UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON ARCHIVES
ORAL HISTORY PROGRAM

Interview #1388
WARLUM, MICHAEL

WARLUM, MICHAEL (1940-)
Undergraduate and graduate student; adjunct professor
At UW: 1958-1969

First Oral History 

Interviewed: 	July 22, 2014 (4 sessions)
Interviewers: 	Troy Reeves (UW Archives); Maryo Gard Ewell (Robt. Gard WI Idea Foundation); George Tzougros (WI Arts Board); Harv Thompson (professor emeritus); Karen Goeschko (WAB); and Anne Pryor (WAB)
Index by: 	Stephen A. Pierce
Length: 	4 hours, 12 minutes

Abstract: In his July 2014 interviews, Michael Warlum overviews his involvement with the community arts development movement during the late 1960s and early 1970s, reflecting on the impact his and Professor Robert E. Gard’s work would have on later generations of community arts developers.  He recounts his early years growing up in rural Wisconsin, including his growing interest in the arts and the profound influence of attending UW and working with Prof. Gard. Outlining his work in the years intervening between his departure from UW in 1969 and reconnecting with Maryo Gard Ewell in the 2000s, he shares his perspectives on what he believes art and arts development should look like in small communities in the future.  This interview was conducted for inclusion in the Robert E. Gard Wisconsin Idea Foundation Oral History Project and the UW-Madison Archives Oral History Program.

Key Words: Robert E. Gard; National Endowment for the Arts (NEA); Wisconsin Arts Board (WAB); University of Wisconsin-Madison; UW-Extension; Neillsville WI; Helen White; National Defense Education Act (NDEA); Burton Kreitlow; community arts movement; WI Idea Theatre Conference; WI Regional Writers Conference; WI Trail of Nations; Lee Strasberg; Rhinelander School of the Arts; Hurley WI; Finnish American Festival; Spring Green WI; Portage WI; Waupun WI; Adams-Friendship WI; Lady Bird Johnson; Ralph Kohlhoff; Indiana Arts Commission; The Arts in a Small Community; insiders and outsiders.

Second Oral History

Interviewed:	September 3, 2014; September 17, 2014 (2 sessions)
Interviewer: 	Troy Reeves
Indexed by: 	Troy Reeves & Jill Slaight
Length: 	1 hour, 11 minutes

Abstract: In his September 2014 interviews, Mike Warlum focuses on the role of sexuality in his personal and professional development. He traces his early awareness of being gay as a boy and later in college and graduate school, commenting on the climate for gay men on the UW campus. Warlum discusses the ways his sexual orientation affected his career, both in Madison and beyond. Finally, he details his relationship with his husband Steve and comments on the politics surrounding gay marriage. This interview was conducted for inclusion in the UW-Madison Archives Oral History Program.

Key Words: Madison’s LGBT Community; homosexuality; “coming out”;  Robert E. Gard; dating; homophobia; Indiana Arts Commission; Seattle Community College; gay rights; marriage; gay marriage; gay pride; HIV & AIDS; Ronald Reagan. 

First Oral History

First Interview Session (July 22, 2014): Digital File

Time	Keywords
00:00:00	Start of Interview/Interviewers’ Introductions

00:03:08	Question [ME]: Talk about your family background. Answer: Noting that most of his family had lived in Neillsville WI their entire lives, he described his parents’ occupa-tions. His mother was a HS teacher who attended UW-Madison and was very committed to continuing education. His father was a prominent electrician in the town and an outdoorsman and naturalist. He described his parents as “very middle class and somewhat conservative.” Follow up: And you were born …? Answer: November 28, 1940, in the midst of a bitter winter. 

00:07:48	Question: Expectations from your parents? Answer: While they always assumed Warlum would go to college, he didn’t have any sense of what direction he would take there. He also discussed his mother’s Catholic faith.

00:10:51	Question [HT]: Siblings? Answer: He explained why he felt it was unfortunate that he was an only child.

