The John F. Kennedy Center for Performing Arts graced American culture with its grand opening in September of 1971. This significant event was marked by a daring original work, the Mass, from Leonard Bernstein, which was commissioned by the late nation’s first Catholic President’s widow. However, the absence of the sitting President Richard Nixon was conspicuous. His absence was not an oversight, but a calculated decision following a review of Bernstein’s extensive FBI file that revealed his unhidden stand against the Vietnam War. Instead, Nixon chose to grace a National Symphony Orchestra event, distancing himself from Bernstein, whom he openly referred to disdainfully.
Despite Nixon’s decision to give the event a wide berth, there was no attempt to undermine the Center’s operations or the messages conveyed by its performances. This decision reflected Nixon’s understanding of the value of cultural engagement and its influence in subtly shifting views and attitudes. Taking a leap to more recent times, we find another President mirroring Nixon’s aloofness for the Kennedy Center. Donald Trump largely avoided the institution during his term, but his reasons were notably dissimilar.
The annual Kennedy Center Honors serves as a platform where selected artists or groups are celebrated for their contributions to American culture. In Trump’s debut year in office, the announcement of the Honorees led to an interesting conundrum when three of them threatened not to attend if they needed to share a platform with Trump. Finding himself painted into a corner, Trump opted not to attend the ceremonies throughout his term, allowing the artists to be honored without having to rub elbows with him.
An otherwise diplomatic move, similar to Nixon’s avoidance was adopted by Trump for his initial term. However, the Kennedy Center never had the dubious honor of his presence throughout that period. It essentially operates as a monument to national performing arts, an area where Trump showed prolonged indifference. Recently though, such disinterest has given way to a more aggressive stance.
Trump has transformed the Kennedy Center’s governing body, leading to the dismissal of board members appointed to six-year terms. He unilaterally declared himself chairman, and placed a loyal follower at the helm as an interim leader. It’s evident that his complete takeover of the institution succeeded, with the board, now consisting solely of his appointees, unanimously proclaiming him chairman. Essentially, this puts him directly as the watchful guardian over all artistic decisions made on this influential national stage.
This aggressive takeover of the Kennedy Center brought swift impacts. The Center’s longstanding chief was ousted, and a musician rapidly resigned from his post as artistic adviser to the National Symphony Orchestra that considers the Kennedy Center a home. Trump’s newfound involvement is likely to have the most noticeable impact on the Kennedy Center Honors, which is frequently the most publicly visual aspect of the Center’s activities.
It’s difficult to envision recent winners accepting such recognition knowing that Trump had assumed a more pronounced role. Potential honorees may feel uncomfortable sharing the stage with Trump, potentially skewing the Kennedy Center Honors in the upcoming years towards artists who have no qualms about accompanying him. This shift may also impact another esteemed Kennedy Center franchise, the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor, typically determined by a select group of insiders.
Although this may sound like inconsequential artistic politicking, it holds more significance than just denying famous individuals their deserved accolades. The performances hosted by the Kennedy Center have broader cultural reverberations, influencing Hollywood and, by extension, global perspectives. Annually, about 2,200 events attract 2 million visitors. As curator of these experiences, Trump’s hand is guiding what these visitors consume.
As it programs its calendar with world premieres of musical theater, opera, and orchestral and dance works, the Kennedy Center’s selection effectively serves as cultural diplomacy. This underlines why the Secretary of State is legally mandated to sit at the board meetings. The decisions made around these tables holds implications beyond simple entertainment considerations, influencing how the world perceives American culture.
Trump’s motivation for assuming control of the Kennedy Center purportedly comes from recent events that featured drag queens, which he has publicly criticized. Regardless of these justifications, Trump’s more significant objective seems to be seeking full control over scheduling future events, pushing towards a politically-influenced national arts platform.
While politics and art have always conversed and sometimes clashed, it is worrisome when veiled threats of boycotts can influence an institution as revered as Kennedy Center. After discontinuing diversity programs across the Federal Government, a major contractor retracted support for World Pride, an event expected to draw numerous LGBTQ individuals to the DC region. This move sent cold waves of concern rippling through artistic communities, hinting at potential strangleholds on artistic expression.
The ramifications are chilling. Evidence suggests that the Kennedy Center’s programming could be heavily swayed by Trump’s personal preferences. Multimedia platforms displayed an AI-generated image of him directing an orchestra, indicating where the future might be heading. The Kennedy Center’s audience extends beyond the local D.C. population striding its plush red carpet or basking on its renovated terrace.
As a global audience clocks the events hosted on its grounds, the ramifications for the freedom of expression and artistic autonomy cannot be understated. In Nixon’s case, his reserved withdrawal under public criticism allowed space for free speech and art in the absence of censorship. Today, the narrative has deviated with Trump assuming the role of the national taste arbiter. The Kennedy Center, under his reign, may veer dramatically based on his whims, potentially distorting its reflection of our national identity.