~a~al i I I  ̄ lllI I I
 

1970 Annual Report National Endowment For The Arts National Council On The Arts 
I IIIII I I I II I Ii 

Nat{onal Endowment for the Arts 

National Council on the Arts 

Washington, D.C. 20506 

Dear Mr. President:
 

I have the honor to submit to you the
 

annual report of the National Endowment for the
 

Arts and the National Council on the Arts for
 

the fiscal year ended June 30, 1970.
 

Respectfully,
 

Nancy Hanks
 

Chaírman
 

The President
 

The White House
 

Washington, D.C.
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contents
 

The National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities 4
 

The Federal Council on the Arts and the Humanities 4
 

The National Council on the Arts 4
 

The National Endowment for the Arts 5
 

Panel Members and Consultants, 1970 5
 

Foreword 6
 

Architecture, Planning and Design 10
 

Dance 14
 

Education 20
 

Literature 26
 

Music 32
 

Public Media 38
 

Theatre 44
 

Visual Arts 50
 

Coordinated Programs 54
 

Federal-State Partnership 55
 

The Treasury Fund 56
 

Contributors to the Treasury Fund 57
 

Authorizations and Appropriations, 1966-1971 59
 

Financial Summary, 1970 60
 

Grants, 1970 61
 

Staff 73
 
The National Foundation On 

The Arts And The Humanities 

The National Foundation on the Arts and 

the Humanities was established as an 

independent agency of the Executive 

Branch of the Federal Government by the 

National Foundation on the Arts and the 

Humanities Act of 1965. The Act, Public 

Law 89-209, was amended by Public Law 

91-346 in 1970. 

The National Foundation is composed of 

the National Endowment for the Arts and 

the National Endowment for the Humanities. 

The two Endowments, advised by their 

respective Councils, formulate their own 

programs, but share ah administrative staff. 

The Federal Council On 

The Arts And The Humanities 

The Federal Council on the Arts and the 

Humanities, also established within the 

National Foundation on the Arts and the 

Humanities by the Act of 1965, is composed 

of the Chairmen of the two Endowments, 

the United States Commissioner of 

Education, the Secretary of the Smithsonian 

Institution, the Director of the National 

Science Foundation, the Librarian of 

Congress, the Director of the National 

Gallery of Art, the Chairman of the Commission of Fine Arts, the Archivist of the 

United States anda member designated by 

the Secretary of State. The Federal Council 

advises the Chairmen of the two Endowments on major problems, coordinates 

their policies and operations, promotes 

coordination between their programs and 

those of other federal agencies and plans 

and coordinates appropriate participation 

in major and historic national events. 

The National Council 

On The Arts 

The National Council on the Arts is 

composed of the Chairman of the National 

Endowment for the Arts, who serves as 

Chairman of the Council, and 26 private 

citizens, appointed by the President, who 

are widely recognized for their broad 

knowledge of the arts, or for their experience or their profound interest in the arts. 

The Council advises the Chairman on 

policies, programs and procedures and 

reviews and makes recommendations on 

all applications for financial assistance 

mad~to the National Endowment. 

In addition to the individuals listed here, 

a number of distinguished Americans were 

members of the Council for all or part of 

the period under review. Robert Berks, 

Paul Engle, R. Philip Hanes, Jr., Ruth 

Carter Johnson, Oliver Smith, Isaac Stern 

and George Stevens, Sr. served on the 

Council until their terms expired in 

September 1970. AIbert Bush-Brown 

resigned from the Council in May 1970 and 

Sidney Poitier resigned in October. 

,’! 

The National Council 

On The Arts 

February 1971 

Nancy Hanks, Chairman 

Maurice Abravanel 

Marian Anderson 

Jean Dalrymple 

Kenneth N. Dayton 

Charles Eames 

Duke Ellington 

O’Neil Ford 

Virginia B. Gerity 

Lawrence Halprin 

Huntington Hartford 

Charlton Heston 

Richard Hunt 

James Earl Jones 

Harper Lee 

Charles K. McWhorter 

Jimilu Mason 

Robert Merrill 

Gregory Peck 

Rudolf Serkin 

Beverly Sills 

Edward Villella 

E. Leland Webber
 

Donald Weismann
 

Nancy White
 

Robert E. Wise
 

Some members of the National 

Council on the Arts, taken at its
 

19th meeting held at Tarrytown,
 

New York. Photographs by
 

Mel Davis.
 

4 
I II I lilii I ~~~miHil li 

The National Endowment 

For The Arts 

The National Endowment for the Arts, an 

agency of the Federal Government, carries 

out programs of grants-ín-aid given to arts 

agencies of the states and territories, to 

non-profit, tax-exempt organizations and to 

individuals of exceptional talent. 

The Endowment is headed by a 

Chairman, nominated by the President and 

confirmed by the Senate. Miss Nancy 

Hanks was sworn in as Chairman on 

October 6, 1969. 

Grants by the Endowment to the states 

and territories are made in accordance 

with the terms set forth in Public Law 

National Endowment 

For The Arts 

Panel Members 

Fiscal Year 1970 

ARCHITECTURE, PLANNING 

AND DESIGN 

William Brubaker 

Jay Doblin 

Allan B. Jacobs 

Norman Klein 

James A. Labrenz 

John A. Parker 

Harry W. Porter, Jr. 

Alan Y. Taniguchi 

Gene Tepper 

89-209, as amended, and are administéred ’ DANCE 

by the individual arts agencies. The Roger Englander, Co-Chairman 

Endowment’s own programs are developed Deborah Jowitt, Co-Chairman by the Chaírman and the staff, with the Wiiliam Bales 

advice of the National Council on the Arts. George Beiswanger Asa general rule, applications for grants, Harry Bernstein 

which fall within the established programs Anthony Bliss of the Endowment, are referred to panels Selma Jeanne Cohen 

of experts chosen from all regions of the Martha Hill Davies 

United States. The recommendations of the Agnes de Mille panels are brought before the National Richard Englund 

Council for review, and to the Chairman Allegra Fuller Snyder 

for final determination. LITERATURE 

Discovery Awards 

Ronald H. Bayes 

Gus Blaisdell 

Mari Evans 

Roderick H. Jellema 

Frank MacShane 

Frederick Manfred 

Howard McCord 

Jarvis Thurston 

Poetry-in-the-Schools 

Carolyn Kizer 

Maxine Kumin 

Stanley Kunitz 

Howard Nemerov 

Anne Sexton 

Louis Simpson

A. B. Spellman 

Mark Strand 

Galen Williams 

MUSIC 

Peter Mennin, Chairman 

Willis Conover 

Donald Engle 

Roger Hall
 

David C. Sennema
 

William Severns
 

Robert Shaw
 

C. Michael Steinberg
 

Shirley Verrett
 

Opera/Orchestra 

Donald Engle, Chairman 

Maurice Abravanel 

A. Beverly Barksdale 

Peter Mennin 

Max Rudolf 

William Severns 

Jazz 

Willis Conover, Chairman 

Bill Evans 

John G. Gensel 

Milton Hinton 

Dan M. Morgenstern 

Russell Sanjek 

THEATRE 

Resident Professional 

Robert Crawford, Chairman 

Earle Gister 

Oliver Rea 

Sandra Schmidt 

Alan Schneider 

Experimental and Workshop 

Harotd Clurman, Chairman 

John Lahr 

Leo Lerman 

Robert Pasolli 

VISUAL ARTS 

Museum Purchase Plan 

James Demetrion 

James Haseltine 

Henry Hopkins 

Walter Hopps 

Gerald Nordland 

Daniel Robbins 

Artists’ Fellowships 

William Seltz, Chairman 

James Camp 

F. Van Deren Coke 

Sam Gilliam 

James Melchert 

James Speyer 

National Endowment 

For The Arts 

Consultants 

Fiscal Year 1970 

ARCHITECTURE, PLANNING 

AND DESIGN 

Paul Spreiregen 

EDUCATION 

Gibson Danes 

Harry Holtzman 

Kenneth Koch 

Peter Marin 

Jack Morrison 

LITERATURE 

Carl D. Brandt 

Carolyn Kizer 

MUSIC 

Douglas Richards 

PUBLIC MEDIA 

David Stewart 

STATE AND COMMUNITY 

STATE AND COMMUNITY James Bravar OPERATIONS

OPERATIONS 

Ralph Burgard Agnes de Mille

Robert Marchand Paul Hume 

George Irwin Stephanie Mayer

Robert Wykes AIwin Nikolais

Frances Poteet 
~;~1 Ilii i I iill 

Foreword 

President Nixon, in his State of the Union 

Message of January 22, 1970, said: "The 

seventies will be a time of new 

beginnings ...." 

One of these new beginnings, in 1970, 

was significant and increased public 

support for the arts. 

The arts in 1970 reached out for new 

and larger audiences and were confronted

by increased financial needs. Our government responded to these needs by making 

additional funds available to the National 

Endowment for the Arts in Fiscal 1970 and 

by authorizing a further expansion of the 

Endowment’s programs in 1971, 1972 

and 1973. 

A sharp rise in funding for the Endowment in Fiscal 1970 was made possible by 

a supplemental appropriation, by a transfer 

of $900,000 from the United States Office 

of Education and by increased donations 

to the Endowment, which released 

equivalent sums from the Treasury Fund. 

Thanks to these funds, the Endowment 

was able to obligate $12,982,667 in 

support of arts programs in Fiscal 1970, 

as against $6,370,639 in 1969. 

The public law under which the Endow­ ment operates was due to expire on June 

30,. 1970. In proposing that the Congress 

re-authorize the Endowment, the President, 

in his Special Message of December 10,

1969, proposed a further expansion of the 

Endowment’s programs. He asked the 

Congress to extend the legislation creating 

the National Foundation on the Arts and 

the Humanities, of which the Arts Endowmentis one of two components, for three 

years beyond its termination date. He 

added, "1 propose that the Congress

approve $40,000,000 in new funds for the 

National Foundatíon in fiscal 1971 to be 

available frorn public and private sources." 

The President’s message was greeted 

by a prompt and overwhelmingly favorable 

response. Over 5,000 letters and telegrams 

were sent to the White House in support of 

the message. It was reprinted in full by

many newspapers and carried as an 

advertisement, paid for by enthusiastic 

citizens, in others. It was praised in lead 

editoriais in newspapers pubiished in our 

largest cities and our smallest towns. Bilis 

to extend the Iífe of the National Foundation were introduced in the Senate and in 

the House of Representatives, and were 

sponsored by many members of both 

political parties. In testifying before the 

Joint Subcommittees of the Senate and 

House in January 1970, I was able to state 

that, "... we have today for the arts, and
 

for the humanities, what we had in only
 

small measure in the past--the leadership


of the Congress and.of the President, and
 

the enthusiasm of the people."
 

In hearings held in January and February 

every aspect of the arts and the humanities 

programs was reviewed. These hearings 

were followed by the Committee reports. 

The House Committee on Education and 

Labor held that: 

"In sum, Federal assistance for the arts 

has proved itself, and public arts funds,

so new a concept in the 1960’s, must play 

an even more significant role in the 

decades ahead." 

The Committee, with only three dissenting

votes, proposed that the National Foundation be re-authorized at the level recommended by the President. 

The Senate Committee on Labor and 

Public Weifare, by a unanimous vote, 

recommended re-authorization for the 

National Foundation at three levels of 

funding: $40 million for both Endowments 

in Fiscal 1971, $60 million for Fiscal 1972 

and $80 million for Fiscal 1973. It recommended further that state arts councils be 

given $75,000 per state in Fiscal 1971,

$100,000 per state in Fiscal 1972 and 

$125,000 per state in Fiscal 1973. 

A bill embodying these provisions passed the Senate by a voice vote on

May 21,1970. A similar but not identical 

bill passed the House on June 30 by the 

gratifying margin of 262 to 78. In a 
 

i 

Ilill I I iHlil ii ilili 

separate action the House and Senate 

approved appropfiations for the National 

Endowment for the Arts of $8,465,000 for 

National Programs, $4,125,000 for State 

Programs and $2,500,000 for the Treasury 

Fund for Fiscal 1971. This level of funding 

was almost double the sum available to 

the Endowment in 1969. 

With the support of the Congress, the Endowment and its advisory body, the 

National Council on the Arts, set three 

goals for the next three years: 

To encourage broad dissemination of the 

best of American arts across the country; 

to work toward solutions of some of the 

core problems that plague arts institutions 

in their efforts to provide greater public 

services; and 

to provide support that encourages

creativity among our most gifted artists and 

advances the quality of life in our nation, 

In two programs in particular, 1970 was 

notable for the progress that was made 

toward these goals. 

Our leading symphony orchestras in the 

1969-1970 season played 70 percent of 

their concerts for the general public or for 

assigned to work in 260 school districts in 

31 states during the 1970-1971 school 

year. These programs, and many others, were 

made possible by the increased funds 

available to the Endowment. Substantial 

as they ate, however, these funds are still 

small in relation to the needs of the arts. 

An important purpose of the Endowment’s grants is to generate increased

income from many sources for the arts. 

This purpose was written into the National 

Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities 

Act of 1965 by the Congress in the 

provision creating the Treasury Fund. By

matching, from federal sources the contributions made to the Endowment on behalf 

of the arts, the Fund serves to generate

increased support for the arts by foundations, corporations and individuals. It is 

of the greatest importance to the Endowment and to the arts that it should succeed. 

For that reason, I was particularly grateful

when in 1970, some 360 donations--over 

150 more than the total number received 

during the prior four years--were accepted 

by the Endowment. The financial needs of the arts are a 

strengthen the arts. Recognition of artistic 

merit, and of the contributions made by 

the arts to our nation, is important. 

President Nixon, in 1970, once again

demonstrated his understanding of tilis 

point by undertaking on many occasions 

to honor and to endorse the arts. The 

Endowment is indebted to the President 

and to Mrs. Nixon for their leadership. We 

are indebted also to the National Council 

on the Arts for its indispensable advice and 

support. The terms of seven Council 

members expired in 1970. They were 

Robert Berks, Paul Engle, R. Philip Hanes, 

Jr., Ruth Carter Johnson, Oliver Smith,

Isaac Stern and George Stevens, Sr. Two 

Council members resigned during this 

period, Albert Bush-Brown and Sidney 

Poitier. These Council members contributed 

greatly to the Endowment, and we Iook to 

them for continuing advice and support. 

Nancy Hanks 

educational purposes--a dramatic change primary concern of the Endowment. But, 

from the performance schedules of only a the provision of funds is by no means the 

few short years ago. The image of the only way in which government can orchestra’s audience as an elite and 

affluent group is simply not valid. In 

reaching out for new and larger audiences, 

the orchestras needed and deserved public 

support. The Endowment had no program 

in support of our symphony orchestras in 

Fiscal 1969. By July 1970, a new program 

was in operation under which 73 orchestras 

in 38 states are receiving grants in the 

1970-1971 season. 

Our schools in 1970 carne under 

continuing criticism as joyless places in 

which the natural curiosity and creativity 

of children are dampened by adherence 

to established and often outworn routines. 

In an effort to bring new vitality into our 

school system the Endowment, with the aid 

of funds transferred from the Office of 

Education, helped to place working artists 

in six secondary schools during the 

1969-1970 school year. The program was

highly successful and led in Fiscal 1970 to 

the transfer of an additional $900,000 to 

the Endowment from the Office of Education. This transfer made it possible for over 