00:11:52	Question: School years? Answer: He attended St. Mary’s Catholic grade school in town at a time when the sisters who taught there had a higher level of education than many elementary teachers. He recalled having weekly music and art lessons from UW-Extension delivered over WHA radio.

00:13:51	Question: What kind of kid were you? Answer: Warlum observed that he had some severe learning difficulties, and as a result was “painfully shy” and a loner for a long time. But he was always very interested in culture.

00:16:01	Follow up: Any major influences? Answer: He distinctly remembered his HS English/Latin/history teacher as well as other English teachers. He attributed his majoring in speech to their influence.

00:17:09	Question: Was it obvious that you’d go to UW after HS? Answer: He admitted that he only considered two choices—UW-Madison and Eau Claire St. College—it never crossing his mind to go elsewhere. He explained why he chose Madison. Follow up: Were you interested in the arts at that point? Answer: Yes; he said he availed himself of whatever cultural activities he could afford, giving examples of hearing reading from Robert Frost, Eleanor Roosevelt, Bette Davis and others.

00:19:55	Follow up: Hedda Gabbler? Answer: He quipped about how his father, as head of the Rotary Club, had been instrumental in bringing “the worst production” of Hedda Gabbler to his town, but despite this, “it was magic” to him.

00:22:32	Question [AP]: Parents names, and from where? Answer: He explained that the Warlums came from Scandinavia, and when they moved to Minnesota, they simply adopted the name of the previous farm owners. He also explained the immigration history of his mother’s family.

00:25:29	Question [TR]: How did you deal with your learning disability? Answer: He suspected that not knowing about it helped, because he was forced to learn how to work hard and study carefully. But he talked about how his natural intellectual ability allowed him to overcome these difficulties, while others may not have been so fortunate.

00:29:17	Question: Friends in school? Answer: He discussed some of his grade school and HS friends, including neighborhood girls whom he considered sisters.

00:30:25	Question [ME]: Travel? Answer: He remembered his family traveling quite a bit, especially to visit family and do big shopping trips.

00:31:55	Question [AP]: Undergraduate years? Answer: Warsum talked about how the enormity of UW “terrified” him, but the anonymity was liberating. Convinced he was going to flunk out, he worked very hard and did well. 

00:33:42	[no question] He talked about influential teachers, sharing several anecdotes about Helen White, with whom he took a year of Shakespeare, and Gladys Borchers, who took him under her wing.

00:35:44	Follow up: What years were you here? Answer: He got his BA in 1962, MA in ’64 and PhD in ’67.

00:36:05	Follow up: Why were White and Borchers good teachers? Answer: He attributed their teaching success to their ability to tell stories, although he recognized that not everybody learned in this way. Question: What were your degrees in? Answer: Adult education/community arts.

00:37:59	Question: The tumultuous 1960s? Answer: Noting that he left just months before the Sterling Hall bombing, he thought he’d been affected by it without knowing it. He also remembered UW being a great party school, though he never availed himself of the party atmosphere. 

00:40:19	Question: Campus life? Answer: He observed that during his undergraduate years, he lived in a roominghouse with several roommates who were very academically minded. When he started grad school, he moved to Hawthorne Court.

00:42:45	Question: Transition to adult education? Answer: During undergraduate, he planned to teach speech and English at the secondary-school level, but during his senior year, he received an invitation (at the prompting of Professor Kreitlow) to apply for NDEA funds to study adult education at the graduate level. As the only undergraduate who applied, he never found out how he scored on the “Miller analogy” test, but thought he must have done well.

00:46:10	Question: Graduate school? Answer: While he lamented that many universities no longer have adult education department, he said that he learned that adult education was “everything—the entire reason we are adults.” The emphasis in UW’s depart-ment, deeply rooted in Cooperative Extension, was in community development, but very few in the department had the arts as their major focus.

00:48:13	Follow up: Kreitlow? Answer: He described Kreitlow as a “great man” who inherited Warlum as a student after he had initially flunked the MA exam (because he didn’t have enough experience). 

