The National Endowment for the Humanities I. The Difference William Bennett Made

Since 1978 I have been a member of the National Council on the Humanities, the citizens’ advisory council that passes on grants made by the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH). From the time 1 came aboard, I have persisted in asking four questions: “What are we talking about? What are we doing? Why does it matter? Where does the taxpayer fit in?” In those days they were not the questions to ask. If I had gotten good answers to any of these questions, maybe I wouldn’t have had to keep asking myself another question: Why was federal support for the humanities such a mess? The answer goes back to the Great Society, when professors in the humanities—languages, history, literature, philosophy, the academic study of religion, and the like—organized to get federal support. Not far behind were supporters of the arts. And why not? After all, the sciences had long been getting funds from the Federal Government. Congress agreed, and for a decade and a half has continued to agree (correctly, in my opinion) that, in some limited ways, there is a public interest to be served through support for the arts and humanities. So the two Endowments were set up.

But it is easier to agree that there is a public interest than to define just what it is. Under the Carter Administration, as under many of its predecessors, the definition was rather broad. As Michael Mooney puts it in his classic The Ministry of Culture: Connections among Art, Money, and Politics, “If they did it, it was arc, and if they talked about it, it was humanities.”

JN

About the Author

Jacob Neusner

Featured Tags

Since 1978 I have been a member of the National Council on the Humanities, the citizens’ advisory council that passes on grants made by the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH). From the time 1 came aboard, I have persisted in asking four questions: “What are we talking about? What are we doing? Why does it matter? Where does the taxpayer fit in?” In those days they were not the questions to ask. If I had gotten good answers to any of these questions, maybe I wouldn’t have had to keep asking myself another question: Why was federal support for the humanities such a mess? The answer goes back to the Great Society, when professors in the humanities—languages, history, literature, philosophy, the academic study of religion, and the like—organized to get federal support. Not far behind were supporters of the arts. And why not? After all, the sciences had long been getting funds from the Federal Government. Congress agreed, and for a decade and a half has continued to agree (correctly, in my opinion) that, in some limited ways, there is a public interest to be served through support for the arts and humanities. So the two Endowments were set up.

But it is easier to agree that there is a public interest than to define just what it is. Under the Carter Administration, as under many of its predecessors, the definition was rather broad. As Michael Mooney puts it in his classic The Ministry of Culture: Connections among Art, Money, and Politics, “If they did it, it was arc, and if they talked about it, it was humanities.”