Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Artists wary of Trump’s unprecedented takeover of the Kennedy Center

News

Artists wary of Trump’s unprecedented takeover of the Kennedy Center

The Kennedy Center seen through trees on Roosevelt Island.

Valerie Chu/MNS

WASHINGTON — Heather Dune Macadam still remembers one thought that bubbled inside her as she stepped onto the stage decades ago at the Kennedy Center for a dance competition: “Wow, I made it.”

Then, just last month, when she heard about President Donald Trump’s appointment as chairman of the Kennedy Center and the replacement of its board, she thought back to a parallel experience she had during the Reagan administration.


It was May 1981 when the then-21-year-old dancer had her first professional dance gig at the Kennedy Center. That same night, the Reagan administration cut funding for the National Endowment for the Arts, as she recalled. The day after their competition, without the pay they had expected to receive, the Wayne State dance team put their pennies together to buy enough gas to get back to Detroit.

Macadam said the funding cut wasn’t only a hit to their pocketbooks and felt like a betrayal of hope and the arts. In the years since, Macadam became a dancer with the Martha Graham Dance Company and later a Holocaust biographer and documentary filmmaker of “999: The Forgotten Girls.”

Now Macadam, like many other performing artists and creative people, viewed President Donald Trump’s appointment as chairman of the Kennedy Center and the replacement of its board with trepidation about the consequences for artistic freedom.

“I fear for my country,” Macadam said. “I fear for my country's moral and ethical conscience, which I think the arts hold us accountable to. And without that moral compass, where will we go?”

One entrance hall of the Kennedy Center displays flags from all 50 states and Washington D.C. Valerie Chu/MNS

The recent upheaval at the Kennedy Center started with a Feb. 7 Truth Social post from Trump, in which he announced the immediate termination of multiple individuals from the Board of Trustees who “do not share our Vision for a Golden Age in Arts and Culture.” To some artists, it marked a startlingly authoritarian approach to the arts that started when he abolished the President’s Committee on the Arts and Humanities hours after his second inauguration.

The Kennedy Center was established under the Eisenhower administration by the National Cultural Center Act in 1958 and later renamed in another law to serve as a “living memorial” to President John F. Kennedy.

A Kennedy Center statement captured by archive on Feb. 8 but no longer available said the center was “aware of the post made recently by POTUS (Trump) on social media” but had received no official communications from the White House regarding changes to their board of trustees.

“There is nothing in the Center’s statute that would prevent a new administration from replacing board members; however, this would be the first time such action has been taken with the Kennedy Center’s board,” the statement said.

In less than a week, multiple Biden appointees were purged from the Kennedy Center. The new board then elected Trump as its chairman. No previous president had ever assumed that role.

Changes to the Kennedy Center’s programming have already started. On March 6, “Hamilton” creator Lin-Manuel Miranda and lead producer Jeffrey Seller told the New York Times that the musical about the birth of American democracy would not be performed next year at the Kennedy Center.

“The recent purge by the Trump Administration of both professional staff and performing arts events at or originally produced by the Kennedy Center flies in the face of everything this national cultural center represents,” Seller wrote in the statement. “Given these recent actions, our show simply cannot, in good conscience, participate and be a part of this new culture that is being imposed on the Kennedy Center.”

On Feb. 18, the Kennedy Center canceled a pride concert planned for May 21 that would have featured the Gay Men’s Choir. And on Feb. 14, actress, comedian, and television producer Issa Rae canceled her sold-out show, “An Evening With Issa Rae.”

Marshall Coid, a musician who has performed at the Kennedy Center multiple times, said that the Kennedy Center should not be turned into a sanitized place that caters to “undeveloped and narrow-minded tastes.” He raised concerns that the new board would villainize art forms such as drag performances, whose elements and history extend far beyond what most people initially picture drag to be.

“The Kennedy Center, to me, represents the nation,” Coid said. “And that’s everyone’s art. There’s room for it all.”

Coid studied violin at Juilliard and has performed as a countertenor and violinist at the Kennedy Center, including as a soloist in Tom O’Horgan staging of Leonard Bernstein’s “Mass” for the Center’s 10th Anniversary Celebration. He has also performed as an onstage violin soloist with Jinkx Monsoon while she played Matron “Mama” Morton in CHICAGO on Broadway, and he acted in several roles himself that included cross-dressing.

Coid said he was worried the Kennedy Center’s new leadership would interfere with programming, including banning drag. In Trump’s Truth Social post, he said: “Just last year, the Kennedy Center featured Drag Shows specifically targeting our youth — THIS WILL STOP.”

Coid described the Trump administration's move to control the Kennedy Center as something that left him and other performers he knows “heartsick, appalled and horrified.”

“We may not have so consciously been carrying around a sense of what it meant to us, but when it's taken away, we realize,” Coid said. “I think we took it for granted and never thought that it was vulnerable. And now it has been clearly demonstrated to be vulnerable, and as far as I'm concerned, under attack and being grotesquely diminished by this intrusion, by people that have no business having anything to do with it and should be nowhere near it.”

Singer, songwriter, and performer Gwen Levey said stories would go untold, and government censorship of the arts would likely increase. She predicted that social justice, which the Kennedy Center showcased previously, would no longer be promoted, and the variety of music would be reduced. She pointed to the diverse board of people appointed by previous presidents who resigned in the wake of Trump’s takeover, such as “Grey’s Anatomy” creator Shonda Rhimes, soprano Reneé Fleming, and singer-songwriter Ben Folds.