00:52:17	Follow up [GT]: Getting a degree in community arts development? Answer: He gave credit to those in the adult education department, who saw his potential even though they had no experience in community arts. Recognizing that Warlum needed experience, they put him in touch with Professor Gard. Follow up [HT]: Did you feel as if you were teaching your advisors in some ways? Answer: He didn’t think of it in that way, but felt grateful that they’d allowed him to design his own program, which experience had been of importance in later jobs he held.

00:57:09	Question [AP]: Where were classes? Answer: Mostly in the education building. Question [TR]: Other places you spent time? Answer: Memorial Union was important, and was a great location to study in the summer. Follow up: Your cohort? Answer: He talked specifically about Paul Butterfield, Jim Long, and Donald Reedy, whom he’d known well in HS and spent much time with in grad school. 

01:03:22	Question [KG]: What were some of the “misses” of designing your own program? Answer: He said that he didn’t do anything he’d regretted.

01:04:19	Question [ME]: Did you spend time in the field? Answer: No; it was primarily a campus program. The one experience he did have was in Hurley, where he worked with Herb Kinney, the “consummate community developer.” He discussed what he saw as the value of cooperative extension during those days—and suggested that without Extension, that Hurley area wouldn’t have survived as well as it did.

01:07:40	Question [TR]: The Kennedy assassination? Answer: He recalled the event vividly, recounting where he was and how stunned he felt at the events. 

01:10:35	Question: Dow Riot? Answer: While he didn’t take part in the demonstration, he shared his memories of the Dow riot and several other instances of rioting more generally. 

01:13:05	Question [HT]: When did you “become yourself away from Neillsville? Answer: He initially went home quite a bit, going home summers, breaks and several other times a year. But in his junior year, he stayed in Madison for summer school, and thereafter tried to stay in Madison as much as he could. He talked about enjoying Madison especially during the breaks.

01:15:55	Question [ME]: Arts administration program in the Business School? Answer: He said that this program was just getting started when he was in grad school. Fan Taylor was in this program, but it was quite different from what he was doing.

01:17:29	End of First Interview Session

Second Interview Session (July 22, 2014): Digital File

Time	Keywords
00:00:00	Start of Interview/Interviewer’s Introduction

00:00:13	Question: How did you first meet Prof. Gard? Answer: He related again how his other professors (Kreitlow, Thiede, Boyd) made experience available to him, suggesting that he talk to Gard. He recounted the “heady” experience of meeting a man with his own NY publisher and doing serious theater work, but very unassuming and excited to bring him on board

00:03:33	[no question] He explained how Gard first asked him to get involved in the Madison Civic Club 50th anniversary planning, always assuming people could do a job given to them. He detailed the ins and outs of working with Constance Elvejhem, how Gard could never say no, what his actual role in planning the show, and some humorous anecdotes about the show itself.

00:07:33	Question: Talk about some of the projects Gard was involved with. Answer: Noting that they always had too much to do with too little time, he discussed doing the Milwaukee Folk Fair, which involved a “cast of thousands” and with which he acted as a stage producer. He also discussed the WI Idea Theater Conference. Unaware of how Gard’s involvement had originated and ended, he cited these as examples of how Gard was often started things, but didn’t continue with them long term.

00:11:22	[no question] One exception to this rule was with WI Regional Writers, which continued strong until Gard’s death. He talked about how the conference was structured and how unique it was in the region. He spoke about how he only learned the real value of this conference until later on, after he’d retired and wanted to rethink his writing process.

00:15:00	[no question] Other organizations he’d helped start were the WI Fellowship of Poets and WI Trail of Nations, which brought together leaders of ethnic performing groups. Gard organized annual ethnic group performances at Camp Randall each summer. He told some humorous anecdotes about these performances.

00:19:37	[no question] Additionally, he mentioned, Gard was able to convince Lee Strasberg of Actors Studio to do a week-long workshop for community theater participants. He also discussed helping with the early years of Rhinelander School of the Arts, held yearly in the northern part of WI. 

