S. Hurok Presents; A Memoir of the Dance World

by Sol Hurok

More than once in the pages of this book I have underlined and lamented the passing of the great, generous Maecenas, the disappearance, through causes that require no reiteration, of such figures as Otto H. Kahn, whose open-hearted and open-pursed generosity contributed so inestimably to the lyric and balletic art of dead yesterday. I have detailed at some length the government support provided for the arts by our financially less fortunate cousins of Great Britain, South America, and Europe. The list of European countries favoring the arts could be extended into a lengthy catalogue of nations ranging from Scandinavia to the Mediterranean, on both sides of that unhappy screen, the “Iron Curtain.”

Here in the United States, the situation becomes steadily grimmer. Almost every artistic enterprise worth its salt and scene painter, its bread and choreographer, its meat and conductor, is in the perpetual necessity of sitting on the pavement against the wall, hat in hand, chanting the pitiful wail: “Alms, for the love of Art.” Vast quantities of words are uttered, copious tears of regret are shed about and over this condition at art forums, expensive cocktail parties, and on the high stools of soda fountains. A great deal is said, but very little is done.

The answer, in my opinion, will not be found until the little voices of the soda fountain, the forums, the cocktail parties, unite into one superbly unanimous chorus and demand a government subsidy for the arts. I am not so foolish as to insist that government subsidy is the complete and final cure for all the ills to which the delicate body is heir; but it can provide, in a great national theatre, a roof for the creative and performing artists of ballet, opera, theatre, and music. More than anything else, the American ballet artist needs a roof, under which to live, to create, and hold his being in security. Such a step would be the only positive one in the right direction.

It is only through governmentally subsidized theatres, or one type of subsidy or another, that ballet, opera, music, the legitimate theatre may become a living and vital force in the everyday life of the American people, may belong to the masses, instead of being merely a place of entertainment for a relatively small section of our population. We have before us the example of the success of government subsidy in the British Arts Council and in the subsidized theatres of other European countries. How can we profit by these examples?

A national opera house is the first step. Such a house should not, in my opinion, be in New York. It should, because of the size of the country, be much more centrally situated than in our Eastern metropolis. Since the area of Great Britain is so much smaller than the United States, our planning of government subsidy would, of necessity, be on a much larger scale. In many of the countries where ballet and music have the benefit of government subsidy, government ownership of industry is an accepted practice. Yet the government theatre subsidy is managed without stifling private enterprise.

I am quite aware that securing a national subsidy for the arts in this country will be a long, difficult and painful process. It will require, before all else, a campaign of education. We must have an increasing world-consciousness, a better understanding of our fellow humans. We must develop a nation of well-educated and, above all, thinking people, who will do everything in their power to make a full-rounded life available to every man and woman in the nation.

Only during the days of the WPA, in the ’30’s, has the United States government ever evinced any particular interest in the arts. I cannot hope that the present materialistic attitude of our lawmakers will cause them to look with much favor on things of the spirit. The attitude of our government towards the arts is noteworthy only for its complete lack of interest in them or care for them. In the arts, and notably in the ballet, it has the most formidable means and potential material for cultural propaganda. The stubbornness with which it insists upon ignoring the only aspect of American cultural life that would really impress and influence Europe is something that is, to me, incredible. It is a rather sad picture. How long will it take us in our educational process to understand that in the unborn tomorrow we, as a nation, will be remembered only through our art rather than through our materialism and our gadgets?

Meanwhile, excellent and highly valuable assistance is being given by such Foundations as the Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation. The latter’s contribution to the New York City Center has been of inestimable help to that organization.

Certain municipalities, through such groups as the San Francisco Art Commission, financed on the basis of four mills on the dollar from the city tax revenues, the Art Commission of the County of Los Angeles, the City of Philadelphia, among others, are making generous and valuable contributions to the musical and artistic life of their communities.

There are still to be mentioned those loyal and generous friends of the arts who have contributed so splendidly to the appeals of orchestras throughout the country, of the Metropolitan Opera Company, and the New York City Center.