It did not require a manifesto, nor a fist-thick art-critical treatise in which a learned committee arrives at an all-defining verdict. No, it was a slip of the tongue by an artist, this time defining a new art movement. Olaffur Eliasson, the architect/artist who has been rapidly gaining popularity in the world of design and architecture in recent years, says it in an interview with the British website DeZeen: 'Popularism'.
'The Ministry of Culture has become an extension of the Ministry of Commerce, and has failed in sustaining the arts. It has degenerated into promotional material.'
In the piece, he speaks of "popularism", where he presumably means "populism". The former term does not exist (yet), the latter does. Still, there is something in taking the word 'popularism' seriously when it comes to art. After all, art is not really governed substantively by the will of the loudest part of the people, but popularity has become an explicit requirement. Even with government funding.
Good Times
Art that fails to become 'popular' within a certain period of time is often doomed in most countries around us - including our own. A government that supports too much unpopular art, and does so openly, loses support. Minister Van Engelshoven, because of her repairs to the art budget, is becoming immensely popular in the art world. During the upcoming Canal Pride, she will sail on the boat of the RTL series GTST, again immensely popular with others. Thus, she makes it clear that this government, with its more art-friendly policies, is not losing sight of the 'common people'. Just as Rutte likes to show up at the Toppers, and not at Schouwburg or Concertgebouw.
Popularism can actually be seen as a direct consequence of the subsidy system that has been rigged since World War II. Back then, it was still about uplifting the people, creating a sense of world art and pushing one's own culture up the peoples' ladder. And, of course, about common decency, in entertaining artists. Though that proved less effective. We still have in 2018 no good working code To pay artists fairly.
Mienskip
With economic prosperity, a large, well-organised art world also emerged, evolving faster than public taste. This led to a countermovement that culminated in budget cuts in the Netherlands and neighbouring countries around 2010. Since then, the conversation about art has changed. And with it, art itself is also changing.
Art, not just the visual arts but also the performing arts and literature, is increasingly used for promotion. There is no denying it. And so then you need popular art, art that is supported by the people. After all, that people are also patrons with those 3 euros of tax money that every adult Dutch person contributes to it every year. So now that the taxpayer has officially been promoted to principal, a whole new dynamic arises.
Sometimes this produces amusing scenes, such as the 'mienskip-driven' fountains in Friesland. More often, it results in art that floats on blockbusters: recognised major artists who are hyped up big time and thus guaranteed to attract audiences.
Trickle-down
Most recently pleaded ex of everything Melle Daamen for strengthening our already popular arts institutions. After all, they generate the most income and attention. The little ones in the region could benefit. A clearer driver for Popularism could not be found. Such a conception of trickle-down economics, by the way, is badly outdated. Indeed, it only makes the well-run institutions better and richer, further widening the gap with the poor and less-run clubs. Until it becomes unbridgeable. Basic Piketty.
Popularism, in other words. Art that is funded from promotional purposes ends up behaving accordingly. And there are of course plenty of examples of this. That the Stadsschouwburg in Amsterdam dissolves itself after three and a half centuries and lives on as a restaurant-with-backstage that - for how long? - International Theatre Amsterdam baptises, for example. That everyone in the theatre suddenly series releases, but prefers to programme them in one evening, as the final episodes would never survive as stand-alone pieces.
Pearl diving
Public outreach has become normative for subsidy - even though the minister says not. After all, subsidy needs support. Public reach also determines media attention. Artists and their expressions have to score within two years, otherwise they are finished. Programmers and brave journalists no longer go looking in small buildings in the deep province to find, among hundreds of embarrassing failures, that one gem. There is no support, and therefore no money, for that anymore.
No one tells the story anymore, which starts small, and through ever few listeners who pass it on, changes something about the world. Anyone who does not go viral within a week is finished. It is extra essential for art today to look like other art. Instagram rules.
Welcome to the age of Popularism. In 25 years, hopefully a first retrospective of what was, in the eyes of the time, a bizarre art movement.
English (UK) 
Nederlands 
Français 
