The Quest for Cultural Supremacy: Trump’s Vision and the Legacy of Camelot
Donald Trump’s recent move to anoint himself chairman of the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts has sparked considerable debate about his aspirations for American culture. By taking control of one of the nation’s most revered cultural institutions, Trump seems intent on crafting his own version of Camelot—a term famously associated with the John F. Kennedy presidency. While JFK’s administration was celebrated for its elegance, intellectualism, and commitment to the arts, Trump’s vision appears more aligned with his MAGA ideology, a far cry from the refined aura of the Kennedy era. Trump’s actions suggest a desire to appropriate the cultural influence of Camelot, but his approach is starkly different. Unlike JFK, who saw culture as a natural resource to be nurtured for the nation’s benefit, Trump seems determined to wield it as a blunt instrument for ideological and personal gain.
Camelot Reimagined: The Kennedy Legacy and the Politics of Culture
The concept of Camelot was not just a reflection of JFK’s presidency but a legacy painstakingly crafted by Jacqueline Kennedy after her husband’s assassination. By invoking the imagery of King Arthur’s court, Jackie Kennedy sought to immortalize the brief, shining moment of hope and idealism that defined the Kennedy administration. This vision was not merely symbolic; it was deeply tied to the Kennedys’ commitment to the arts. From Robert Frost’s inauguration reading to Duke Ellington’s role as a “jazz ambassador,” the Kennedys elevated the cultural landscape of America, blending glamour with intellectual depth. Their efforts culminated in the establishment of the National Endowment for the Arts, a testament to their belief in the transformative power of culture. Yet, even Camelot had its limitations, as the Kennedys’ patrician tastes often excluded more radical artistic expressions, particularly those from marginalized communities.
MAGAlot: Trump’s Cultural Agenda and the Limits of Authoritarian Aesthetics
If the Kennedys’ Camelot was a vision of refinement and idealism, Trump’s MAGAlot seems to represent something altogether different—a mishmash of personal taste, ideological posturing, and a raw desire to provoke. Trump’s cultural agenda, as reflected in his tenure at the Kennedy Center, is marked by a focus on “beautiful” and “classical” architecture, the revival of his National Garden of American Heroes, and a vague promise to “make art great again.” His vision for the Kennedy Center is similarly unclear, beyond a stated opposition to “woke” programming and a desire to feature events like performances by the J6 Prison Choir, a group of January 6th insurrectionists. This approach reflects Trump’s broader worldview—a zero-sum vision of culture as a battleground for ideological dominance, rather than a dynamic, evolving force.
The Struggle for Cultural Relevance: Obama’s Inclusivity vs. Trump’s Division
In contrast to both the Kennedys and Trump, Barack Obama’s approach to culture was defined by inclusivity and a belief in the power of art to bridge divides. During his presidency, the Obamas championed a wide range of American art forms, from jazz and hip-hop to literature and theater, often using the White House as a platform to celebrate diversity and excellence. While Obama’s efforts were not without criticism—some accused him of curating a sanitized version of culture—his vision was undeniably broader and more inclusive than Trump’s. The Obamas’ commitment to culture extended beyond their time in office, as they continue to produce and promote art through platforms like Netflix. Their approach, however, also highlights the limitations of presidential boosterism, as even their efforts have struggled to leave a lasting cultural imprint.
The Unruly Nature of Culture: Why Trump’s Vision Is Doomed to Fail
Trump’s greatest challenge in his quest to reshape American culture lies in the inherently unruly nature of art itself. Culture is not a static entity that can be dictated or controlled; it is a living, breathing organism that resists authoritarian manipulation. While Trump may succeed in banning drag shows or installing gaudy chandeliers, these gestures are unlikely to have a lasting impact on the broader cultural landscape. Even the Kennedys’ Camelot, for all its elegance, was a fleeting moment in American history—a nostalgic rearview mirror image that obscured the complexities and challenges of their time. Trump’s efforts to impose his own vision of culture are similarly doomed, as they fail to account for the messy, unpredictable nature of artistic expression.
The Enduring Power of Culture: Lessons from the Past and the Future of Soft Power
The Kennedys understood something that Trump does not: the true power of culture lies not in its ability to serve as a propaganda tool but in its capacity to inspire and unite. By promoting American arts during the Cold War, JFK’s administration not only elevated the nation’s global standing but also showcased the dynamism and creativity of American society. This approach to cultural diplomacy—soft power—remains as relevant today as it was in the 1960s. While Trump may dismiss drag shows or mock “woke” programming, his inability to see the value in diverse, challenging art reflects a deeper misunderstanding of culture’s role in shaping America’s identity. As history has shown, authoritarian attempts to control culture rarely succeed, and when they do, they often backfire, inspiring resistance and innovation. In the end, Trump’s vision for the Kennedy Center—and for American culture—may prove to be little more than a footnote in the ongoing story of Camelot.