logo
‘Not what we signed up for': inside Trump's ‘shocking' Kennedy Center takeover

‘Not what we signed up for': inside Trump's ‘shocking' Kennedy Center takeover

The Guardian24-02-2025

America's biggest annual gathering of conservatives had just got under way near Washington when its organiser, Matt Schlapp, turned to Ric Grenell and quipped: 'My daughters want tickets to all the good Kennedy Center shows.'
The Guardian's journalism is independent. We will earn a commission if you buy something through an affiliate link. Learn more.
Grenell, a former acting director of national intelligence, was recently named by Donald Trump as interim president of the John F Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington. He told the Conservative Political Action Conferenc last week that his vision for the centre is 'to make art great again', including 'a big, huge celebration of the birth of Christ at Christmas'.
Trump's shock decision to seize control of the Kennedy Center, with a loyal apparatchik in charge, has put his anti-woke 'Maga' populism on collision course with America's progressive cultural scene like never before. Performers are cancelling shows, donors are questioning their support and audience members are threatening to boycott. It is the biggest crisis in the 54-year history of the Kennedy Center, the crown jewel of performing arts in the nation's capital.
Supported by government money and private donations and attracting millions of visitors each year, the centre is a 100ft-high complex on the banks of the Potomac river featuring a concert hall, opera house and theatre, along with a lecture hall, meeting spaces and a 'Millennium Stage' that has been the site for free shows.
It has long been a bipartisan enterprise, first conceived during the administration of Republican president Dwight Eisenhower, who backed a bill from the Democratic-led Congress calling for a 'national culture center'. It was later designated as a living memorial to President John F Kennedy, a Democrat, after his assassination.
Construction began in 1965 and the centre formally opened in 1971 with a premiere of Leonard Bernstein's Mass. Five years later, within view of the Watergate complex, it hosted the premiere of the film All the President's Men, starring Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman as journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein.
The centre presents theatre, contemporary dance, ballet, vocal music, chamber music, hip-hop, comedy and jazz and also serves as the home to the National Symphony Orchestra and Washington National Opera. It has hosted artists ranging from the Paul Taylor Dance Company to a joint concert by Tony Bennett and Lady Gaga. Its educational initiatives reach more than 2.1 million teachers and students.
Other highlights include the annual Mark Twain prize for comedy, with recipients including Lorne Michaels, Tina Fey and Bob Newhart, and the annual Kennedy Center Honors for outstanding artists, most recently Francis Ford Coppola, Bonnie Raitt and the Grateful Dead, among others.
All this is now in jeopardy. Earlier this month Trump ousted chair David Rubenstein, a billionaire philanthropist, and installed himself to preside over a board that by tradition was divided between Democratic and Republican appointees but is now predominantly Republican, with recent additions including country star Lee Greenwood and the White House chief of staff, Susie Wiles.
The Kennedy Center president, Deborah Rutter, brought on by Rubenstein in 2014, was fired soon after the board shakeup, along with the centre's general counsel and head of public relations. Rutter told National Public Radio (NPR): 'I'm really, really, really sad about what happens to our artists, what happens on our stages and our staff who support them. The Kennedy Center is meant to be a beacon for the arts in all of America across the country.'
Trump wrote on social media that Grenell 'shares my Vision for a GOLDEN AGE of American Arts and Culture' and would be overseeing 'daily operations' to ensure 'NO MORE DRAG SHOWS, OR OTHER ANTI-AMERICAN PROPAGANDA'. But he also admitted to reporters that he has not attended performances at the centre.
The cultural community was stunned by the velocity of the takeover. Amy Austin, president and chief executive of Theatre Washington, says: 'It was shocking to have that come so suddenly and so early in an administration that is making so many changes. For them to act as if there needed to be programmic changes at the Kennedy Centre when referring to one drag show and not acknowledge the work that's done there was ridiculous.
'There was no cause given for the need for change. Ever since the institution was founded it's always been a bipartisan place. The board of trustees was always a mixed group of people who, we would say in DC, come from different sides of the aisle but come together around the arts. And then it was summarily dismissed.'