“The diversity is basically being sucked out of the Kennedy Center,” Levey said. “And I wouldn't be surprised if, like most things with this administration, it becomes very whitewashed.”

Neither the Kennedy Center nor the White House responded to multiple requests for comment.

Still, despite its uncertain future, in the weeks after Trump named himself chairman, music continued to fill the Kennedy Center’s halls like normal.

At a concert featuring Cody Fry, LANY, and Sleeping At Last, the artists made jokes, the audience whooped and clapped, and some even sang together during one song.

“Sometimes, I look out into the world, and it feels like optimism is like this radical act of bravery,” singer-songwriter Cody Fry said when introducing his last song. “And I want to focus my mind on the things that are good because I truly believe that the good outnumbers the bad.”

Valerie Chu is a Northwestern University student majoring in journalism, data science, and international studies.

Read More

Someone wrapping a gift.

As screens replace toys, childhood is being gamified. What this shift means for parents, play, development, and holiday gift-giving.

Getty Images, Oscar Wong

The Christmas When Toys Died: The Playtime Paradigm Shift Retailers Failed to See Coming

Something is changing this Christmas, and parents everywhere are feeling it. Bedrooms overflow with toys no one touches, while tablets steal the spotlight, pulling children as young as five into digital worlds that retailers are slow to recognize. The shift is quiet but unmistakable, and many parents are left wondering what toy purchases even make sense anymore.

Research shows that higher screen time correlates with significantly lower engagement in other play activities, mainly traditional, physical, unstructured play. It suggests screen-based play is displacing classic play with traditional toys. Families are experiencing in real time what experts increasingly describe as the rise of “gamified childhoods.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Affordability Crisis and AI: Kelso’s Universal Capitalism

Rising costs, AI disruption, and inequality revive interest in Louis Kelso’s “universal capitalism” as a market-based answer to the affordability crisis.

Getty Images, J Studios

Affordability Crisis and AI: Kelso’s Universal Capitalism

“Affordability” over the cost of living has been in the news a lot lately. It’s popping up in political campaigns, from the governor’s races in New Jersey and Virginia to the mayor’s races in New York City and Seattle. President Donald Trump calls the term a “hoax” and a “con job” by Democrats, and it’s true that the inflation rate hasn’t increased much since Trump began his second term in January.

But a number of reports show Americans are struggling with high costs for essentials like food, housing, and utilities, leaving many families feeling financially pinched. Total consumer spending over the Black Friday-Thanksgiving weekend buying binge actually increased this year, but a Salesforce study found that’s because prices were about 7% higher than last year’s blitz. Consumers actually bought 2% fewer items at checkout.

Keep ReadingShow less
Censorship Should Be Obsolete by Now. Why Isn’t It?

US Capital with tech background

Greggory DiSalvo/Getty Images

Censorship Should Be Obsolete by Now. Why Isn’t It?

Techies, activists, and academics were in Paris this month to confront the doom scenario of internet shutdowns, developing creative technology and policy solutions to break out of heavily censored environments. The event– SplinterCon– has previously been held globally, from Brussels to Taiwan. I am on the programme committee and delivered a keynote at the inaugural SplinterCon in Montreal on how internet standards must be better designed for censorship circumvention.

Censorship and digital authoritarianism were exposed in dozens of countries in the recently published Freedom on the Net report. For exampl,e Russia has pledged to provide “sovereign AI,” a strategy that will surely extend its network blocks on “a wide array of social media platforms and messaging applications, urging users to adopt government-approved alternatives.” The UK joined Vietnam, China, and a growing number of states requiring “age verification,” the use of government-issued identification cards, to access internet services, which the report calls “a crisis for online anonymity.”

Keep ReadingShow less
The concept of AI hovering among the public.

Panic-driven legislation—from airline safety to AI bans—often backfires, and evidence must guide policy.

Getty Images, J Studios

Beware of Panic Policies

"As far as human nature is concerned, with panic comes irrationality." This simple statement by Professor Steve Calandrillo and Nolan Anderson has profound implications for public policy. When panic is highest, and demand for reactive policy is greatest, that's exactly when we need our lawmakers to resist the temptation to move fast and ban things. Yet, many state legislators are ignoring this advice amid public outcries about the allegedly widespread and destructive uses of AI. Thankfully, Calandrillo and Anderson have identified a few examples of what I'll call "panic policies" that make clear that proposals forged by frenzy tend not to reflect good public policy.

Let's turn first to a proposal in November of 2001 from the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). For obvious reasons, airline safety was subject to immense public scrutiny at this time. AAP responded with what may sound like a good idea: require all infants to have their own seat and, by extension, their own seat belt on planes. The existing policy permitted parents to simply put their kid--so long as they were under two--on their lap. Essentially, babies flew for free.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) permitted this based on a pretty simple analysis: the risks to young kids without seatbelts on planes were far less than the risks they would face if they were instead traveling by car. Put differently, if parents faced higher prices to travel by air, then they'd turn to the road as the best way to get from A to B. As we all know (perhaps with the exception of the AAP at the time), airline travel is tremendously safer than travel by car. Nevertheless, the AAP forged ahead with its proposal. In fact, it did so despite admitting that they were unsure of whether the higher risks of mortality of children under two in plane crashes were due to the lack of a seat belt or the fact that they're simply fragile.

Keep ReadingShow less