As I see it, the Olympiad of the Arts and Sciences could include competitions in five main fields. First, I should like to see an international folk festival, where the nations of the world would compete in dancing and folk singing, and in displaying native handicrafts including fabrics, woodcarving, and other traditional crafts. This would help to preserve the folk heritage of mankind, a heritage which is rapidly being dissipated around the world. The industrialization of the modern world is seriously diminishing the interest of many in the folk arts. It would be a tragedy if these noble traditions were to be lost. I believe that the International Olympiad program would be a strong influence in preserving this inheritance from man's past. Secondly, there could be a festival of drama and the dance which would involve competition in the presentation of assigned classical plays, such as Shakespearean tragedy; competition in the presentation of original plays; competition in the presentation of national theatrical forms such as the Kabuki and plays of Japan; and finally, competition in classical dance forms such as the ballet. The difference between these dances and those which might be presented under the folk festival is that there are certain types of dances which are common to a variety of cultures and competition here would be on the basis of national interpretation of these classical dance forms. There could be a music festival which would involve individual competition in all of the principal instruments in use today around the world. We should have competition in piano, the stringed instruments, the brasses, and the woodwinds. Special categories for national instruments which would make it possible for the world to become acquainted with the unique musical heritage of various cultures could be included. There could also be a competition in painting and sculpture. Here an international body of critics might set up the appropriate categories, and select qualified judges. I hope there will be several categories, including both the classical and modern schools, and the traditional art of the world's civilizations. The fifth competition might be in the sciences. A group of distinguished international scientists could decide upon the type of competitions to be held. It might be patterned after the science talent search and National Science Fair, which are sponsored by Science Service. The International Olympiad could follow the tradition of the sports olympics with the lighting of the traditional flame, the reciting of the Olympic oath, and the awarding of medals. However, I believe that the winners in the Olympiad should receive additional prizes, such as opportunities for concert tours, gifts of musical instruments, and opportunities for additional exhibits of their artistic or scientific achievements. Many benefits are to be derived from these contests. First, there would be an opportunity for young artists or scientists to win distinction. Secondly, people would have a chance to learn that Americans are not materialistic money-minded individuals. Finally, the world would be enriched by this exchange of artistic and scientific ideas. Unquestionably an appropriation would be required from the Congress to initiate these contests. However, I think that there would be enough public interest after the first Olympiad to warrant reliance upon public subscription to finance future American participation. The revenue from admission to various events would be very substantial, and should go a long way toward financing the entire project. The arts and the sciences are a universal language. We should use this language to become better acquainted with our friends around the world, and to enable them to understand us. The millennium will have to be achieved by hard work. The alternative may be the destruction of mankind. I believe the International Olympiad of the Arts and Sciences and the two-way cultural exchange program of young artists would be gigantic steps toward more effectively promoting international stability and mutual understanding of the world's peoples. As we go about living our busy lives today, we think of and pray for peace in our time. And as we ask for divine guidance, we should remember that it is not enough just to ask for peace we must work for it. NATIONAL LEGISLATION AFFECTING THE ARTS (Remarks of Hon. Harris B. McDowell, Jr., Congressman at Large, Delaware, to the 36th annual meeting of the National Association of Schools of Music, Palmer House, Chicago, Ill., second general session, Nov. 26, 1960) It is a distinct pleasure to be with you of the National Association of Schools of Music. This is a wonderful opportunity for us who share a special concern for America's cultural destiny. Together we can consider in what direction this Nation is heading in the field of the arts and your particular role in shaping this course. As members of a professional organization dedicated to strengthening the quality of higher education in music, I know that you have a deep interest in efforts to insure a widespread recognition of the arts in this country. Since my election to the Congress, I have introduced and supported measures to advance this purpose. You are already aware, I am certain, that throughout the country we are experiencing a stimulating growth in the arts. And the picture is getting better every year despite the still prevailing fiscal undernourishment which, in my