Course blog for American University PERF-570, Fall 2014
“Chiseling your name in the stone, or we can name after you.” It’s such a tempting idea for plutocrats to donate millions of dollars to a philharmonic theatre or a museum, isn’t it?
This article from The Wall Street Journal is an interesting one with a high-lightened headline for me, because in a comparatively philistine mindset, donors are triggered by fame and attention. And I used to believe in this, too. Nonetheless, just as what we have discussed in survey class about fundraising, if you actually ask a lot of donors, they’re not motivated by that. It’s usually the organization that thinks they are, so they put the name to cater donors.
In the article I think the author is kind of talking the stupid name game in a sarcastic tone, but it virtually reveals the fact that sometimes people cannot resist seeing their names on a hall though the public will ignore most of the names. Arts organizations are undoubtedly responsible to provide donors something more significant as a thank you feedback, such as fulfilling their mission and serve the community, however if the name game is still going on, I think it’s mostly harmless for arts organizations to keep doing so.