Empty Text

I like to employ a method of research called "Wandering the library stacks and choosing books by their cover." Some people call it serendipity. I say that's not enough syllables. Recently, I picked up a book- Arts and Cultural Programming: A Leisure Perspective. The jacket is a photo collage of various arts activities and the blurb promises case studies and information on how to "plan, design, manage, and evaluate events." Sadly, the interior is management lingo gobbledegook with a poverty of accessible meaning. Now I don't mean to harsh on the authors and editors, but who picks up a how to guide on art and event programming expecting to wade through empty management phrasing that says much while meaning very little.

Let me re-phrase. I have opened to a random page- 67, with the sub-heading "Risk Management." The first sentence "When arts managers are developing their programs, they must consider the potential risks to the staff members, visitors, environment, and artwork at each step of planning.", is an exercise in stating the obvious. But that is the opener- often a bland placeholder for the rest of a paragraph. The paragraph in question goes on to state how you must consider risks while planning events, keep policy in mind during all stages, and recognize that some risks are hard to identify. It's not a terrible paragraph, but it exemplifies the problem I have with this book as a whole. Namely- the reader must be suitably educated and versed in management speak to understand what the authors are talking about, while remaining stupid enough to be oblivious to the glaring obviousness and condescension in the text. No shit, plan for the safety of the art and guests. The next few paragraphs provide concrete examples of safety issues that bear consideration (check sound levels, make sure kids can't drown in your new fountain, etc.) so it's not that the book is completely devoid of value and practical considerations. And there are some case studies for inspiration.

But the audience that this book is aimed at is so broad (everyone who has an interest in participating or putting on leisure activities) that it appeals to no one specifically. Bleargh. It's like an employee awards program- How do you know you work for a corporation that is too big to value their employees individually? When they have to create metrics of evaluation that lead to public recognition awards. The corporatizing of work is now the corporatizing of academia and research. It has no personal perspective, no author or editor engagement with the subject of the text. No humanity, because it is designed to appeal to everyone. Only people seeking money over artistic excellence would find this book engaging.