The radical overhaul comes as Trump and his ally Elon Musk scythe through the federal government on a mission to root out waste and inefficiency. The Kennedy Center had a budget of $268m last year, with $225m flowing from ticket sales and donations and $43m coming from taxpayers to cover building operations and maintenance.
Last week Grenell raised concerns about the centre's finances in a post on X, claiming that its chief financial officer acknowledged having 'ZERO cash on hand'. A staff member at the centre, who wishes to remain anonymous, dismisses that as an 'absolute fabrication', 'complete manipulation of the data' and 'manufactured crisis'.
The source says: 'The real crisis we're facing, in addition to people rescinding their membership, is that we're normally finalising our season at this time and it's been completely turned upside down. You see performers pulling out and that has real ramifications for staff and morale. We feel like we're walking on eggshells. But I want to convey the amazing leadership my colleagues are showing in an untenable situation.'
The changes have sparked significant backlash. Kennedy Center consultants such as musician Ben Folds and singer Renée Fleming resigned and actor Issa Rae and author Louise Penny cancelled appearances. The Manhattan Theater Club announced that it would not bring Eureka Day, a satire about a school forced to reconsider its liberal vaccine policy, for a planned two-week run 'due to financial circumstances'.
During a concert that proceeded as scheduled, singer-songwriter Victoria Clark wore a T-shirt reading 'ANTI TRUMP AF'. Stand-up comedian W Kamau Bell lambasted the president during his set and, in a dig at a pro-Trump musician, asked: 'How many times can you give Kid Rock the Mark Twain award?'
The source says further big names are withdrawing. 'It's more than you've heard so far. That is the existential threat we're facing. We were just about to initiate the selection of this year's Kennedy Center honorees; all of this has been upended.'
'This coup is antithetical to the founding of the institution. The Kennedy Center is a neutral space, non-partisan by design, where everyone can see themselves on the stage. Thrusting it into a political space like this is unconscionable. This is not what we signed up for.
'This is warfare. It's an attack on freedom of expression and speech. It's repressive. It's unAmerican. The Kennedy Center is a pipeline to the broader arts ecosystem. There will be ripple effects across the whole cultural ecology if the Kennedy Center is not playing its role.'
Nowhere in Washington do politics and culture meet as they do at the Kennedy Center. An 8ft-tall bronze bust of John F Kennedy sits in the grand foyer and an 81-inch bronze statue of him stands on the adjacent Reach campus. Upstairs a permanent exhibition explores the 35th president's relationship with the arts. Shops feature books by and about Kennedy and his wife Jackie along with magnets, mugs and other merchandise.
Kennedy's words about the role of culture in society are inscribed in the exterior marble walls of the complex. Their highbrow references would be unthinkable for any US president today and are almost absurdly contrary to Trump's ingrained anti-intellectualism and anti-elitism.
For example: 'There is a connection, hard to explain logically but easy to feel, between achievement in public life and progress in the arts. The age of Pericles was also the age of Phidias. The age of Lorenzo de Medici was also the age of Leonardo da Vinci. The age Elizabeth also the age of Shakespeare. And the New Frontier for which I campaign in public life, can also be a New Frontier for American art.'
Kerry Kennedy, his niece, was at the 1971 grand opening and in 2000 saw her book Speak Truth to Power turned into a play there by the Argentine-Chilean writer Ariel Dorfman. Featuring actors such as Sigourney Weaver, Alec Baldwin, John Malkovich, Alfre Woodard and Giancarlo Esposito, the performance was attended by president Bill Clinton and human rights defenders from across the world.
She recalls: 'For a lot of the people in that audience, it was an important part of the healing process. To me that one performance encapsulates why the arts are so vitally important for our country, for democracy and for the world.'
But the speed and scale of Trump's actions are unlike anything the Kennedy Center has experienced in its history. Kennedy describes the firing of Rubenstein – who donated $120m to the organisation over 20 years – as 'crude and rude and ungrateful'. She is concerned about Trump reshaping the centre to reflect his own preferences and potentially eliminating content he deems objectionable.
Kennedy, who is president of Robert F Kennedy Human Rights, admits: 'I do worry about it, not as an abstraction but because we've already seen it with the AP [Associated Press] being barred from White House events for refusing to go along with what the White House dictates. That's very dangerous for democracy and has grave implications for what will happen not just at the Kennedy Center but for government funding of the arts across the country.'
