Remarks of Anne-Imelda M. Radice
Director, Institute of Museum and Library Services
Picturing America symposium at
UNESCO
September 30, 2008
Paris, France
Ambassador Oliver, Chairman
Cole, Dignitaries and Friends. We have just heard about
a program that I would venture to say will become a
gold standard example of what should and can be done
in the realm of cultural diplomacy.
It demonstrates the highest
quality of scholarship and presentation. To my mind,
it stands on its own in that it does not have a special
context. It shows different art historical and historical
periods of American creativity.
The examples used often depict
periods of American History which were challenging and
not shining. It is the work of honest chroniclers who
tell a story based on art. Its educational and aesthetic
appeal for an international audience.
Why is that important? Allow
me to try to answer with some reflections as a person
who has observed and participated very modestly in the
cultural scene.
As a practitioner and not
an expert, I feel these observations have some value
within the international general public — the
audience that we all seek when we try to create bilateral
and multilateral alliances.
In the interest of full disclosure, I must state that
I was at the U.S. Information Agency at the end of the
1980s. Among my responsibilities was “Artistic
Ambassadors,” which some of you will, no doubt,
remember with a smile.
Literature about cultural
policy in the international arena is varied. But I would
recommend, if you are so inclined, reading Richard Ardt’s
book, ‘The First Resort of Kings” observations
and publications by Dr. Cynthia Schneider of Georgetown,
and any and all government reports about various cultural
commissions and recommendations.
American cultural diplomacy
– and you hear, I am avoidng a definition for
now – dates back to the Founders.
James Madison said in Paris
on Sept 20, 1785, “You see I am an enthusiast
on the subject of the arts. But it is an enthusiasm
of which I am not ashamed, as its object is to improve
the taste of my countrymen, to increase their reputation,
to reconcile to them the respect of the world, and procure
them its praise.”
This is all rather straightforward.
At its heart, however, is an emphasis that success –
another subjective term – is based on two-way
activity….that the citizens of the U.S. benefit…that
we have something to learn.
Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson
and Benjamin Franklin were other practitioners of this
form of statecraft.
“Modern” cultural diplomacy began as an
international partnership to battle the horrors of the
Axis.
This was the time of the
birth of the British Council and the strengthening of
the French Ministry of Culture. I think we would all
recognize that cultural diplomacy at this stage was
primarily a means for providing information… positive
propaganda to battle what was a growing threat to the
world, Nazism.
Words are often parsed in the annals of American Cultural
diplomacy.
A significant part of recorded
history involves functions of various entities…
and the juxtaposition of terms like education, aesthetics,
information vs. culture and propaganda.
The frequent challenges and eventual disbanding of USIA
was, in part, based on this battle of nomenclature…
and which groups within the governmental structure could
get the “objectives” – another laden
term – accomplished.
With President Roosevelt came a public attempt to have
a bi-partisan cultural diplomacy and the appointment
of Nelson Rockefeller as a cultural representative reaching
out to Latin and South America.
Rockefeller often clashed with other government officials
concerned with foreign cultural interests because he
unabashedly tied commercial interests with cultural
exchanges.
He was brave, however, and when needed, privately funded
exhibitions of modern art. As America moved into the
1950s and the horrendous McCarthy debacle, such entrepreneurial
ventures became shining moments.
In the 1950s, the Central Intelligence Agency had a
well-known role in cultural diplomacy, publishing and
disseminating materials for use abroad.
It was also during this time that a former general named
Dwight Eisenhower established a very important international
component at Columbia University as its president –
an approach he would take with him to the White House.
And we have the birth of the acronyms… bureaus,
departments, agencies, commissions, study groups, etc.
All are defined by initials… too staggering in
number to list here.
In the push-pull of program continuation, adversity,
fear of wars and lack of position are challenges that
have always inspired our government to spend more time,
expertise, and funds abroad telling the American story
and strengthening relationships. When such challenges
have retreated so has our unilateral engagement.
We also have a government structure without a centralized
cultural operation or a minister of culture.
