Chronic. The word excellence is a dogma of culture, brandished by those in charge of operas, museums or theatres. Show the most innovative artists, the most exciting works. Logic. To say otherwise would be a defeat. And yet, this criterion is now drowned out among others by the State or the cities in their choices. The phenomenon is latent but vertiginous. Good or bad ? The two.
As a sign, the quality of the works as places is not a subject in the programs of the presidential candidates. As are not mentioned the jewels that are the Louvre, the Philharmonie, Versailles or the National Library of France, which carry excellence and monopolize a large part of the subsidies.
To take the measure of the swing, we must go back to the Mitterrand-Lang tandem, from 1981. The artist was king. It is up to him to offer the best. To enchant the State, a city, a district and to promote France abroad in complete freedom. The director Patrice Chéreau, at the Nanterre theater from 1982 to 1990, was a symbol of this.
Today, the artist has lost his aura. Not so much the biggest, but the thousands of less established creators and managers. Many elected officials are wary of it as they are wary of excellence, an abstract term over which they have little control. So they favor management, the number of entries and the quality-price ratio. These were swear words, which are much less so since the State like the big cities are asking their cultural jewels to generate more and more of their own resources – ticket prices, sponsorship, rental of spaces. These criteria are not without consequences. While for many places, excellence is about discovering and taking risks, many are forced to display the same names bankables.
Priority to the public
Another factor shakes up the notion of excellence. A minister or a mayor look less at the stage than at the room. The priority no longer being the artist but the public, noting that the first failed to attract young people and modest people, the elected officials took up the subject.
The pass of arms was only a sleeve effect. Except that the ministers of culture who followed rushed into the breach, forging a change of software in small steps – moving from excellent supply to diversified demand. Without raising many eyebrows, this time. We talk so much about the artists they create for the privileged that they have become fatalistic. A number of elected officials, mainly mayors, then pushed their advantage, they interfered in the creation in order to program “wider”.
You have 55.07% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.