Jamie Stiehm stirred controversy with her latest piece concerning the playing of the national anthem in Washington, D.C. The liberal columnist voiced her discontent in an article for The Capital Times, suggesting that the “Star-Spangled Banner” is a poor fit for classical music concerts. Stiehm argues that while the anthem belongs at “ballparks and stadiums,” it is “dissonant” when performed before a symphonic presentation, especially given today’s political climate.
Stiehm’s attendance at a concert of the National Symphony Orchestra, which reportedly opens its performances with the anthem under the Trump administration, fueled her criticism. She referenced Trump’s influence directly, claiming that his leadership at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts dictates this shift. The columnist remarked, “President Donald Trump’s new regime at the beloved center decreed the National Symphony Orchestra must stand and play the national anthem before every concert. How dissonant,” encapsulating her core disagreement with this new policy.
The sentiment she expresses ties into a broader concern over the intersection of politics and the arts. Stiehm views classical music as an international form that should rise above such nationalistic symbols, emphasizing its ability to transcend borders. Yet with the trumpet of nationalism blaring through the anthem, she feels this artistic purity is compromised. “This is just one more way Trump leaves his fingerprints on our city scene, after tearing down the White House East Wing,” she reflects, equating the anthem’s presence with a broader political encroachment into cultural spaces.
Her experience at the Kennedy Center was marked by appreciation for the classical repertoire performed, including Saint-Saëns’s “Organ Symphony” and Beethoven’s “Piano Concerto No. 1.” Still, she admitted, “The Star-Spangled Banner not so much.” Stiehm’s dismissal of the anthem in this context indicates a preference for a cultural space devoid of political preamble, where art can exist independently of nationalist sentiment.
Furthermore, Stiehm’s closing thoughts reveal a poignant reflection. She paraphrased a fellow concertgoer who reminisced about her youth in Germany during the Second World War, evoking images of a past marked by its own set of nationalistic struggles. This broader historical context enriches Stiehm’s argument, suggesting that the national anthem is not merely a song but a potent symbol entwined with political ideologies that should not dominate the serene environment of classical music performances.
In discussing the decision to play the national anthem, Stiehm also touches on how it reflects Trump’s leadership style, which some may view as a push to retain a certain cultural identity. This says a lot about shifting norms in the arts and how they reflect societal values—or, in some cases, sow division.
As Stiehm asserts, “there is a time and place for everything,” she emphasizes the need for discernment when integrating national pride into artistic expressions. Her critique not only challenges the relevance of the anthem in a classical context but also raises larger questions about the evolving relationship between politics and the arts in contemporary American society.
"*" indicates required fields