300 dancers, musicians, writers, theatre 

artists, painters and sculptors to be 

7 
II I II I |ii ili
 
~~~illll I lllllI I -­
I II I I  ̄ li~l I li 

Architecture, Planning 

And Design 

Development, was given a grant to expand Grants made by the National Endowment in this work into a full- the ideas contained Los Angeles in Fiscal 1970 in Architecture, Planning Photograph by William A. Garnett. length manual for professional use by and Design were largely in support of architects, landscape architects and civil student research and of design projects engineers. Current techniques in gathering which were closely related to our develop- the basic data concerning soil and other 

ing environmental needs, elements that must be considered by 

planners have lagged behind the current Environmental Design suburban rates of land development and it is In November 1968, the Endowment an- growth. The grant to Mr. Way will, nounced its first annual program of grants hoped, provide designers and planners in the field of Environmental Design. Indi­ with a means of obtaining data with greater vidual, non-matching grants of up to accuracy and speed. $5,000 and institutional, matching grants Children in Cities: Michael Southworth, a of up to $10,000 were offered for "pro­ graduate student in the Department of City posals which hold promise of advancing Planning of the Massachusetts Institute of and broadening the nation’s capabilities in Technology, was awarded a grant to pre- environmental design." pare an information system through which Announcements of this program were children may be aided in their discovery of carried in professional journals during the the cities in which they live. He began with winter of 1968-1969. By March 1969, 249 the assumption that: "Today’s city has few proposals had been received. These were places which have been designed for reviewed in May by an evaluation panel of children’s needs. It is an unfriendly place, experts drawn from all regions of the unaware of their physical presence and nation. On the basis of the panel’s recommendations, in which the National Council 

on the Arts concurred, environmental design grants were awarded to 36 individuals 

and to 12 organizations. All of these are 

listed in the appendix to this Annual Report. Some, for purposes of illustration, 

are described below: Furniture for Low-Cost Housing: Mrs. Erma 

B. Striner, a Lecturer in Interior Design at 

the University of Maryland, undertook her 

study in the belief that archit~cts and city 

planners have neglected the interiors of 

Iow-cost, inner city housing projects. She 

held further that there has not been on the 

market a line of furniture meeting the 

needs of inner city residents. She felt that

new materials should be used in the production of items such as cribs, bunk beds,

trestle tables and storage cases, and that 

training courses should be developed in 

space planning and in the design, production and marketing of furniture suited to 

inner city needs. Mrs. Striner’s study, Low 

Cost and Livable, was completed in 1970 

and led, among other developments, to a 

national furniture design competition, 

sponsored by the Washington Center for 

Metropolitan Studies as part of a $90,000 ~ 

research grant from the Department of "Tot Lot": a model for a small playground de- Housing and Urban Development. signed for pre-school children. Dennis and Aerial Photography: Douglas Way, an In- Richmond Streets, New Brunswick, New Jersey. structor and a Research Associate at Harvard’s Graduate School of Design and Photograph by Paul Ryan, courtesy of America 

co-author of Visual Analysis of Landscape the Beautiful Fund. 

1O
 
 

 

unresponsive to their attempts at modifying 

it." He suggested that cities could construct information systems for children including "exploration trails painted on 

sidewalks, five-minute film Ioops, sonic 

messages, child-oriented maps and signs, 

a children’s caravan theater, viewing tubes 

and periscopes to provide visual access to 

inaccessible places, city observator’es’ 

and other devices to stimulate and to 

satisfy the curiosity of children and their 

needs for adventure and activity. Mr. mental Design Program included a matching grant of $10,000 in federal funds given help improve the environment;
 Southworth’s study, supported also by a 

grant from the National Science Foundation, was undertaken with the active participation of 28 boys in Cambridgeport, 

Massachusetts. Their attitudes and their 

~ ~ « 

...... 

~J(~]í~.O01 

~ 

 ̄ " 

_« .... .......... .~~
 i " ~ ~ .~ 

’ ~ * .............. .~ ............ 

¿ 

, ~ ~ i 

i ........ 

~" " "~ . 

:: 

’ I 

~ i. ~ ! 

 ̄

~ ....	 ­

: :,. ~ 

t " -~~ 

, 

~ 

activities formed the basis of his full-length 

report: An Urban Service for Children 

Based on Analysis of Cambridgeport Boys’

Conception and Use of the City. Mr. Southworth is now working on the application of 

his ideas with the Mayor’s Office on Cultural Affairs of the City of Boston, the 

Boston Children’s Museum, the Model 

Cities Programs of Boston and Lowell and 

the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 

Grants to institutions under the Environto the America the Beautiful Fund of the 

Natural Area Council. This organization 

makes small "seed" grants to young professionals in architecture, landscape archi­

’ ~ ~~ T!, o$ ~: ’~.~ "~. | ~’. 

. . 

,, | 

~ 

~ I 

~ ~ 

,~.,, 

-= 

._-  ̄ 

 ̄ ."
 

!
 

~
 

 ̄.	 | Ao~’~~_e ’~ .................... ~’I:~ ~ ’~

~ i.,~i ~ I~

’~~ I 

°~’
 

~~
 

tecture, planning and design to advocate

specific solutions for the improvement of 

our physical environment. Twenty "seed"

grants were made by the Fund, with the 

assistance of the Endowment grant; in 

almost every case these grants led to 

further actions by local authorities. Among 

the 20 grants were the following: 

Mili River, Massachusetts: A study of pollution in the River, with funding matched

by Smith College, was followed by the 

creation of conservation commissions to 

 ̄ , a University of Louisiana student, matched 

~~ by Parish offic[als, led to the formulation of 

" i a master park and recreational plan for the 

Traverse City, Michigan: A grant to a i Michigan State University School of Urban 

i	 Planning and Landscape Architecture stu­

~	 dent, supplemented by funds from the 

Peninsula Township, led to the formulation 

of a land use plan for the OId Mission 

Península, an area of beautiful natural sites ~ .i	 now under pressure for development; 

Madera County, California: A grant suppleSpanish Harlem, New York: A design project, also supported by a local cultural 

group, will, it is hoped, lead to the construction of a festive plaza for this community; 

St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana: A grant to 

~,.,~.., mented local support for "Project Hellfire," 

" ........ an effort to find new solutions for solid 

i .... 

 ̄ 

waste disposal through the demonstration ~ of underground combustion techniques; "	 and 

Tualatin Valley, Oregon: A study, also 

sponsored by Oregon State University, resulted in a comprehensive land use and 

preservation plan for the Tualatin Valley. 

, Student Research Grants 

. ....¡i	 A program in support of fellowships for 

students of architecture, landscape archi­ tecture, planning and design was supported for the third year in Fiscal 1970. Awards of $500 were given to 125 students 

in schools in which these disciplines are

taught. Grants were given for travel, or for 

~ the study of a particular region and its 

indigenous architecture. Students were 

~ 

t~~,~~]í],sit~ /] required to prepare reports for the Endowment and for their schoots. Grants were 

.-~= made under this program to 125 students

in 79 colleges and universities in Fiscal 

Exploring the City: a diagram illustrating Michael Southworth’s proposal for making cities more 1970. 

hospitable for children. 

11 
I |ili lil Ililil I i~iil i li 

iil llii i I II I ~i I III~| 

Dance 

funds would be ~natched by private contri- An article on ballet, in the Newark Sunday butions drawn from new sources. Members of the Paul Taylor Dance Company Star-Ledger of October 18, 1970, spoke of It was hoped that grants of $133,333 in Aureole. "the burgeoning realm of great dance- could be given under this program to 

theatre." three companies: the American Ballet 

For the American dance world, this is Theatre, the City Center Joffrey Ballet and 

certainly a time of rapid expansion and of the New York City Ballet. In fact, due to a intense creativity. It is also a time of acute shortage of Endowment funds, two comfinancial need. panies agreed to postpone the schedules The need is measured not only in terms set for two of the three commissions. An of the costs of mounting new productions initial grant of $20,000 in Fiscal 1970 made and of presenting them to the new and it possible for the City Center Joffrey Bal­ young audiences throughout the country let to start on the choreography of a new which are clamoring to see them. It is re- production: Beauty and the Beast. A grant flected in the income received by dancers of $133,300 to the American Ballet Theatre during professional careers which are Iong enabled this com]3any to prepare four new 

in preparation, and very brief in their span. productions: GaSté Parisienne, Petrouchka, 

There were 100 professional dance com- Traitor and The River. Clive Barnes, writing 

panies in the United States in 1970, ac- in the New York Times, felt that the appeal cording to the Association of American of Gaité Parisienne asa dance work had Dance Companies. In 11 leading com­ faded. Of Petrouchka, he wrote: "1 have panies, according to data gathered by the never seen a better-looking Petrouchka. 

National Endowment, dancers received It is a joy from start to finish." Traitor, a average incomes ranging from $2,775 to work by Jose Limon, was well received 

$8,528 ayear. when it was presented on tour by the com- The dance programs of the Endowment pany. A performance of the unfinished new in Fiscal 1970 were shaped by these cir- ballet, The River, with a score by Duke cumstances. They were intended to stimu- EIlington and choreography by AIvin Ailey, late creativity; to build new audiences for was first presented by the American Ballet the dance; to strengthen the financial and Theatre at Lincoln Center in June 1970. organizational structures of dance com- Mr. Barnes described the ballet-in-prog­ panies; to assist regional companies ress as a "major work" in which "almost 

through professionally led workshops and surprisingly beautiful" dancing was ac­ to offer professional performances to re- companied by music that was "marvelous gions and to communities which have not . . . contemporary, moving and yet totally had the opportunity of se6ing the dance unsent~menta  ̄ 

at first hand. The Corbett Foundation of Cincinnati 

Commissions for New Productions made a $5,000 donation to the Endowment From Fiscal 1966 through Fiscal 1969, the enabling the Endowment to award a National Endowment awarded 22 grants to $10,000 Treasury Fund grant to the Ameri­ individual choreographers and an addi- can Dance Foundation in support of the tional four to dance companies to create production of Pagan Spring by Eliot Feld’s and to rehearse new works. Many of these American Ballet Company. works are now established in company Touring repertoires. The Coordinated Residency Touring Pro- In 1969, in response to the urgent needs gram, initiated asa pilot project in Illinois of large companies, a new program was in 1967, was extended in Fiscal 1970 to prepared. It was understood that the cost six circuits covering 22 states. Under this of mounting new productions had sharply program, Endowment funds are used to risen, and might range from $50,000 to provide one third of a guaranteed fee paid 

over $300,000. It was understood also that by local sponsors to two or more dance the dance has received inadequate sup- companies for engagements which last for port from private sources and that the large at least half a week each. During this companies have rarely undertaken fund period, the companies provide master 

drives. For these reasons, the National classes, workshops and demonstrations as Council in January 1969, recommended well as performances. Endowment grants that the Endowment establish a program of Challenge Grants for new productions by are made to state arts councils for inter­ ~\ 

state circuits, and cooperation between major dance companies in which federal 

14
 
circuits as well as bookings are worked out 

by a national coordinator. 

The Fine Arts Council of Florida acted as 

the grantee for the Florida circuit in 1970; 

the Maine State Commission on the Arts 

was the grantee for Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine and Rhode Island. The 

Maryland Arts Council acted as grantee 

for Maryland, New Jersey, North Carolina, 

Pennsylvania, Virginia and the District of 

Columbia; the Oklahoma Arts and Humanities Council for Oklahoma and Missouri. 

The Utah State Institute of Fine Arts acted 

tarta and Utah; the Michigan State Council 

on the Arts for Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, 

Minnesota and Wisconsin. 

Ten dance companies took part in the 

Residency Touring Program in Fiscal 1970. 

They were the Aivin Ailey American Dance 

as grantee for California, Colorado, Mon- pose of dance. Movements were shown, the residency, the company also toured, 

the Krannert Center for the Performing other three," the Times adds, "the Joffrey Arts in Urbana, at Lewis College in Lock- has a feel for the present . . . a certain port and at Rockford College. The Com- sensibility toward contemporary fashion.. 

pany made six appearances in schools that is all the Company’s own." and colleges in the Chicago area, includ- In 1970, as part of its fourth annual ing a day spent at the Highland Park High summer residency in the Northwest, the 

School. There, before a crowd of 1,500 Joffrey company conducted an intensive 

students, the Company, in the words of six-week training program at Pacific Luththe Deerfield Review, "beamed a ray of eran University in Tacoma. Fifty-six young sunshine on the bare auditorium stage ...." dancers from the West Coast, selected as 

The program began with warm-up exer- winners of scholarship competitions, 

cises, accompanied by a narration dealing worked with the company and were prewith Louis’ concept of the nature and puf- sented in a special performance. During 

repeated and explained, anda portion of presenting performances in Boise, Tacoma, 

one work, Proximities, was performed three Portland, Seattle, Walla-Walla and other 

times, once without musical accompani- communities in the Northwest. 

ment. The Deerfield Review commented: In addition to this program, the donation 

"Far from being dull, it was a Iovely visual of $125,000 to the Endowment on behalf 

Theater, Merce Cunningham and Dance cal, lyrical . . . expression." Finally, the Company, the First Chamber Dance Com- entire work was presented. By then, as the pany of New York, the Lucas Hoving Dance Review noted, "lt was familiar and the Company, the Pearl Lang Dance Company, students applauded warmly." the Jose Limon Dance Company, the Mur- The usefulness of this kind of presenta­ ray Louis Dance Company, the Nikolais tion was summed up by The Boston Herald 

Dance Theatre, the Don Redlich Dance Traveller, in describing the New England Company and the Paul Taylor Dance circuit of the Dance Residency Program: Company. 

In Illinois--to take one example~the 

Murray Louis Dance Company appeared at 

experience, standing on its own as whimsi­

"One of the values in the Residency Program is that it urges participation, not just 

through master classes and the iike but 

participation for non-dancers as weil ....

A spectator does not have to be someone 

who sits and stares straight ahead’(the 

of the City Center Joffrey Ballet permitted 

a Treasury Fund grant of $250,000 to be 

made to the company in Fiscal 1970. FolIowing its residency in the Northwest, the 

company toured in residencies for several 

weeks in Los Angeles, Berkeley, Chicago 

and New York. 

The American Ballet Theatre is characterized by the Wall Street Journal as "a 

superb and exciting company, one of the 

world’s great dance organizations." It is 

known for its breadth of repertoire and for 

its determination in bringing the best of 

American dance to audiences in all regions 

of this country and throughout the world. 

universal television phenomenon); he can Since its formation in 1940, the company 

be someone who knows and feels and is has performed in420 cities in 43 countries 

open to the experience of another’s cre- and in all of our states. 

ativity; he can resist the great 20th-Century A grant of $120,000 in Fiscal 1970 suprush towards dehumanization; he can take ported the American Ballet Theatre in its part." 1969-1970 touring season. The tour was a 

The Pacific Northwest Ballet Association critical and a popular success, with soldwas given grants of $100,000 and $95,000 out performances in Arizona, in Texas, in 

for its summer programs in 1969 and 1970 California andin new institutions such as 

as part of the Endowment’s plan to bring the Krannert Center in Urbana, Illinois. In 

large dance companies to audiences cities such as Denver, Chicago and St. 

throughout the United States. The Associ- Louis, the c~mpany drew audiences subation, a non-profit organization serving stantial¡y larger than in prior years. In Los 

Idaho, Oregon and Washington, sponsored Angeles, San Fran~cisco, Chicago and 

the City Center Joffrey Ballet in summer Urbana, the company appeared in short residencies in regional tours, residencies, adding demonstrations and The City Center Joffrey Ballet is de- exchanges with local dance companies to scribed by the New York Times as "the its schedule of performances. The purpose next to youngest of America’s four im- of these activities, as the Ballet Theatre 

portant classic dance companies ...." The Foundation explained, was to make local company is eclectic, performing works dance companies "feel that we are there created by many choreographers and pre- not to demonstrate their shortcomings, but sented by many companies over the his- to help them achieve as high a level of tory of the dance. "More than any of the exceilence as they can." 

Mernbers of the American Ballet Theatre 

in The River. 

15 

Fund grant of $50,000 in Fiscal 1970. The	 Craft of Choreography Conferences held Despite its enthusiastic reception, the in the surnmers of 1969 and 1970. In 

American Ballet Theatre operated under grant enabled the Martha Graham Com- recognition of the importance of the namounting financial strain in its 1969-1970	 pany, founded and ied by the rnost re­ tional growth of community-based civic nowned of modern dancers, to present its season. Costs were rising more rapidly 1970-1971 season. The season opened on and regional performing cornpanies, the 

than box office income. The financial base October 2, 1970 at the Brooklyn Acaderny of the company was narrow. Salaries paid of Music and continued in a cross-country by the American Ballet Theatre to its 

dancers were cornparable to those paid	 tour which included university and college 

engagements in which classes and dernon­ by other leading companies. Yet, as an strations were presented in addition to article in the Wall Street Journal of June perforrnances, 16, 1970 noted: The repertory for the tour included four "At present Arnerican Ballet Theatre prin­ works which had not been seen for over cipal dancers . . . earn an annual incorne 

that averages below $8,000; soloists aver- 15 years. The dernand for tickets by students was a notable feature of the tour. As age about $5,500, and the corps de ballet the New York Times reported: "For an below $5,000. These are dedicated artists, entire generation that has missed the re­ rnany with families to support, and merely vivals presented this season . . . the cur- considering that they are committed to a 

discipline rnore demanding than that of rent engagement has served asa crash 

any athlete, the pay levels are ludicrous." 

The management of the cornpany shared 

this view and in 1970, undertook to raise 

the salaries of its dancers and to provide 

them with 36 weeks employment each year. 

The National Council on the Arts, in its May 1970 rneeting, recommended additional support for the American Ballet 

Theatre for its 1970-1971 season, in which 

the company will present short residencies 

or perforrnances in 14 cities. A donation 

of $250,000 to the Endowment on behalf 

of the company freed ah equivalent surn its American Dance Festival, a surnmer from the Treasury Fund. session in which perforrnances and train- The American Dance Foundation is the ing are cornbined. The resident companies sponsoring organization for the American at the 1970 Festival included those led by Ballet Company, founded in 1969 by Eliot Jarnes Cunningham, Martha Graham, Feld. Mr. Feld, who first danced with the 

American Ballet Theatre, is described by 

the New York Times as "the first major American choreographer since Jerorne 

Robbins." His company is characterized by 

Byron Belt of the Newark Sunday StarLedger as "one of the most exciting new 

dance organizations anywhere." Donations and pledges given to the 

Endowment for the American Dance Foundation permitted the Endowment to make a 

grant of $67,000 to the Foundation in Fiscal 

1970 frorn the Treasury Fund. The grant 

enabled the company to present performances in seven states during the 1970­

1971 season, 

The Martha Graham Center of Contemporary Dance was awarded a Treasury 

Members of the Lucas Hoving Dance

Company in Icarus. 

Photograph by Jack Mitchell. 

Lucas Hoving and Meredith Mon.k. 

Dance Theater Workshop held performance seasons in the Manhattan School of 

Endowment has supported the costs of a 

professional staff of choreographer, 

teacher, technical director, music director 

and national director to conduct weekIong craft of choreography workshops in 

four regions of the country. These workshops are attended by artistic directors of 

community dance cornpanies. The Endowrnent rnade grants of $16,200 and $17,050 

in support of these workshops. The 1969 

workshops were attended by 302 participants frorn 74 companies and schools; 

enrollment was increased in 1970. 

Services to the Profession 

course in Graham choreography of 30 A review by the Endowment of the expenses and incomes of leading dance years ago." 

Workshops companies led to a belief that rnany of

these cornpanies have been unable thus The Endowment, in Fiscal 1970, rnade 

grants to five organizations which provide far to develop their potential in funding

from private donors. Grants were therefore summer training in the dance: 

Ballet West, made in Fiscal 1970 to two leading com- a classical ballet company panies underapilotprogram of supportfor resident in Salt Lake City, was given Directors of Developrnent. The grants, of $14,000 in support of two seasons of performances and training prograrns for area $16,700 apiece, were structured to pay

two-thirds of the salary of the directors in students; one in Albuquerque and one in the first year of their employment and one- Aspen. 

Connecticut College was given $25,000 for	 half in the second year and to be phased 

out in the third year. The Brooklyn Academy of Music has 

provided resident services for three dance 

companies led by Alvin Ailey, Merce Cunningham and Eliot Feld. The Academy 

offers storage and office space to these 

companies in addition to offering full performance seasons, and assists them in 

Music in November 1969 and April 1970 in	 raising private funds. Donations amounting to $25,000 were made to the Endow- which the works of 14 choreographers ment on behalf of the Academy in Fiscal were presented. A grant of $10,000 was 

given in support of these seasons, which
 1970, and released an equal amount from

were offered to the public without admis- the Treasury Fund.
 

The Alvin Ailey Arnerican Dance Theater sion charge. 

The Kansas Dance Council was given twofound itself unable to continue in operation 

grants of $7,500 (for the surnrners of 1969 after its spring 1970 season at the Brookand 1970)in supportof itsArnerican Dance lyn Academy. The company subrnitted an 

I 

i 

’, 

i 

~~ ’ ~~~ 

i 

