Arts & International Affairs Volume 5, Number 1, Summer 2020 | Page 13

ARTS & INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
Our willingness as cultural institutions to valiantly engage with our racial past can often
be motivated through a cynical pitch for philanthropic dollars. In 2017, New York City
(NYC), as culturally rich and diverse as it is segregated in public access to the arts, mandated
data collection on the diversity of cultural institution staff, requiring arts organizations
to submit meaningful goals in making their ranks more diverse. This initiative was
motivated by evidence that most robust and thriving institutions were helmed by white
male leaders. With a subway grid connecting virtually every NYC borough to the island
of Manhattan, these mainstream institutions have come under criticism and scrutiny for
their failure to engage audiences of color, and for their lack of sensitivity in creating an
inclusive environment for these communities.
Recently, Carnegie Hall was one of the first to make a grand gesture celebrating NYC’s
immigrant legacy through an ambitious, citywide project, Migrations: The Making of
America. Closer examination, however, reveals a sophisticated marketing sleight of hand.
Over 137 events across NYC and its boroughs were programmed to engage audiences
of color whom the institution has not had success cultivating. Only nine were actual
main stage events at Carnegie Hall. Only four of those nine artists that the organization
risked its curatorial and production resources toward were artists of color. Kevin Gover
(Pawnee), director of the Museum of the American Indian at the Smithsonian, was
featured in a promotional video, but Martha Redbone (Cherokee/Shawnee/Choctaw),
the festival’s only native artist, was relegated to an ancillary educational event. Community-based
arts leaders who nurture diverse audiences in their venues despite the paucity
or absence of funding support were forced to choose from a roster of artists contracted
by Carnegie Hall, rather than being invited to participate in an advisory capacity for programming
expertise within their own communities. The large institution’s paternalistic
approach exposed a superficial commitment to diversity. Instead of creating a welcoming
gateway for audiences of color to fill the seats of their storied venues, Carnegie Hall,
in pursuit of diversifying its branding, maintains its tradition of segregating and marginalizing
audiences of color.
Since its Statement of Commitment, CMA now reports approximately 75 percent of its
grant recipients are artists of color. Its presenting support effectively reaches organizations
helmed by administrators of color, enabling them to continue fostering their authentic
commitment to inclusivity within their audience communities. CMA was also featured in
Stanford Social Innovation Review for “addressing inequities at the community level in creative,
systemic ways.” Diversifying applicant pools has resulted in diversifying the notion
of excellence, and removing barriers in accessibility to CMA’s grants applications is where
we invest most of our resources and strategic thinking. The result has been many historic
firsts for the organization, including the island of Puerto Rico receiving support to foster
audience communities and artists for the first time in CMA’s program history.
Blind spots haunt even the most effective strategic EDIA approaches. At a recent Grantmakers
in the Arts conference in Denver, CO, non-profit leaders and members of the
10