English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 49064/83170 (59%)
造訪人次 : 6964039      線上人數 : 39
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library & TKU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧:
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號",以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋,建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位,可獲得較完整資料
  • 進階搜尋
    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: http://tkuir.lib.tku.edu.tw:8080/dspace/handle/987654321/30988


    題名: 美國政府與藝術發展之關係:以美國國家藝術基金會為例
    其他題名: Government funding and the arts in the united states: a study on the national endowment for the arts
    作者: 陳弘穎;Chen, Hung-ying
    貢獻者: 淡江大學美國研究所碩士班
    紀舜傑;Ji, Shun-jie
    關鍵詞: 美國國家藝術基金會;藝術補助;政府與藝術;National Endowment for the Arts;government subsidy;arts funding
    日期: 2008
    上傳時間: 2010-01-11 00:07:20 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 藝術需要政府補助嗎?筆者不是全然的同意政府需要補助藝術,但筆者絕對認同「國家藝術與人文基金會法案」(National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities Act of 1965) 的宗旨,偉大的藝術家或是學者不可能被創造出來,但政府絕對有責任培養及開創一個能讓藝術家自由自在思考、無拘無束想像的環境。
    美國藝術資金補助的制度非常複雜,唯美國政府直到二十世紀之前,並沒有通過任何正式的國家藝術政策。一方面承襲於歐洲的社會與宗教傳統歷史,早期的新英格蘭移民者認為藝術會讓那些殖民地的開拓者沉迷於其中,進而使他們無所事事,喪失了原本勤勉的精神;另一方面,美國缺乏了一個強而有力且願意為藝術付出,成立國家藝術機構的領導者。也因此美國的國家藝術補助或是政策比起歐洲其它國家可以說起步相當的晚。雖然在美國國家藝術基金會(National Endowment for the Arts, NEA)成立前,美國已經有一些國家藝術機構的出現,但大多數都因為不完整的政策或像上述原因一樣,缺乏強而有力的領導而失敗。若以歐陸的標準來看,美國聯邦政府的補助是非常少的,但有趣的是美國的藝術環境卻又得以發展,仔細想想其實是非常有趣且值得探討、省思的。
    本研究主要討論幾個問題:首先,藝術補助政策與其他公共政策一樣,一定是在某種特殊的歷史背景和社會氛圍的結合下所產生的,究竟在國家藝術基金會成立前,美國藝術政策之演進為何?而又是在何種氛圍下,促成了國家藝術基金會的出現?其次,聯邦政府對於藝術的補助,相較於歐陸其他國家來說,相對的少。在聯邦政府如此少的資金補助下,究竟美國藝術機構從何獲得足夠的資金運作?而美國整體藝術補助制度的架構為何?再者,美國國家藝術基金會,1965年由國會法案通過後成立,聲稱獨立於聯邦政府之外,向各州提供藝術補助,為全美最大的藝術資金贊助者。美國國家藝術基金會成立之背景、組織結構、資金分配為何?其內部審查機制,如何運作?現階段之補助計畫為何?又其對於美國藝術環境之貢獻為何?最後,基金會成立至今,各方評價不一,部份持正面的肯定,而部份則持批判的態度。因此,對於美國國家藝術基金會的論證為何?又基金會現階段之定位為何?
    本研究基本上認同國家藝術基金會四十餘年來對於美國藝術環境與社會所帶來的貢獻。基金會並非以其資金補助特定藝術組織或單位,而是透過「相對補助款」所帶來之倍增效果,達到活絡整體藝術環境之效;而近年,基金會所補助之對象日漸多元,幾乎涵蓋所有藝術領域,並將之推行至全國各大小社群,甚至推廣至國際;除此之外,基金會也更為著重在藝術教育與文化傳承兩方面,前者從下紮根,後者對於舊有文化的推廣與保存,貢獻良多。然而,本研究認為「如何有效避免政治性干預?」是基金會一直以來都必須面對的首要問題。此政治干預包含基金會人員任命與政府部門之關係,以及基金會與其補助對象之關係兩個層面;其中特別是前者對於基金會整體運作之影響最劇,因此,是否能從基金會主席之任命與審核小組之組成作思考,找尋改善的空間。總歸來說,本研究認為國家藝術基金會若能克服所謂「政治干預」的難題,並清楚了解其自身定位,以其多元之補助計畫,將藝術推廣至全國,甚至國際,對於美國社會之貢獻,絕對是無庸至疑的。
    章節編排上,第一章為緒論;第二章討論國家藝術基金會成立前,美國政府藝術補助政策之歷史發展脈絡;第三章為美國現行藝術補助機制整體之架構探討;第四章為美國國家藝術基金會之研究,其中包括其成立之宗旨、背景、現行組織結構、資金分配、審查機制、現階段之補助計畫、亦或其對於美國藝術環境及社會本身之貢獻等;第五章則針對基金會自成立以來所歷經的重大危機與爭議作討論,從正反兩面的論證歸納出基金會之於美國藝術界,或社會之定位;最後,第六章則為結論。
    Although this research is not completely in favor of government funding on the arts, it absolutely agrees with one of the main purposes of the National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities Act of 1965, which is “no government can call a great artist or scholar into existence, it is necessary and appropriate for the Federal Government to help and create and sustain not only a climate encouraging freedom of thought, imagination, and inquiry, but also the material conditions facilitating the release of this creative talent.”
    Not until the twentieth century did the American Government pass any arts policy. On the one hand, it was because of its European origins. Early immigrants believed that arts would make those pioneers in the colony indulge in it and force them to lose their virtues of industry. On the other hand, it was a lack of a strong leader who would be willing to die for arts postponed the timetable for a national arts institute. Although there were a few arts institutes established under government sponsorship, most of them failed due to incomplete policy or the reason mentioned above, lack of a strong leader. The American Federal Funding on the arts had been so rare to compare with European standard, yet the art world in the United States grew without limits.