00:21:26	[no question] The most life-changing experience with Gard, he continued, was working for a year on the Finnish-American Festival in Hurley, which at the time had a reputation for being rowdy and uncultured and economically depressed following the closing of the iron mines. He related how he moved there, bought a house, and began working with Finnish-Americans starting the festival. When those he was working with decided they wanted to mount a festival right away, not wait for a year of planning, he said it was the hardest he’d worked in his life. He briefly explained what the festival did, how much he learned while he was in Hurley, and the impact the festival had in local people’s lives.

00:29:18	Follow up: The couple who were radio hosts on Finnish Radio Hour? Answer: Gene and Edna Komsy, who mentored him and encouraged the organizers when they got discouraged with the process. This led him to reflect on how meaningless academic degrees are when it comes to motivating people.

00:31:00	Follow up: What was the grounding philosophy? Answer: He thought Gard himself grounded the program, musing how he felt fortunate to have met important and remarkable people throughout his life, including his spouse. He summed up Gard’s philosophy as never saying no to a request, that artistic expression was a basic human right, not an ivory tower pursuit, a firm belief in people’s abilities and a “scattergun approach.” He lauded Gard’s energy, which enabled him to do all these things, and quipped about his absolute contempt for institutional rules.

00:36:17	Follow up: How did this inform your philosophy? Answer: He said that in the same way he just picked up Madison’s liberal values, the concept that the arts belonged to all people “just made great sense” to him, and was astounded when he discovered that not everyone felt that way. He believed that one critical problem in community arts development was the definition of art, which not everyone agreed upon. 

00:39:11	[no question] Explaining how “radical” he’d become in his belief in artistic expres-sion as a human right, he lamented that arts institutions were actively keeping art peripheral in US culture. While he saw opera as just a museum in American culture, he said that all this would be okay had not arts institutions held money back from popular forms of expression simply because they were popular. He suggested that funding problems encountered by the NEA could be traced back to the fact that it didn’t appeal to real American constituencies.

00:44:31	Question [ME]: Your PhD? Answer: He did write his dissertation on the Hurley experience. While he quipped on how little he understood his research and data model and how “shocking” his conclusion was, he observed that it was some of the first research of its kind and thus was pathbreaking.

00:46:40	Question [HT]: Were you drawn to community arts because new NEA money was available or had your thesis already drawn you in that direction? Answer: Both; he explained that after coming back to work with Gard, Gard asked him to coordinate the NEA grant as a junior faculty, even before he’d finished his dissertation. 

00:49:45	[no question] He discussed how Gard came to win an NEA endowment in the first place, having been invited to apply by the first NEA state administrator under the original legislation.  Gard, he noted, proposed a rather ambitious scheme of studying what would happen if arts programs were brought to bear on community develop-ment. When the program received some open opposition at the national committee of the NEA, Leonard Bernstein spoke up and quieted the criticism.

00:54:36	Follow up: Was Bernstein’s position Gard’s philosophy? Answer: He said that Gard believed that since ¼ of Americans were rural, that ¼ was unserved by the arts. He thus wondered what would happen if they were served by the arts. Follow up: What was the arts councils environment like in the 1960s? Answer: “It was very bleak,” he quipped. Very few arts councils existed, and the Wisconsin Arts Council was not to start for a decade.

00:58:58	Follow up: So the Arts Extension was really the infrastructure for the arts? Answer: Yes; he related some of the early (and unique) history of arts extension in Wisconsin, largely due to the prompting of an early Dean of Agriculture who promoted it.

01:00:35	Follow up: What were you “testing”? Answer: They were “trying to see what would happen if resources were brought to bear.” He explained the three phases of the grant: in yr.1, entertainment and exhibits would be brought in from outside the community and a local arts council was encouraged; yr. 2 focused on developing local arts; and yr. 3 concentrated on reporting.

