Laurie Anderson at the keyboard in her Manhattan studio. (AP Photo/Louis Lanzano)

Given NASA‘s recent financial woes, it’s hard to imagine a time when the U.S. space program found room in its budget for an artist-in-residence. Between 2003 and 2005, NASA paid experimental performance artist Laurie Anderson $20,000 to create a film about moons and a vaguely space-oriented performance piece.

Yep, Anderson (famed for the 1981 track “O Superman“) was NASA’s first and last artist in resident* — and you really see two prevailing views of the situation on the Internet.

First, there’s the wasteful spending side of the coin — especially if you look at the comments of former U.S. House of Representative member Chris Chocola. The Indianan Republican lambasted NASA’s artist-in-residence program and, in 2006, presented the amendment that killed it.

“Mr. Chairman, nowhere in NASA’s mission does it say anything about advancing fine arts or hiring a performance artist,” Chocola said. “In fact, Laurie Anderson, the person that was chosen to perform the role of a performance artist, when she was called to be offered the job, she said, Sure, what do I do?”

And sites like NASA Watch like to augment the argument by cherry picking Anderson’s quotes that portray astronauts as out of place, Congress as a bunch of jocks and the $20,000 stipend as “not enough to really do stuff.” Tie all that together and it paints a rather ludicrous picture of government fiscal irresponsibility and an ungrateful artist with only a passing interest in space exploration.

But if you look closer at Anderson’s various interviews from over the years, most of what she says about the residency is very positive. She toured NASA facilities for inspiration and ultimately staged her resulting show “The End of the Moon” to positive reviews. Even today, she’s still quite vocal about space, as this quote (from a Salon interview) about the future of manned space flight suggests:

“I don’t think we actually have to go ourselves,” Anderson said. “It’s risky, and we have some pretty sophisticated and beautiful machines for looking. They’re not us. They aren’t going to write songs or poems about it, but they can still be really inspiring. I think it’s probably good not to be sending living creatures up on the tail end of huge explosions.”

So on one hand, certainly, NASA’s primary mission is scientific, not artistic. And 20 grand is far from chump change to the average voter. But we’re also living in a time of dampened interest in space exploration. Artists-in-residence programs are typically about art for art’s sake, but might more space-oriented art help ensnare young minds and the public interest?

Granted, Laurie Anderson might not have been the best candidate for the program. Maybe something more along the lines of Dr. Dre’s upcoming space album could convey a passion for the spheres in a way NASA TV cannot. Heck, there are some compelling arguments that even science fiction doesn’t generate much space enthusiasm (read author Mike Brotherton’s blog entry here).

So what’s a space program to do?

* NASA has also commissioned other musical performances, such as “Sun Rings” by Terry Riley and the Kronos Quartet.

As always, you can find all the other Space Music posts right here.

Want more? Follow Allison and Robert for more SFSL action on Twitter and Facebook.