NEA v. Finley: Explicating the Rocky Relationship Between the Government and the Arts

Abstract

The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) has been the principal source of governmental support for artistic expression since 1965, awarding over three billion dollars to artists over that period of time. As an integral part of President Lyndon Johnson's Great Society, the NEA's principle goal was to ultimately make the arts more accessible to all Americans through funding private expression. Additionally, the NEA strived to preserve American culture and encourage widespread artistic expression.

Aside from the funding, the NEA originally desired to keep government out of the entire process altogether. The original authors of the enabling legislation feared that government involvement at any depth or stage beyond funding, would promote the perception that government-supported art, funded by the NEA, was merely government approved, conformist art; truly not works of uninhibited exploration and communication. Thus, the original framers stressed that "funding is to foster free inquiry and expression. Conformity for its own sake is not to be encouraged, nor shall undue preference be given to any particular style or school of thought or expression. The sole standard should be artistic excellence."

However, despite the framers' fear of conformist art, the NEA's enabling statute has afforded the agency with an expansive range of discretion in awarding the grants. The statute broadly states that the agency should construe "artistic and cultural significance, giving emphasis to American creativity and cultural diversity, professional excellence," and the encouragement of "public knowledge, education", "understanding, and appreciation of the arts".