published Wednesday, October 12th, 2011

Beyond the Blue Rhino

The City Council's split vote last week over the purchase of the Blue Rhino sculpture in Coolidge Park turned out the right way: The council, with one member absent, voted 5-3 to buy the sculpture, which has captured a substantial fan base in the two years it's been on free display in the park. The council's divide was a bit discouraging nonetheless. It illustrated the sort of official schizophrenia that hampers badly needed support for the range of arts in civic life here.

Council members Deborah Scott, Pam Ladd and Jack Benson opposed spending $32,500 for the popular work, the creation of local artist John Petrey, even though both Ladd and Benson have themselves sought pieces of public art for their individual City Council districts.

That contradiction is regrettable, but not unusual. The core of the problem, at least at the government level, is that while most public officials appreciate the cultural and civic value of arts in our community's quality of life, some don't want to justify public expenditures in support of the arts to taxpayers.

In fact, city and county officials tend to spend next to nothing from public coffers on public art while simultaneously praising its enormous public value. Unfortunately, their unwillingness to advocate a moderate view of public investment in the arts for the good of the city is bound to make more citizens think that art does not merit public support.

That's neither constructive, nor wise. The role of the arts is not just essential to our personal quality of life. It has also become one of the most important factors in our community's economic development and in the public's enjoyment of our community's expanding amenities.

New business, tourism and our residents' public enjoyment of our improving quality of life depend on far more than our basic infrastructure of sewers, streets and schools. When Volkswagen decided three years ago to build the manufacturing center that is transforming our economic potential, for example, its leaders explained that it was the city's renaissance and its cultural amenities -- the Riverwalk, public art, the museum district and the revitalization of downtown -- that cemented their decision. Indeed, they chose to announce their decision in the atrium of the Hunter Museum, where they explicitly lauded the city's aesthetic quality.

The council's divide, to be sure, was ironic and out of sync for other reasons. It came as citizens were engaged in meetings nearly every day last week, in one area of the county or another, to participate in Imagine Chattanooga 20/20. This cultural planning process is aimed at honing the ways that creativity, arts and culture can address community issues ranging the gamut of local needs: education and job creation, crime and neighborhood revitalization, environmental sustainability and demographic trends.

This important work underscores just how much the public benefits from the arts. Students, families, seniors and individuals of all ages benefit already from a range of arts activities -- plays, concerts, public art and exhibitions -- that uplift our lives and elevate our goals. And Allied Arts groups are studying ways to bring more arts activities to more schools and neighborhoods, senior centers and public venues.

The more that area residents discover how essential the various forms of art are to their lives, the more essential such outreach efforts will become. That realization should prompt broader financial support, publicly and privately; in fact, it must to take the place of a vanishing generation of a few large donors. But the rewards will be immense.

Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
Allan12 said...

You may not be aware of this, but Chattanooga has a poverty rate of 26% with children doing without basic needs. A $32,000 Rhino is outrageous and an unneeded expenditure. It is not the taxpayer's responsibility to fund what others deem as art. If the minority wishes to fund what a few deem to be art pieces, let them raise the money, but not from my mandated taxes. Chattanooga taxpayers are unfairly burdened by these art expenditures.

October 12, 2011 at 6:40 a.m.
chioK_V said...

Allan12, $32,000 is not a whole lot of money. All Chattanooga children I see appear quite healthy. Some overly so. Just because Chattanooga has a poverty rate of 26% doesn't mean that 26% is going without the most basic needs.

As for those so-called taxpayers aren't they the main ones who have been claiming they're tired of their tax dollars going to the poor? Are you speaking of those same taxpayers who follow fellow Chattanoogans around in the store to see what they have in their grocery shopping carts and then stand in line to watch and see if they pay with a foodstamp debit card?

I say, BY EVEN MORE ART, Chattanooga!! Provide grants to some of these local artists to take some of these wandering youth with seemingly no direction where these artists can share their talents. I'd rather see such funds allocated to someone with a skill and something to offer than to have those fundings go to these worthless programs that do nothing but throw and block party and pocket the rest. They always come back for more and more with no end in sight.

So, by all means! Take some of these locally talented artists, provide them with the funding to share their talents and watch how some of these lost young boys and girls soar. Be ii through the art of paintings, sketching or learning to play a musical instrument. Allowed to be made a part of something great and constructive would greatly drive down many of the problems with Chattanooga's youth and crimes committed by them.

October 12, 2011 at 10 p.m.
ScoopAway said...

chioK_V said... Allan12, $32,000 is not a whole lot of money. All Chattanooga children I see appear quite healthy. Some overly so. Just because Chattanooga has a poverty rate of 26% doesn't mean that 26% is going without the most basic needs ....... Best comment I've seen on here!!

October 13, 2011 at 8:48 a.m.
ms1824706 said...

i agree with "chioK_V. He makes some very good points. We have to invest in our "appearance" which includes ART.

October 13, 2011 at 11:31 a.m.
talkthetalk911 said...

Paying Attention: i would say that you are correct. its amazing what can be said when people dont have to leave their real name. $32,000 here $325,000 there.....things add up! i would agree. have the ones who want art start a private organization to raise money and buy the art for the city if they choose to do so.

October 13, 2011 at 2:54 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »


Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.