opinion, the Federal Government should help to remedy in the immediate future. I want to discuss with you today some of the efforts being made to further the national recognition and encouragement of the arts and artists. In the Congress some of these efforts have already achieved success. Others, I sincerely believe, will be accorded more serious consideration under the new administration. I am firmly convinced that the immediate future holds great promise for recognition of the arts on the national level. Both of the presidential candidates, for example, recently assured citizens that they were aware of many of the needs relating to the arts and the Nation at home and abroad. Both thought that the Federal Government had a role to play in meeting some of those needs. Both concurred on the desirability of expending the present cultural interchange program. The two candidates, however, opposed the establishment of a Secretary of Culture of Cabinet rank and with broad authority in this field. Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Nixon expressed concern for maintaining the freedom of the arts and favored instead the creation of a Federal Advisory Council on the Arts. I am certain that such a council of experts would greatly assist in the evaluation, development, and expansion of the cultural resources of the United States. A bill (H.R. 7656) which would establish a Federal Advisory on the Arts was reported by the House Committee on Education and Labor during the past session of the 86th Congress. This Council would undertake studies and make recommendations relating to appropriate methods for encouraging creative activities, participation in and appreciation of the arts. It would be composed of 21 members appointed by the President from among private citizens who are widely recognized for their knowledge of, experience in, or their profound interest in one or more of the arts. The House committee reported that it— ***** visualizes the Council as a national clearinghouse for the consideration of methods by which the Federal Government might appropriately and effectively act to encourage and stimulate both artistic endeavor and appreciation on the part of our citizens." 1 I am one of those who believe that the enactment of this legislation is long overdue. In introducing one of the presentations of the candidate's views on the arts, which I mentioned previously, Irving Kolodin, music editor of the Saturday Review, makes the following observation: "Among the subjects with which the next administration will have to deal is the claim of art and artists to Government recognition, encouragement, and assistance. Though not the gravest issue before the country, it is far from the least if our culture is to attain the growth of which it is capable * * *"2 As President-elect Kennedy so ably states: "The encouragement of art, in the broadest sense, is indeed a function of Government. H. Rept. No. 1660, 86th Cong., 2d sess. "The Government cannot order that culture exist, but the Government can and should provide the climate of freedom, deeper and wider education, and intellectual curiosity in which culture flourishes* * *"3 To the readers of Musical America, Senator Kennedy also points out: "* * * We live in an era of impressive artistic achievement. "American education has opened its curricula to the creative arts all across the country. No campus is now complete without a gallery, a drama and dance group, a resident poet and composer. "And the American Government is even more dependent upon art. For art works direct; it speaks a language without words, and is thus a chief means for proclaiming America's message to the world over the heads of dictators, and beyond the reaches of officialdom." 994 In line with this relationship between the arts and public affairs, two of the other major organizations in your field requested that cultural planks be included in the national party platforms-the National Federation of Music Clubs and the American Federation of Musicians. I assure you that it is only through the continued support of your own and other professional organizations that we in the Congress can hope for success in the promotion of the arts on a nationwide basis. I heartily agree with the recent suggestion of Miss Marie Hurley, national legislation chairman of the National Federation of Music Clubs, that various committees for the arts in both political parties should be retained after the campaign. Moreover, as Miss Hurley points out, these committees "should be assigned appropriately and permanently as organizational components of the Democratic and Republican National Committees to work on a continuing bipartisan basis specifically, for the enactment of sound legislative proposals advanced by the presidential candidates, and overall, for cultural progress throughout the Nation." I have mentioned in a general way the growth of the arts in recent years— as indicated both by the increased activity and by greater awareness of what still remains to be done to promote the arts nationally. Surely you have noted the surge of interest in your own field. Some of this enthusiasm certainly cannot be subjected to a mere economic measuring stick. Yet it is still true that the ways in which we as a people spend our money reflect, to some degree, our national sense of values. The American Music Conference and the National Association of Music Merchants recently reported that last year