She adds: 'It's the assault on our democracy that concerns me. I've worked for 40 years on stopping autocracies from repressing people's voices and the one consistent pattern is they go after the arts, so that's very dangerous.'
Others share concerns that Trump will cause lasting damage to the Kennedy Center's reputation as a space for diverse artistic expression. It could enter a death spiral in which artists and donors are alienated, ticket sales decline, programming shifts in a more populist direction and its status as a non-partisan institution is shattered.
Peter Marks, who was the Washington Post's chief theatre critic from 2002 to 2023, says: 'It's so distressing and potentially ruinous for the foreseeable future. Once an institution becomes weaponised, once an arts organisation takes such a dramatic shift away from its mission, it's very hard to get it back to what it was. People stop thinking of it as theirs and think of it as belonging to someone else. Once that happens, the alienation is disastrous.'
The Trump brand could prove toxic. Marks adds: 'Which artists in this country are going to want to be aligned on a title page in a programme with Donald Trump's name at the top of it? It changes the whole question of the relationship between an artist and their audience and why they're there.
'I doubt that many producers are going to pull, for example, their theatre productions at this point – it's too financially difficult – but I wonder how many artists are going to be able to stomach lending their name to anything marketing-wise for the Kennedy Center. It remains to be seen just how deep the wound is in the short term.'
Trump mostly ignored the centre during his first term, becoming the first president to routinely skip the honours ceremony. One honouree, producer Norman Lear, had threatened not to attend if Trump was there. It remains uncertain whether the president will show up this year – and whether artists will stay away as a result.
Recently on social media Trump posted an AI-generated image of himself waving his arms like a conductor in a concert hall and wrote: 'Welcome to the New Kennedy Center!' What might a Trump-infused artistic programme look like? In a phone call to the Kennedy Center board obtained by CNN, he promised: 'We're going to make it hot. And we made the presidency hot, so this should be easy.'
And at CPAC last week, when Grenell was asked what he thought the ideal performance at the Kennedy Center would be, he chose country singer Dolly Parton. 'I would love to see it,' he said.
Indeed, his boss's cultural palate is frozen in the 20th century. Trump is known to admire singers such as Elvis Presley and films such as Citizen Kane, The Godfather, Gone with the Wind and The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.
His campaign rallies warm up with numbers from the Andrew Lloyd Webber musicals Cats and The Phantom of the Opera, open with Greenwood's God Bless the USA and close with the Village People's YMCA. His celebrity supporters include Mel Gibson, Dennis Quaid, Kid Rock, Sylvester Stallone and Jon Voight. Lara Trump, his daughter-in-law, is an aspiring singer seemingly immune to bad reviews.
Steve Bannon, a longtime Trump adviser, mischievously proposed an opening night performance by the J6 Prison Choir, consisting of people jailed for the January 6, 2021 insurrection at the US Capitol only to be later pardoned by Trump. Bannon also described the Kennedy Center 'as the high church of the secular, atheist administrative state that runs the imperial capital'.
Trump's bid to control or neuter cultural institutions plays into a long history of authoritarians using the arts to push their agenda. One source in the Washington theatre industry drew comparison with Andrei Zhdanov, the Soviet politician whose doctrine sought to define permissible revolutionary art and labelled 'incorrect art' as counter-revolutionary. The source said: 'We are entering a Socialist Realist moment in American cultural policy. The purge is already happening. And there is a climate of fear at arts institutions. It's a scary time.'
Marks, the theatre critic, agrees that a 'war on the arts' has been declared but adds: 'The louder the war becomes, the more vociferous the response will be and you will find a whole rising up of writers and musicians and directors and actors who are going to find other avenues of expression that will, I hope, show up this disastrous tack that the government has taken and actually compel some great art.
'That's what's going to happen because it's inevitable. Outrage feeds contemplation ultimately and we're going to all find out what that means over the next few years.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump administration claims Columbia violated Title VI, threatening school's accreditation
Trump administration claims Columbia violated Title VI, threatening school's accreditation