Syrnposium. The 1969 Symposium was a 

six-day festival of classes, discussions and 

perforrnances in Wichita in which leading 

choreographers, critics and dance companies took part. The 1969 Symposium included perforrnances by Ballet West and 

the Paul Taylor Dance Company and received substantial local support. 

The National Association for Regional 

emergency appeal to the Endowment for 

a grant to cover operating expenses prior

to touring this country and overseas. A 

non-matching grant of $10,000 was made 

to the company. Its overseas tour, in which 

perforrnances were given in six Soviet 

cities, under the sponsorship of the State

Department, was a "triumph" according to 

the Moscow correspondent of The WashBallet received continuing support for the	 ington Post. 

17 


Education
 

Charles Huntington and helper atwork: Visual

Artists-in-Residence project, Minneapolis, 1970. 

Photograph courtesy of Arts Development 

Associates. 

of a free and democratic society," said Distinguished educators, including James Harry D. Gideonse. B. Conant, Jerome Bruner, Gerald B. The Artists-in-the-Schools program of Zacharias and others have been saying,

increasingly in recent years, that the	 the National Endowment for the Arts and 

American system of education is inade­ the United States Office of Education was

designed, at the very least, to provide the quate, inapplicable to the needs of chil­ beginnings of such development. The En­ dren and of society and so off-center as 

to be virtual¡y irrelevant to the purpose and dowment’s concern with making the arts 

central to the curricula of our schools is function of the educative process, demonstrated not only by the placement of Charles Silberman, for example, in his 

study, Crisis in the Classroom (Random	 artists in the schools, but also by innovative projects which will make possible House, New York), says bluntly: advanced placement in the arts for higher "lt is not possible to spend any prolonged education and assist in the development period visiting public school classrooms of a program for comprehensive secondary without being appalled by the mutilation school curricula. 

visible everywhere--mutilation of spon- The concept underlying the program is taneity, of joy in learning, of pleasure in that art, by itself, is as important within the creating, of sense of self .... Because totality of education as are mathematics, adults take the schools so much for science, history and geography. Moreover, granted, they fail to appreciate what grim, that properly engaged in, art becomes a
 joyless places most American schools are,
 way of seeing, feeling and thinking that is how oppressive and petty are the rules by absorptive for other disciplines of thought which they are governed, how intellectually and knowledge. The program can have, sterile and esthetically barren of atmos­ and is having, a decided effect on the phere, what an appalling lack of civility basic process of teaching and education. 

obtains on the part of teachers and princi- Of all the areas of learning, the arts fit pals, what contempt they unconsciously extraordinarilywell into the central concept dispiay for children as children." of innovative and practical curricula. The 

Mr. Silberman is not without hope. He program can provide, at the very least, the 

goes on to say: space, air and illumination--the atmosphere--required for the beginnings of the "Schools can be humane and still educate 

well. They can be genuinely concerned transformation those most knowledgeably

with gaiety and joy and individual growth involved in education are calling for.

and fulfillment without sacrificing concern The Visual Artists-in-Residence Project 

for intellectual discipline and development. A transfer of $100,000 in Fiscal 1969, from 

They can be simultaneously child-centered the Office of Education to the National 

and subject-or-knowledge-centered. They Endowment for the Arts, enabled the Endowment to place visual artists in resi­ can stress esthetic and m’oral education 

without weakening the three R’s. They can dence in six secondary schools during the 

do all these things if--but only if--their 1969-1970 school year. This program, 

structure, content and objectives are trans- organized asa pilot project, was directed 

by the Central Midwestern Regional Edu­ formed." cational Laboratory, Inc. (CEMREL), and A new approach is needed. More and carried out with the full cooperation of the more of the authorities in the field are six school boards which provided the calling fora fresh and full use of the arts, studio space in which the artists worked. as part of the basic structure of curricula, At that time, it was hoped that these artists as a way of expanding and enlivening and would primarily relate to students, while making more valid the process of Ameri­ also working with teachers and in teacher can education, training, and that students and teachers The arts, says Professor Lewis B. Mayhew of Stanford University, must no Ionger would be stimulated by watching them and 

helping them work. That hope was realized. be shunted off to the outiying borders of School systems in six cities (in Cali- the main content of education. fornia, Colorado, Florida, Minnesota, Mis­ "lt is time to consider the full and souri and Pennsylvania) were selected by systematic development of the so-called the Endowment, CEMREL and the National ’fads and frills’ as ah essential part of an 

educational program for the preservation Art Education Association (NAEA). Local 

2O
 
selection committees, working with the 

Endowment and with consultants, then 

chose the six artists. A full report on the 

project is published in CEMREL’s study, 

The Artist in the SchooL In his commentary, 

published as part of the study, Charles 

Dorn, then Executive Secretary of the 

NAEA, notes that the six artists felt at first 

that the schools presented "an inhospitable environment for aesthetic learning." 

But, he added, by the year’s end, all six 

had demonstrated that practicing artists 

could work freely and constructively within 

the schools. 

At the end of the academic year, students in the Overbrook High School in 

Philadelphia, one of the six schools, obtained 200 signatures on a petition to keep 

their ar~ist, Mac Fisher, for another year. 

The petition stated: 

i "The artist provides a source of advice for 

the art and non-art student. He serves as 

~. ’.	 a source of inspiration for the non-art 

students. His room serves asa showplace 

for any art work done by students. His 

room provides a good atmosphere in which 

the students can take pride. His value to 

the faculty and the betterment of the 

school has been proven by his overwhelming popularity .... " 

A further grant of $45,000 in Endowment 

funds in Fiscal 1970 enabled CEMREL to 

produce a film on the project. The film, 

See, Touch, Feel: A Report on the Artist 

in the School, made on Iocation in three of 

the schools, under the direction of Donald 

Wrye, has been released by CEMREL for 

national distribution. The film examines 

and documents the impact of the artist on 

the students and on the schools. 

Artists-in-the-Schools 

The success of the Visual Artists-in-Residence project in the 1969-1970 school 

year led, in June 1970, to the further transfer of $900,000 in Fiscal 1970 funds from 

the Office of Education to the National 

Endowment for the Arts. The additional 

transfer funds made possible the development of a broader, more comprehensive 

program. The Artists-in-the-Schools program in the 1970-1971 school year, 

through over 300 dancers, musicians, 

poets, theatre artists, painters and sculp­ ~ ~	 tors, is bringing the stimulus and insight of _ ,. the arts directly to elementary and sec- Students at work, Overbrook High School, Philadelphia, 1970. Photograph by Charles Fuchs, ondary school students in 31 states. The courtesyofCEMREL, Inc. program is being administered primarily 

21 
inll ili iil i I II I lilnl nlIll 
--

~ 

~ 

~
 

~ i
 ’ " ~’,~1
 

~~ 

~ 

~ 

Young photographer: New Thing Art

and Architecture Center’s Photography 

Workshop Program, Washington, D.C.

Photograph by New Thing Art and

Architecture Center. 

by state arts councils. In addition to the understand the significance and vitality of 

artist residencies, part of the transfer funds the arts, even if he doesn’t plan a career 

are being used by CEMREL to train teach- in them. He can learn first-hand what they 

ers in techniques of evaluating such pro- can do to enrich his own life, and that elegrams. A grant of $100,000 was made to ment of fear that is usually present can be 

KQED in San Francisco for the production eliminated at an eariy age .... It’s a most 

of three documentary films on the artists’ hopeful program." 

residencies. In addition, one state, Rhode Advanced I}lacementin the.~u’t$ Island, is instituting a major three-year pilot A study, completed in 1952, on General program which will attempt to bring all the Education in School and College, led to arts to schools across the state. 

The Minnesota State Arts Council has the establishment of an Advanced Placereceived a grant of $25,000 to enable the ment Program through which students of 

Children’s Theatre Company of the Minne- exceptional talent were given recognition 

for advanced work accomplished in sec­ apolis Institute of Art to provide training in ondary schools either through placement the performing arts as part of the students’ in higher level college courses or through regular program for academic credit, granting of college credit or both. The The state arts councils of Colorado, 

Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Wash- program, administered by the College Enington and Wyoming have been given trance Examination Board, proved to be 

$11,000 each for Poetry-in-the-Schools highly successful for students engaged in 

the academic disciplines to which it was projects coordinated by the Poetry Center applied. of San Francisco through the Frederic Burk Extensive studies led the Board, in 1968, Foundation for Education. The arts council 

in Idaho received a $2,500 grant for a to propose that the program be extended 

to art and music. special pilot project in poetry. Additional 

Poetry-in-the-Schools projects are being A grant of $100,000, matched by The

JDR 3rd Fund, to help carry out this pro- administered under the Endowment’s Liter­ posal was recommended by the National ature Program and are described in that Council on the Arts in January 1969 and section of this report. funded in Fiscal 1970. It is hoped that the The state arts councils of Alabama, 

Ohio, Oregon and Pennsylvania are par- first examinations under the program will 

be given in the spring of 1972. ticipating in a program which, under grants
 

totalling $100,000, will bring professional The.~.rl$ in Se¢o~{laty ~=ducatio~
 dance companies led by Lucas Hoving,
 In 1967, with the support of the Office of Murray Louis and Bella Lewitzky into the Education, a voluntary network of 17 school systems of these states and also school systems was formed to devise and into Glendale, California. Virginia Tanner, a execute a program for the development of noted dance movement teacher, is working a new comprehensive secondary school with teachers and students in conjunction curriculum and organization--an Educa­ with in-school performances of dance tional System for the Seventies (ES ’70). companies. In Fiscal 1970, the Endowment, with a In Alabama, Connecticut, Hawaii, Indiana, grant of $25,000, joined the Office of Edu- Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, New Mexico, Ohio, cation and The JDR 3rd Fund in support- Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Wash­ ing the development and demonstration of ington, West Virginia and the District of a new Arts Curriculum for the ES ’70 net- Columbia, councils with grants of $12,200 work. "Through publications, demonstra­ each are administering Visual Artists-in­ tions and conferences," ir was stated, "this Residence programs similar to those car- project should exert a significant influence ried out in the 1969-1970 program, upon high school practice over the United The enthusiasm which has met the ex- States." panding Artists-in-the-Schools program The project initially studied the existing can be sensed in excerpts from an article arts offerings of the high schools in the by Rolf Stromberg which appeared in the ES ’70. This study and further documents, Seattle Post-lntelligencer on May 4, 1970. consisting of reports and transcripts of Stromberg calls the program that will put a discussions held by the Curriculum Team poet in residence in western Washington of the project, the members of its Advisory anda visual artist in residence in eastern Committee and other consultants are con- Washington a "worthwhile move." He tained in the final report of the project, continues: The Arts in Secondary Education, sub­

"There is an artistic barrier between the mitted by the Director of the project, Dr. 

stage and the audience that can hardly be George D. Stoddard, and published by the 

breached. But, daily, personal contact with United States Department of Health, Edua significant artist can help a youngster cation, and Welfare. 

23 


Líterature 

Kenneth Koch and young poet: P.S. 61, The National Endowment in 1970, con-	 of the poetry program, they had revisec New York City, 1970. Koch is the subject of tinued its grants in support of writers and	 their courses and felt much more in touck a 30 minute Endowment film. Photograph by of the literary magazines and the inde-	 with their’students." Helen Weaver. pendent presses which publish their works. For Students: It greatlyexpanded the program in support "Students who were involved with the of poets who are now at work in our classroom poets have responded with a schools reinforcing the teaching of Eng­ staggering enthusiasm .... For many, it lish, and bringing out the creative power was the first time that they had been that is present within each child, reached and touched by a school experi- Poetry-in-the-School~ ence. For the poets spoke and wrote of President Nixon, in his Special Message things and experiences the students knew to the Congress of December 10, 1969, firsthand." pointed to the Poetry-in-the-Schools Pro- For Administrators: gramas a successful project that deserved "The administration has seen its teachers increased support. The program, begun in respond enthusiastically to a new and 1966, was undertaken first in Detroit, Long 

Island, New York City, Pittsburgh and San unusual program .... Asa result . .. the

Francisco. It gained a prompt response	 administration has committed itself to a 

greatly expanded program in the arts ...." and was extended in 1967 to Chicago, 

Minneapolis, California and the South- For Poets: 

western states. A grant of $62,000 in "We have discovered many fine writers in 

October 1969 brought the program into this community asa result of the poetry 

Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, project .... They all enjoyed their class- Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, Ohio, room work and felt great rapport with the 

Rhode Island and the city of Saint Paul. young people .... They especially appreci­ ~	 In May 1970, the use of $100,000 in trans- ated the chance to get some feedback 

fer funds from the United States Office of from a young audience for their poetry, Education made it possible to extend the and several said that the students had 

program further to Colorado, Idaho, Mon- become their best critics." 

tana, Nevada, Northern California, Oregon, In Wishes, Lies, and Dreams, (Chelsea Utah, Washington and Wyoming.	 House Publishers, New York) a poet, The Poetry-in-the-Schools Program has, Kenneth Koch, summarizes his conclusions in the course of five years, brought 300 after three years of work with elementary poets into classroom encounters with over school children in Manhattan’s P. S. 61. 500,000 students. The sense of excitement He notes that many of the children with generated by the program is found in re- whom he worked had experienced difficul­ ports such as the one.prepared by the ties in reading and writing and were Project Director for the Minneapolis Public thought to be "deprived." He adds: Schools, Mrs. David LaBerge. In her study, "The tragedy--and for a teacher, the hope The Art of Poetry in the Minneapolis Public and the opportunity--is not that these Schools: 1967-1969, Mrs. LaBerge sum­ marizes the value of the program for teach- children lack imagination, but that it has 

been repressed and depressed, among ers, for students, for administrators and other places at school, where their diffi­ for the poets themselves: culties with writing and reading are some- For Teachers: times a complete bar to their doing 

"Teachers have been directly affected by anything creative or interesting. They 

the program .... For many it provided the needn’t be .... The power to see the world 

only time in their entire teaching career in a strong, fresh and beautiful way is a that they were able to meet and talk with possession of all children. And the desire the artist who practices the art they teach, to express that vision is a strong creative 

"... most of these English teachers were and educational force."
 

delighted and grateful for the program. Koch notes that the capacity to write
 They had never been offered a chance to creatively is not limited to a small minority:
 

take part in anything special before. They
 "... of the children I taught, every one felt out of touch with the contemporary had the capacity to write poetry wel] scene, as indeed they were .... enough to enjoy it himself and usually well 

"Many teachers remarked that, asa result enough to give pleasure to others ...." 

26 
 

L 

I II I I I i lilIl IIIi
 

He concludes: Poets in Developing Colleges Program, by Walt Whitman, in which great audiences "Writing poetry makes children feel happy, initiated in 1967, has placed black writers give rise to great poets. capable, and creative. It makes them feel in residence on the campuses of ten col- In Fiscal 1970, grants totalling $30,000 more open to understanding and appreci- leges, primarily in the Southern states. Dr. were made to eight colleges, primarily in ating what others have written (literature). Stephen Henderson, Chairman of the Eng- Southern states, under the Poets in De- It even makes them want to know how to lish Department of Morehouse College in veloping Colleges Program. spell and say things correctly (grammar). Atlanta has written that this program Once Mrs. Magnani’s students were ex- helped to produce good student poets. 13oordinatin~l ~,oun¢il of cited about words, they were dying to know "They were good not only because of their I-iterary I~la~lazines how to spell them. Learning becomes part own talents, but because the older poets of an activity they enjoy ...." Nearly 1,000 non-commercial literary mag- had talked to them and encouraged them, A film showing Koch and his students azines are published in the United States. made them trust themselves." In addition, was made with the assistance of an En- Some, sponsored by universities, are 

dowment grant in 1970. The film, Wishes, many secondary benefits have been found printed on expensive formats; others are to flow from the use of poets in college Lies, and Dreams, is available for national mimeographed in basements. Some, well- classrooms: reading skills improve; the distribution. endowed, continue to appear Iong after use of the college library is increased; they have Iost vitality; others vanish at the Poetsin Developing Colleges classroom teachers find themselves able Nearly all of the small colleges established height of their creativity because they to make use of contemporary works which cannot pay their printers’ bilis. It is in these to educate black students have lacked bear a particular significance to young stu­ magazines that the writing of many Ameri­ sufficient funds to provide strong courses dents. And, in terms of poetry itself, prog­ in literature or in creative writing. The ress is made towards the state envisaged cans whom we come to regard as masters 

first appears. 

Mar~in Luther King, Jr. School, Roxbury, Massachusetts, 1971. "1 arn a black man.., and 

I am proud to be black people .... " Photograph courtesy of Massachusetts Council on the Arts and Humanities. ~ 

27 
I I mil 

fil 
The Coordinating Council of Literary ect. The volumes were published on a 

Magazines was established in 1966 to pro- non-profit basis. vide financial support and cooperative Volume 1 of the Anthology was pubservices to small literary magazines, lished in 1968, and Volume 2 in 1969. Both 

Grants made to the C.C.L.M., from Fiscal were well received by the press. In January 1966 through Fiscal 1970, were in large 1970, the National Council on the Arts 

part distributed to these magazines through established a new policy on grants which 

~~- C.C.L.M.’s own Grants Committee. In ap- basically committed the Endowment to the 

plying to this Committee, magazines were support of future creativity rather than to 

!	 required to show some evidence of con- the provision of cash awards for past work. 

tinuity. Beyond this the criteria employed After reviewing the Anthology in the light i by the Committee were largely literary. "In of this policy, the Council recommended 

essence," William Phillips, President of the that it be given no further support. 

C.C.L.M., wrote in the organization’s 1970 Dis¢overy Awards Annual Report; "C.C.L.M.’s policy has In recognition of the central importance of been to make grants to magazines which the individual creative writer, the Endow- are serious, energetic, exploratory and ment, in Fiscal 1970 made "Discovery show a minimal professional level of Awards" to 41 young or relatively unknown competence." writers who were regarded as having ex- Since its inception, C.C.L.M. has made ceptional talent. These writers were identi­ 203 grants to 152 magazines in 38 states, fied and recommended for awards by a amounting to a total of $191,786. The team of eight experienced writers and grant funds have been distributed in the teachers whose search covered every sec­ following manner: tion of the United States. Although publiGeographic Area Percentage of Total cation of a completed work is seldom

possible within ayear, it is noteworthy that Northeast	 23.6 

Mid-Atlantic	 the works of several writers who received 9.9 awards in 1970 have since been published, South	 14.3 

Midwest	 or will be published in 1971. Among these 25.6 writers are Besmilr Brigham of Arkansas, Southwest	 4.9 whose first volume of poetas, Heaved trom West	 21.7 the Earth, will be published in March 1971 

In addition, C.C.L.M. has organized 21 by Alfred A. Knopf; R. E. Sebenthall of conferences, workshops, college contests Wisconsin, whose collection of poems, 

and other projects, all intended to improve Acquainted with a Chance of Bobcats, was 

the content, production and distribution of published by the Rutgers University Press, 

non-commercial literary magazines, and about which a Human Voice reviewer 

said: "This book is an exciting first col- The American Literary Anthology lection, full of verbal and emotional surThe American Literary Anthology was prises"; Alice Walker of Mississippi, whose 

founded in 1966 with the aid of a grant first novel, The Third Life of Grange Copefrom the National Endowment for the Arts. land, (Harcourt Brace, Jovanovich) was 

One of its purposes was to bdng works of called by the Chicago Daily News "a most 

merit published in small magazines to a promising first novel, and an unusual book 

larger audience. It was seen also, in the to come from a young black writer"; and 

words of its editors, George Plimpton and Hugh Seidman of New York, whose first 

Peter Ardery, asa "method of getting volume of poetry, Co//ecting Evidence, was 

money to deserving writers and editors.., published in 1970 by the Yale University 

compensating them for what they had done Press. 

and been ill-paid for." Grants to other Projects 

The editors were in charge of the gen- Grants in literature were also made by the 

