It's what's under the hood:

In the 1970s, the American automotive industry was taking a beating. The high cost of gasoline and a tidal wave of imports from Japan had U.S. automakers on the ropes. Nobody wanted a Ford or GM gas guzzler. But people were buying — and raving about — their new Hondas, Toyotas and Datsuns. The Japanese cars were smaller, more reliable and more in tune with what customers wanted. Things in Detroit got so bad Chrysler had to ask the federal government for a financial bailout to keep from going out of business.

The American auto industry was faced with a choice. It could pretend its product was fine and continue trying to persuade Americans that it was their patriotic duty to buy domestic instead of those foreign imports. Or it could reinvent itself and make better-built cars.

I was reminded of this history while reading the Central Indiana Regional Citizens League (CIRCL) summary of a roundtable discussion on arts and culture. CIRCL assembled a group of area arts administrators and advocates in order to gather perspectives on four questions pertaining to our region's cultural scene. The questions dealt with access to arts activities, how the arts serve families and communities, opportunities for arts development and that perennial chestnut, how to increase funding.

The arts administrators answered by calling for better mass transit; they suggested that local governments could do more to encourage people to attend arts events; they said they needed better marketing and increased media coverage; and that kids needed better arts education in our schools.

These are all good ideas. But what the arts administrators didn't talk about was their product. Like those automakers of old, our arts administrators would have us believe that Indy’s arts scene has never been better. This is probably true. Over the past 10 years, Indy's arts offerings have attained an indisputable level of professionalism. Our visual arts are handsomely displayed, our musicians perform with authority, our plays are staged with flair.

But too few shows are selling out. Audiences don't seem to be getting any younger. Apart from our burgeoning jazz festival, arts events come and go, leaving the city pretty much unchanged. While an increasing number of people can see that a lively arts scene is a key to the city's success, they may be forgiven for questioning whether the potentates currently governing our arts institutions are daring enough to make it happen.

Although it is true that Indianapolis lags behind other cities in public funding for the arts, it must be noted that many of our arts institutions have been enjoying an economic boom. The IMA, IRT, Eiteljorg, American Cabaret Theatre, symphony and state museum have all recently undertaken or are in the midst of major construction projects. This is money dazzlingly spent; one can only wonder what might have happened, though, had half these dollars gone for the presentation of provocative works of art similar to those routinely showcased by institutions like the Wexner in Columbus, Ohio, or the Walker in Minneapolis.

"This is Indianapolis," claim our cultural arbiters — in a tone infused with equal parts lament and parochial pride. The audience here, they like to say, isn't "ready" or won't "tolerate" or is "turned off" by so-called experimental or cutting-edge work, thereby defining contemporary art as, by definition, adversarial and hard on the eyes and ears.

This is where CIRCL's work may prove significant. As our metropolitan area is forced to accept a larger definition of itself, one including several counties, old stereotypes about who constitutes the audience in Indianapolis are bound to crumble. The audience suggested by CIRCL's regional vision is diverse, suburban and potentially ready to savor the same sorts of artwork available in other large metropolitan communities.

In the meantime, though, city arts administrators and the boards they serve will complain that, in spite of their building projects, there isn't enough money; that the education system is doing a deplorable job of instilling arts appreciation in our kids and that the adults in existing audiences just don't get the fine work already being offered. A swift kick to the marketing department's backside suffices for self-examination.

What these arts mavens — like the automotive tycoons of the 1970s — are missing is that the crux of the matter has less to do with packaging and persuasion than with what's under the hood.

First steps
Cultural Tourism takes the stage

by David Hoppe

Together at last: Leaders of the city’s arts community rubbed elbows with representatives of Indy’s hospitality business at the Indianapolis Cultural Tourism Conference on June 27. Convened by the city, the Arts Council, the Convention and Visitors Association and Indianapolis Downtown, Inc., the conference was the first step of a public process intended to create a cultural tourism strategy for Indianapolis. Complete with a mayor, Bart Peterson, who sounded like he actually believed in what he was talking about, this was the sort of gathering many of the city’s arts and cultural advocates have been wishing for and working toward for years.

Cultural tourism has become a buzzword linked to economic development in communities across the nation. In Chicago, for example, the Daley administration invested $16 million in a two year period on cultural campaigns that are estimated to have brought the city $350 million in revenues.

Indianapolis defines cultural tourism as "... an economic strategy for attracting and/or extending the stay of visitors through the marketing and developing of artistic, heritage-related or historical offerings. Cultural tourism is a mosaic of places, traditions, art- forms, celebrations and experiences that portray Greater Indianapolis and its people ..."

But as Louise Stevens, the president of ArtsMarket Consulting, the firm engaged to perform an assessment of Indy’s cultural strengths and weaknesses, pointed out, a strong policy of cultural tourism should benefit local citizens as well as visitors. Great cultural destinations, she said, offer people a uniquely local experience that includes good food, dynamic neighborhoods and arts events that can’t be found anywhere else. In other words, cultural tourism is not done with smoke and mirrors. This kind of success is based on building a truly attractive quality of life.

Stevens’ study found the best potential cultural tourists, representing approximately 3 million households, within a 250 mile radius of Indianapolis. The study described these prospects as "... more racially and ethnically diverse than the local arts audience, less homogeneous, less conservative and more experienced in the area of arts and culture." The study continues: "… programming and brand image developed to entice this market to visit Indianapolis as a cultural destination will have to reflect this difference and level of experience. They will likely be more demanding than the local cultural audience with higher expectations and a more complex frame of reference. They will expect to see high quality events and top quality amenities that are uniquely Indianapolis and that stand out against regional and national comparison sites."

Stevens said that these consumers do not differentiate between nonprofit and for-profit cultural experiences -- they want what they perceive to be the best and do not draw lines between what used to be called entertainment and fine art. She added that Indianapolis showed great potential to become a "family cultural destination."

For his part, Mayor Peterson was forthright in his support for a cultural tourism strategy. While allowing that cultural tourism still needs the development of a shared definition, he stated that his administration is prepared to make a substantial financial commitment once a consensus strategy is reached. Peterson said we must not only focus on marketing, but on capacity development. "Are we prepared," he asked, "for the consequences of success?"

Peterson noted that he thought of the city’s cultural tourism program within the context of a 25-year time frame. During that period, he said, he thinks it possible for Indianapolis to take its place among the elite cities of the country and, perhaps, the world in arts and culture. This, he said, is a "high priority" because it could make a dramatic difference in how the city is perceived.

Peterson blended a cautionary note with his sense of cultural ambition. He observed that developing an effective strategy was paramount because if this effort does not succeed, the opportunity might not come again for another generation. The conference, he said, represented "the kickoff of the real work."

dhoppe@nuvo.net