On Monday, the House Appropriations Committee approved something called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Bill, which includes a $50 million supplement for the National Endowment for the Arts. What this means, in practical terms, is that the new federal administration is committed to reviving culture in America.

I think that it is easy to get caught up in high-level debates over economic stimulus packages and resource allocation, and believe that our biggest worries in this country are economic. We come from a generation accustomed to strip malls and shopping centers, where we have been taught to translate our aspirations into a language of materialism. Our culture is built on the concept of ownership; we  define ourselves by what we buy­—by what we own. We manifest our creativity with an appreciation for culture that sells at a going rate: culture we can wear, watch and to which we listen.

What happens when we can’t afford culture on an individual level anymore? What becomes of the idea of “cool?” Will we cease worrying about aesthetics?

I think that the answer is no. I think that the notion of cool need not be material; when culture becomes a free good, cool becomes a free good as well. The NEA supplement has the power to change our idea of culture in a fundamental way. Instead of individualizing, making ourselves distinct with the culture we buy, there is potential for us to be brought together by the culture that we collectively appreciate. There is something of pathos in this common experience. If our pocketbooks are universally strained, perhaps our hearts will learn to feel in unison as well.

This holds especial relevance for us as students, and I think we must never forget the classic axiom of the Greeks: we must strive for moderation in everything.

Even—especially—in times like the ones we live in, when we feel as though the world is ending, when worries about tabulated numbers have become global cause for panic, when we are not quite sure what we fear—we should strive to shape our character. Culture shapes character; nationally-funded culture creates national character, which is something we sorely need.

In the end, art is worthwhile, because it puts everything in perspective. If the increased funding for the NEA can do that for us as a nation, it’s more than worthwhile. In economic terms, the government’s provision of increased funding for the arts means that there is an external benefit to the nation from artistic productivity that cannot be measured in dollars, and we should stand behind this equation at full force.