Antonio Gala, an excellent Spanish writer, described American culture some years ago in an article published by El Mundo newspaper, with his distinctive sensitivity and accuracy; America is not popular. In addition, it is strongly disliked. America’s type of culture is incredibly boring, without brilliance, splendor or ease for anyone. Not even for Americans. Its myths have ceased to be myths; its clichés show its true colors. America only dazzles the poorest or the dumbest because they equate dollars with heaven.

 

Surprise, surprise, but just a little one; the dogma of our times continues to be the dogma of anti-Americanism, a religion imposed through ideology power, elitism and “civics classes.” In early July, former Spanish Prime Minister José María Aznar made remarks at the book presentation of Jean François Revel’s memoirs in Spanish. The old Parisian lion dedicated a good part of his life to dispel the myths and fantasies that Europeans have about the United States. It may be a thankless and barely fruitful task, but one that perhaps prompted the end of European ideological and cultural unanimity about America.

 

So, by the end of last year, Frédéric Martel’s On Culture in America was published by Gallimard and this summer he paid a visit to Spain. As a sociologist, Martel is a regular contributor to L\'Express, Le Magazine Littéraire, and Esprit; and as many French intellectuals before, he has held numerous positions in diplomatic and cultural fields for the government. He was a former French Cultural Attaché in Boston; the title of his book immediately brings to mind Tocqueville’s style. But contrary to what the title seems to indicate, On Culture in America is not an essay; it is rather an empirical investigation about the history and everyday influence of culture in the United States.

 

The first thing one notices without much fuss is that, in contrast with other European countries, America does not have a Culture Ministry; however, culture is a sector particularly linked to the government. The existence of an institution dedicated to culture broke away with American social and political traditions, nevertheless the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), was born; Martel dedicates a good part of his book to NEA’s origins and history. The first surprise is that American culture is not as private as many Americans would like it to be, or as many Europeans believe it is. The fact is that caring and advancing culture has included a pampering role historically taken by American administrations with diverse results. 

 

Martel’s theory, unbearably solid in light of the provided data, is that America is, in its own right, a society of culture with more drive, mobility and vigor than European culture. And the secret of all that resides precisely in its character, so independent and far removed from serfdom to government and politics. Recently, José María Marco’s book La Nueva Revolución Americana (The New American Revolution) has described for Europeans how American civil society actually works; Martel’s book shows how American culture actually works – and all this coming from a Frenchman displaying more his disenchantment with Europe than his joy for America.

 

Culture in America rests on the support given by foundations and private institutions, but also on a fundamental fact, American fiscal policy on culture is the secret of its success. While Europeans grant the government power to distribute thousands of millions among their own, Americans keep for themselves the right to finance the cultural projects they want. The public purse versus the private purse; taxation versus tax exemption. As a result, culture in America is basically popular and public, precisely because it does not come from the government.

 

The truly public and non-governmental nature of American culture rests on the smooth and continuous relation among universities, foundations and the business sector, the three pivots on which culture revolves around unflaggingly: namely, in civil society, away from political and governmental elites. Accordingly, culture in America has its own independent and plural dynamics. Qualitative notions…but with quantitative expression. Martel’s study is particularly clear in regards to the data presented to France and Europe.

 

There are more than 4,000 universities in America containing 700 museums, 2,300 artistic centers, 110 publishers, and 3,500 libraries. For example, the Harvard University Library has as many books as the Library of Congress, and has the biggest film library in the world. Is America indifferent to great museums, the Prado, the Louvre, the National Gallery? Without a doubt. Is America indifferent to the culture of museums? In the United States, there are 17,143 inhabitants per museum, in France 52.500 inhabitants per museum.

 

In the United States, there are 7.722 inhabitants per movie screen; in France, 11.725. Compared side-by-side, those numbers amount to a surprise for Europeans that, if in the political arena they feel smug when it comes to culture, they become insolently arrogant. The economic numbers show that America dedicates more resources to culture than Europe, and it has more museums, movie theaters, and publishing houses per inhabitant than the culturally proud Europe. The shocking thing about Martel’s study is not his opinions; it is the data he provides.

 

Martel states that, in reality, America’s cultural world is not safe from the evils troubling modern society like excessively high prices, influence on the moral and ideological preferences of its philanthropists and commercialism. Dangers that combine the nature of modern society and the free market, but dangers that do not seem greater than the ones troubling European society. Martel identifies these dangers, but also the barrier that keeps them at bearable limits, decentralization and diversity of groups and institutions regarding culture creation.

 

In sociological terms, one gets a sociological truth out of Martel’s study; culture refers to the society from where it emerges. And it is here where American culture shows a doubtless advantage over European culture, if Europe considers tradition as an essential part of every culture, America can boast the other great component; pluralism, diversity, distinctiveness.  Paradoxically, the Europe that proclaims its faith in diversity keeps and cultivates a monolithic, orthodox culture submitted to oppressive
ideological guidelines. As an irony of history, the United States seems to be the guardian of a tradition it does not possess, but that Europe has exclusively left in America’s hands.

 

Without tradition, culture does not exist; neither without diversity. In Europe, the self-contented denounce the submission of American culture to the rule of money; it seems that Antonio Gala wants to head the hyper-educated, hyper-literate and hyper-tolerant crowd fueling the flames of the Inquisitor\'s pyre against America. They forget that submission is not a matter of means, but of ends. Are European filmmakers less prone to be brought into submission than Americans? Are European writers freer than their American counterparts? Is Antonio Gala freer and more educated than his American colleagues? Is he less prone to that disease called economic greed? According to Martel’s data, in America, there are three times more artists per capita than police officers, about two million, an identical number to the one proudly boasted along the Parisian Rive Gauche and that the European intelligentsia displays as an example.

 

This is, after all, the conclusion reached by Martel and his investigation unraveling in typical Tocquevilleian style; culture in the United States is a direct dialog between creator and citizen, and in which the government is conspicuously absent. It is a system despised in Europe, but whose results are overwhelming; America publishes more books and has more publishing houses than proud France has; there are 4,000 persons per library in France, there are 2,000 persons per library in America.

 

The way things are, the success of American culture is not accidental, but causal; since it has been kept existentially away from politics, it remains free from political viruses. In the United States, culture does not depend on politics, instead by some sort of a balance deeply rooted in American history and sociology, it is rather as if culture meets face to face with politics, living its own life – and as a result, culture can surpass and withstand politics. In that fashion, culture can wipe away geographical barriers and that puts another unbearable truth right in front of our eyes; Spaniards buy more books written by Paul Auster or even Dan Brown than by Antonio Gala. Perhaps it is because American culture bores people to death…or that Gala does not get it.

 

©2007 Translated by Miryam Lindberg