As we might learn early in the game, Cid Meyer’s “Civilization”, a society requires practical sustainability before it can devote human resource towards specifically artistic endeavours. As Singapore functions as a sort of city-in-simulation, we see this progression play out in real-time. From a struggling resource-poor rock in the ocean, it took a lot of results-producing work to get the nation to first function and then sustain itself. In this narrative, artistic development was not high on the list of priorities that got government support. Today, Singapore is different. People from all over make Singapore a must stop-over destination to enjoy the vibrant nightlife, entertainment and recreation opportunities it now offers. This transformation occurred on a policy timeline, which means government support for the arts was planned for as an eventuality. But to say that the arts are flourishing in Singapore today would be premature. Singapore’s founding history as an independent nation has much to do with how it manages its relationship with the arts. Especially in the early years, the arts were aspirational as long as basic needs were still a struggle to acquire. Setting the tone, then Prime Minister outright declared poetry a luxury. It was not because he was ignorant or anti-art, but more because he was pragmatically pro-survival. He didn’t say Singapore couldn’t have it, but there were some prerequisites to be met first: food, water, shelter, security – Maslow’s basic stuff. Lee’s tone resonated with the population and the social attitude that survival came first lingered for a generation or two, or three. Honestly, to some level it still does. Parents discouraged their children’s dreams of pursuing and even practicing arts beyond after-school tuition for the purpose of grade certification. With little government support for the arts – and some implied discouragement, even – Singapore’s gained the reputation as a ‘cultural desert’. But let’s take a step back to other civilizations that had a thriving arts scene without so-called government support. Art, in some vocations, was literally baked into people’s livelihoods. It wasn’t that they sold ‘art’ but practical things like food and household materials. The art was in the packaging, in the storage containers, made of materials that survived across time. Because they were hand-made, their creators could play with the designs and make them unique. But because people didn’t buy the containers but the contents, these containers ended up in the trash heap in non-biodegradable form for modern day archaeologists to find and display for the admiration of modern day people. “Such art”, we say.” Such an artistically flourishing civilization” as we stare at amphorae once discarded as garbage long ago. Some of the work Singaporeans engaged in during the 1960s may have been similarly ‘artistic’, such as our celebrated ‘dragon kilns’ that once fired pottery, but prosperity came through work in mass-production and clerical duties. Not much art to find in either. The people neither produced art nor had much time to appreciate art, apart from isolated dedicated professional artists. Local culture and art forms were at least kept alive in schools as co-curricular activities and otherwise kept within family or community spaces. As Singapore continued to prosper, it crossed a threshold that made the arts a luxury it could afford. However, not for its own sake but primarily for – as usual – pragmatic purposes. A cultural desert only has so much to offer before people lose interest. It was a period of brain drain, when people started looking at foreign countries with more freedom, less educational pressure and more variable climates other than ‘hot and wet’ as viable options to call ‘home’. At the same time, if Singapore wanted to attract talent from overseas, offering just money wasn’t enticing enough to seal a commitment to a tiny island with nothing worth spending on. Government purse strings opened to fund infrastructure like the fancy and iconic The Esplanade Theatres on the Bay, and amphitheater structures in town centres as local performance and exhibition spaces. They funded new arts academies like the Nanyang School of Fine Arts and the School of the Arts to train young Singaporeans for careers in the arts. They funded an increased budget for schools to employ professional coaches offering performance level training in music, dance and theatre. At the right time, government support reached out to all levels of the arts development in the community that needed the boost. But governments don’t spend money unless there is a return on investment. Foundationally, the people now receive encouragement that artistic expression is not just aspirational but achievable. The hope is that young Singaporeans have the green light to start creating a culture that is truly representative of the nation. There is also a layer of government control over the artistic narrative that Singaporeans are creating, whether through funding conditions or negotiations over community standards. While these are expected restrictions, perhaps there is an additional layer of overenthusiastic government support for international artists for the purpose of farming their aura and capitalizing on their superstar appeal to drive the tourism market. Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour 2025 stands out in Southeast Asia in that Singapore paid to be the exclusive stop in the region. Singapore also funds international performances like musicals exhibitions and other performances like the annual F1 concert series to create an almost year-round calendar of world-class must-attend events. While these attractions no doubt bring in the tourist dollar in lucrative amounts, they also somewhat discourage local audiences from attending local productions which are taken for granted and often seen as of lower quality. Considering the spectacle they are competing against the contrast is understandably stark. The arts cannot be said to ‘flourish’ on government support alone. At best, government support is a boost and an encouragement to the local arts scene. But if the people the art is created for do not support their own local creators, the best we can describe the local arts scene is “it’s a start”. Realistically speaking, an artistic culture needs …
Continue reading “Government Funding for the Arts in Singapore: Is It Enough?”