    This research focuses on a few questions: first of all, arts policy is like other public policy, which comes out only under certain historical backgrounds or societal atmosphere. Hence, what is the historical development of American arts policy before the establishment of the National Endowment for the Arts? Secondly, how do art institutes in the United States find enough funding to run themselves under limited government funding? And what is the entire structure of American arts-funding system? In the third place, the National Endowment for the Arts, the biggest arts-funder in the United States, was established under the National Foundation on the Arts and Humanities Act of 1965. NEA claimed itself to be independent from the Federal Government and has been providing arts funding to each state over forty years. What is the background of its establishment, structure of the organization, and also distribution of the funding? Besides, what is the reviewing system and how does it work is also the part this research focusing on. In the end, different people may have different arguments on what the NEA has been doing over the past forty years. Therefore, what is the contribution the NEA brings to the American society, and also what are those arguments about?
    This research basically gives its credit for what the NEA has activated the American arts environment and its contribution to the entire society as well, especially through its “match grant” system. Recently the NEA’s grants have been even more diverse, and covered almost all fields of the arts community. Furthermore, the NEA steadily promotes the arts domestically and internationally. Besides, it especially focuses on two important aspects, which are arts education and culture heritage. The former nourishes the arts from the roots, and the latter contributes a lot to the promotion and preservation of traditional American culture. However, “How to efficiently avoid political interferences” has been one of the most important and urgent issues the NEA confronts. This “political interference” includes two aspects, one is the relationship between the appointment of the president of the NEA and the government administration, and the other is the relationship between the NEA and its grants applicants. Overall, this research believes that if the NEA could overcome the so-called “political-interfered” issues, and has a better and clearer understanding toward the position it stands, doubtlessly, its contribution toward the entire American society would be even stronger.
    Chapter 1 introduces the motives, methods, and also the literature reviews of this research. Chapter 2 contains the historical development of the arts policy of American Federal Government before the establishment of the NEA. Chapter 3 describes and focuses mainly on the current system of American arts funding. Chapter 4 would be a study on the National Endowment for the Arts, including its purposes and background of establishment, structure of the organization, distribution of funding, review system, strategic plans, and also its contribution to not only the Arts environment in the United States, but also the society itself. Chapter 5 would discuss the position of the NEA from both sides of the arguments through the crises and controversial issues that the NEA had been through, especially during the end of the 80s and the beginning of the 90s. Chapter 6 eventually would be the conclusion of this research.
    顯示於類別:[美國研究所] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 大小格式瀏覽次數
    0KbUnknown372檢視/開啟

    在機構典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.

    TAIR相關文章

    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library & TKU Library IR teams. Copyright ©   - 回饋