eral administration of the Anthology which Endowment in Fiscal 1970 to P.E.N. AmeriPutting a poet into a classroorn often was to be published annually. Its contents, can Center fora conference on translation; arouses creativity at ah astonishing in poetry, fiction and criticism were chosen to the Association of American University level, frorn students and teachers by three panels, appointed for each Presses, for the publication of a number of alike. Although the writers rnay not volume. Endowment grants were made di- volumes of fiction and poetry, and to 11 insist that the students must write on rectly to the writers whose works were small, non-profit presses, Iocated in Cali- a specific subject, many times they do selected, and to the editors of the maga- fornia, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Jersey, rnake suggestions--"Write about

colors. Tell a lie in a poern. Make zines in which their works first appeared. New York and North Carolina. Eighty yola wish." Gradually the child begins to The publisher of each volume was chosen umes have since been published by the 

search within himself, finding subjects by Iot from a group of publishing houses 11 presses given assistance under this 

of his own. who volunteered to participate in the proj- program. 

II I I III I I  ̄ liiIiII lil~ i~~~~~ilil 
I II I IIll li _
 

Music 

new projects. Instead, grants were offered Grants made by the National Endowment Finale: the Center Opera Company production for the extensi.on of orchestral seasons be- in support of music amounted to $861,620 of Virgil Thomson’s The Mother ot Us AII, yond the traditional subscription series,

Minneapolis. PhotographbyEricSutherland, in Fiscal 1969 and $2,525,195 in Fiscal and for the improvement of artistic and

WalkerArt Center. 1970. A program involving grants of more administrative standards. In addition, under than $4,000,000 was projected for Fiscal the terms of a resolution adopted by the 1971. Council, the purpose of the new program This rapid expansion of the program was was stated to be the encouragement of: undertaken in response to the urgent new performing groups within orchestras; needs of our musical institutions. It re- performances of contemporary as well as flected their commitment to reach out for
 

new and wider audiences, ah effort which traditional music;
 

programs of appeal to new audiences; the Endowment and the Council felt was more vigorous fund-raising campaigns; and necessary and deserved support, new contributions from private sources. Support for Symphony Orchestras

Until recently, the orchestras of the nation Grants under the new program were to be 

had not Iooked for support from the En- limited to organizations considered to be 

of national or regional importance and dowment which, because of its limited

funds, had undertaken no broad program were directed to "major" or "metropolitan" 

of assistance in the field. A pilot program, orchestras or those of equivalent artistic 

however, was approved by the National and organizational status. 

Council at its June 1968 meeting. Under The Orchestra Program was announced 

this program, four grants of $50,000 for on March 20, 1970, and applications were 

ancillary services were awarded in Fiscal invited for grants to be made in Fiscal 

1971. At the same time, since the needs 1970 to: of the orchestras were so urgent, all of The Atlanta S~,mphon~’ Orchestra, for the applications which had been received chamber music performances in Atlanta, for grants under the pilot program were and tours of the Southeast by ensembles reconsidered, and, from the Treasury Fund, composed of orchestra members ($15,300 the following grants were made: was obligated in Fiscal Year 1970; the The Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra: amount will increase to $50,000); 

The Boston Symphony Orchestra, for the $50,000 for junior and senior high school 

development of experimental video taped concerts; 

The Chamber Symphony Society of Cali- programs of orchestral performances;

The Detroit Symphony Orchestra, for innerfornia: $40,000 for youth concerts and 

city performances involving black soloists performances of new works; 

and composers anda black conductor; The Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra: 

The Minnesota Orchestra, for tours through-$100,000 for student and community concerts by the orchestra or by the ensembles out the upper Midwest ($27,500 was obli­ drawn from it; gated in Fiscal Year 1970; the amount will The Cleveland Orchestra: $64,400 for spe­ increase to $50,000); 

A fifth grant was approved but not ex- cial performances in Alaska, Oregon and 

Washington; pended in Fiscal 1970 to the New York 

Philharmonic, The Denver Symphony Orchestra: $59,000 for a series of concerts for 

union members and their families jointly for touring in Colorado, Nebraska and 

sponsored by the orchestra and the Central Wyoming; 

Labor Council of the AFL-CIO. The National Symphony Orchestra AssociIn preparing for an expanded Music ation of Washington, D.C.: $125,000 for 30 

Program, the Chairman in December 1969, youth concerts in Maryland, Virginia and
 

appointed a new Music Panel and an the District of Columbia;
 

Orchestra/Opera Panel. With the help of The St. Louis Symphon~’: $100,000 for a
 

these advisors, guidelines for an assist- conductor training program including perance program for symphony orchestras formances;
 

were developed and were recommended The San Francisco S~/mphony: $100,00~
 bythe Council at its January 1970 meeting. for a summer workshop program and for
 Across-the-board subsidies were ruled out concerts in schools; and
 

by these guidelines, but orchestras were The Utah Symphony: $30,400 for perform-
 not required to limit their applications to
 

32 
ii 

students with the orchestra in seven regions of the state, 

These grants were made possible by donations to the Endowment which were 

matched from the Treasury Fund. In each 

case, one half of the grant as it is listed 

consisted of federal funds, 

8upport for Opera 

The National Opera Institute, a non-profit 

corporation in Washington, D.C., was established in 1970 with the aid of a grant of 

$600,000 from the National Endowment. 

The grant, made from the Treasury Fund, 

was made possible by pledges in an equal 

ances presenting 2,000 high school choral apolis: $40,000 for its 1969-1970 season young Americans evoked in nursing 

homes, in Rotary Clubs, in youth centers, which included two new commissioned in factories, in classrooms and in union works, two American premieres and a two- halls. A new activity undertaken with the week tour of communities in Minnesota; support of the Endowment grant was the The Goldovsky Opera Institute: $30,000 for organization of an annual training con- a production of La Traviata which touredference and festival in Beloit in which new through 17 states in the East, Southeast methods of presenting the arts are worked and Midwest in February and March 1970; out. An evening of opera, ballet and musi- The Opera Association of New Mexico: cal comedy, held in September 1970 as $50,000for its apprenticeship program and part of the festival, drew 8,500 people-­ its production of The Marriage of Figaro in one-fifth of the population of Beloit. its 1970 season; Young Audiences, a non-profit organio 

The Philadelphia Grand Opera Company: zation founded in 1949, brings chamber 

areas:
 

To supplement production costs of new
 

or hitherto unproduced operas;
 

To conduct a study (by the New York City
 

Opera) of the methods and costs of developing operatic films for television;
 

To commission new operas;
 

To bring introductory opera programs into
 

sections of the nation where opera is not
 

generally available; and
 

To assist exceptionally gifted young singers in their professional careers,


At the same time as it gave support to the
 

Institute, the Endowment continued to
 

make grants to companies providing current performances in opera. Matching
 

i~
 

Participant in Young Audiences concert.


Photograph courtesy of Young Audiences, Inc.
 

$20,000 for the production of three operas 

in the Philadelphia Academy of Music and 

amount from private donors. In July 1970,	 for in-school performances; 

The St. Paul Opera Association: $50,000 the Institute announced that grants in the 

first year would be made in five program for the completion of its 1969-1970 season; and 

The Seattle Opera Association: $36,000 for 

a tour of seven cities in Montana and 

Washington in which productions of Tosca 

and La Boheme were presented as part 

of a program involving schools and 

communities. 

Youn~l Artists and New Audiences 

grants, made up of federal funds and informal concerts, demonstrations, lecprivate donations in equal amounts, were tures and discussions with community 

given to the following companies: groups. It is, as W. F. McCurdy, President 

The Center Opera Company of Minne- of The Sears-Roebuck Foundation, said, a 

Two nation-wide organizations, Affiliate Artists and Young Audiences, have done mith, Mozart or Webern. A discussion fol- Iows in which the children describe the outstanding work in recent years in developing new audiences for music. These	 feelings that the music engenders within 

them. Then one of the children takes over organizations were again supported with as a guest conductor, and the work is matching grants in Fiscal 1970. played again, slower or faster, Iouder or Affiliate Artists, founded in Beloit, Wis­ softer. The audience is then asked which consin in 1966, brings young artists i.nto 

communities for eight weeks of formal and	 interpretation seems right to them and why. 

The children draw the bow across the 

means by which "... an artist can build 

larger audiences by going to the people,

demonstrating and speaking about his art, 

and its meaning in our daily lives." 

A donation of $80,000 from The SearsRoebuck Foundation made possible a

matching grant of $160,000 to Affiliate 

Artists in the faLI of 1969. It helped Affiliate 

Artists to place young artists in communities in 21 states, under auspices which included universities, colleges, churches, 

state arts councils, symphony orchestras 

anda wide variety of civic organizations,

The appointments included two pianists, 

two dancers, two harpsichordists, one 

instrumental ensemble, one violinist and 

26 singers. Sheafs of press reports and 

letters testify to the response which these 

ensembles into school classrooms where 

they present their instruments, play to

young children and exchange ideas. Forty 

chapters of Young Audiences, in 24 states, 

presented 10,000 classroom concerts in 

1970. Like the Poetry-in-the-Schools Program, the classroom encounters of children 

and musicians evoke an immediate response as they open the world of the arts 

to the young through sight and touch and 

hearing. 

Typically, in a classroom session with 

young children, a string quartet plays a 

movement from a work by Bartok, Hindestrings of the cello and hold the violins. 

And they are left with a comprehension 

anda sense of excitement far beyond

those which result from listening to recorded music. 

A grant of $60,000 in Fiscal 1969 en­ abled Young Audiences to enlarge its 

training staff and to test the appropriateness of its programs for children in kindergarten through the third grade. A second 

grant of $150,000 in federal and private

funds was made to Young Audiences in 

Fiscal 1970, primarily for the purpose of 

strengthening its national organization. A 

third grant from the Treasury Fund was 

made to Young Audiences for $323,000 of 

which $126,050 came from Fiscal 1970 

fundsand$196,950fromFiscal 1971 funds. 

,lazz 

Jazz has been one of the most important

of our art forros, providing enrichment for 

--

~ 

i
 

I,
 

~ 

~o 

At a New York Philharmonic rehearsal, 

Photograph by Larry Davis, courtesy 

of The Christian Science Monitor. 

Americans and for all the peoples of the Music in Our Time: $5,000 for four conworld. Despite its continuing vitality, jazz certs given in New York City; 

is not sharing in the prosperity of other The Philadelphia Composers’ Forum: 

forms of music. For this reason, the En- $5,000 for support of its program of predowment established, in Fiscal 1970, a senting concerts of contemporary works pilot program in support of jazz. Thirty in colleges in seven states; grants, amounting to a total of $20,050 The Universityof Alabama Regional Comwere awarded, on the advice of a Jazz posers’ Forum: $3,000 for support of its 

Panel, under four categories of assistance: programs in which works by composers 

Individual grants of up to $1,000, to Ameri- living in the Southeast are presented; and 

can jazz composers and arrangers for The Washington Theater Club/Theater commissioning new works and for com- Chamber Players: $3,300 for support of pleting works-in-progress. Ten grants the series of concerts presented by the amounting to a total of $7,150 were made Players in the Washington Theater Club in this category, building. 

Matching grants of up to $1,000, to col- Spe¢ial Grants leges, universities and schools of music, Grants which did not fall within the estab­ to establish short residencies and to pre­ lished categories of the Endowment’s pro- sent jazz workshops and clinics. Nine gramsinmusic, butwhichwerenonetheless
 grants amounting to $6,975 were made to substantial in size, were made to five
 schools, colleges and universities in seven organizations in Fiscal 1970:
 states in this category.
 The American Choral Foundation was given Individual grants of up to $500 to musicians $25,000 for a summer institute held in and students for travel and study. Seven Pennsylvania in which choral and orches­ grants, amounting to $2,700, were made to tral conductors were given advanced students and instructors in seven states training and were coached in leading a in this category, professional orchestra in choral works by Matching grants of up to $1,000 to public Corelli, Faure, Hindemith and Honneger; 

and private elementary and secondary The American Musical Digest, a non-profit, schools and other institutions to present monthly digest of music criticism, was jazz concerts. A grant of $975 made in given two grants amounting to $115,000 this category enabled jazz sessions to be for printing and distributing the magazine held in the public elementary schools of which commenced publication in the New Orleans. A second grant of $1,000 to autumn of 1969; the New Thing Art and Architecture Center The American Symphony Orchestra League enabled the Center to present jazz concerts was given a grant of $10,000 in support of in the Washington, D.C. public schools, its summer institutes for conductors in In addition, the Jazz Institute of Cfiicago California and Virginia anda second grant was given $1,000 to record interviews with of $40,000 to support a pilot project in jazz artists, and ayoung musician, Stephen which the St. Louis Symphony Orchestra A. Reid, was awarded $250 to assist him and the Kansas City Philharmonic Orches­ in providing a workshop in drumming for tra cooperate with community orchestras underprivileged youth in New York. in presenting concerts in smaller cities 

New Musi¢ and towns; 

The Endowment’s interest in developing The National Guild of Community Music audiences for works by contempora[y Schools was given $17,500 for its work in American composers and creators of ex- providing services to the community music perimental forms of musical expression schools of the nation and for organizing led, in Fiscal 1970, to support for the new schools. The Arts for AII Fund, estab­ work of six groups: lished by the National Guild in November Carnegie Hall Corporation: $15,000 for 1970, will lead a nation-wide effort to pro­

"Evenings for New Music" performed in vide the Guild with increased private supNew York, in Buffalo and on the campus port; and 

of Rutgers University by resident profes- The New York Chamber Soloists, through sional musicians of the State University of the Festival Orchestra Society, were given New York at Buffalo under the direction of $20,000 to extend their tours of colleges Lukas Foss and Lejaren Hiller; and universities in which they present perContra’sts in Contemporary Music/Com- formances which consist in part of composers’ Showcase: $6,000 for a series of missioned works and also meet with stUfour concerts given at the Whitney Museum dents and faculty members in discussions 

in New York City; and in rehearsals. 

35 


Public Media
 

Buster Keaton and Marceline Day in MGM’s

The Cameraman (1928), shown as part of the 

opening program of The American Film Institute

Theatre in January, 1970. Photograph courtesy

of the Museum of Modern Art. 

preservation copies of America’s films to- The American Film Institute, one of the 

Endowment’s major undertakings, was gether for safekeeping and study. 

established in the summer of 1967 through To date, AFI has secured for preservajoint funding from the Endowment, The tion more than 4,500 American films, inFord Foundation and the member com­ cluding many long believed Iost. These

panies of the Motion Picture Association	 films are stored at the Library of Congress 

in The American Film Institute Collection. of America. Fiscal 1970 was the final year A natural outgrowth of AFI’s archival of the Endowment’s initial three-year $1.3 

million commitment to the Institute. activities was the inauguration of a film

repertory series in Washington, D.C. atthe The Institute, under the direction of 

George Stevens, Jr., has headquarters in National Gallery of Art in January 1970. 

Washington, D.C. and offices in Los The American Film Institute Theatre was 

Angeles. Its general purpose, "to stimu­ established to serve as a showcase for

late and encourage progress in the film	 classic films as well as the works of conart," is pursued through programs in film temporary filmmakers. Outstanding film

preservation, filmmaker training and assist- professionals are invited to introduce their 

works and to participate in an informal ance, film exhibition and education. In 

addition, several publications are regularly audience discussion following the film 

showing. produced and distributed by the Institute. The response to the film series was At the time The American Film Institute 

was founded, it was estimated that over enormous~,000 members enrolled within

half of the feature films produced in the	 five weeks of its public announcement, and 

United States had been Iost. The country membership had to be suspended until

that had nurtured and contributed signifi- the Institute could provide larger facilities. 

cantly to the development of a new art Asa result of the tremendous demand, the 

form, the film, was fast Iosing all records AFI Theatre established a full-time operaof its development. AFI, following the tion in the fall of 1970 in a new 800-seat, 

pioneering lead of groups such as George fully equipped theatre in Washington’s 

Eastman House and the Museum of Mod­ L’Enfant Plaza.

ern Art, established an archives program In order to document America’s film 

dedicated to preserving the American film heritage, the Institute has undertaken an 

heritage,	 exhaustive search for information on 

AFI directed its first efforts toward Iocat­ films produced in this country since 1893.

ing and securing some of the thousands of The results will be published in The Amerifilms produced from 1912 to "1942, when can Film Institute Catalog which will conmotion pictures were printed on perishable stitute the first definitive record of Americar,

nitrate stock. The chemical base of nitrate films. Feature films, short films and newsreels will be treated in 19 separate vol­ stock is an unstable compound which is
 

highly flammable and explosive. It is in- umes. The first volume, Feature Films,
 

evitably and unpredictably subject to 1921-30, will be published in 1971 as ~

chemical decomposition which destroys two-book set. 

the film, leaving nothing but a powdery In addition to its archival activities, AFI 

also concerns itself with the present need.~ residue. The danger of Ioss increases as 

the film grows older, of film. The Stanford Report, a study comCast against this picture of a decaying missioned by the Endowment in 1966 tc 

help define the function and programs of national film heritage, AFI began ah intensive program to Iocate and to acquire for	 the proposed Film Institute, recognized the 

need for a bridge to span the gap betweer preservation as many American films from academic training and the professiona the nitrate era as still remained intact, 

The libraries of major producing com- realm. Consequently, when AFI was 

founded, one of its goals was to establish panies, including RKO, Columbia, Warner 

Brothers and Paramount are now being	 a center where young filmmakers could 

secured through the Institute’s archives work closely with leading professionals in 

program. Hundreds of private film col- tutorial relationships. 

lectors have been persuaded to add their The American Film Institute’s Center for 

Advanced Film Studies opened at Grey- rare holdings to the nation’s repository. 

Museums and archives throughout the stone in Beverly Hills in September 1969

world are cooperating to bring the best	 after two years of intensive planning and 

38 
I I IlilR IHi| 

 ̄ ~ 

~ ~~., 

,o ~~ 

z" ~: ,-~~; 

~"~’.,’,~ ; ~-4 

~ : 

preparation. Nineteen fellows were chosen 

from 200 applicants screened for admission the first year. 

During the two-year course of study and 

~,,. training, each fellow is given a budget that 

allows him to take a film from the initial 

idea stage through final editing, working 

closely with leading professionals in the 

field. Fellows also study films of importance in a screening program designed to 

fill in the canvas of film history and to 

survey the work of new filmmakers. The 

Center’s program gives fellows the opportunity to actively engage in all aspects of 

production, as well as research and criticism, under the guidance of experts. The 

original 19 fellows completed their first 

year at the Center in July 1970. 

AFI’s concerns in education extend 

from the filmmaker to his audience and are 

addressed to the need for information and 

assistance in universities, colleges and 

schools, wherever film is taught and utilized. A 1968 conference in Santa Barbara, 

co-sponsored by the United States Office 

of Education and AFI, clarified these needs 

and pointed to the value of a national 

membership of film educators. AFI’s Education Membership was launched and enrolled more than 2,200 members from 49 

states in less than two years. Through a 

newsletter, publications and advisory services, the Education Department disseminates a wide variety of film information. 

Teacher training is also a prime concern. 

A seminar for film teachers, held at the Center for Advanced Film Studies in July ,I 

1970, brought together 35 film teachers 

from 14 states; a summer institute was conducted at the Kent School in Connecticut 

in August 1970 for another 35 teachers of 

all grade levels who were beginning their

work in film study. AFI has assisted in establishing 35 

model projects across the country in which 

innovative procedures for teaching film can 

be observed and shared with other film 

teachers. The Institute has also encouraged 

the formation and growth of regional film 

associations that can respond to needs in 

particular locales. In 1969-1970, the Institute worked with regional groups in presenting "regional preview screenings" in 

Boston, Philadelphia, Denver and Dallas to 

acquaint film users with newly available 

films they would not normally see. 

American Film Institute Fellows shooting on Iocation in Kentucky. 

Two Education Department surveys have been published: The American Film Insti39 

 

Decaying nitrate film: frames showing

the Young Men’s Blaine Club of 

Cincinnati. Copyrighted by Thomas

A. Edison in 1897. Photograph courtesy of the Library of Congress. 

tute’s Guide to College Film Courses, for 

students seeking information about film 

study, and The Membership Directory 

which includes descriptions of film programs across the country by region. 

Filmmaking is an expensive art. The cost 

of equipment and material makes it extremely difficult for new filmmakers to produce quality films without assistance. 

To help ease this burden, AFI has provided grants to nearly 100 filmmakers over

the past three years for film production, 

script development and internships on 

feature films. These awards, given to help 

filmmakers advance their careers, go to 

men and women of promise who have 

demonstrated some command of the craft 

