Cleveland is not high on my list because it's all palaver. It's individual palaver. It's people not cooperating with one another. There's no apparent leader to the enterprise.Palaver. This word has synonyms: hot air, empty words, empty talk, idle chatter. Why doesn't Lewis speak his mind without the insults, leave it at that? And why does the arts and culture community put up with the patronizing language?
My dust mote on the tea cup perspective is this. Lewis has the power. He's got the money. He's given about $52 million in NE Ohio philanthropy since 1990. Arts and culture institutions need money to realize their goals. Their leaders turn their cheek away from his barbs. They are the workers, he's the boss. They are the kids. He's the parent. What else is new? Progressive sells insurance to lowly car owners, premiums that apparently exceed payouts to body shops, car dealers, hospitals (thus the wealthy insurance magnate). I wonder if Lewis' model of leadership, which he derides Cleveland for lacking in the sphere of culture, is the corporate one. I wonder if he sees himself at the helm of Cleveland's arts enterprise.
I would pay my share of a regional tax for arts and culture projects here. It might take the wind out of Lewis' sails and the palaver out of his vocabulary.
No comments:
Post a Comment