01:02:29	Follow up [GT]: Where were the models for this organization coming from? Answer: He assumed Gard was taking examples from what was happening in the few other communities that had arts councils. Follow up [ME]: Building on an Extension model? Answer: Yes; that makes sense.

01:04:55	Follow up [ME]: What was your role in the communities? Answer: For the first year, he was assigned to all five test communities, with less emphasis on far-away Rhinelander. Follow up: How did you work in those communities? Answer: He explained how they began arts councils in the communities, most of the time through county agents 

01:09:21	End of Second Interview Session

Third Interview Session (July 22, 2014): Digital File

Time	Keywords
00:00:00	Start of Interview/Interviewer’s Introduction

00:00:07	Question [ME]: Talk about what made each of the communities different. Answer: Warlum talked about how the Northern Arts Council grew out of the School of the Arts, which was a totally different approach to what they took elsewhere. He talked about how exciting these early developments were, with numerous prominent artists-in-residence coming to northern WI and the arts council emerging from the initiative of local organizers. He noted that this was the only of the 5 arts councils still around.

00:04:19	[no question] He continued talking about individual communities by discussing Portage, which proposed a multi-faced stage theater in which the audience moved. He talked about how the arts council used dissension and competition in the arts community to promote the arts even more.

00:08:17	Follow up [ME]: Waupun? Answer: Since he was the point person in Waupun, he talked about Cornelia Hull, a local woman who acted as the great organizer for the arts in the town. He mused about how some people were just “imbued” with this natural spirit and ability to lead in organizing, and discussed how they did things like starting a writers’ group in the prison hospital in the area and a fiber arts center which had continued and attracted local students from all over southern WI.

00:11:39	Follow up [ME]: Adams Friendship/Spring Green? Answer: He said they had to start from scratch in Adams Friendship, but noted that once they got started, they realized what was just beneath the surface in the town. 

00:13:51	[no question] He thought that Spring Green’s arts council was probably the first one in the country to have an environmental focus, and related how Robert Graves, who’d studied with Frank Lloyd Wright, was instrumental in the program there. He discus-sed the impetus to encourage theater there, the refurbishing of an old movie theater, then named after Gard, and workshops that were held there later on.

00:17:08	[no question] Responding to the comment that perhaps the NEA community arts projects sowed seed harvested later, he reflected on his amazement that, during a 2006 restudy, people were still working on the arts even though many couldn’t remember the 1960s project.  He gave the examples of Spring Green and Adams Friendship.

00:20:06	Follow up [KG]: What kind of support did you receive for your work? Answer: He said that it started out very cordially, especially due to the state coordinator for NEA and because they were “flying by the seat of our pants.” But when the chairmanship at the NEA changed, they began getting hassled about part of their grant going toward administrative fees and community arts councils began getting bad-mouthed by state arts councils and others.

00:27:13	Follow up [KG]: And from the university and local leadership? Answer: He said that the administration was fairly neutral toward the program; while they were open to the program on an intellectual level, Gard’s constant flouting of university rules irritated administrators. When the dean of Extension called him on these irregularities, Gard passed over responsibility for budgets to Warlum, which was very difficult for him but which he mastered over time.

00:32:49	[no question] He then talked about the good, but limited, buy-in they got from music and art departments. He suspected this was because Gard anticipated working with some of the reliable “old-guard” faculty, when in fact a number of these retired or were unable to help.  This led to a lot of bad-mouthing and back-biting, much of with was unnecessary.

00:37:27	Follow up [ME]: Lady Bird Johnson’s visit? Answer: Warlum chronicled how, as part of one of her “beautification” tours, Mrs. Johnson made Spring Green one of her stops, perhaps at the prompting of the NEA director. He described the “folderol” that ensued as a result of the visit, which involved them having dinner in Spring Green and then seeing a performance of “Hodag” at the theater. He explained his work on the scenery, the security arrangements, some curiosities about the visit, and Mrs. Johnson’s grace and beauty in person.