of filmmaking and have a developed sense 

of discipline toward their art. These grants 

have ranged from $400 to an upper limit 

of $15,000. 

The Endowment’s continuing interest in 

arts programming for television is evident 

in two Fiscal 1970 Public Media Program 

grants. A $60,000 grant was given to the 

National Center for Experiments in Television, associated with the Bay Area Educational Television Association (KQED), to 

provide two year-long fellowships for individuals who have demonstrated special 

talents which may be applied to researching television as an art forro itself. 

The second grant in the field of television 

served as a follow-up to a program the " 

Endowment funded in Fiscal 1967 and 

1968. In 1967 the Endowment made a 

matching grant of $64,991 to the Educational Television Stations Program Service 

so ir could launch an incentive grants 

program which would enable educational 

television stations to begin production of 

arts programs. That grant resulted in the 

selection of 20 original programs for production by local educational stations. A 

second grant in 1968 made possible the 

production of an additional 41 half-hour 

arts programs developed during the initial 

phase of the project by local educational 

television stations for national distribution 

by ETS. As a follow-up in Fiscal 1970, the 

Endowment made a $110,000 matching 

grant for a project entitled "Artist in America Public Television Awards." That project led to the production of 20 half-hour 

television programs which feature the work 

of local artists and explore the effects of 

these artists on their communities. These I 

programs were produced Iocally for na- I 

tional distribution in 1971. 

I 

41 
ii I~II II I II  ̄ ~~II II
 
 ̄ I I IliH ii lii~l 
nmi III	 I illli ii Ililili I 

Theatre
 

Members of Milwaukee Repertory Theater

Company in Frank Gagliano’s The Prince of 

Peasantmania. Photograph byJackHamilton, 

~ 

~’,íi 

The Theatre Program of the National En- Angeles). The American Place Theatre 

dowment in Fiscal 1970 followed the was given a grant to broaden its audience 

general pattern established in prioryears, and to extend its community services. 

Grants given to sustain and stimulate Grants in support of evolving works-increative activity and to raise artistic stand- progress were made to The Open Theater 

ards were directed, in two major programs, and The Performance Group in New York 

to Resident Professional Theatre Com- City and Theatre Workshop, Boston. 

panies and to Experimental Theatre and A.N.T.,~ Workshop Groups. Under the terms of a contract signed in 

ResidentProfessionalTheatreCompanies 1969, the National Endowment for the Arts 

Over 40 resident professional companies accepted the donation from the American 

National Theatre and Academy of its equity are now in operation presenting seasons 

of 20 weeks and more. Their emergence in the A.N.T.A. Theatre, Iocated on West 

52nd Street in New York City. In return for over the past 15 years has been one of

the most hopeful aspects of the theatre in this gift, which was subject to the retirement of first and second mortgages, the America. 

Grants have been made by the National	 Endowment undertook to provide A.N.T.A. 

Endowment to some of these companies with funds for operation of the Theatre.

The Theatre was seen as a national re- since Fiscal 1967. In 1970, 24 grants were 

made under this program to theatre com- source and it was agreed that, in the 1969­

panies in 16 states. Nine companies re- 1970 season, regional repertory companies 

would be brought to New York with the ceived grants to present new works. Other 

grants were made for staff development, aid of Endowment funds. The season 

opened in September 1969 with the Ameri­ for community and education projects, for

local touring and for company training, can Conservatory Theatre of San Francisco 

In addition to these grants, three com- presenting three plays: Tiny Alice, The 

panies, the Arena Stage of Washington, Three Sisters and A Flea in Her Ear. These 

D.C., the American Shakespeare Festival were followed by Henry V, produced by

Theatre of Stratford, Connecticut and the the American Shakespeare Festival Theatre 

New York Shakespeare Festival were given of Stratford, Connecticut. Later in the seasubstantial matching grants from the son, plays were presented by the National 

Treasury Fund to meet operating costs at Theatre for the Deaf, the Meadow Brook

Theatre of Rochester, Michigan and the a time of special need. Trinity Square Repertory Company of Experimental Theatre and Providence, Rhode Island. Productions at Workshop Groups A.N.T.A. by three New York groups, the 

These groups are devoted to the develop- Theatre ’70 Playwrights Unit, the LaMama 

ment of new playwrights and to the Experimental Theatre Club and the New 

exploration of new forros and techniques. York Shakespeare Festival’s Public Theatre 

The best of them ate responsible for some were also supported by the Endowment. 

of the most adventurous and promising In addition, plays produced by the Plumwork in the American theatre, and cre- stead Playhouse and the Phoenix Theatre 

ative development is importantly fostered were presented in the Theatre without Enthrough the opportunities offered by these dowment support. 

groups to playwrights, directors and In general, the season was well reperformers, ceived, and one of the plays presented at 

Twenty-five companies in eight cities the Theatre, No Place to be Somebody 

were supported with grants made under by Charles Gordone, was subsequently 

this program in Fiscal 1970. Grants were awarded the Pulitzer Prize. 

made principally for support of production On balance, however, the Council conof new works by such groups as the cluded and the A.N.T.A. board agreed that, 

Chelsea Theatre Center (Brooklyn), La- although the benefits gained were subMama Experimental Theatre Club (New stantiai, the costs of bringing out-of-town 

York City), The Julian Theatre (San Fran- companies into New York did not justify 

cisco) and the Company Theatre (Los the continuance of the program for a sec44
 
ond season, particularly when considered 

within the context of the present needs 

of noncommercial professional theatre 

companies. 

Educational and Special Projects 

The Endowment has also made a limited 

number of grants for training projects and 

to organizations engaged in educational 

programs. 

The largest of these enterprises, the 

Educational Laboratory Theatre Project, 

was undertaken jointly with the United 

States Office of Education in 1966. The 

objectives of this pilot project, which concluded in 1970, were to observe and 

evaluate the impact of live professional 

theatre upon secondary school students; 

to investigate the possibilities of cooperation between a professional theatre anda 

public education system and to provide 

adult theatre as well for the communities 

involved. 

Three theatre companies, in Los Angeles, 

New Orleans and Providence were supported under this project which received a 

total of $1,351,000 in Endowment funds 

and more than $4,500,000 in other monies. 

The project was fully evaluated in a fourvolume report prepared by the Central 

Midwestern Regional Educational Laboratory. "The Project," the report held, "accomplished its two primary goals; it brought 

live theatre to hundreds of thousands of 

students who otherwise would never have 

seen a play, and it gave three theatre companies an opportunity for growth and 

development they would not otherwise 

have had." The report concluded: 

"The total cost of the project over a span 

of four years was slightly over six million 

dollars. This may at first seem like a 

staggering figure, but when one considers 

that students received copies of the plays 

for study in class, were bussed to and 

from the theatres, had many opportunities 

to talk with and learn from actors in small 

group situations, that their teachers were 

given supportive curriculum materials and 

in many cases in-service training, that a 

considerable amount of valuable research 

was conducted in relation to the project 

and that the communities were given professional theatres, the cost per student 

attendance of about $6.70 is really quite Helena Carroll and Marie Carroll in the Washington Theater Club’s production of The Effect of 

Gamma Rays on Man-in-the-Moon Marigolds a bargain." by Paul Zindel. Photograph by Alex Minor. 

 

I I I  ̄ I I II mIIIll II
 

A second special project of the Theatre 

Program involved the creation, in Fiscal 

1967, of the Theatre Development Fund. 

I A $200,000 grant, hall of which was provided by private donations, enabled the 

Fund to establish a pilot program for the 

support of plays of special merit produced 

for the commercial theatre. From 1968 to 

July 1970, the Fund assisted 22 Broadway 

and off-Broadway productions principally 

through the purchase and re-sale at reduced prices of 54,150 tickets to students, 

teachers, union members and agencies 

working with the disadvantaged. 

A third grant, of $50,000, made in Fiscal 

1970 is providing professional training for 

students in technical theatre crafts. Under 

this program, also supported by the Rockefeller Foundation, and administered by 

Brooklyn College, students, principally 

from disadvantaged backgrounds, are 

trained to become scenic artists, costumers 

and lighting technicians, and are given 

externships with cooperating regional 

theatres as well as intensive classroom and 

laboratory work. It is hoped that the prograto will serve as a model for others 

throughout the country. 

Services to the Field 

A national program of support for the 

theatre must recognize those particular 

organizations which provide vitally needed 

services for the field asa whole. These 

organ, izations serve as centers of information, they undertake research, they host 

international meetings in the United States 

and organize American participation in 

such meetings abroad, they facilitate exchange of information and personnel, they 

aid communication between theatre professionals both nationally and internationally. Thus, their value to the theatre is 

far in excess of the small cost of sustaining 

them. Grants made in Fiscal 1970 in this 

area include support for the programs of 

the International Theatre Institute of the 

United States and the Foundation for the 

Extension and Development of the Professional Theatre (an Actors’ Equity sponsored organization), as well asa grant 

Vincent Gardenia and Laura Esterman 

in the American Place Theatre’s 

to the American Society for Theatre Research for the first international congress 

production of The Carpenters by tO be held in the United States. 

Steve Tesich. 
IIIIII I I li I llIllIIIIl i~ 

Visual Arts 

Eugene Eda painting the Wall of Meditation,

Olivet Presbyterian Church, Chicago, 1970.

Photograph by John P. Weber. 

! 

’ !! 

The MacDowell Colony, in 1969, com- artists are particularly gratifying since 

recognitio,n, is difficult to obtain in this pleted a survey of the professional artists


who had lived and worked at the Colony atea ....
 

as residents. Only 12 percent of the paint- The general tenor of the responses may


be sensed fro~ a few excerpts from the ers and sculptors included in this survey 

stated that they were able to support them- replies made to two questions: 

selves through their work as artists. The How did you use the tunds which you 

great majority were engaged in part time received? 

occupations ranging from ice-skating in­ "... the grant enabled me to casta num­ struction to genealogical research. ber of very delicate pieces in bronze which In continuing its programs in support of otherwise would have been Iost ....Castvisual artists, the National Endowment ing has become a luxury unless one can 

provides fellowships for individual painters count on some sales ...." 

and .sculptors and makes grants to the --Mary Frank, Cape Cod, Massachusetts institutions which serve artists and which "... until I received the grant, I had been present their works. working outdoors with few tools and poor Fellowships for Individual Artists materials. After the grant, I made a down Grants of $5,000 were given to 60 individ­ payment on a studio and bought an ade­ uals in Fiscal 1967, to 29 individuals in quate set of tools ...." Fiscal 1968 and to 30 individuals in Fiscal --J. Geoffrey Naylor, Gainesville, Florida 1969. In Fiscal 1970, the National Council 

agreed to stress fellowships for future "1 bought a crane. It cost me $4,200 and
 

work, rather than awards for past achieve- then another $1,500 to get her running.
 

ment. Twenty fellowships in the visual arts With the crane as my paintbrush, I was

were offered by the Endowment in Fiscal able to do what every normal modern

sculptor has dreamed of: to use industrial 1970 and obligated early in Fiscal 1971; scale and size in sculpture." they were for $7,500, an amount comparable to the average sabbatical leave for --Mark di Suvero, New York City
 

associate professors engaged in academic Did the grant aid you significantly in your 

work. Nominations for these fellowships career? 

were solicited from 73 critics, artists, "Yes. It is important for the artist in the 

teachers, museum directors and editors of early years of his career to experiment... 

art journals. In addition to the 356 nomina- and not to feel compelled to establish a 

tions which were received, the 278 appli- particular image and style. The grant encations for individual grants which were on ables the young artist to keep many doors 

file in the Endowment were reviewed, open .... " 

Selections were made by a special com- --Christopher Wilmarth, New York City 

mittee, made up of experts from all regions "... I was able to enlarge the body of my of the nation, work for exhibitions. I was thus prepared
 A total of 119 artists were given grants to accept the invitation of the Arts Council
 of $5,000 apiece under the Endowment’s of Great Britain to hold a retrospective
 Visual Arts Program from Fiscal 1966 showofmyworkinLondon ...." 

through Fiscal 1969. In an effort to ap- --CharlesBiederman, RedWing, Minnesota 

praise the value of these awards, the Artists’ Housing Endowment, in August 1970 wrote to the In 1967, when the Bell Telephone Com­ artists who received them and asked how pany’s Laboratories building on New the funds were used, whether they were of York’s Iower West Side was put up for significant aid, whether the grantees were sale, the Endowment was able to join with still engaged in professional careers as The J. M. Kaplan Fund to act on one of artists and whether they felt that individual the earliest recommendations made by the awards were an effective means of sup- National Council on the Arts. Recognizing porting the arts. the critical need of all artists, particularly AII of the artists who replied stated that painters and sculptors, for reasonably- they were still following their professional priced working and living space, the Coun­ careers in the arts; all felt that individual 

grants were effective. One, formerly resi- cil hoped to launch a pilot effort which 

might provide a partial solution to the prob­ dent in the Midwest, noted that: lem and, more importantly, might offer a "An award direct from Washington has model for similar projects all over the more impact .... grants to Midwestern 

50
 
 

 

i I I II I III III il I I~ I
 I


professional artists with incomes of no hold on the site, led to a request for further more than $11,750 ayear. The 383 units country. The Bell Laboratories seemed a financing. This was provided in part when, were quickly occupied, and the waiting list perfect opportunity, The J. M. Kaplan Fund and the Endow­ in Fiscal 1970, the Endowment madé a had grown to over 1,000 by the time the $500,000 Treasury Fund grant, half of ment each provided grants of $750,000, first tenants moved in. The ’project was which was private money. Federal Housing and with the aid of these funds, the prop- dedicated in a special ceremony on May Administration financing was, at the same 19, 1970. A reporter for the New York erty was purchased by the Westbeth Cor- time, raised to a total sum in excess of poration, a non-profit organization created Times examined the tenants’ roster at that 

for the purpose of converting the labora- $10,800,000. time and concluded that there were in The design and construction of the tories into working and living quarters for studio/living units in Westbeth were com- residence: 27 pho­ " 150 painters 49 sculptors, artists. pleted within the very short span of two Three hundred and eighty-three studio/ t(~gr~phers, 29 writers, 26 musicians, 38 years. The issuance of a Certificate of actors, 18 dancers, 14filmmakers, 11 play- living units were constructed within the 

main building at Westbeth. Remodeling Completion in December 1969 permitted wrights, 7 poets, 9 composers, 7 architects, the units to be occupied by artists and costs averaged $12,000 a unit, in contrast 7 stage directors, 7 printmakers, 3 de- their families at rentals ranging from $110 signers, 4 graphic artists, 5 craftsmen, 4 to the $30,000 which would have been to $190 a month. Applicants were seiected theatre producers, hundreds of children required for new construction. Rising costs, by a committee on the basis of merit and and the necessity of expending an addi- anda Iot of pets." need, and were limited to those who were tional $900,000 for the purchase of a lease-  ̄ 

Escalator, a painting by Richard Estes, one of the 20 artists chosen to receive Endowment 

fellowships. Photograph courtesy of the artist. 

51 

tury to the Present; gram was undertaken "to help museums In November 1970, Westbeth received the	 The Fort Worth Art Center, $2,000 for its stimulate awareness of the visual arts, and only award given by the American Institute	 retrospective show of the works of Milton to make their collections more readily of Architects to non-profit enterprises in available to a wider public." Three grants Resnick; 

the field of rehabilitation of Iow or moderate	 The Sheldon Memorial Art Gallery of Lin­ were made under this program to museums income housing. It was selected, the jury in Boston, Detroit and Fort Worth. In addi-	 coln, Nebraska, $8,500 for its exhibition: declared, " .  ̄ because ir proves that a	 American Sculpture from its Beginnings to tion, programs which related to museums viable environment can be created out of	 the Present, which marked the opening of in specific areas were undertaken and old buildings."	 the Gallery’s Sculpture Garden; and were continued in Fiscal 1970. Works of Art in Public Places	 The Walker Art Center of Minneapolis, The Museum Purchase Plan, established Under this program, matching grants are in Fiscal 1968, offers federal grants which	 $8,500 for a show of commissioned works made to cities to enable them to place museums match from new sources of by eight artists commemorating the re- commissioned works of art in public	 opening of the museum in its new building. funds for the purchase of works by living places. Artists are generally selected by American artists. Museums are notified of Liaison between Museums and Univer­ panels made up of local representatives the program through correspondence and	 sities: This one-year program, established and nationally-known experts chosen by through announcements in the professional	 in Fiscal 1970, undertook to bring univer­ the Endowment. Two works commissioned journals. Applications are reviewed by a	 sity art history departments into closer under this program were installed in Grand panel. The $10,000 grants, in general, are	 relationships with art museums. Chairmen Rapids &nd Seattle in 1969. A third grant, directed toward small and medium-sized	 of art history departments were offered given to Wichita in 1970, led to the com­ museums.	 grants of $1,500 to engage scholars at­ missioning of a large work by James Eighty-two museums applied for match- tached to museums to teach in their de- Rosati, ah artist who was born in Pennsylvania and who is currently Professor of	 ing grants under this program in Fiscal partments for one semester. In 1970, 16
 

1970. Ten were selected: grants were made under this program.
 Sculpture at Yale University. Additional The Dayton Art Institute purchased five	 Courses already completed include a grants were made to Minneapolis and to paintings, five drawings, 18 prints and one	 seminar in Expressionism given by the Scottsdale, Arizona for sculpture and to construction;	 Director of the Des Moines Art Center at Boston for inner city mural work. A similar Drake University and one on the Art of grant to the Community Arts Foundation	 The Huntington Galleries of West Virginia, 

with funds matched by the Booth Coal Africa and the South Pacific given by a assisted a black artist, William Walker, to Dallas Museum of Fine Arts staff member paint a mural, the "Peace and Salvation	 Company, purchased five works by HumWall of Understanding," on the side of an	 bert AIbrizio, Leonard Baskin, Harry Ber- at Southern Methodist University.

Workshops: Support for workshop pro- old four-story building in Chicago. The toia, Seymour Lipton and Daniel Rhodes;
 

mural, according to the Chicago Sun- The Isaac Delgado Museum of Art in Newgrams in Fiscal 1970 included grants made
 

to two museums: Times, reflects Walker’s concern about	 Orleans bought works by Alexander Lieb­

"hate, and the dangers we face" and his	 erman, Earl Reiback and Wayne Thiebauld; The Corcoran Gallery of Art in Washington, 

conviction that "out of hate, out of con- The New Jersey State Museum bought two D.C., $10,000 for a model workshop profrontation, only Death wins." The artist’s works of contemporaryAmerican sculpture; gram in which artists are provided with 

work is intended to show, in his own words, fellowship grants, studios, materials and and
 

"the dignity and pride and unity of all The San Francisco Museum of Art bought exhibition space in the museum; and
 

mankind ...." a carving by Raoul Hague, and a painting The Whitney Museum of American Art,


Museums $10,000 fora program which brings stu­ by Jules Olitski. The Belmont Report, prepared in 1968 for	 dents from all regions of the country to the Purchases have not yet been completed by the Federal Council on the Arts and the	 Museum for one semester of study in New Humanities, noted that "a pervasive and the five other museums selected under the York City. program: The Arkansas Art Center; The insistent financial crisis confronts" our Rose Art Museum of Brandeis University in In Iooking beyond these programs, the 6,000 museums. It added: "A strong case Waltham, Massachusetts; Endowment prepared, in 1970, to under- The Museum of can be made for Federal support." Art at the University of Iowa; the Tacomatake a more active role in support of the Museums were among the institutions Art Museum and the WadsworthAntheneum nation’s museums. Ah advisory group, re- listed by the Congress in the Act of 1965 viewing the needs of our museums, con- of Hartford, Connecticut. as legitimate concerns of the National En­ Aid to Museum Exhibitions: Under this cluded that the troubles encountered in dowment for the Arts. At the time it was felt pilot program, special exhibitions were financing exhibitions, the chronic under- that, given the small budget of the Endowment, a broad program of support for	 supported through matching grants made staffing of museums, the urgent need for 

in Fiscal 1970 to five museums: funds for conservation and restoration of museums was impracticable. A pilot pro- The Corcoran Gallery of Art of Washington, works of art and the neglect of training 

were all problems of high priority which D.C., $8,500 for its exhibition: Two Hun- the Federal Government should work with West Canton Street, Boston, 1970:	 dred Years of American Genre; professionals in the field, private donors Neighborhood participants in	 The University Art Museum of Berkeley, Summerthing atwork on a playground	 California, $8,500 for its exhibition: Re- and state and local authorities to help 

overcome. beneath a mural painted by	 ligious Art in America from the 18th Cen- Roy Cato, Jr. 

53 
~m,,,,~, |, i i| mili iiB illlli i

Coordinated Programs 

From its inception, the National Endowment 

has undertaken to distribute arts programs 

of high quality to the greatest possible 

number of people. 

