Fleisher Op-Ed Reveals Moral (Political?) Dilemma

Pianist Leon Fleisher is back in the news, but not for his playing or his recent Kennedy Center Honor. In Saturday's Washington Post, Fleisher writes about the deep moral struggle he faced. On the one hand, he received a prestigious award that recognized his lifelong contributions to American arts and culture; on the other hand, he received that award from President Bush.

Seven years into the Bush's presidency, I think most Americans--even those of us who initially supported him--now disapprove of a majority of his administration's policies. Fleisher acknowledges that he deeply respects the Office of the President, but confesses that he is so "horrified" by the president's actions that he didn't even want to even step foot in the White House for a pre-gala reception. Eventually, he decided to attend.

I'm no longer a Bush supporter, and some of Fleisher's complaints--particularly concerning torture and the environment--are valid. Yet I have a significant problem with his fundamental dilemma. Attending a White House function does not imply complete agreement with the administration's politics. And using this stage as an opportunity for political protest, in my opinion, would have been disrespectful to both the award and the Kennedy Center itself; it's a fundamentally apolitical event.

Fleisher spoke out through his article and by wearing a peace symbol and purple ribbon--the First Amendment guarantees those rights. Would he have had the right to skip the reception in protest? Certainly. But I for one am happy that he chose not to. There are so many opportunities to debate what is right for our country, the Kennedy Center Awards should be nothing more than a celebration of our country's greatest artistic talent.