Rohrabacher’s Goals for Art Impossible

“Art! Who comprehends her? With whom can one consult concerning this great goddess?” wrote Ludwig van Beethoven. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Lomita) suggests in his recent Times column (March 19) that only himself, Jesse Helms, and others who share the Ed Meese mind-set are blessed with such knowledge. As if a small group of dictators would be a true improvement over the current “Soviet-style committee system,” which he so roundly condemns.

His position seems to be: Government should not be involved with funding art (through the National Endowment for the Arts), but as long as it is, we must legislate that art into something Jerry Falwell would be proud to hang on his wall.

Might I suggest that such a goal is impossible. When you take “art” and mold it and squeeze it and rip its guts out and pretty it up so that it finally can offend absolutely nobody, you no longer have “art.” At best, you’ll end up with some form of visual Muzak. Unless you change the name of the NEA to the “National Endowment for Pretty Things” you’ll look very hypocritical.

If Rohrabacher is serious about getting government out of the art business, the solution is obvious. Don’t bother fighting through a bill to control the type of art the NEA funds, but fight through a bill giving tax breaks to privately funded arts groups. The private sector will pick up the ball and you’ll kill two birds with one stone: you’ll be able to cut off government funding of art completely, and you won’t have to worry about whether current art is offensive or not.

Then, once Rohrabacher’s done piddling around with this censorship garbage, he can get to the business of eliminating the things that government funds that are truly offensive to taxpayers, like the Department of Education, HUD, the Department of Transportation and at least 50% of the Defense Department.

ROBERT D. HALL

La Habra