The Kennedy Center's Fall: A Cautionary Tale for UK Arts Institutions

The Kennedy Center: A Symptom of Larger Political Manipulation

Into the pale stone wall of the Kennedy Center, above its elegant terrace on the edge of the Potomac River, are carved bold and idealistic sentiments. “This country cannot afford to be materially rich and spiritually poor,” proclaimed John F. Kennedy. The impulse to build this national performing arts center came from Dwight D. Eisenhower, was named after JFK posthumously, and opened in 1971 to the music of Leonard Bernstein and the choreography of Alvin Ailey. This storied institution was envisioned as bipartisan, a gathering place for Americans from all political backgrounds, showcasing the finest in dance, opera, and music.

However, just as politics has the power to uplift, it can just as easily destroy. The last 50 years of careful bipartisan management unraveled shockingly fast when Donald Trump decided to insert himself into the center's operations. In March, amidst my visit, stunned patrons observed Trump first expelling its Republican chairperson and then appointing a new set of trustees eager to comply with his demands. The immediate aftermath was palpable; during a National Symphony Orchestra concert, Vice President JD Vance, a Trump loyalist, was publicly booed, illustrating the tension brewing within the once-celebrated institution.

A Grim Shift in Artistic Direction

During my visits, the stark transformation of the Kennedy Center became increasingly evident. Ticket sales, according to a Washington Post analysis, plummeted as audiences began to view the venue as toxic and politicized. Productions like the popular musical Hamilton pulled out, abandoning the once-vibrant cultural landscape. The Washington Performing Arts decided to shift concerts elsewhere, further eroding the Kennedy Center's relevance in the artistic community.

The exodus of talent and loyal patrons deepened alongside a wave of resignations from staff members unwilling to align themselves with the new management. This significant shift included the abrupt termination of the Kennedy Center's dance programming staff, only to be replaced by individuals promoting a narrower ideological perspective.

One angry staff member described the Kennedy Center as feeling like a “mortuary” because of its thinly populated performances and visitor numbers. What was once a hub of culture now bears the distinct marks of an institution in ideological decline.

The Trumpification of Culture

The Kennedy Center now regularly features the national anthem at concerts—an act that, while customary in other contexts, takes on a new function when art is intertwined with a nationalist agenda.

Trump's recent antics, including involvement with the FIFA World Cup draw—a deal lacking a hire fee and rescheduled performances—illustrate the troubling blend of culture and politics. Awarding him the “FIFA peace prize” further exacerbates this spectacle, raising questions about the integrity of the Kennedy Center itself.

Moreover, in an alarming departure from tradition, Trump exerted influence over the selection process for the Kennedy Center Honors, directly intervening in the nominations. This kind of meddling devalues the artistic merit of such accolades and serves only to centralize power within a politicized framework.

A Call to Action for Arts Institutions

The resistance is slowly taking shape, with figures like Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse questioning the dubious spending practices at the center, including lavish costs tied to public funds. Yet, even as pushback begins, the damage to this once-prestigious institution is undeniable. It serves as a cautionary tale, not just for the Kennedy Center itself, but for arts institutions everywhere.

For those in the UK who are tempted to think, “It couldn't happen here,” I urge them to reconsider. The rise of figures like Nigel Farage, who echo Trump's divisive rhetoric, demonstrates an unsettling trend—a new form of populism that seeks to undermine creative freedoms and reshape cultural institutions as tools of propaganda.

Conclusion: Preserving Cultural Integrity

The story of the Kennedy Center should not merely be read as an isolated incident of cultural decline, but rather as a vital reminder of the fragility of our artistic institutions. Protecting our cultural spaces from ideological encroachment demands vigilance and an unwavering commitment to the ideals that underpin them.

We cannot afford to allow the narrative to shift unnoticed; the artistic legacy that once united us is at risk. The fight for the soul of our cultural institutions has begun, and it is one we must engage with urgency and passion.