellak. As in other fields, when a philanthropic organization of this connections between artists, humanists, and society. Until magnitude graces a discipline with its dollars, people take recently, the arts program has been a somewhat flexible one, sion, the funding of programs intended to foster a cross- notice and are more inclined to followsuit. In the relatively tiny with its director having a substantial amount of freedom in cultural exchange of ideas, individual grants to artists, and world of video art, the interest and support of the Rockefeller choosing what monies to give to what media. Grants of up to the funding of equipment resources (specifically post- Foundation has been instrumental in shaping and guiding $50,000 (in the 1960s, the figure was $25,000, in the 1970s, production facilities) for artists. There is also a smattering of many of the directions taken by the community as a whole. $35,000) are made at the discretion of the director and do not small, somewhat unexpected grants, which indicates a de- The person responsible for that support and the directions require the approval of the board of trustees. While the arts sire to respond to the moment and a distinctly personal style. and humanities it encouraged is Howard Klein, who worked at the foundation program currently supports several fellow- Howard Klein came to the Rockefeller Foundation with a ship from 1967 to 1986, as director for arts from 1973 to 1983 and programs in which grants are often made through nomi- background as a musician and critic . He was born in 1931 in nations from the deputy director for arts and humanities from 1983 to 1986. field and panels, most ofthe grants awarded Teaneck, NJ, received a B.S. and M.S . in music at the Juil- in the The survey of the funding of video by the foundation since arts since the late 1960s have been made by Klein him- liard School as a scholarship student, and worked as a music self. In the field 1965, which accompanies this article, shows not only the of media arts, where no such fellowship pro- teacher and pianist for dancer Jose Limon. From 1962 to gram exists, Klein has been solely responsible for all but a 1967, Klein was a music reporter and critic for the New York few of the grants awarded.4 Times. He came to the foundation in 1967 as assistant direc- In tracing the history of the grants awarded in media and tor under Norman Lloyd and became the director of arts in MARITA STURKEN is an artist and critic of film and video in New television through Klein's program, a mixture of strategy and 1973 when Lloyd left. York City. This article was funded by a video writing eclecticism becomes grant from the apparent . Several trends can be traced : To understand the way in which Klein perceived his role as New York State Council on the Arts. support for artists' projects under the aegis of public televi- a funder and specifically as one of the primary and initial fund- AFTERIMAGE/January 1987 9 PERSONAL INFLUENCE and artist-in-residencies from the foundation, including sup- port for his two large collaborative satellite broadcast proj- ects, Good Morning, Mr. Orwell (1984) and Bye, Bye Kipling (1986), and for his retrospective exhibition at the Whitney Museum of American Art in 1982.