‘My Queer Body’ should not be a priority when local funds at

stake

A few weeks ago, a proclamation that I objected to was read at a City

Council meeting. The way it was listed on the council agenda was

“Arts and Humanities Month Proclamation.” The actual proclamation

mentioned the National Endowment for the Arts, and therefore implied

support of it. Part of the confusion was because the proclamation was

made at the same time that support and recognition was given to

members of the cultural arts committee for their work on an upcoming

chalk art program. I am not placing blame for this confusion, but it

should be made very clear what we as a city are expressing support

for.

Even former Mayor Sandy Genis recently said, “My philosophy on

proclamations is their primary purpose is usually to make people feel

good or tell them how to think, and I don’t think either of those are

government’s jobs ... It’s not government’s job to tell people how to

think or make them feel good.”

Now, I have no objection to chalk art and encouraging children to

develop their artistic talents. What I did object to was the support

for the National Endowment for the Arts. My comments generated a

short news story in the Pilot, and at the most recent council

meeting, Charlene Ashendorf expressed disappointment with what I had

said. Therefore, I believe a little clarification is in order. Here

is part of what I said:

“In 1990, the NEA spent $175 million of your taxpayer money ....

As of 2000, the NEA continued to give out about $100 million of your

tax dollars every year. In 2000, it funded the Manhattan Theatre Club

in New York, which two years earlier put on an anti-Christian play

called ‘Corpus Christi,’ which depicted Jesus as a homosexual having

sex with his apostles on stage. The Wooly Mammoth Theatre in

Washington, D.C. received money for a show called ‘My Queer Body.’

“The Whitney Museum in New York City got $40,000 to display a

depiction of Jesus surrounded by obscene sadomasochistic imagery. The

museum continues to display a photograph by Andres Serrano of a

crucifix immersed in a jar of the artist’s own urine.

“How any of our congressmen, senators or president, for that

matter, can support any budget that contains funding for any of this

is beyond me. This is clearly another argument in support of state

and local government in order to have better oversight. How anyone

can support these types of expenditures, when we fall short on

infrastructure, public safety and securing our borders is beyond me.

“Even from a less-government viewpoint, we have no business

funding the NEA regardless of whether the money goes to fund

pornography or religion. We have no business supporting this funding

period. On Monday, we had a full agenda of the people’s business

before us, and we should not be wasting our time on proclamations

such as this one.”

I would like to explain how and why I have arrived at the

conclusions I have arrived at. Here is the Reader’s Digest version. I

grew up with a generally conservative upbringing, and my parents were

by no means wealthy.

Ironically, my dad bought and sold antiques and art. That is how

he earned a living and supported his family. They only owned a home

for one year and then sold it so my dad could use the money to open

up an antique and jewelry store. Between the two of them, the store

was open seven days a week to make ends meet.

So, growing up with a father who loved and lived for art, I could

not help but develop an appreciation of it. I like art and even own

some.

My parents are now retired, but since they were self-employed they

have no retirement. They do not have “3% at age 50,” or 2% or any

percent. They get about $1,000 a month in Social Security.

Perhaps if they were able to keep more of their earned income and

paid less in taxes they would have been able to invest a little more.

I am glad that I have been able to help them out with their

retirement a little. I say this not to brag but to make the point

that if people kept more of their income they would be better able to

help out their own families instead of passing the buck to the

government bureaucracy.

So this is what shapes my thinking regarding what we spend our tax

dollars on and what we, as a government body, express support for.

Yes, I know we are the City of the Arts, and I think we have some

great examples in our city of what private funding of the arts can

accomplish. We have a beautiful playhouse and performing arts center,

and a world-class concert hall is under construction. The Art

Partners have a countywide program that allows school kids to have

access to plays and symphonies.

So, ultimately my views have been shaped to believe that the main

focus of government should be infrastructure and public safety. Most

everything else is best handled by the private sector. Not only is

much of what the NEA funds offensive to many, but individuals would

be better off if they could keep more of their income to raise and

support their families.

* ALLAN MANSOOR is a resident of Costa Mesa and a member of the

City Council.