For this reason, the Coordinated 

Programs were created. The programs are 

designed to make availabie, through 

touring, exhibitions and experimental 

projects, arts presentations which would 

not otherwise be available to residents of 

smaller communities and rural areas, 

Many times the amount of money made 

available by the Endowment is small. In 

Fiscal Year 1970, for example, the following small grants produced notable results: 

One of the most novel ideas came from 

the Michigan State Council on the Arts with 

its development of a touring "Artrain" for

visual arts exhibitions. A $10,000 special 

grant from the Endowment aided the state 

Council and heiped to generate more than 

half a million dollars from the railroad 

industry and other private interests. The

Council hopes to have the "Artrain" in 

operation during 1971. 

A $5,000 grant to the Charleston, West 

Virginia section of the National Council of 

Jewish Women, made possible the continuation of the 13-state Appalachian 

Corridors Exhibition of arts and crafts. 

Endowment support helped to produce 

nearly $50,000 in privately-contributed 

funds and services for the exhibition. 

In Alaska, a $10,000 grant to the state 

arts agency brought about the first statewide conference of arts and community 

leaders in the area’s history. 

With a $6,570 grant from the Endowment, 

the American Association of University 

Women of Des Moines created the first 

state-wide exhibit of artists asa highlight 

of the annual Iowa State Fair. 

The Arizona Commission on the Arts 

and Humanities applied for and received a 

$10,000 grant to found a bilingual theatre 

serving both English- and Spanishspeaking residents of the state. 

The Vermont Council on the Arts 

appealed to residents of the state to search 

their attics and storehouses for works of 

art from the past. Using a $3,600 grant 

from the Endowment, the Council put 

together a unique and highly successful 

"Art Out of the Attic" exhibit. It has been 

both a critical and popular success. 

An experimental project making the 

visual arts available for the first time to 

unsighted individuals was undertaken by 

the Washington State Arts Commission 

with the assistance of a $5,000 grant from 

the Endowment. 

Through the West Virginia Arts and 

Humanities Council and private interests, a 

new forro of outdoor drama, termed a 

"significant breakthrough" in this field, was

based on the legendary exploits of "The 

Hatfields and McCoys." A $7,500 grant 

from the Endowment provided seed money 

for the project, 

Each of these projects, and many others 

like them, hada direct bearing on the 

efforts of the Endowment and the state 

arts councils to reach a wider audience for 

the arts. 

Major programs were also undertaken 

through funding from the Coordinated 

Programs. Chief among these were the 

touring projects of the Federation of Rocky 

Mountain States. Aided by a $75,000 grant 

from the Endowment, the Federation was 

able to tour professional arts organizations 

such as the Utah Symphony, the Denver 

Symphony, Ballet West and Repertory 

Dance Theatre to communities throughout 

the Rockies. 

in 1970 the Endowment also continued 

its support of the Western Opera Theater, 

a touring organization created by the San 

Francisco Opera Company, in states 

throughout the far West, the Southwest, the 

Rocky Mountains and in Alaska. It was the 

first time a professional opera company 

had appeared in the nation’s northernmost 

state. 

During Fiscal Year 1970, Coordinated 

Programs reached audiences and assisted 

artists in two dozen states, many of which 

lack major professional arts organizations 

capable of touring in all fields. 

54
 
FederaI-State Partnership 

A central purpose of the federal arts

program has been to stimulate support for 

the arts by the states. This aim has been 

carried out through Congressionallymandated funds set aside specifically for 

the state arts councils and through close 

and continuing cooperation between the 

state councils and the National Endowment 

for the Arts. 

In the states, as in the nation, the 

question of public support for the arts was 

raised many years prior to the passage of 

the National Foundation on the Arts and 

the Humanities Act of 1965. At that time, 

according to a study made by the United 

States Office of Education, arts councils 

existed in 24 states. In only four of these, 

however, had funds been appropriated for 

an arts council in excess of $10,000 ayear, 

On the initiative of Senator Jacob K. 

Javits of New York, federal aid for state 

arts programs was made an integral part 

of the 1965 Act. Matching funds were 

oííered to those states where councils were 

already providing programs. Ah initial nonmatching grant of $25,000 was offered to 

the remaining states to enable them to 

survey existing facilities, needed program 

areas and establish liaison with community 

arts organizations so that an official state 

arts agency could be created, 

The response of the states was prompt and decisive. By the summer of 1970, each 

of the 50 states and four of the five 

territorial jurisdictions authorized to receive

aid under the Endowment’s legislation had 

established arts councils. In the one 

exception, American Samoa, the creation 

of an arts council was reported under way. Not only did the number of state arts 

councils increase dramatically in this time; 

the quality and effectiveness of a majority

of their programs were so notable that in 

which will serve directly the special needs 

of their citizens. For example, in New 

Mexico, with its high concentration of 

Spanish-speaking residents, the state Arts 

Commission has given íts support to a

dual-language theatre. In Maine, the State 

Commission worked ciosely with Canadian 

provincial officials to develop a mutually

beneficial exchange of arts programs. In 

Connecticut, where members of the State 

Commission felt that a major thrust should 

be made toward changing concepts in arts 

education, a program enabling more than 

a hundred artists to work with students in 

40 towns and cities was undertaken. In 

many states, the administrative weaknesses 

of community-based arts organizations 

nated Residency Touring Program in which 

leading dance companies tour towns and 

smaller cities giving performances, holding

master classes and meeting with students,

teachers and community leaders. In Fiscal 

1970, state councils in Florida, Maine,

Maryland, Michigan, Oklahoma and Utah 

administered programs in which ten dance

companies toured through 22 states fora 

total of 67 weeks. 

The pattern of regional cooperation 

established in these programs seems 

certain to be extended in the future. It is 

further aided by a national citizens organization, the Associated Councils of the Arts, 

and by the North American Assembly of 

State and Provincial Arts Agencies, which 

have made the development of far-reaching bring together representatives of arts 

arts programs more difficult. The South 

Carolina Arts Commission met this problem

by sharing the costs of salaries for professionals in both administrative and 

artistic fields, 

Although the relationship between the 

various state councils and the National 

Endowment was cordial and effective from 

the beginning, the exchange of information 

and coordination of programming was

enormously enhanced in Fiscal 1969 and 

1970 through a series of regional conferences. These meetings, held in every 

area of the nation, breught state council 

directors and chairmen together with 

Endowment program directors for the first 

time to discuss ways in which quality 

programs could be broadened for greater 

regional impact. Out of these meetings--and the first 

annual FederaI-State Conference on the 

Arts held in Washington, D.C., in September 1969--there has grown a far more 

extensive effort to make the Endowment’s 

national programs of greater interest and 

benefit to the state arts councils. Typical Fiscal 1970, 32 state legislatures appropri­ of this cooperation has been the Coordi­ ated funds for their arts councils in excess 

of the federal contribution ($36,363) in that 

year. 

To obtain its regular, annual federal 

grant through the Endowment, each state 

council is required to submit an application 

outlining its program for the year ahead. 

As might be expected, these programs are 

noted for their variety and for the inclusion 

of art forms indigenous to each area. The councils are encouraged to develop 

broad, imaginative programs and projects 

councils throughout this country and 

Canada. 

The impact of the FederaI-State Partnership continues to grow. By working

together, by planning carefully to use every 

available dollar in the most judicious way

possible and by constantly striving to meet 

the increasing demands of greater 

audiences, the Endowment and the state 

arts agencies are meeting the challenge of 

the Congress to make the arts available to 

all American citizens who want to enjoy 

and take part in them. 

55 
i 

The Treasury Fund 

delíghted--and slightly staggered--that pledges from private sources. Nancy Hanks, The importance of pluralism in support of the combíned efforts of our national the arts, a philosophy clearly articulated by	 Chairman of the Endowment, commented organization and its chapters have been the Congress when it established the Arts	 afterwards, "We were ’oversubscribed’... able to 0btai[~ donations which represent Endowment, is one to which the Endow- by almost 50 percent. Perhaps this will give a surplus." ment is deeply committed. When assistance	 fundraisers for the arts encouragement in 

this period of tight money."	 In Fiscal 1970, the Endowment accepted is provided by widely diverse sectors of Donations came from 109 communities some 360 donations totalling $2 million society--individuals, foundations, corpora- in 32 states. Contributions ranged from	 from 201 individuals, 76 foundations, 51 tions, unions, state and local governments, 

as well as by the Federal Government-- $2.50 to $250,000 and carne from a wide corporations and 34 other public and 

range of sources including large and small private sources. These gifts made an equal the arts can only benefit. Domination from foundations; small businesses and major	 amount available from the Treasury Fund. one source of funding does not exist; the corporations; school systems and univer-	 A listing of contributors to the 1970 arts are free to develop according to their 

own needs and goals. A fuil partnership	 sities; a union; a school district; world- Treasury Fund appears in this report on 

famous composers and artists; outstanding pages 57 and 58. effort helps insure a healthy cultural 

environment,	 civic leaders; wealthy patrons and many The Endowment continues to be most
 

A particularly useful mechanism of
 individuals of modest means, grateful for these donations which make


assuring this partnership was provided by Perhaps the most dramatic example of possible this unique federal-private
 

this successful partnership between the	 partnership in support of the arts. the Congress in the form of a legislative

provision making a portion of the Endow- Federal Government and private sources is
 

ment’s funds available for arts support Young Audiences, Inc. $161,000 had to be


raised by Young Audiences in order to only when private donations (funds,
 

bequests or "other property") are received qualify for the Treasury Fund grant recommended by the National Council on the by the Endowment. Subject to a recommendation from the National Council on Arts at its May 1970 meeting. When an
 

anticipated single large donation failed to the Arts, each donation is then accepted,

matched with an equal amount drawn from materialize, Young Audiences appealed to
 

this special "Treasury Fund" and made its 40 chapters. In less than a month,
 

available to an arts organization. The grant checks and pledges totalling $221,000
 ~ " "" recipient then matches these "doubled ranging from $2.50 to $20,000 were
 

monies" with additional non-federal funds, received at the Endowment’s office in
 

Washington. Thus, four times the amount of the initial
 

donation becomes available to the grantee.I Representatives of Young Audiences
 

Gifts to the Endowment may be made observed that, 

for unrestricted purposes; or for the "We are particularly gratified that so many 

specific support of a non-profit, tax-exempt new sources of monies cooperated with 

arts organization; or for a particular pro- us .... While there are several sizable 

gram within the Endowment. The Endow- contributions, for the most part the support : 

ment encourages use of the Treasury Fund has come from many interested local Nancy Hanks and basketful of donations given method asa means of producing larger individuals or organization~ which are to the Endowment’s Treasury Fund. grants; as an especially effective way of dedicated to enlarging the work of Young 

combining federal and private support and Audiences throughout the country. With 

as an encouragement to the search for the grant we will be able to concentrate on
 

new sources of funds, school programs for inner city or rural
 

For Fiscal 1970, $1 million was set aside disadvantaged areas which have hereto-


by Congressional appropriations in the fore had no or at least very infrequent
 Treasury Fund. Gifts totalling $1 million Young Audiences exposures. We are
 were quickly received by the Endowment.
 

A further $1 million was added to the
 

Fiscal 1970 Treasury Fund by a supplemental appropriation near the end of the
 

fiscal year.
 

In four weeks the Endowment received
 

more than $1,400,000 in checks and
 

I When the donor contributes $1.00. that releases $1.00
 

from the United States Treasu,3’. The resulting $2.00 is
 

then made available to the grantee who must ordinadly
 

match it w~th ah add=tional $2.00, resulting in a final
 

total of $4.00 for the grantee, frorn the original investment


of $1.00.
 

56 
~I II I II llI I llllllI I
 

Contributors To 

The Treasury Fund

Fiscal Year 1970 

Adolph’s Food Products Manufacturing 

Company 

The Ahmanson Foundation 

Mrs. Alexander Albert 

Alcoa Foundation 

Elaine M. AItenburg 

The Alvord Foundation 

Amerace-Esna Corporation 

American Express Foundation 

American Security and Trust Company 

Ruth H. Anderson 

Anna Head Parents Association 

Archdiocesan High Schools 

The Arts and Education Council of 

Greater St. Louis 

Arts Rhode Island 

Associated Food Stores, Inc. 

Mrs. Ed Axton 

The Bachmann Foundation, Inc. 

Carl W. Bacon 

Milton E. Bacon 

W. N. Banks Foundation 

Courtlandt D. Barnes, Jr. 

Mrs. Gene W. Bartu 

Lois Baskerville 

The Bayport Foundation, Inc. 

The Louis D. Beaumont Foundation 

Maria Bennett 

Mrs. Thomas R. Bennett 

T. Roland Berner 

The Leonard Bernstein Foundation, Inc. 

Simon Michael Bessie 

Dr. and Mrs. James F. Bing 

Cora Bishoprick 

Marilyn W. Blair 

Blinken Foundation, Inc. 

John R. H. Blum 

William G. C. Boyken 

Stanley Brenner 

BristoI-Myers Fund 

Broadcast Music, Inc. 

Mrs. Jack Brockhouse 

Yvonne M. Brown Memorial Foundation 

Frank M. Burger 

M. Louise Burgueires Foundation 

Mrs. O. F. Burris 

C. H. Byfield, II and Associates, Inc. 

Charlton G. Campbell 

R. McLean Campbell 

Carbon County School District 

Frank Cassas, Jr. 

Mr. and Mrs. C. Castenskiold 

Central Labor Council of Clark, Skamania 

and West Klickitat Counties 

Central Utah Medical Properties 

Corporation 

Mrs. Robert Charles 

Clara Chism 

City Center of Music and Drama, Inc. 

Elaine H. Clark
 

Mrs. Howard Clark
 

Victor H. Clark
 

Helen Clavin
 

The Cleveland Chamber Music Society
 

The Cleveland Foundation, Greater
 

Cleveland Associated Foundation
 

Joan Cogen
 

Joseph Cohen
 

Colt Industries, Fairbanks Morse Inc.,
 

Weighing Systems Division 

The Combined Arts and Education Council 

of San Diego County (COMBO) 

Community Funds, Inc. 

Community Projects, Inc. 

Bettie Minette Cooper 

Charles N. Cooper 

Aaron Copland 

The Corbett Foundation 

V.K.T. Cord 

The Corpus Christi Caller-Times 

Suzanne M. Corradetti 

Cleveland C. Cory 

Courier-Journal and Louisville Times 

Foundation, Inc. 

Mrs. Sidney D. Craford 

Elizabeth W. Crouch 

Cupertino Council of Parent-Teacher 

Associations 

Mary W. Custer 

Arthur N. Daniels 

David M. Daniels 

Daniels Foundation 

Kenneth N. Dayton 

Jack deSimone 

Mrs. John Dimick 

Frances L. Dinkelspiel 

Dixie School District (Council of Music 

and Arts) Sally Dodge 

Betty Dranow 

Marilyn Moore Drendel 

Margaret W. Driscoll Trusts 

Mrs. Stephen P. Duggan, Jr. 

Colin O. Dykeman 

Eddie’s Music House 

Mrs. Wiiliam V. Ellis, Jr. 

Elma Elementary P.T.A. 

Elmwood-Franklin School, Inc. 

Elva Fund, Inc. 

The Paul H. Epstein Foundation, Inc. 

The Equitable Trust Company 

Faigel Leah Foundation, Inc. 

Mrs. Lawrence H. Favrot 

Nancy Featherstone 

Mr. and Mrs. Benjamin N. Feld 

Marvin J. Feldman 

Samuel S. Fels Fund 

Judith Fermoile 

Mrs. Howard Fertig 

First National Bank of Oregor~ 

Fisher Supply Company 

Robert J. Fitzwilliam 

The Ford Foundation 

Helen Foster 

Maureen Fothergill 

Mrs. Joe Francis 

Bertram A. Frank 

Max Frankel 

Constance J. Frasch 

Joanne Freedman 

Rosemary Dwyer Frey Trust 

F.T.H. Corporation 

Orpha Gardner 

Mrs. Maurice Georges 

Gimbel Brothers Foundation, Inc. 

Stanley Goldstein 

Dr. and Mrs. Victor Goodhill 

Mrs. Robert W. Goodwin 

The Oliver R. Grace Charitable Trust 

Sterling, Grace and Company 

Mary K. Granger 

Mrs. Lester Gross 

Mrs. Aline D. Gunzberg 

Ely Haimowitz 

Nancy Hale 

Charles Hall 

Hewa S. Halvorson 

Edward Harris 

Mrs. George Harris 

Mrs. Robert L. Harris 

Mrs. Stephen F. Harris 

Mrs. Lester E. Harwell 

Mary Hattori 

Enid Annenberg Haupt Charitable Trust 

Mrs. David G. Hayhurst 

Harold H. Heath 

The Hecht-Levi Foundation, Inc. 

Heineman Foundation for Research, 

Educational, Charitable and Scientific 

Purposes, Inc. 

Barbara B. Heistuman 

Ben Heller 

Jay and Marian Heller 

Jenifer Heyward 

Mrs. Charles V. Hickox 

Leroy E. Hoffberger 

Mrs. Salley I. Holbert 

Frank E. Holley 

Home and School Association of 

St. Augustine’s Church 

Lou Ann Horn 

Florence Powel Howard 

Mr. and Mrs. Hyman L. Hymson 

Illinois Arts Council Foundation 

Independent Fuel Company 

International Business Machines 

Corporation 

57 
Horace H. Irvine 

Mrs. Thomas E. Irvine 

Philip Ludwell Jackson Charitable Trust 

Mr. and Mrs. Leonard Jacobs 

Eliot Janeway 

Jane Jenks 

Jay Jerome 

Robert S. Johnson 

Junior League of Bakersfield Community 

Trust Fund 

Janet R. Justin 

Mrs. Phyllis B. Kaiser 

Abbott Kaplan 

Felicia Lamport Kaplan 

Gilbert Kaplan 

The J. M. Kaplan Fund, Inc. 

Kaye, Scholer, Fierman, Hays and Handler 

Kearns-Tribune Corporation (The Salt Lake 

Tribune) 

Keene Sentinel Fund 

James L. Kerr 

Diane A. King 

Mr. and Mrs. Manfred Klein 

Mrs. William C. Knudtsen 

Paul Kohnstamm 

Samuel H. Kress Foundation 

Eleanor G. Kubie 

Lackawanna, New York Board of Education 

Beverly Lambourne 

Beatrice Landeck 

Chet and Jon Lappen 

James Lawrence 

Mr. and Mrs. Paul Lehmann 

H. Elizabeth Lenz 

Max M. Leon 

The Edgar M. Leventritt Foundation, Inc. 

Doris M. Levinson 

Lois P. Lines 

Hal Linker Productions 

Frederick R. Livingston 

University of Louisville 

Gail H. Ludowise 

A. L. and Jennie L. Luria Foundation 

Lowell H. Lyford 

Russell Lynes 

Robert P. Lyons 

Ranald H. Macdonald 

MacDowell Colony Benefit 

Mr. and Mrs. Kurt Mann 

Mr. and Mrs. Eugene Marías 

Joseph M. Masling 

May D & F 

Maya Corporation 

Mrs. Donald McAIlister 

Louise F. McCarthy 

McCormick and Company, Inc. Fund 

Marshall L. McCune 

The McKnight Foundation 

Billie B. McReynolds 

Mr. and Mrs. John Gaw Meem 

Donald R. and Barbara J. Mello 

A.W. Mellon Educational and Charitable 

Trust 

The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation 

Mr. and Mrs. Robert B. Menschel 

The Merchants National Bank, Winona, 

Minnesota 

LuEsther T. Mertz 

The Meselson Foundation 

The Messer Foundation 

Mrs. Mary B. Meyer 

Miller Felpax Corporation 

Dr. and Mrs. N. Edd Miller 

Minnesota State Arts Council 

Mary Simpson Moller 

Francis L. Monachino 

University of Montana 

Monumental Life Insurance Company 

W.T. Moore and Associates 

Marcia Moss 

The Mountain States Telephone and 

Telegraph Company 

Musicians Mutual Protective Association 

Mrs. Percy H. Myers 

Raymond King Myerson 

National Music Publishers’ Association, 

Inc. 

Nativity of the B.V.M. Home School 

Association 

Stuart and Sandy Newmark 

Nevada National Ice and Cold Storage 

Company 

The New Hope Foundation, Inc. 

New York Community Trust 

Northwestern Michigan Symphony 

Women’s Association 

Terence G. O’Brien 

The J. S. O. Foundation, Inc. 

Ogden Symphony Guild 

Ogilvy and Mather, Inc. 

Anne L. OIwine 

David Oppenheim 

Orinda Union School District 

Orem High School 

Mr. and Mrs. Robert Osborn 

Adeline O’Shaughnessy 

Our Lady of Mount Carmel School 

Overseas Foundation, Inc. 

Martin Padway Foundation 

Mrs. Donald Paff 

Mrs. Leon Pagel 

Mrs. John R. Pappenheimer 

Shirley D. Paro 

Peoples Finance and Thrift Company of 

Beverly Hills 

Petersen Publishing Company 

Alma H. Peterson 

Allan R. Phipps 

The Lawrence Phipps Foundation 

Eleanor R. Piacenza 

Mrs. Mala Pick 

N.L. Pines Foundation, Inc. 

Princeton Gardens,. Inc. 

Public Service Company of Colorado 

Putnam Foundation 

Judith S. Randal 

Arthur N. Reicher 

The Jeanne Rich Foundation 

Mrs. P. O. Richardson 

Richard J. Riordan 

Robbert and Favaloro 

The Martha Baird Rockefeller Fund for 

Music, Inc. 

The Rosenberg Family Foundation 

The Edmond de Rothschild Foundation 

Helena Rubinstein Foundation, Inc. 

Lionel Ruby 

Ruder and Finn, Inc. 

Sachs Foundation Inc. 

San Leandro Unified School District 

Save the Philharmonic Fund 

Joseph H. Savitz 

Jos. Schlitz Brewing Company 

The Sears-Roebuck Foundation 

Seed and Feeding Corporation 

J. and W. Seligman and Company 

Bertram R. and Erna E. Sheldon 

Shell Oil Company 

Mrs. William A. Shurcliff 

Mrs. Justin V. Smith 

Mr. and Mrs. Fred E. Sonderling 

South Camden Garage 

South Mountain Association, Inc. 

Leonard and Rose A. Sperry Fund 

Lucy P. C. Steinert 

Mrs. Sybil Stoller 

Hattie M. Strong Foundation 

John S. Thacher 

Mrs. Robert H. Thayer 

Mrs. Richard H. Thompson

Transcript Bulletin Publishing Company, 

lnc. 

Paul R. Trichon 

TRW 

James R. Ullman 

Universal Money Order Company 

Vladimir Ussachevsky 

Utah Power and Light Company 

Board for Utah Symphony Society 

Frederick R. Waingrow 

Archie D. and Bertha H. Walker Foundation 

John W. Warner 

The Weil Foundation 

Fred Weil, Jr. 

M. Weinstein, Inc. 

Mrs. Robert N. West 

Western Packers 

Thornton Wilder 

Ruth Crary Young 

58 
 

" History Of Authorizations And 

Appropriations Through Fiscal 1971 

National Endowment For The Arts 

Authorization Appropriation 

Fiscal 1966 

Program ............................................ $ 5,000,000 ...... $ 2,500,000 Funds to match private donations 2,250,000 ...... 34,308 (Subtotals) ........................................ ($ 7,250,000) ......($ 2,534,308)
 

Fiscal 1967 

Program ............................................ $ 5,000,000 ...... $ 4,000,000 States .............................................. 2,750,000 ...... 2,000,000 Funds to match private donations 2,250,000 ...... 1,965,692 (Subtotals) ........................................ ($10,000,000) ......($ 7,965,692)
 

Fiscal 1968 

Program ............................................
 $ 5,000,000 ...... $ 4,500,000 States ..............................................
 2,750,000 ...... 2,000,000 Funds to match private donations 2,250,000 ...... 674,291 (Subtotals) ........................................ ($10,000,000) ......($ 7,174,291 )
 

Fiscal 1969 

Program ............................................
 $ 6,000,000 ...... $ 3,700,000 States .............................................. 2,000,000 ...... 1,700,000 Funds to match private donations 3,375,000 ...... 2,356,875 (Subtotals) ........................................ ($11,375,000) ......($ 7,756,875) 

Fiscal 1970 

Program ............................................
 $ 6,500,000 ...... $ 4,250,000 States .............................................. 2,500,000 ......