00:42:37	Follow up [GT]: Ralph Kohlhoff [sp?] Answer: He talked about how he and Kohlhoff, another graduate student in the community arts program, put together a national conference. Also, when it became obvious that managing the NEA program was too much for one person, Kohlhoff and Warlum co-managed it.

00:44:50	Follow up [ME]: What were your hopes for the project? Answer: He said that they hoped to “alter the face and the heart of America.” But there were a number of things that remained unfinished—Gard had hoped to complete a book articulating the community arts philosophy, but they became too busy to carry it out. They also hoped that the Rhinelander School for the Arts would become a national trend, but it stayed more statewide. Similarly, Waupun had a great sculpture show that might have been repeated, but was such an undertaking that it burnt people out.

00:50:14	Follow up [GT]: David Peterson? Answer: Peterson was working for Gard already when Warlum came to UW.  He produced and wrote shows that could be toured around WI; he was thus one of the great resources at Gard/Warlum’s disposal.

00:52:02	Follow up [KG]: What kind of support from local governments? Answer: He said it was overwhelmingly positive.

00:54:13	End of Third Interview Session

Fourth Interview Session (July 22, 2014): Digital File

Time	Keywords
00:00:00	Start of Interview/Interviewer’s Introduction

00:00:00	Question: After you left Wisconsin? Answer: He left UW in 1969, when he got a job as executive director of the Indiana Arts Commission, which had started in 1966 but had “crashed and burned.” Between 1966 and 1969, an “arts underground” worked to reinstate state funding and hired him as director. Although the funding for this job was sufficient, he quickly found out that many of the board members had a very different philosophy of the arts than his WI Idea philosophy. Thus, when his initial ally in the job moved away, the board “just ate me up.” Burned out and with a factionalized board, he resigned after 3 years.

00:05:25	[no question] After leaving Indiana, he followed his spouse Steve to Michigan (where Steve got a job at E. Michigan State U).  Warlum got a job teaching drama at a Catholic HS and worked with Sangamon University in IL on their community arts program. From here, he worked for a while at a B.Dalton bookstore and then with Ray Scott with the MI Council for the Arts. Though Scott did much for the arts in MI, he was not a good director, so they then left MI to live in Seattle.

00:08:42	[no question] In Seattle, he continued, he began work as a professional fundraiser, though he quipped that his first assignment was training in Milwaukee. He expressed the value of learning these skills, and talked about some companies for whom he raised money. Eventually he got a job doing development for Seattle Repertory Theater; but again, once he got through some challenges and got the job set up, he got bored with it and the managing director was difficult to work with.

00:11:36	[no question] Leaving Seattle Repertory Theater and wanting to write, he took a part-time position teaching business math at Shoreline Community College. Feeling like a “total fraud,” he spoke with one of his colleagues after being asked a question he couldn’t answer and came up with the idea for a business math textbook with a math anxiety approach, which they subsequently wrote and published almost immediately with Scott Foresman. He quipped about how unlikely this was.

00:15:29	[no question] After publishing this textbook, he taught courses and developed an MA program in arts management, but he noted that he never got a full-time contract, which he thought was likely due to his sexual orientation.

00:17:01	[no question] After 8 years of teaching for half of full-time faculty wages and no contract, he “sold out” and applied for a technical writing job at Boeing. He discussed how different this kind of job was from his previous experience, and how he then developed training courses, became a trainer, and eventually left Boeing to start his own training company in technical, computer-based design training. After this he retired and took art classes at the local community college.

00:19:58	Question: Opening doors for people? Answer: He felt that one of the vehicles for doing this was teaching, which he did as soon as he was comfortable with it.

00:21:01	[no question] After discussing for a moment how Warlum and Ewell became reacquainted after Warlum’s long absence, Thompson asked what Warlum thought of the affect The Arts in a Small Community. Warlum admitted that he was “utterly blown away” by the fact that community arts people looked at the book as their “Bible,” though he knew the work was important while he was here. He considered this book as the most important influence he’d ever had, precisely because Prof. Gard demanded that the work be simple, accessible.