Americans spent a record of $550 million for musical instruments. This amount represents more than double the 1949 sales of $220 million and represents an increase of 78 percent greater than the growth rate in personal consumption spending during the same period." Moreover, a recent report to the trustees of the National Cultural Center included the following encouraging facts relating to the situation in music in the United States today. We are told, for example, that— We now have 1,142 symphony orchestras (more than half of those in the world), as compared with fewer than 100 in 1920 and 10 in 1900; Americans spend more at concert box offices than at baseball ticket gates and as much for recordings of concert music and high-fidelity equipment as on all spectator sports; Since 1948 about 1,000 compositions of some 300 American composers of "serious music" have appeared on longplaying records; There are over 75 national musical organizations in the United States with more than 900,000 members devoted to the cause of concert music and over 185 organizations dedicated to music; Over 35 million Americans are actively interested in some form of concert music. During the 1958-59 season, the American Concert League reported more sold-out houses and the highest concert music ticket sales in history." Similar increases are also noted in the hours of concert music carried over the radio each week and in the number of municipal auditoriums and special con Ibid., pp. 43-44. Musical America, October 1960, p. 11. Wall Street Journal, Aug. 24, 1960. The National Cultural Center; pt. 1, sec. I, "The Case," New York, G. A. Brokeley & Co., Inc., 1960, pp. 5-6. cert halls in cities. It is no wonder that the situation today has been referred to as everything from a "cultural revolution" and a "cultural breakthrough" to a "cultural explosion" and a "cultural bender." Yet the picture is still not entirely rosy, even in the music field. As Howard Mitchell, of the National Symphony, noted earlier this year, there is the problem of those for whom the "products" of the musicians are still "too exclusive."" There are still the many economic difficulties involved in bringing more good music to more appreciative citizens. Although the price of symphony tickets has gone up in many cases, some of our finest orchestras still cannot keep up with rising costs. Thus, without additional aid, they face the same plight as the universities with their ever-increasing tuition fees. We know, for example, that concert ticket sales usually only cover from 40 to 50 percent of the year's expenses for our major orchestras. Moreover, with standards of performance and the degree of competition on the upgrade, we are told also that there is a shortage of orchestral players and a great demand for full-time professional music teachers. Some of the orchestras, it is true, receive financial assistance from local governments. Most of the leading symphonies, however, must rely mainly on gifts from individuals and business firms. I do not suggest at this point, however, that the Federal Government merely step in and buy a solution to such problems facing music and the other arts. This is something neither you nor I want to see happen. Rather, I have chosen this close-to-home example as only one illustration of the many serious deficiencies which will continue to exist unless we can develop in citizens a greater appreciation of the significance of artistic endeavor in our national life. Our State and local governments play important parts in this task, but I believe that the impetus for a broad program of national cultural awareness must come from the national level. I am convinced that our democratic society must accept responsibility for preserving and promoting the arts as it has done in other areas of universal human need-in health, in welfare, and in education. In this regard, I share the view expressed last year by a member of a family that has afforded substantial financial support to the arts. In emphasizing the concept of community responsibility for the arts at the dedication of the magnificent Lincoln Center for the performing arts in New York, John D. Rockefeller III stated that "* * * today creative fulfillment is as important to man's wellbeing and happiness as his need for better physical health was 50 years ago." Let us look now at some of the Federal legislation enacted during the 86th Congress. One bread-and-butter problem for many musicians was helped with the passage of a bill which reduces the cabaret tax from 20 percent to 10 percent (Public Law 86-422). As you know, the American Federation of Musicians had vigorously opposed this Federal tax for years on the grounds that it was confiscatory and discriminatory and that it greatly reduced the number of job opportunities for some musicians. Another bill passed in 1959 would amend the National Cultural Center Act by permitting donors to the center to name an alternate recipient for tax deduction purposes if the total amount of donation in 5 years is insufficient for the construction of the center. As you are already aware, national cultural history was enhanced in 1958 when the Congress chartered a National Cultural Center to be located in the National's Capital and constructed with private funds on Government-donated land. The National Cultural Center Act, incidentally, received wholehearted, bipartisan support and can be an excellent example of cooperative public-private efforts to encourage cultural activities. You in the music field will surely be pleased to know that the hall of this multi-million-dollar project scheduled for completion first is an opera house. Until the other projected facilities are constructed, symphonies and theatrical performances will probably also be held in this hall. Trustees recently announced plans to start building by 1963 a complete shell of the center and to finish a multipurpose hall by that date. A plan is now under consideration which proposes using the center as a showcase for the performing arts-presenting rather than producing shows, with a clearinghouse for art information, an arts museum, and a library. 