PHOTO BY MISTY TOMPOLES.
The Performing Arts Building at Reed College, completed in 2013, cements the college’s commitment to the arts.
Why are colleges investing
in arts facilities?
The Times article, by James S. Russell,
suggests two reasons. The first is connection to the community: Princeton is making its new performing arts center and art
gallery a new gateway to its campus by
paying to move the transit center serving
the university to its doorstep. The arts are
good ambassadors, apparently. The second reason? The Times quoted Harvard
Museum director Thomas Lentz, who
argued that students “expect an advanced
university to have an art museum as part
of what they offer, especially in a world
where the visual is so foregrounded.”
Reed’s new theater also opens a new
gateway to the campus, and Lincoln Hall
has always been a meeting place for the
rest of Portland and Portland State. And
both local projects are student-driven,
too. Reed has always had robust interest
in its arts classes, and PSU has seen a 40
percent growth in arts majors during the
past several years.
Student interest in the arts makes perfect
sense in a lot of ways. The arts involve
“doing” in addition to “studying.” They are
creative, not just mimetic. They involve
learning and practicing a deep form of
communication. And yes, as Princeton
President Christopher Eisgruber argues,
“We must make it possible for the human
spirit to soar.” So, I’m all for the investment in the arts on campuses.
But Chicken Little that I am, I have concerns, too: I don’t want the arts to hunker
down in universities for the foreseeable
future. I don’t want Shakespeare to be
a language that only college graduates
understand. Or for any modern painting
to be incomprehensible to anyone who
hasn’t ventured into a college gallery. Or
for the music of anyone not associated
with Top 10 downloads to be obscure.
These s