 2,000,000 Funds to match private donations 3,375,000 ...... 2,000,000 (Subtotals) ........................................ ($12,375,000) ......($ 8,250,000) 

Fiscal 1971 

Program ............................................
 $12,875,000 ...... $ 8,465,000 States .............................................. 4,125,000 ...... 4,125,000 Funds to match private donations 3,000,000 ...... 2,500,000 * (Subtotals) ........................................
 ($20,000,000) ......($15,090,000)* 

TOTALS $71,000,000 ...... $48,771,166 * Private donations ........................................................
 $ 9,548,549 * Total Office of Education Transfers to date ................................... $ 1,000,000
 Total Available for Obligation ...............................................
 $59,319,715 * 

Final total will be determined by amount of donations recelved and matched. 

59 
I H I ilHI | I 

Financial Summary: Fiscal Year 1970 

Hi II 

Available for Obligation 

Unobligatéd Balance Prior Year 5(c) ........................................
 $134,156

Unobligated Balance Prior Year 10(a)(2) ....................................
 4,246,222

188,099 Prior Year Refunds and Deobligations .......................................
 900,000 Transferred from Department of Health, Education, and Welfare 

Appropriation 5(c) .......................................................
 4,250,000

Appropriation 5(h) .......................................................
 2,000,000

Appropriation 10(a) (2) ...................................................
 2,000,000

2,000,000 Gifts ....................................................................
 

$15,718,477 

Funds Obligated 

$347,750 Architecture, Planning and Design ..........................................
 1,751,350 Dance ..................................................................
 1,240,000 Education ...............................................................
 513,121 Literature ................................................................
 

Music ..................................................................
 2,525,195

195,000 Public Media ............................................................
 2,891,000 Theatre .................................................................
 970,244 Visual Arts ..............................................................
 

Coordínated Programs ....................................................
 505,711

1,963,602 , FederaI-State Partnership Program ..........................................
 74,644 li Program Development and Evaluation .......................................
 5,000 t Transferred to National Endowment for the Humanities .........................
 

$12,982,667 

Gffts amounting to $2,000,000 were comm~tted to the Endowment 

in Fiscal 1970; they caused ah equal amount to be committed 

in Treasury funds under Section 10(a) (2) of the governing law. 

Both items are therefore listed under funds Available for 

Obligation. However, $1,000,000 of the Treasury funds were 

60 

appropriated under the Second Supplemental Appropriations Act

of 1970, which became law on July 6, 1970, after the close of 

the fiscal year. This sum, and the equivalent sum in g=fts were 

therefore not actually obhgated during the fiscal year, and do 

not appear in the second table. 
Architecture, Planning And Design ..............................................
 $347,750

I 000"
 Carl Feiss, Washington, D.C .................................................
 4,500 National Trust for Historic Preservation, Washington, D.C ........................
 

278,500 Environmental Design Program .............................................
 10,000 America the Beautiful Fund, Washington, D.C ...............................
 10,000 American Institute of Architects Foundation, Washington, D.C ..................
 10,000 Boston Architectural Center ..............................................
 10,000 Kent State University, Kent, Ohio .........................................
 10,000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass ......................
 5,000 Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, N.Y .................................
 10,000 Philadelphia Museum of Art ..............................................
 10,000 School of Art Institute of Chicago .........................................
 10,000 Tocks Island Regional Advisory Council, Stroudsburg, Pa .....................
 8,700 University of Florida, Gainesville, Fla ......................................
 10,000 University of Washington, Seattle, Wash ....................................
 9,600 University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisc .....................................
 5,000 Sidney Cohn, Chapel Hill, N.C ............................................
 4,900 William K. Cooper, Washington, D.C .......................................
 2,000 James R. Cothran, Atlanta, Ga ............................................
 5,000 Laurence S. Cutler, Cambridge, Mass ......................................
 5,000 Alton J. DeLong, University Park, Pa .......................................
 3,000 Frederick C. Eichenberger, Raleigh, N.C ....................................
 5,000 Franklin L. Elmer, Jr., Columbus, Ohio .....................................
 5,000 Francis Ferguson, New York, N.Y ..........................................
 4,600 John F. Furlong, Brookline, Mass ..........................................
 5,000 Myron A. Guran, Eugene, Oreg ............................................
 5,000 Eugene Kremer, St. Louis, Mo ............................................
 4,000 R. Randolph Langenbach, Cambridge, Mass ................................
 5,000 John B. Mackinlay, Jr., Orinda, Calif .......................................
 3,000 Hal M. Moseley, Jr., Birmingham, Mich .....................................
 5,000 Louise H. Odiorne, Yellow Springs, Ohio ...................................
 4,400 Goldie Rivkin, Chevy Chase, Md ..........................................
 4,800 Gary O. Robinette, Washington, D.C .......................................
 . 5,000 Donald C. Royse, St. Louis, Mo ............................................
 5,000 Robert M. Sarly, Boston, Mass ............................................
 5,000 John W. Seddon, Jr., Irvington, N.Y ........................................
 5,000 Roger D. Sherwood, Ithaca, N.Y ..........................................
 5,000 Nathan Silver, New York, N.Y .............................................
 5,000 Leonard D. Singer, Chicago, III ...........................................
 5,000 Michael Southworth, Boston, Mass ........................................
 5,000 Carl F. Steinitz, Cambridge, Mass .........................................
 5,000 Erma B. Striner, Washington, D.C ..........................................
 5,000 Erik A. Svenson, Bethesda, Md ............................................
 5,000 Richard Tatlock, Boston, Mass ...........................................
 4,900 Philip Thiel, Seattle, Wash ...............................................
 4,200 Robert L. Vickery, University City, Mo ......................................
 5,000 Donald R. Watson, Guilford, Conn .........................................
 1,500 Joseph B. Watterson, Washington, D.C .....................................
 5,000 Douglas S. Way, Cambridge, Mass ........................................
 5,000 Harry J. Wexler, New Haven, Conn ........................................
 4,000 Myer R. Wolfe, Seattle, Wash .............................................
 4,900 David L. Young, Baton Rouge, La .........................................
 * Treasu~ Fund 

61 
IIi III I I I ilil I I Ilii ii II 

Student Travel Awards (1969) ..............................................
 1,250

Frank Armentano, Syracuse, N.Y ..........................................
 250


Virginia Buchanan, Stillwater, Okla ........................................
 250


Courtney Francis Hashimoto, Seattle, Wash ................................. 250
 

250
 Jan Keane, New York, N.Y ...............................................
 

Peter Pike, Berkeley, Calif ............................................... 250


Student Travel Awards (1970) ..............................................
 62,500

William Abney, Denver, Col .............................................. 500
 

Michael D. Alcorn, Lexington, Ky ..........................................
 500


500
 Jim Arrowsmith, Westerville, Ohio .........................................
 

Douglas D. Baker, Bloomfield Hills, Mich ................................... 500
 

Michael D. Bamberger, Frankfort, N.Y ...................................... 500
 

Kenneth A. Barnhart, Madison, Wisc .......................................
 500


Gregory K. Barriere, Gainesville, Fla ....................................... 500
 

Bruce Basemann, Columbus, Ohio ........................................ 500
 

Katherine Bason, New York, N.Y .......................................... 500
 

Mark Joseph Battista, Kailua, Oahu, Hawaii ................................. 500
 

Roland F. Bedford, New Haven, Conn ......................................
 500


Larry Lee Berry, Houston, Tex ............................................ 500
 

Eugene Karl Blauth, Norman, Okla ........................................ 500
 

Peter W. Boland, Los Angeles, Calif ....................................... 500
 

Daria Bolton, Philadelphia, Pa ............................................ 500
 

Robert Brandon, Rocky Hill, N.J ........................................... 500
 

Mary K. Breuer, Cambridge, Mass ......................................... 500
 

Lawrence Brown, Santa Monica, Calif ...................................... 500
 

Tarlee Brown, Seattle, Wash .............................................. 500
 

Paul Busse, Cincinnati, Ohio ............................................. 500
 

Robert D. Butler, Piscataway, N.J .......................................... 500
 

Karen Calhoon, Trenton, Mich ............................................ 500
 

Dennis A. Call, Tempe, Ariz .............................................. 500
 

Darryl F. Caputo, Upton, Mass ............................................ 500
 

John Marvin Chilton, Austin, Tex. 500
 

Bruce Arnott Clark, Urbana, III ............................................ 500
 

Thomas C. Clarke, Yale, Mich ............................................ 500
 

Sharon Collins, Washington, D.C .......................................... 500
 

Thomas Cunningham, Winthrop, Mass ...................................... 500
 

Robert DiAiso, Pittsburgh, Pa ............................................. 500
 

Stephen William Domreis, Tigard, Oreg .................................... 500
 

Stephen M. Drake, Amherst, Mass ......................................... 500
 

Thomas Drerup, Columbus, Ohio .......................................... 500
 

Charles Steven Dwyer, Alhambra, Calif ..................................... 500
 

Gary Wayne Emmett, Springdale, Ark. 500
 

Kenneth Ethridge, Tucson, Ariz ........................................... 500
 

Robert L. Farley, Baton Rouge, La ........................................ 500
 

Robert F. Flack, New Orleans, La ......................................... 500
 

William C. Fronick, Manhattan, Kan. 500
 

Philip B. Gallegos, South Bend, lnd. 500
 

Leon Goldenberg, Lincolnwood, 111 ........................................ 500
 

John J. Graham, New Britain, Conn ....................................... 500
 

Robert L. Graham, Washington, D.C ....................................... 500
 

Thomas P. Graveno, South Euclid, Ohio 500
 

Cecilia Guiu, Providence, R.I ............................................. 500
 

Everett A. Gustafson, Davenport, Iowa 500
 

James M. Haggans, Nevada, Mo .......................................... 500
 

Gordon Hall, Albuquerque, N. Mex. 500
 

Robert Harthorne, Seattle, Wash .......................................... 500
 

Robert L. Hewatt, Tucker, Ga ............................................. 500
 

Nicholas Hillman, Cincinnati, Ohio 500
 

62
 
500
 William John HiskeF, NoFman, Okla ........................................
 500
 i Bobbie Sue Hood, Berkeley, Calif .........................................
 500
 ~ Warrick G. Hoopes, Jr., Fort Washington, Pa .................................
 500
 Nobert D. Hosler, Eugene, Oreg ...........................................
 500
 James Murray Howar6, Talla6ega, Ala .....................................
 500
 i Sharon Howell, New York, N.Y ............................................
 500
 -- kloy6 Brian Huehls, In6ianapolis, ~n6 ......................................
 500
 William H. Hunse, Tempe, Æriz ............................................
 500
 Paul W. Jensen, PocateIIo, 16aho .........................................
 500
 Taffia Kennedy, Pasa6ena, Calil ...........................................
 500
 San6ra Kiger, Salt kake City, Utah ........................................
 500
 Philip Klinkert, Pomona, Calif .............................................
 500
 Kathleen C. Knight, Chapel Hill, N.C .......................................
 

Mark Craig Kopchell, Nocklor6, III ........................................
 500


500
 Allen Krathen, Princeton, N.J .............................................
 500
 Dean kaba6ie, San Mateo, Calil ..........................................
 500
 Ga~ Martin kampman, Minneapolis, Minn ..................................
 500
 Bruce Gor6on kanphear, Moscow, Idaho ..................................
 500
 Hervey kavoie, Pontiac, Mich .............................................
 5O0 William keon, West Covina, Calff ..........................................
 500
 doseph C. LeVert, Decatur, Ga ...........................................
 500
 Joshua ~. kichterman, Berkeley, Galil .....................................
 500
 Tenis Unnamaa, Ithaca, N.Y .............................................
 500
 Gary W. ~aclnb/re, Coral Gables, Fla ......................................
 500
 Stephen R. Markowitz, New ~ochell~, N.Y ..................................
 500
 Enri¢o Marziali, Arlington, Va .............................................
 500
 Kathy Mathewson, Berkeley, Calil ..........................................
 500
 Jeremy P. Mayberg, S~. t_ouis Park, Minn ...................................
 500
 John K. NcCauley, University Park, Pe .....................................
 500
 Davi~ A. Meeson, Ce6ar Grove, N.d .......................................
 500
 George Metz~er, Cambri6ge, Mass ........................................
 500
 Bradley H. Miller, Ma6ison, Wisc ..........................................
 500
 Philip Miller, Lawren~ebur~, lnd ...........................................
 500
 Dennis N. Morris, Knoxville, Tenn .........................................
 500
 James Muggenburg, Chicago, Ill ..........................................
 5O0 Victor N. Nelhiebel, kansing, Mich .........................................
 500
 Nobert J. Newcomer, Los Angeles, Ca~ff ...................................
 500
 Floger Blake Norred, Austin, Tex ..........................................
 500
 Nancy B. Oleksa, Okemos, Mich ..........................................
 500
 T. Jacob Pearce, ~uston, ka .............................................
 500
 ~aniel Pdce, Waukesha, Wise ............................................
 500
 Glen G. Nains, San kuis Obispo, Calif ......................................
 500
 day W. Nan61e, Naleigh, N.C ..............................................
 500
 Charles E. ~ee6er, kexington, Ky .........................................
 500
 Nobert Negni, ~rooklyn, N.Y ..............................................
 500
 Ni�olas Ftet$inas, $omerville, Meas ........................................
 500
 dohn ~ock, Dearborn, ~ich ..............................................
 500
 Mon6e~ W. Nogers, Jr., $weetwater, Tex ....................................
 500
 David Bruce Nottman, Chicago, I1~ .........................................
 500
 $an6ra Nuffin, Washington, D.C ..........................................
 500
 Barbera dean Nzeszewski, $outh Ben~, In6 .................................
 500
 Pe~er d. Sartorius, Ma6ison, Wisc .........................................
 500
 Timothy Lee Shuck, Blairstown, Iowa ......................................
 500
 Nobert John $ilvestri, New York, N.Y ......................................
 500
 Armistea6 Burwell Smith, III, Charlottesville, Va ..............................
 500
 Barry g. $mith, Muncie, Ind ..............................................
 500
 Ron Stephenson, Ma6ison, Wise ..........................................
 500
 Eastern W. Tin, Tallahassee, ~la ..........................................
 500
 Bruce Toreo Tsuchi6a, Cambri0ge, Mass ...................................
 

6a 
II iill I I I IIII I IDl 

500 Ronald F. Turner, Raytown, Mo ...........................................
 500 Richard C. Van-os-keuls, Jr., Cleveland, Ohio ..............................
 

Forrest D. Varnell, Chattanooga, Tenn .....................................
 500

500 LIoyd J. Vogt, Baton Rouge, La ...........................................
 500 John Wakefield, Philadelphia, Pa ..........................................
 

Carl F. Watson, Lafayette, La .............................................
 500

500 Bryce Weigand, Alva, Okla ...............................................
 500 Frank Michael Wester, Borger, Tex ........................................
 

Andrew J. Wick, Northport, N.Y ...........................................
 500

Michael Eugene Wiemers, Lincoln, Neb .....................................
 500

David Winitt, Brooklyn, N.Y ..............................................
 500

William Wischmeyer, St. Louis, Mo ........................................
 500

500 Larry Philip Witzling, Ithaca, N.Y ..........................................
 500 Alan T. Yokota, Honolulu, Hawaii .........................................
 

Richard L. Zumbrunnen, Fargo, N. Dak .....................................
 500

Dance $1,751,350 ....................................................................
 

Commissions ............................................................ 163,300

American Ballet Company/Feld/American Dance 10,000­ Foundation, Inc., New York, N.Y ......................................... 

Production Challenge Grants .............................................
 153,300

American Ballet Theatre/Ballet Theatre Foundatíon, 133,300 Inc., New York, N.Y .................................................
 

City Center Joffrey Ballet/Foundation for
 20,000 American Dance, Inc., New York, N.Y .................................. 

Services to the Profession ................................................. 93,400

Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater/Dance Theater 

Foundation, Inc., New York, N.Y ........................................
 10,000

Brooklyn Academy of Music .............................................
 50,000~"

-~ ........
 Directors of Development ......................................
 33,400

American Ballet Theatre/Ballet Theatre Foundation, 16,700 Inc., New York, N.Y .................................................
 

City Center Joffrey Ballet/Foundation for
 

American Dance, Inc., New York, N.Y .................................. 16,700

Touring ................................................................. 1,397,400 

American Ballet Theatre/Ballet Theatre Foundation, 120,000 Inc. (1969-1970 season) ...............................................
 100,000 Pacific Northwest Ballet Association (summer of 1969) 95,000 Pacific Northwest Ballet Association (summer of 1970) 

Coordinated Residency Touring Program ...................................
 215,400

Fine Arts Council of Florida ...........................................
 11,600

Maine State Commission on the Arts ....................................
 23,900

Maryland Arts Council ................................................
 31,500

Michigan State Council on the Arts .....................................
 79,000

Oklahoma Arts and Humanities Council ..................................
 26,800

Utah State Institute of Fine Arts .........................................
 42,600

* Treasu~ Fund 

64 
National Tours/1970-71 season 

American Ballet Company/Feld/American Dance 

Foundation, Inc. 

American Ballet Theatre/Ballet Theatre Foundation, Inc.

City Center Joffrey Ballet/Foundation for 

American Dance, Inc. 

Martha Graham Center of Contemporary Dance 

Workshops 

Ballet West (summer of 1970)


Connecticut College/American Dance Festival
 

(summer of 1970)
 

Dance Theater Workshop, Inc. (summer of 1970)
 

Kansas Dance Council (summer of 1969)
 

Kansas Dance Council (summer of 1970)


National Association for Regional Ballet (summer of 1969)
 

National Association for Regional Ballet (summer of 1970)
 

Education 

867,000 

67,000"~ 

500,000~ 

250,000~ 

50,000~ 

97,250 

14,000 

25,000 

10,000 

7,500 

7,500 

16,200 

17,050 

$1,240,000 

Central Midwestern Regional Educational Laboratory, Inc. (Film), St. Ann, Mo ....... 45,000 

College Entrance Examination Board/Advanced Placement, New York, N.Y. 100,000 

Educational Systems for the 70’s, San Mateo, Calif. 25,000 

George Washington University/Workshops for Careers in 

the Arts (summer of 1969), Washington, D.C. 5,000 

Inner City Cultural Center/Los Angeles Laboratory Theatre 165,000 

Artists-in-the-Schools Program/Office of Education Transfer Funds 900,000 

Dance 100,000 

Alabama State Council on the Arts and Humanities 16,000 

Ohio Arts Council 52,500 

Oregon Arts Commission 12,000 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Council on the Arts 19,500 

Music 25,000 

Affiliate Artists, Inc. (Performing Artists Residency Project) 25,000 

Poetry 100,000 

Colorado Council on the Arts and Humanities 11,000 

The Frederic Burk Foundation for Education/ 

San Francisco State College 20,500 

Idaho State Commission on the Arts and Humanities 2,500 

Montana Arts Council 

Nevada State Council on the Arts 

Oregon Arts Commission 

Utah State Institute of Fine Arts 

Washington State Arts Commission 

Wyoming Council on the Arts 

Theatre 

11,000 

11,000 

11,000 

11,000 

11,000 

11,000 

25,000 

Minnesota State Arts Council (for Chíldren’s Theatre
 Company of the Minneapolis Institute of Arts) 25,000
 

 ̄ ’ Treasury Fund 

65 
III II I  ̄ I I III i|illl|i 

Visual Arts 183,000 

Alabama State Council on the Arts and Humanities ......................... 12,200 Connecticut Commission on the Arts 

D. 12,200 C. Commission on the Arts ....................................
 12,200 Hawali State Foundation on Culture and the Arts ...........................
 12,200 Indiana State Arts Commission 12,200 Iowa State Arts Council .........................................
 ............................................... 12,200
 Kansas Cultural Arts Commission 

Missouri State Council on the Arts .......................................
 12,200

New Mexico Arts Commission ......................................
 12,200

12,200 Ohio Arts Council ..........................................
 

Oregon Arts Commission .................................................... 12,200


12,200 South Carolina Arts Commission 12,200 Tennessee Arts Commission ........................................
 

Washington State Arts Commission ...........
 ........................................... 12,200


West Virginia Arts and Humanities Council ___--_--_----_------ .............
 12,200

12,200 

Central Midwestern Regional Educational Laboratory, Inc. 

(for training in evaluation techniques), St. Ann, Mo ......................... Bay Area Educational Television Association/KQED
 17,000

(for film documentation), San Francisco, Calif ......................
 100,000 Rhode Island State Council on the Arts (for statewide .......
 

three-year pilot project) ...............................................
 350,000 

Literature .................................................................... $513,121
 

Discovery Awards ........................................................
 82,000 Besmilr Brigham, Horatio, Ark ............................................
 3,000 Bill Butler, Missoula, Mont. 1,000 Henry Carlile, Portland, Oreg.

Raymond Carver, San Jose, Ca~i~. .......................................... 3,000
 

......................................... 3,000
