The arts can only flourish if they become a fundamental and universally valued part of American culture, said the current and former chairs of the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), who gathered last night at the ARCO Forum for a panel discussion.

"The arts are essential to our civilization and our country," said panelist Livingston L. Biddle, a former NEA chair. "I can't think of anything of greater importance than creative expression through the arts."

The panelists, who included current NEA Chair William Ivey and four former chairs, went back and forth on their organization's role in spreading support for art in America.

Ivey linked support for arts in America to currently prevailing political winds.

"In a Cold-War wrestling match art and art-making really mattered," he said." The notion of the arts as unique to democracy faded with the collapse of the Soviet Union."

Comparing the diverse American culture to a border conflict, Ivey said the arts should help Americans communicate despite their different backgrounds.

"We must move from an era of entitlement, when art laid a moral claim on wallets, to an era of community service, where that claim is truly deserved," he said.

Other panel members agreed that the NEA should try to increase public interest in the arts.

"There should be an effort outside the arts to explain why the arts should be part of everyone's lives and intellect," said former NEA Chair Frank Hodsoll.

However, the panelists did not agree when it came to the role of the organization in promoting particular types of art.

Ivey said that the NEA should fund popular culture and for-profit arts as well as traditional "high culture."

"The arbitrary category of good art and bad art will not work in this society," Ivey said.

Former Chair John E. Frohnmayer, on the other hand, said the NEA should only fund art forms that might not otherwise survive.

"The Endowment is a counter-market force," Frohnmayer said. "We're there to support [art] because no one else is there to support it."

Panelists also differed on the question of whether the NEA should fund controversial art that might offend particular cultural or religious groups.

Hodsoll said NEA should be wary of political backlash when funding potentially offensive art.

"What does cause a problem is what is significantly offensive to a group of people," Hodsoll said. "You can only push it so far."

Frohnmayer countered that the NEA should ignore political risks when deciding what art to support.

"Offense is a birthright in America," he said. "If we are never offended, the first amendment is not working."

Audience member Roger Falcon, a student at Tufts University's Fletcher School of Diplomacy, said the NEA should keep funding controversial forms of art.

"It's a slippery slope," Falcon said. "There are political realities, but it's important to work against limits that might be set."

Liz M. Santoro '01, another audience member, said she believes the NEA should focus only on specific types of art, even if it means ignoring popular culture.

"I don't think there's a need [to fund more popular art], " Santoro said. "It's important for the NEA to nurture and bring up the small factions of art."

Frank Rich '71, New York Times columnist and senior writer for the New York Times Magazine, moderated the discussion. Rich is a former Crimson executive.

President Neil L. Rudenstine introduced the discussion, which was preceded by a performance by opera singer Jessye Norman.