NBC News

time31 minutes ago

  • NBC News

Trump administration claims Columbia violated Title VI, threatening school's accreditation

The Trump administration said Wednesday it has notified the accreditor for Columbia University that the school violated Title IV, threatening the university's accreditation status by saying it "no longer appears to meet the Commissions accreditation standards." The U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) and the Department of Health and Human Services' Office for Civil Rights (HHS OCR) "determined that Columbia University acted with deliberate indifference towards the harassment of Jewish students, thereby violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964," according to press release from the Education Department. The release says the school has been in violation since the start of the war in the Middle East that began on Oct. 7, 2023 when Hamas invaded Israel.

The People's Republic of iPhone
The People's Republic of iPhone

New Statesman​

time41 minutes ago

  • New Statesman​

The People's Republic of iPhone

Photo by In Pictures Ltd./Corbis via Getty Images On Friday 23 May, Donald Trump threatened to impose a 25 per cent tariff on what is arguably the world's most successful consumer product, the iPhone. This would be a historic tax hike on American consumers, because Apple currently sells around 70 million iPhones in the US for about $1,000 each; the US government would ask for $17.5bn in additional taxes on a single product line from a single company. But what Trump wants is actually more extreme: he believes that in order to escape his punitive tariff, Apple might bring production of the iPhone back to America. There are two reasons that this is wishful thinking. The first is that the iPhone is the apex product of globalisation. It would be impossible to make something as complex as a smartphone with the resources of a single country. Apple's supplier list runs to 27 pages of companies, many of which are themselves multinationals with long lists of their own subsidiaries. It is not the product of one country – more like 50. It will never be the case that the iPhone can be described as a purely American product. As Patrick McGee explains in Apple in China, in light of the company's long history of contract manufacturing, the vast sums it has invested in China, the knowledge and skills it has imparted to Chinese workers and the Chinese factories it has developed, it makes more sense to describe it as Chinese. Trump's discomfort with Americans using Chinese phones is not without foundation. What Apple has achieved in China is a spectacular example of industrial strategy. Apple's investment in China for a single year, 2015, was $55bn – greater than the combined research and development spending of every business in the UK. Around the same time, Apple's engineers were working in 1,600 Chinese factories. 'We were unwittingly tooling them up,' a former Apple executive told McGee, 'with… incredible know-how and experience.' It is unclear how other countries can loosen China's grip on technological manufacturing; an American iPhone would cost more than three times the price of current models, according to one analyst. But this is a power that China has been helped to acquire by the Western capitalists who rushed to exploit its people for cheap labour, and who never stopped to consider the long-term implications. A former Apple vice-president told McGee: 'We weren't thinking about geopolitics at all.' For all the Silicon Valley rhetoric about changing the world, Apple does not appear to have understood how successfully it was doing just that. We're reminded to question the information we see on our screens, but the screen itself is also an illusion. The devices of digital modernity are made, we are told, by companies that are American, German, Japanese and Korean. The brightest minds compete in an unending race to make the displays ever more crisp, the computers ever more intelligent. We choose between phones and laptops made by Google, Microsoft, Apple or Amazon, televisions made by Philips or Samsung, games consoles made by Sony or Nintendo. But there is only really one company. It makes products for all of these companies, and hundreds of other businesses around the world. It is called Hon Hai Precision Industry. Hon Hai began in 1974, in a shed in a suburb of Taipei called Tucheng ('dirt city', in Mandarin), in which ten people moulded knobs and dials for televisions from molten plastic. Their boss was Terry Gou, the 24-year-old son of a police officer, and recently released from national service. As personal computers began to proliferate, Gou moved to making components, mostly sockets and connectors; the trading name for the company, Foxconn, refers to connectors. The 'fox' part is simply an animal Gou admires. He also admires Ghengis Khan, and wears a bracelet from a temple dedicated to the Mongol emperor. Gou was instrumental in Apple's return from the brink of defeat. In 1997, Steve Jobs and Jony Ive had created the iMac, which offered to replaced the complicated and boring world of personal computing with an aspirational consumer product that connected easily to the internet. Apple quickly realised why everyone else made beige boxes – making anything else was expensive and difficult – but the company's designers and executives had an additional problem, which was that if they didn't do exactly what Steve Jobs told them to do, he would scream at them and then sack them. Every engineer who doubted the design eventually left and the 'unmanufacturable' iMac was finally manufactured by the Korean company LG. When Apple's exacting demands became too much for LG, it began looking for another company to build its products, and in Taiwan it found Terry Gou. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe In Gou's factory at the end of the 1990s, the roof was made from corrugated metal and the air conditioning was reserved for equipment, not people. Around the building, banners reminded workers of the wisdom of 'Uncle Terry', which included such aphorisms as 'work hard on the job today or work hard to find a job tomorrow' and 'hungry people have especially clear minds'. Gou, more than anyone else, took advantage of the opportunities offered by the special economic zone that had been established around Shenzhen, in Guangdong province on the east coast of mainland China, in 1980. At the time the zone was created, Shenzhen was a town of around 70,000 people; by 2020, it had a population of 17.5 million. This accelerated growth was the result of the 'Guangdong model', in which local government and private businesses (often led by Taiwanese entrepreneurs such as Gou) collaborated to produce growth. Gou's factory was subsidised and outfitted by the state; the advanced machines on which he began making Apple's designs had been paid for by the Chinese Communist Party. China also provided its people, in vast numbers. Among the sources that McGee has obtained for Apple in China are documents showing that when Apple needed to increase production – in the weeks before a new iPhone went on sale, for example – the Chinese state would be able to secure an additional 800,000 workers for its production lines. This would be done by government-backed companies, which would send buses into rural areas to draw workers from China's 'floating population' of internal migrants. These migrant workers numbered in the hundreds of millions, a larger workforce than that of the European Union. Apple was an exceptionally demanding client, led first by Steve Jobs and then, after his death, by his trusted lieutenant, Tim Cook, whose forensic eye for detail was even more exacting than his predecessor's temper. On his first day as CEO, Cook presided over an operations meeting that lasted for nearly 13 hours. But this was also what China needed: a company that would push its factories to ever greater standards and quantities of production. Jobs, Cook and Gou helped to make China the global factory. By 2010, the executives of Silicon Valley joked that within 20 years, there would be two companies left. Wal-Mart would be the only shop, and everything it sold would be made by Foxconn. As the Guangdong Model brought economic growth to China, Apple discovered that the country was also becoming its most important new market. Despite the role the company had played in China's industrial development, access to this market still came at a price. In 2016, Cook and two of his top executives visited the headquarters of the Chinese Communist Party, where they promised to invest $275bn in the country over the following five years. McGee points out that this sum is more than twice the amount (in real terms) that America had invested through the Marshall Plan in rebuilding Europe after the Second World War. The effects of this investment can be seen on government buildings around the UK. The technology transfer enabled by Apple and others enabled the rise of a new generation of native Chinese companies, such as Huawei. China ceased to be a taker of foreign technology and began pushing its own technology into other states, including Britain. Huawei equipment was installed in the UK's mobile networks, and cameras made by companies such as Hikvision (of which the Chinese state is the largest shareholder, and which human rights organisations have alleged supplies equipment used in the mass surveillance of Uyghur people) appeared at sensitive sites in the UK. Some were worn by our own police officers. Attempts have been made to ban Chinese technology from our infrastructure, but it will be years before it is removed, if it ever is. The trade policy of the Trump administration is an erratic series of pronouncements made via social media, which are almost always delayed and abandoned. And if Trump does persist in battling Apple, he will be abruptly reminded that trillions of dollars of American savings are invested in the company. Xi Jinping has no such concerns. Apple must appease him or lose access to the world's largest group of consumers. As the trade war between America and China grows, then, it must be asked if the world's most influential technology company can avoid picking a side – and to what extent it already has. Apple in China: The Capture of the World's Greatest Company Patrick McGee Simon & Schuster, 448pp, £25 Purchasing a book may earn the NS a commission from who support independent bookshops [See also: The lost futures of Stereolab] Related This article appears in the 04 Jun 2025 issue of the New Statesman, The Housing Trap