 Leslie Chapman, Laguna Pueblo Reservation, Ariz ............................
 1,000 Lucille Clifton, Baltimore, Md. 2,000 Leo Connellan, Clinton, Conn .................................... - ........
 David Deck, San Francisco, Calif .........................................
 1,000

2,000 Peter Dexter, Ft. Lauderdale, Fla ..........................................
 1,000 Monica di Emidio, San Francisco, Calif .....................................
 2,000 Roland W. Flint, Washington, D.C. 2,000 Gene Fowler, Berkeley, Calif. 3,000 Kathleen Fraser, Iowa City, Iowa ..........................................
 1,000 Nikki Giovanni, New York, N.Y ...........................................
 2,000 Louise Glück, Provincetown, Mass .........................................
 2,000 Sidney Goldfarb, New York, N.Y ..........................................
 

Walter Hall, Tigard, Oreg. 2,000

3,000 Arlene Heyman, Syracuse, Ñ.~’-~--_--_----_--~-~_---_--_---~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1,000 Ben L. Hiatt, Sacramento, Calif ...........................................
 3,000 Fanny Howe, Marblehead, Mass ..........................................
 1,000 Ronald Johnson, San Francisco, Calif .....................................
 

David M. Kelly, Geneseo, N.Y ............................................
 2,000

2,000 Keorapetse Kgositsile, New York, N.Y ......................................
 

Don L. Lee, Chicago, III. 2,000

2,000 F. S. Manalli, Santa Rosa,-(~~~i~.----_---_-----_--~--"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2,000 Lawrence Naumoff, Carrboro, N.C .........................................
 3,000 Simon Ortiz, Chinle, Ariz. 3,000 Raymond R. Patterson, M~r~i~~<~Ñ~~-------_---_----_--~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~-~~~~~~­ - - _ 2,000 Arthur Pfister, New Orleans, La. 

Carolyn M. Rodgers, Chicago, II~.------_-_-----_--~-----_-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2,000

Rick Rubin, Portland, Oreg. 2,000

2,000 

66 
ililli iili i I II I mili III 

Eugene Ruggles, Bodega Bay, Calif.
 

Primus St. John, Portland, Oreg.
 

Roger Sauls, Chapel Hill, N.C.
 

Roberta E. Sebenthall, Mount Horeb, Wisc.
 

Hugh Seidman, New York, N.Y.
 

Robert Ullian, Merrick, N.Y.
 

Alice Walker (Leventhal), Jackson, Miss.
 

James Welch, Missoula, Mont.
 

Geoffrey M. Young, Albuquerque, N. Mex.
 

John F. Zeugner, Tallahassee, Fla.
 

Independent Literary and Art Presses 

The Auerhahn Society, Calif.
 

Cummington Press, Iowa
 

Four Seasons Foundation, Calif.
 

The Jargon Society, N.C.
 

Journeyman Press, N.Y.
 

Kayak Books, Calif.
 

Poets Press, Calif.
 

Praírie Press, Iowa
 

Pym-Randall Poetry and Arts Foundation, Mass.
 

Stone Wall Press, Iowa
 

James L. Weil Foundation, Inc./Elizabeth Press, N.Y.
 

Poetry-in-the-Schools 

Academy of American Poets, New York, N.Y.
 

Illinois Arts Council (for 8 Midwestern states)
 

New Jersey State Council on the Arts
 

Rhode Island State Council on the Arts
 

St. Paul Council of Arts and Sciences
 

Poets in Developing Colleges 

Bishop College, Dallas, Tex.
 

Hampton Institute, Hampton, Va.
 

Johnson C. Smith University, Charlotte, N.C.
 

LeMoyne-Owen College, Memphis, Tenn.
 

Lincoln University, Lincoln University, Pa.
 

Miles College, Birmingham, Ala.
 

Texas Southern University, Houston
 

Virginia Union University, Richmond
 

Support to Institutions 

Coordinating Council of Literary Magazines, New York, N.Y. 

Corcoran Gallery of Art (Kenneth Patchen Exhibir), Washington, D.C. 

Hollins College (Conference), Hollins College, Va. 

P.E.N. American Center, New York, N.Y. 

P.E.N. American Center (Translators’ Conference), New York, N.Y. 

American Literary Anthology/3 

George A. Plimpton (Administration) (2 grants) 

45 poetry awards; $250 each
 

9 essay awards, $1,000 each
 

8 fiction awards, $1,000 each
 

2 fiction awards, $500 each
 

32 poetry editors’ awards, $250 each
 

6 essay editors’ awards, $500 each
 

7 fiction editors’ awards, $500 each
 

3,000
 

2,000
 

3,000
 

2,000
 

1,000
 

1,000
 

1,000
 

2,000
 

2,000
 

2,000
 

90,000 

10,000
 

10,000
 

5,000
 

15,000
 

5,000
 

10,000
 

5,000
 

10,000
 

5,000
 

10,000
 

5,000
 

64,815 

4,815
 

50,000
 

2,500
 

2,500
 

5,000
 

30,000 

4,000
 

4,000
 

3,000
 

3,000
 

4,000
 

3,000
 

4,000
 

5,000
 

178,685 

150,000 

1,185 

1,000 

20,000 

7,500 

66,621 

11,621
 

22,500
 

9,000
 

8,000
 

1,000
 

8,000
 

3,000
 

3,500
 

67 
 

 

aId I I Ii I I II iiIll I
 

Music ..................................................................... $2,525,195
 Composer Assistance Program (carry-over from previous year) .................. 4,870 Thomas Beversdorf, Bloomington, III.

Orchestra Da Camera, Hempstead, N~Y~---_-_-~_---_- .......................... 1,100 

Gunther Schuller, Boston, Mass. .......................... 750

David Sheinfeld, San Francisco, (~~~~.-_--_-_---_-_----_-_----~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1,700

1,320 

Contemporary Music Performing Groups Program ............................. 37,300 

Carnegie Hall Corporation, New York, N.Y ..................................

Contrasts in Contemporary Music, Inc./Composers’ Showcase, New York, N.Y .... 15,000 

Music In Our Time, New York, N.Y. 6,000

Philadelphia Composers’ Forum ....................................... 5,000 

University of Alabama, University,-~,l-a-.--_-_----_------_-_--_-_-_--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 5,000

Washington Theater Club for Theater Chamber Players, D.C .................... 3,000 

3,300 

Jazz Program ........................................................... 20,050 

Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Chic ......................... 

Friends of the D.C. Youth Orchestra, Washington D.C ......................... 1,000 

The Jazz Composer’s Orchestra Associat on, Inc., New York, N.Y ............... 1,000 

1,000 Jazz Institute of Chicago, Inc .............................................
 1,000 Langley High School, McLean, Va .........................................
 1,000 Louisburg College, Louisburg, N.C ........................................
 

New England Conservatory of Music, Boston, Mass ...........................
 600

New Orleans Public Schools .............................................
 1,000

New Thing Art and Architecture Center, Washington, D.C ...................... 975

Richmond College, Staten Island, N.Y. 1,000 

State University College at Fredonia, Ne-v;~-o-r~-_---_-_--_-_-_-í-_-_-_--_---_-_-~~~~~~~~~~ 500 

University of Cincinnati 750 

750 University of Wisconsin,-~~~a~~~ñ-~~~ñ~~-~~~~~~-_-_---_--_-~_-_-~_-----_---_-_--_-~_-_-_­

Wartburg College, Waverly, Iowa ..........................................
 375

Richard S. Ambler, Wichita, Kan ...........................................
 1,000

Edmund A. Bemis, Jr., Essex Junction, Vt ................................... 300

William R. Berry, New York, N.Y. 250 

Ronald B. Dewar, Champaign, II1. - ........................................ 1,000 

McKinley H. Dorham, Jr., New Yorl~,-Ñ~"~.-~-~-~---~-_----_--_--~-~---~-----~---" 500 

Robert H. Garren, Landover Hills, Md. ....... 600 

Allan B. Gumbs, St. Albans, N.Y. 500 

Billy R. Harper, New York, N.Y. - ......................................... 325 

Lee Konitz, New York, N.Y. - .......................................... 500 

John E. Leubke, No~h East, I;~.---~_--_----_--_-_-_- ..................... .~ ...... 60O 

Henry J. Levy, Baltimore, Md. 325 

1,000 James R. Mitchell, Boston, Ma~~.-_--_-~_--_----_---_-_-~--__--_-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

Grachan Moncur, III, New York, N.Y ........................................
 250

7O0 Stephen A. Reid, St. Albans, N.Y ..........................................
 250 Joseph C. Scianni, New York, N.Y .........................................


John R. Sox, Greencastle, Ind. 500
 

Opera Program
 836,000
 The Center Opera Company, Minneapolis, Minn ..............................
 

Goldovsky Opera Institute, Brookline, Mass. 40,000~
 

The National Opera Institute, Washington, D.(~. ............................... 30,000~
 

Opera Festival Association, Inc./Lake George O~~;~-F-e-s~~v~~,- .................. 600,000~
 

Glens Falls, N.Y. 

Philadelphia Grand Opera Company 10,000 

St. Paul Opera Association ..............................................
 20,000~

Santa Fe Opera/Opera Association of New Mexico ........................... 50,000*
 

Seattle Opera Association (Touring Northwest Region) ....................... 50,000*
 

36,000* 

* Treasury Fund 

68 
I I i I ill l iilill ii IIII
 

931,600 

Orchestra Program ....................................................... 15,300
 

Atlanta Symphony Orchestra ............................................. 50,000
 

Boston Symphony Orchestra ............................................. 50,000*
 

Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra ........................................... 40,000~
 

Chamber Symphony Society of California, Los Angeles ....................... 100,000"
 

Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra .......................................... 59,000*
 

Denver Symphony Society ............................................... 50,000
 

Detroit Symphony Orchestra ............................................. 20,000*
 

D. C. Youth Symphony .................................................. 27,500
 

Minnesota Orchestra .................................................... 64,400~
 

Musical Arts Associat on/Cleveland Orchestra .............................. 125,000"
 

National Symphony Orchestra Association of Wash ngton, D.C ................. 100,000"
 

Pittsburgh Symphony Society ............................................ 100,000~
 

St. Louis Symphony Society .............................................. 100,000~
 

San Francisco Symphony Association ..................................... 30,400*
 

Utah Symphony, Salt Lake City ...........................................
 695,375
 

General Programs ........................................................
 160,000~
 

Affiliate Artists, Inc., New York, N.Y ......................................... 25,000
 

American Choral Foundation, New York, N.Y ................................ 115,000
 American Musical Digest, New York, N.Y. (2 grants) .......................... 50,000
 

American Symphony Orchestra League, Vienna, Va. (2 grants) ................. 6,700
 

Eastern Connecticut Symphony Orchestra .................................. 20,000
 Festival Orchestra Society/New York Chamber Soloists New York, N.Y ..........
 17,500 National Guild of Community Music Schools, Evanston, Ill ...................... 20,000*
 

Philadelphia Composers’ Forum .......................................... 125
 

Phoenix Chamber Music Society, Ariz ...................................... 5,000
 

Seattle Opera Association (Conference) .................................... 150,000"
 

Young Audiences, Inc., New York, N.Y ...................................... 126,050"
 

Young Audiences, Inc., New York, N.Y .....................................
 

$195,000
 

Public Media .................................................................
 

Bay Area Educational Television Association/KQED/National Center for 60,000
 

Experiments in Telev sion, San Francisco, Calif ..............................
 110,000 Educational Television Stations/Indiana University Foundation, Bloomington, Ind. 

Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts, Inc. (New York Film Festival), 25,000
 

New York, N.Y .........................................................
 

Theatre ................................................................... $2,891,000
 744,000
 

Educational and Special Projects ...........................................
 694,000~ American National Theatre and Academy, New York, N.Y ......................
 50,000 Brooklyn College Theatre Artisan Training Program ..........................
 2,099,500
 

Performing Institutions ....................................................
 1,065,500 

Resident Professional Theatres ...........................................
 13,500
 

Actors Theatre of Louisville, Ky ......................................... 20,000
 

Alley Theatre, Houston, Tex ............................................. 25,000
 American Conservatory Theatre, San Francisco, Calif .......................
 25,000
 

Arena Stage, Washington, D.C .......................................... 12,500
 Art Institute of Chicago for Goodman Theatre ............................. 10,000
 Asolo Theatre Company, Sarasota, Fla .................................... 20,000
 

Center Stage, Baltimore, Md ............................................
 

,~. Treasury Fund 

69 
IHI i I ill I I liilll 

Center Theatre Group, Los Angeles, Calif. 

Cleveland Play House ................................................ 

A Contemporary Theatre, Seattle, Wash. 

Dallas Theater Center ................................................. 

Guthrie Theatre Foundation, Minneapolis, Minn. 

Hartford Stage Company, Conn. 

Milwaukee Repertory Theater Company 

Negro Ensemble Company, New York, N.Y. 

Playhouse-in-the-Park, Cincinnati, Ohio

Repertory Theatre, New Orleans, La. 

Seattle Reper~ory Theatre .............................................. 

Stage/West, Springfield, Mass .......................................... 

Theatre Company of Boston, Inc. 

Theatre of the Living Arts, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Trinity Square Repertory Company, Providence, R.I. 

Washington Theater Club, Washington, D.C. 

Yale Repertory Theatre, New Haven, Conn ................................ 

American Shakespeare Festival Theatre and Academy, Stratford, Conn. 

Arena Stage, Washington, D.C ..........................................
 

Trinity Square Repertory Company, Providence, R.I. 

Professional Experimental Theatres and Workshops 

American Place Theatre, New York, N.Y.
 

The Barbwire Theater, Inc., San Francisco, Calif.
 

Caravan Theatre, Boston, Mass.
 

Chelsea Theatre Center, Brooklyn, N.Y.
 

Chicago City Players .................................................
 

Company Theatre, Los Angeles, Calif.
 

The Cubiculo Experimental Arts Center, New York, N.Y.
 

Dancers Studio Foundation, New York, N.Y.
 

Free Southern Theatre, New Orleans, La ..................................
 i Free Theatre Fund, Inc., Chicago, III .....................................
 . Group Concept, New York, N.Y .........................................
 

The Interplayers, San Francisco, Calif ....................................
 

The Julian Theatre, San Francisco, Calif.
 

LaMama Experimental Theatre Club, Inc., New York, N.Y.
 

Loft Theatre Workshop, New York, N.Y ....................................
 

New Dramatists Committee, New York, N.Y.
 

New Lafayette Theatre, New York, N.Y.
 

New York Free Theatre, N.Y .................................... L .......
 The Open Theater, New York, N.Y .......................................
 

The Performance Group, New York, N.Y ..................’_ ...............
 Society Hill Playhouse, Philadelphia, Pa.
 

Studio Watts Workshop, Los Angeles, Calif ................................
 

Theatre Workshop, Boston, Inc ..........................................
 

Thresholds, New York, N.Y .............................................
 

Two Arts Playhouse, Inc., New York, N.Y.
 

Other Performing Institutions .............................................
 

Atlanta Arts Alliance, Inc ...............................................
 

Berkshire Theatre Festival, Stockbridge, Mass.
 

City Street Theatre Ensemble, Brooklyn, N.Y.
 

New York Shakespeare Festival, New York, N.Y.
 

The Paper Bag Players, New York, N.Y ...................................
 

Phoenix Theatre, New York, N.Y .........................................
 

University Players/Olney Theatre, Olney, Md.
 

 ̄ " Treasury Fund 

25,000 

15,000 

7,500 

15,000 

25,000 

15,000 

25,000 

25,000 

25,000 

25,000 

20,000 

5,000 

20,000 

22,000 

25,000 

25,000 

20,000 

250,000"~" 

300,000, 

50,000* 

179,000 

10,000 

2,500 

1,500 

15,000 

5,000 

10,000 

2,500 

2,500 

10,000 

5,000 

2,500 

2,500 

2,500 

15,000 

5,000_ 

5,000 

5,000 

5,000 

30,000 

15,000 

5,000 

5,000 

7,500 

5,000 

5,000 

855,000 

435,000* 

30,000 

15,000 

200,000* 

20,000 

100,000. 

55,000"~" 

70 
Services to the Field ...................................................... 47,500 

American Society for Theatre Research, New York, N.Y ........................ 15,000 

Foundation for the Extension and Development of the American Professional 

Theatre, Inc., New York, N.Y ............................................ 

International Theatre Institute of the United States, Inc., New York, N.Y. 

7,500 

25,000 

__-. |

] _

I 

i 

~ 

: 

~ 

Visual Arts ................................................................... 

Exhibition Aid Program .................................................... 

Corcoran Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C ................................... 

Fort Worth Art Association, Tex ........................................... 

University of California, Berkeley/University Art Museum ...................... 

University of Nebraska/Sheldon Memorial Art Gailery, Lincoln 

Walker Art Center, Minneapolis, Minn ...................................... 

$970,294 

36,000 

8,500 

2,000 

8,500 

8,500 

8,500 

I Museum Purchase Plan ................................................... 100,000 

Arkansas Art Center, Little Rock .......................................... 

Dayton Art Institute, Ohio ................................................

Huntington Galleries, Inc., W.Va ........................................... 

Isaac Delgado Museum of Art, New Orleans, La .............................. 

New Jersey State Museum, Newark ....................................... 

Rose Art Museum/Brandeis University, Waltham, Mass ........................ 

San Francisco Museum of Art ............................................ 

Tacoma Art Museum, Wash .............................................. 

University of lowa/The Museum of Art, Iowa City ............................. 

Wadsworth Atheneum, Hartford, Conn ...................................... 

10,000 

10,000 

10,000 

10,000 

10,000 

10,000 

10,000 

10,000 

10,000 

10,000 

Promoting Increased Liaison between Universities and Museums 24,000 

Brown University, Providence, R.I .......................................... 

Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences ........................................ 

Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa ........................................ 

Drew University, Madison, N.J ............................................ 

Fisk University, Nashville, Tenn ........................................... 

Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md ................................... 

Marshall University, Huntington, W.Va ...................................... 

Philander Smith College, Little Rock, Ark .................................... 

Sacramento State College Foundation, Calif ................................ 

Southern Methodist University, Dalias, Tex .................................. 

State University of New York at Buffalo ..................................... 

University of Arkansas, Little Rock ......................................... 

University of Cincinnati .................................................. 

University of Minnesota, Minneapolis ...................................... 

University of South Florida, Tampa ........................................ 

Washington University, St. Louis, Mo ....................................... 

" 

1,500 

1 500 

1 500 

1 500 

1 500 

1 500 

1 500 

1 500 

1 500 

1,500 

1,500 

1,500 

1,000 

1,500 

2,000 

1,500 

Wider Availability of Museums .............................................. 120,000 

Amon Carter Museum of Western Art, Fort Worth, Tex. 

Detroit Institute of the Arts ............................................... 

30,000 

90,000 

Works of Art in Public Places .............................................. 94,000 

Boston Foundation, Inc .................................................. 

Community Arts Foundation, Chícago, III .................................... 

Minnesota State Arts Councii, Minneapolis-St. Paul .......................... 

City of Scottsdale, Ariz .................................................. 

City of Wichita, Kan ..................................................... 

5,000 

4,000 

20,000 

20,000 

45,000 

General Programs ........................................................ 596,294 

American Association of Museums, Washington, D.C ......................... 5,000 

~r Treasu[y Fund 

71 
Corcoran Gallery of Art/Washington Gallery of Modern Art, D.C. 10,000 

Experiments in Art and Technology, New York, N.Y. 

The J. M. Kaplan Fund, Inc./Westbeth, New York, N.Y. 

The MacDowell Colony (fellowships), Peterborough, N.H. 

New Means Foundation/Something Else Press, New York, N.Y. 

25,000 

500,000~ 

25,000"~ 

10,000 

Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 

Whitney Museum of American Art, New York, N.Y. 

Miscellaneous Contracts 

10,000 

10,000 

1,294 

Coordinated Programs $505,711 

National Touring Program 251,960 

Alaska State Council on the Arts (Harkness Ballet)

Federation of Rocky Mountain States, Inc. 

Maryland Arts Council for Center Stage 

Montana Repertory Theatre .............................................. 

New Orleans Philharmonic Symphony Orchestra 

Phoenix Symphony Association ........................................... 

Princeton Chamber Orchestra 

St. Louis Symphony .................................................... 

San Francisco Opera Association/Western Opera Theater 

4,800 

75,000 

15,000 

10,000 

9,500 

10,260 

8,300 

9,100 

110,000 

Special State Projects .................................................... 124,450 

Alaska State Council on the Arts (State-wide Conference)

Arizona Commission on the Arts and Humanities (Bilingual Theatre) 

Fine Arts Council of Florida (Education Program) 

Hawaii State Foundation on Culture and the Arts (Survey) 

Idaho State Commission on the Arts and Humanities (Touring Theatre) 

Illinois Arts Council (Theatre) ............................................ 

Indiana State Arts Commission (Audience Development) 

Kentucky Arts Commission (Poetry Program) ................................ 

Maine State Commission on the Arts and Humanities (Art Exhibir)

Michigan State Council on the Arts (Develop Artrain) 

Missouri State Council on the Arts (Bi-State Crafts Exhibition) 

Montana Arts Council (Arts Festival) .......................................

New Jersey State Council on the Arts (Inner city Program) 

New Mexico Arts Commission (Orchestra Tour) .............................. 

North Carolina Arts Council (Theatre Tour) 

Rhode Island State Council on the Arts (Art-Teachers’ Workshop)

South Dakota State Fine Arts Council (Summer Music Workshop) 

Utah State Institute of Fine Arts (Art Restoration) 

Vermont Council on the Arts, Inc. (Art Exhibition)

Virginia Commission of the Arts and Humanities (Arts Administration) 

Washington State Arts Commission (Art for the Unsighted) 

West Virginia Arts and Humanities Council (Experimental Outdoor Drama) 

10,000 

10,000 

6,000 

5,000 

9,800 

4,750 

7,500 

5,000 

3,400 

10,000 

4,000 

3,600 

5,000 

3,500 

7,500 

2,500 

7,000 

2,500 

3,600 

1,300 

5,000 

7,500 

General Programs ........................................................ 129,301 

Agnes de Mille ......................................................... 

American Association of University Women, Des Moines, Iowa 

George Washington University/Workshops for Careers in the Arts, 

10,000 

6,570 

Washington, D.C ..................................................... 

Lubbock Cultural Affairs Council, Tex. 

National Council of Jewish Women for "Appalachian Corridors/Exhibition 2" _ .... 

National Folk Festival ................................................... 

Oakland University, Rochester, Mich. 

Performing Arts Council of the Music Center, Los Angeles, Calif. 

University of California, Los Angeles (Arts Administration Program) 

20,000-X" 

5,000 

4,500 

39,000 

21,611 

15,120 

7,500 

 ̄

A" Treasury Fund 

72