7 Christian Science Monitor, Apr. 20, 1960. Economist, July 24, 1957, p. 219. New York Times, Oct. 7, 1959, p. 45. Unlike the capital cities and even the larger provincial cities of Europe and the U.S.S.R., Washington has never enjoyed the distinction of such a monument to the performing arts. It is hoped that the proposed cultural center would not only be an inspiring, useful, and tangible project in which our own citizens could take pride but also an international meetingplace of world renown in the arts. We have looked at some of the recent legislative enactments. Surely, the progress to date is notable. Yet much more remains to be done. Numerous other bills which would affect the cultural life of the Nation were left pending at the end of the last session. I call your attention particularly to a proposal which would provide for the preservation of the Dolly Madison House, Benjamin Tayloe House, Decatur House, and the famous old Belasco Theater-historic landmarks in the Nation's Capital. The Senate (Committee on Labor and Public Welfare) held hearings on such proposals this spring. And yet, despite the overwhelming evidence in favor of the preservation of the historic buildings, and despite the efforts of the General Services Administrator to recommend another site for the proposed court building, the Senate Public Works Committee voted to authorize new construction on Lafayette Square. The one final hope now is intervention by the new administration next year. Since GSA will not be ready to raze the buildings for about 2 years, the new President would be able to save these historic buildings by refusing to spend the money authorized for the new courthouse. I am certain that Mr. Kennedy will fully support every effort to preserve these buildings which have such deep connections with America's cultural past. These efforts have the support of some 30 national and local organizations representing millions of Americans-among them several large music organizations. President-elect Kennedy introduced a splendid measure in March of this year to preserve and maintain buildings for historical, cultural, and civic purposes. In introducing this bill, he said: “*** The Dolly Madison house, the Benjamin Tayloe house, and the Belasco Theater have long served as an inspiration to generations of Americans who have visited their Capital City. Certainly, before any irrevocable action is taken to destroy these buildings to provide a site for a courthouse, other sites should be investigated." The bill also authorizes that the National Park Service and the District of Columbia Recreation Department shall advise and assist the Administrator in the restoration and management of the Belasco Theater as a municipal art center. I also introduced a similar bill in the Congress this year. In my opinion, it would be an act of folly to destroy these important symbols of our cultural heritage as a Nation. In this city of Chicago, the famed Garrick Theater, build in 1892, the same decade the Belasco Theater and Carnegie Hall were built, was recently saved through the efforts of a citizens' committee headed by Mayor Richard J. Daley. Concerted effort and the cooperative interest of professional organizations such as your own often lend important support to such projects. Another significant piece of proposed legislation was that relating to a Federal Advisory Council on the Arts, which I have already discussed. As I indicated, the bill was favorably reported in the House. In the Senate, it was left awaiting action by the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare. I also sponsored, as did Senator Humphrey, a bill to provide that 1 mill out of each $1 of tax revenue of the District of Columbia government be set aside in a special fund to be administered by the District Recreation Board in order to help defray the expenses of the National Symphony Orchestra, the Corcoran Gallery of Art, the Washington Opera Society, and other nonprofit art and cultural programs of the Nation's Capital. This is not a new idea in municipal support of culture, and it certainly could do wonders for Washington's artistic and cultural activities. You may be surprised to learn that the municipal government of Washington spends for less on the fine arts than most other major U.S. cities. A survey conducted in 1959 by the Library of Congress at my request showed that the Nation's Capital gives only $16,000 in municipal funds for cultural activities as compared with much larger amounts in other cities of comparable size and less per capita income. It is no wonder that, in culture, Washington has been called a "hick town." Certainly our Capital does not compare favorably with the capital cities of other nations throughout the world where much higher |