Trump says Putin told him he'll retaliate against Ukraine, casting doubt on peace progress
Trump says Putin told him he'll retaliate against Ukraine, casting doubt on peace progress

NBC News

timean hour ago

  • NBC News

Trump says Putin told him he'll retaliate against Ukraine, casting doubt on peace progress

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump said Wednesday that Russian President Vladimir Putin told him that Moscow would retaliate against Ukraine's major drone attack over the weekend, casting doubt that a peace deal to end the war could come soon. In a post on Truth Social, Trump said he and Putin spoke for about an hour and 15 minutes and conveyed that it wasn't going to lead to "immediate" peace between Russia and Ukraine. "We discussed the attack on Russia's docked airplanes, by Ukraine, and also various other attacks that have been taking place by both sides. It was a good conversation, but not a conversation that will lead to immediate Peace. President Putin did say, and very strongly, that he will have to respond to the recent attack on the airfields," Trump wrote, referring to Ukraine's massive drone attack on Russian air bases that took place Sunday. Trump said they also discussed negotiations over Iran's nuclear program. "President Putin suggested that he will participate in the discussions with Iran and that he could, perhaps, be helpful in getting this brought to a rapid conclusion," he said. "It is my opinion that Iran has been slowwalking their decision on this very important matter, and we will need a definitive answer in a very short period of time!" Putin aide Yuri Ushakov told reporters during a phone briefing that the Russian president accused Ukraine of trying to thwart peace talks. Ushakov also said Trump told Putin that the U.S. was not made aware in advance of Ukraine's massive drone attack Sunday. The White House didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. A delegation of Ukrainian officials held meetings this week with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who also serves as Trump's national security adviser, as well as Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau. Negotiators from Ukraine and Russia met in Istanbul on Tuesday for peace talks during which they discussed exchanges of prisoners of war, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Wednesday. Zelenskyy said that Russia gave Ukraine an "ultimatum," not a memorandum for a cease-fire agreement. He also said he's ready to meet with Putin and Turkish President Recep Erdoğan in the coming days. Despite these negotiations over ending the war that began in 2022, the conflict has continued. In addition to the massive drone attack Ukraine launched against Russia over the weekend, Ukraine has also attacked key Russian bridges, including a critical one that connects Russia to its territory of Crimea. Russia, meanwhile, has continued launching strikes against civilians in Ukraine. In the last 24 hours in Ukraine, four civilians were killed and more than a dozen were injured as a result of Russian strikes. Trump has in recent months publicly expressed frustration with the Russian leader, with whom he has long bragged about having an amicable relationship. Trump said last week that the U.S. would know within two weeks whether Putin was serious about ending the war in Ukraine.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store