Renowned ‘Grey’s Anatomy’ mastermind, Shonda Rhimes, recently vacated her post as the Kennedy Center’s treasurer amidst a leadership shuffle carried out by none other than Donald Trump. Rhimes, lauded for her role in creating popular television series such as Bridgerton and Inventing Anna, announced her departure via a headline shared on social media. For the rationale behind her decision, she merely chose to share a cryptic quote from John F. Kennedy: ‘If art is to nourish the roots of our culture, society must set the artist free to follow his vision wherever it takes him.’
Alongside Rhimes, singer Ben Folds made a similar decision, departing from his position as artistic advisor to the National Symphony Orchestra. It seems that these moves are part of a broader exodus of figures with known liberal loyalties, ones who have consistently emphasized their political underpinnings in their work.
Known for using their illustrious careers for political influence, Rhimes and Folds had previously endorsed Kamala Harris during her run against Trump’s reelection. Many will remember their ostentatious use of their fame to support the Democratic representative. Regrettably, their departure now presents an explicit depiction of how partisan politics continues to seep into cultural institutions, negatively affecting their broader mission of celebrating and propagating the arts.
In stark contrast to Rhimes’ implications of artistic freedom, the actions taken by Trump seem to signal a no-nonsense approach to strictly professional procedures. Trump has boldly assumed the role of chair for the Kennedy Center board, a position he states he earned through a unanimous vote (although conflicting reports suggest otherwise). Irrespective of these reports, Trump’s move shows a decisive effort to steer this ship away from partisan leanings.
Upon establishing his position as chair, Trump exercised his authority by declaring the center was in dire need of an overhaul. He critiqued the facility for exposing our younger generations to ‘drag shows,’ suggesting a moral decline under previous leadership. While his critics argue this is merely an act of personal vendetta, Trump’s intentions seem more angled towards sheltering the youth from inappropriate content.
But the real stroke of genius lies not in Trump’s criticisms, but in his proactive redressal. Not only did he enact changes by eliminating the peripheral influence of inherently divisive elements, he also went a step further and revitalized the Kennedy Center’s leadership. His swift moves demonstrated an intent to manage the center for the benefit of the community without any partisan favoritism.
Trump’s first line of action was to replace David M. Rubenstein, who had been enjoying a comfortable chair for over a decade since 2010. David’s withdrawal could be seen as an attempt to inject fresh perspectives into the Kennedy Center, a move which many have been eagerly longing for.
Additionally, Trump appointed Ric Grenell as the new executive director, presumably summoning a leadership that echoes his own audacious vision for a restructured center. If anything, Trump’s move reflects the kind of determined leadership that steers influential cultural institutions clear of personal political prejudices, focusing primarily on their core responsibilities.
In his initial week as chair, Trump has demonstrated a keen disapproval of the incumbent board, most of whom, unsurprisingly, were democratic appointees. Among those terminated were former White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and long-standing Biden adviser, Mike Donilo, a clearly partisan duo whose presence many felt was at odds with the Kennedy Center’s impartial standing.
Insiders purport these moves as ‘unprecedented,’ but isn’t it time we break away from such passive acceptance of the ‘ordinary’? Trump’s actions beg us to question whether these so-called norms were ever beneficial in the first place. If anything, these moves signal an attempt to recalibrate the scales, allowing for an unbiased functioning of the Center.
It can’t be denied that Trump’s actions have ruffled feathers, but those seeking the truth might ask if these feathers needed ruffling. Was anything truly lost when Rhimes and the like chose to abandon their positions? Or did their departure simply expose the political bias that had seeped into the very fabric of the Kennedy Center, marring the institution’s fundamental mission?
As a haven for the arts, shouldn’t institutions like the Kennedy Center strive to remain equally representative and unprejudiced? As critics, one needs to ask, ‘Should politics have shaped the Center’s course in the first place or is there indeed room for an overhaul?’
Often, these impeachment exercises are described as undermining the democratic foundations of an institution. However, one could argue Trump’s actions are the manifestation of democracy as it enables change, adaptation, and evolution, regardless of the discomfort or opposition faced from firmly-established yet prejudiced norms.
Customarily, substantial informational neglect would accompany such a viewpoint. However, by addressing these unpopular insights with an unfiltered eye, one could engage with the probability that Trump’s reshuffling of the Kennedy Center is symptomatic of extensive, politically biased management. In reality, these galleries function as cultural gateways and should restructure to ensure unarrested artistic expression and engagement, eliminating any partisan prejudice.