So, just change the circumstances.
In this first article for 2023, let’s discuss how change happens. Real change. Decisive change. Permanent change. For better or worse.
Change is essential to the betterment of the planet, continent, country, state, city, neighborhood, community. Without disequilibrium, we have stasis. And stasis is only good for those on the top of the pile. As nonprofits, and especially as arts organizations, your company can either be vital in its responsibility to make your community a better place; it can be obstinate about not changing whatsoever because the needy people in your neighborhood cannot be helped by what you choose to do; or somewhere in the middle, where perhaps you’ve put a lovely manifesto on your website about DEI, violence, or another key issue adversely affecting your community, but in reality, that’s about it.
Oh, and you hired one Black person. That’s a step in the right direction, right (he asked snarkily)?
Disequilibrium. Without it, art would not exist, let alone thrive as a tool to help mankind.
“A great artist… must be shaken by the naked truths that will not be comforted. This divine discontent, this disequilibrium, this state of inner tension is the source of artistic energy.”
— Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Disequilibrium is more than the pea under the princess’s mattress. It uses a fulcrum, like a seesaw, to gauge equity. The obstinate continue to try to nail that board to the fulcrum in order for it to stop moving, or worse, put sixteen tons of divisive, discriminatory pressure on one side in order for the other side never to be able to play.
Disequilibrium is not often caused by anything except circumstance. Despite all the energy put forth by those who protest, actual change comes about by a change in circumstance that makes it unpalatable for the obstinate among us (in all walks of life, not merely arts organizations and their leaders and boards) to continue on their current paths.
American involvement in the Vietnam War did not end because of protests. One week after Richard Nixon was inaugurated for his second term, Nixon finally saw that the war was unwinnable and had “The United States had lost its global standing due to its military intervention.” That circumstance ended the war, not signs and marching.
If you use your art as a protest machine, you may gain friends (and enemies), but it’s likely that you won’t achieve the disequilibrium you need to effect change. To get the change going, you have to make it impossible for the status quo to remain, not merely complain about it or protest against it.
Years ago, a nonprofit arts leader in the US received news that the company’s funding for its vaunted education program was being zeroed out by its funder. The funder had provided nearly a million dollars each year to support that part of the business, which it deemed (even after deleting its funding entirely in one fell swoop) integral to the children of the community. They hoped that the company would do more with less and continue to educate, at the expense of everything else.
The arts leader initially tried to see how that could be done, but then remembered that, at least in this case, disequilibrium could be her confederate.
Rather than allowing the company to take on the cost, the arts leader, with the board’s knowledge and nervous assent, took it upon herself to engage in a game of public relations chicken with the funder, which included on its board a whole slew of state representatives. She let the public know that their children would no longer be able to be educated by the arts organization because the funder pulled out, regardless of any empty statements of moral support.
After a tense few weeks that must have seemed like years, a third party “came to the rescue” with funding for the company’s education program. Through back channels, presumably engaged by the politicos who did not want to infuriate their constituents because they would be blamed, this third party came through will all the funding necessary. The education program returned to the budget.
Change happens because the circumstances change, not from protest or acts of vandalism. Unfortunately, for climate change activists, throwing tomato soup on a Van Gogh or tying oneself to a tree does little to change the circumstances.
The main circumstance that will change the discussion on fossil fuel will occur when a critical mass of people connect the dots, including those in the fossil fuel industry, and learn that their lives are being lost (not “about to be lost”). I can envision some right-wing platform that will poll the public about mass destruction.
Don’t take this image the wrong way. British oddsmakers believe there’s an 80–1 chance that a robot uprising will cause the end of the world. So there’s hope.
For your arts organization to change the lives of all those people your manifesto said you would, you’re going to have to forget about protesting, letter-writing, and even marches. The circumstances have to change. Make strong decisions, not decisions to do everything with less money. There have to be consequences for subsidy cuts, not continuing to do “more for less,” which serves no one in your community.
And if you want to serve those who need it, take services away from those who don’t. Or at least put them last in line, not first.
Happy 2023! Based in Kirkland, Washington, Alan Harrison is a writer and speaker specializing in nonprofit organizations, strategy, the arts, and life politics. His columns appear regularly in major publications. Contact him directly at alan@501c3.guru.
If you’re feeling generous or inspired, just click on the coffee cup above. You don’t have to, of course, but if you can afford it and find some value here, please provide the desperate need for caffeine.
Alan is always looking for good opportunities to write and consult for nonprofits that need a hand. And, of course, that elusive Perfect Opportunity™.
Leave a Reply