Throughout our time in Washington so far one theme has emerged loud and clear: the arts are a means of expression, but the issue of who creates and who consumes art is much more complicated than it seems. We are here to study democracy and the power of the people, and that idea begins with equity. It’s important to understand what exactly equity means, both broadly and in the context of arts accessibility. To do so, it’s helpful to clarify how equity is different from equality.
Equality is simply treating everyone the same. It tries to promote fairness and often is utilized with the best intentions, but it relies on the blanket assumption that everyone is coming from the same place and needs the same support to be successful. Equity, on the other hand, acknowledges that people start at different places and need different things. While it may appear unfair to some, equity is leveling the playing field for everyone. If we accept that everyone is different and celebrate that, then we also need to change our views on what fairness is and realize that success for everyone contingent on using privilege to level the playing field rather than simply treating everyone the same. Both strategies are important, but equality alone will always leave someone out. [1]
TL;DR – Equality is not enough.
So what do we do with this idea, and how does it relate to the arts? This is a question I’m surprised (and a little embarrassed) I hadn’t thought about up until recently. The reality is that for a lot of disabled people, attending arts events are a frustrating and maybe even impossible task. Studies show that attending arts events improves health in a myriad of ways, especially in older adults. Older adults who deliberately became involved in the arts for 9 months reported better overall health over the next 2 years (fewer doctor visits, medication prescriptions, and falls), as well as improved mental health (higher morale, improvements in depression, and less loneliness). [2] This creates a frustrating paradox: we understand the benefits that the arts can create, but some organizations still don’t put in the work to make their built spaces or their experiences accessible.
“If art venues aren’t doing everything feasibly within their power to ensure that the arts can be accessed and enjoyed by all people, then they are doing an active disservice to the advancement of the arts as a whole.” -Max Michalsky, daily arts writer for The Michigan Daily
There is one more piece of the puzzle that Betty Siegel, Director of Accessibility and VSA at the Kennedy Center, spelled out for us both with the numbers and the impact they hold. The sheer number of people in this country who are disabled is staggering. Betty told it like it is: 19% of the population is disabled, and 97% of those people’s disabilities are invisible. This statistic was shocking to me. There is clearly a huge need not being met by arts organizations, and simply being ADA compliant in terms of the built environment is not enough.
At our site visit to the Kennedy Center we had the pleasure of hearing Betty and 2 other fantastic panelists (Diane Nutting and Roger Ideishi) talk about their experiences working in the accessibility field. The common threads in their stories illuminated for me the clearest way that democracy relates to the arts. The reality is, accessibility is a topic often left out of corporate boardroom. But this is another point of dissonance: accessibility isn’t talked about at a high level, and yet accessibility advocates like Betty are equipped with an arsenal of arguments for why it should be. Bringing in disabled people brings in the people they are surrounded by, which is an argument that any bottom line oriented person should see the value in. 1 ticket sale turns into 2.5 ticket sales when performances are made accessible, not to mention that most mission statements promise to make programming more diverse and inclusive.
The other point made at the panel that stuck with me was the idea that disability education goes both ways. It is the responsibility of arts organizations not only to make their spaces accessible, but to broadcast that message to the disabled community. The psychological barrier that many disabled people experience when they think about what sorts of activities and spaces are accessible to them is equally important of an issue to solve. This is a point I will carry with me as I think about how arts spaces can become truly democratic spaces, and how we as arts advocates can better serve people’s needs. Assuming my understanding of math is correct, 18.43% of people in this country have an invisible disability. Those people deserve to not worry about being in the arts space, and I hope to learn more about what can be done to make the arts equitable. It is not only the morally right thing to do, but in the interest of democracy it is imperative.
References
Sun, Amy. “Equality Is Not Enough: What the Classroom Has Taught Me About Justice.” Everyday Feminism. September 25, 2014. https://everydayfeminism.com/2014/09/equality-is-not-enough/.
Cohen, Gene D. The Creativity and Aging Study: The Impact of Professionally Conducted Cultural Programs on Older Adults.The Center on Aging, Health & Humanities, The George Washington University (GW), 2006. https://www.arts.gov/sites/default/files/CnA-Rep4-30-06.pdf.
Michalsky, Michael. “An in-depth look at the accessibility of the arts and art spaces.”The Michigan Daily, April 3, 2018. https://www.michigandaily.com/section/arts/secondary-depth-look-accessibility-arts