Our cultural contributions are scattered throughout
some excellent agencies including The National Endowment
for the Humanities, The Institute of Museum and Library
Services, The National Endowment for the Arts, The National
Archives, The Library of Congress, The Smithsonian Museums,
and work at The State Department.
There have been coordinated international efforts with
particular broad goals, such as the teaching of English
and even formal agreements with our British friends
about what kind of English should be taught worldwide
(American informal vs. British formal). With that said,
the sharing of the American Cultural identity and ideals
has often been directly related to the ingenuity of
individual attaches and non-governmental participants
– those involved in exchanges, formally and informally.
In the 1950s and 1960s, there was a conscious effort
to recruit experts and often young scholars. Those were
heady times with the likes of a David McCullough or
a Paul and Julia Child representing American Culture
in far flung outposts.
It was also beginning of the Fulbright Exchange Program
– a program the late Senator Fulbright insisted
had to remain bi-partisan. How many positive human experiences
have resulted from this important program? Wonderfully,
too many to count.
When I sought advice about what I should say today I
had an extraordinary conversation with the Deputy Librarian
of Congress Deanna Marcum.
As I left her office she entrusted me with a small piece
of the Berlin Wall. She encouraged me to use it as a
muse and to even bring here today.
We all remember that day. We remember what led up to
it, beginning with President John F. Kennedy’s
declaration ‘Ich Bin Ein Berliner” –
to my mind a fantastic declaration of identification
with others from a different culture…that we understood
each other as members of the same humanity.
We remember the challenge of President Ronald Reagan,
“Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.”
Neither speech would have been possible without the
work of the cultural representatives and organized programs
abroad – one of those premier programs being the
sharing of American Jazz world wide.
Today, I hold a very small piece of that wall in my
hand. How unthinkable that would have been those short
decades ago… encased in plastic almost like a
religious relic… hatred broken down one little
piece at a time.
We must continue to let artists and the arts represent
us. Creativity, as Wilhelmina Holladay, founder of the
NMWA, recently told me is our only salvation. It unites
not divides. It captures our hearts and souls. U.S.
diplomacy has had many moments like that…we witness
one today.
Without getting bogged down in the rhetoric of official
statements and agency acronyms and the life-and-death
cycles of government programs, let us recognize what
makes cultural diplomacy work….
First… Let us recognize that the most far reaching
cultural diplomacy should simply be the sharing of cultural
experiences, artistic work and goodwill that flows both
ways across borders. We do not have to sacrifice cultural
and national identities to understand and enjoy and
respect other cultures.
Second… Let us speak of quality. We should not
engage in trying to give only quantitative values for
why we need to have cultural diplomacy. We should not
have to use official reports that use phrases like,
“combat the forces of darkness.” Yes, there
is a public document that uses this phrase to justify
sending a music group abroad.
Third… We must always recognize that one person
can make a difference. I would suspect that Louis Armstrong
did more for the American image, if you will, with one
song and one smile than…well, you fill in the
blanks.
Fourth… We must continue to identify with people,
not regimes, and not punish people through ignorance
because of unfortunate government structures under which
they may live.
As Thomas Jefferson said, we must show a “decent
respect to the opinions of mankind.” That kind
of respect is evident here… with “Picturing
America.”
It is easy for me to hold this piece of the Berlin Wall
in my hand. It is tiny but powerful. It represents millions
of blows against a hard surface, a world-changing event
etched into our consciousness through film footage and
photography.
Today, technology produces billions of instant reactions,
instant images…usually without context or exchanges
on a human level…so now we have a new wall that
is more insidious because it wraps around people as
well as divides them.
Ignorance of others, fear of cultural difference, lack
of mutual respect are some of the nearly invisible fibers.
However, I continue to hope and we all continue to work
as individuals to try.
We must reach through this wall and continue to share
cultures…one on one. We can see each other through
this wall…and perhaps we need to have faith in
the humanity that stands across from us: different,
but maybe not really different at all.
So today we celebrate what we hope can be a step forward
in creating a new era of respect – the kind Thomas
Jefferson referenced.
Again congratulations to you, Mr. Chairman, for clarity
of vision and quality that stands alone. Thank you,
Madame Ambassador, for your leadership and humanity.
