President Donald Trump has, for most of his life in the public eye, had a gift for marketing his name and a knack for putting it on buildings.
The most recent building to bear the Trump name is that hallowed national cultural center, the Kennedy Center, which was recently rechristened the “The Donald J. Trump and The John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts,” a move that was unanimously voted in by the current board of directors for the center, a board which, by the way, Trump serves as chairman.
Some, such as South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham have claimed the name change is a “well-deserved honor,” while others aren’t quite so keen on it. Maria Shriver, who is a niece to the late John F. Kennedy said it is “beyond comprehension” that Trump had sought to add his name to the venue, alongside her uncle’s, and called the move unacceptable.
To me, the move drew quite a few laughs. I have a healthy appreciation for the absurd, and renaming the Kennedy Center in honor of Trump is, at its core, an exercise in utter absurdity.
The Kennedy Center was a product of legislation signed into law in 1958 by then-President Dwight D. Eisenhower, to create a national cultural center in the nation’s capital. In November of 1962, Kennedy and First Lady Jackie Kennedy launched a $30 million fundraising campaign for the center’s construction. One year later, and Kennedy would be dead, and so the center was later named in his honor.
As far as a public facility goes, any time I see the word “memorial” affixed to a title, it usually implies that the honoree(s) are deceased, which is another strange feature of this recent name change.
We all carry with us different priorities, and, again, Trump has been successful through his life in the public eye at marketing his name. Where one might see the Kennedy Center as a living memorial to JFK, Trump, on the other hand, sees the value in the branding of it and wants to be a part of that. Heck, I’m sure he looks upon the Lincoln Memorial and imagines a similar edifice erected nearby, and containing a statue of him holding a Big Mac and looking heroic. It would be fitting, in a sense, since Trump claimed he was superior to both Lincoln and George Washington.
I can’t think of many public figures who have been more enthusiastic about placing their name on large structures and using that name for merchandising purposes. From towers, hotels and golf courses to T-shirts, hats and even the Bible, our president has used just about any available surface as a billboard for his legacy.
Absent the absurdity, the problem with the Kennedy Center rebranding, to me, anyway, has to do with our priorities as a nation. The center, as I’ve understood it, has always meant to represent and reflect a shared heritage as opposed to the ego of one individual. There’s a major, awkward collision here between the purpose of a national cultural institution and Trump’s priorities, and the Kennedy Center was never meant to function like a Palm Beach luxury condo with a removable nameplate.
The other problem, for which much press has been given, has to do with the legality of the name change. According to the Associated Press coverage of the story, some lawmakers have claimed that the Kennedy Center board has overstepped its legal authority with the renaming; that such a process would be up to Congress, and not just a matter of executive whim. The Kennedy tribute name is embedded not just in contracts, endowments and agreements, but in federal law, and tied to the venue’s mission and identity.
One last point here to make, beyond cultural cringe and the legalities, is one of precedent. If one president can rename a national memorial to honor himself or an ally, then what can stop the next one from doing the exact same thing? With that in mind, public institutions could become political trophies, and be endlessly rebranded, depending on who is holding power. It’s a model of instability and undermines any notion of a national cultural commons.
Recently, several performers and shows have scrapped scheduled appearances at the Kennedy Center, following the leadership shake-up and the name change. A touring production of “Hamilton” has cancelled its run there, and performers such as Rhiannon Giddens and Ben Folds have severed ties with the venue.
On the institution’s website, if one scrolls through the lists of honorees, year-by-year, the names read like a who’s who of the arts of yesteryear – Fred Astaire, Irene Dunn, Jimmy Cagney, etc., and into recent years, names like the Grateful Dead, Led Zeppelin and Willie Nelson have been added to the fray.
With so many performers and shows cutting their presence at the Kennedy Center over the changes, one has to wonder what the subsequent years of honorees will look like, or if there will be anyone left to accept the annual honors.
A legacy is not just a transactional thing, and the Kennedy Center has always reflected a view in which honor was earned, not claimed, but with the recent developments, it makes me wonder if history is just another negotiable asset.
The Kennedy Center does not need a new name. What it needs is to remain what it was meant to be: a place where the arts flourish and a shared love of the deep well from which all artistic endeavors arise is larger than any one person, living or dead.