00:27:49	Follow up [GT]: The “Christmas tree books”? Answer: Warlum talked about the supplement sets to The Arts in the Small Community, the first of which (the “Christmas” set) arose out of the proceedings of the conference he and Kohlhoff organized.  As they saw the effect of these, however, they published other supplements.

00:30:52	Follow up [ME]: Life magazine? Answer: Having mentioned earlier that Life was going to publish a story on community arts, he explained that Life sent a reporter and a photographer who visited each of the test towns and took “reams of pictures.” Ultimatly, Life didn’t publish the article, but sold UW the pictures.

00:32:52	Follow up [AP]: Do you think that the project set in motion something that conti-nues? Answer: Yes; he discussed some of the organizations that had survived over the years and continuing involvement of the communities in the arts. This led him to note that the major finding of the resurvey was that people in these communities have a stronger expectation than other places that arts will be part of communal life.

00:36:45	Follow up [ME]: Anything else? Answer: Warlum mentioned that when the 2006 rewrite of Arts in the Small Community was being reviewed, he encouraged Ewell to mention explicitly communities all over the country where similar things were happening. Additionally, they made the volume a “do-it-yourself” manual by adding questions and also did a workshop at Rhinelander for community arts leaders based around the book.

00:40:43	Question [KG]: Should arts councils being formed today be different from those in the 1960s? Answer: He didn’t think so; if he was to make changes, he’d encourage them to be more inclusive; concentrate more on creativity outside of just the visual, traditional arts; concentrate less on importing arts programs and more on developing them within communities; and should devote significant time to defining what art is.

00:45:40	Follow up [ME]: So “creativity” is more inclusive than “art”? Answer: He thought so, believing that by defining art too narrowly, the tendency was to leave people out. He gave the example of his hometown, Neillsville, which didn’t have much that seemed artistic, but had a flourishing, active and cutting-edge Historical Society. This, while not “art” was creativity. He then broadened out to a criticism of those who didn’t consider popular and commercial art to be art, suggesting that making money wasn’t “sinful” as he’d been brought up to believe.

00:50:18	Follow up [ME]: So “access” was the goal of this 1966-69 project—the next shift is creativity? Answer: He found it difficult to define the frontier for arts councils, since he didn’t know what they were doing now. But he felt that inclusiveness—breaking down feelings of elitism—was critical to the future of arts councils, though this was neither new nor uncommon among those who promoted community arts.

00:54:03	Follow up [GT]: What should a renewed NEA grant try to do? Answer: He thought that finally writing a book of philosophy of community arts was a critical step, since strides needed to be made toward making community arts a profession. He also thought studies should be made more scientific, with control and test communities, a growing body of scientific literature, and the ability to track the effect of community arts development on individuals over longer periods of time. He quipped about how Gard had little interest in doing this kind of scientific research. 

00:59:42	Follow up [GT]: Would you still address small communities? Answer: He thought small communities “as good a thing as any to look at,” but believed strongly that the issues he’d addressed applied equally to all communities.

01:00:28	Follow up [ME]: What is The Arts in the Small Community “about”? Answer: He said that, while Ewell’s summary of what the book could be about was largely true, it was important to emphasize the structure of “arts and …” which was a new way of look-ing at art, the assertion of art as a human right, and the sheer simplicity of the book. The talked about the fact that the book wasn’t copyrighted specifically so it could be distributed freely across the country.

01:06:33	Follow up [TR]: How has your sexual orientation/coming out affected your work? Answer: Characterizing himself as an “Eisenhower faggot” (born in 1940s, small-town, Catholic America) he related that “there was no way to talk about this sanely” in his town. Absolutely isolated, he recalled trying hard not to be who he was and was overjoyed that young people in America didn’t have to go through what he did. Thus, he felt that his attitudes about sexuality were skewed compared to those who’d been able to grow up accepting themselves, and was saddened that it had taken him this long to talk about it. At the same time, he considered himself fortunate to have found a soul-mate and have been married longer than many heterosexual couples.

01:13:06	[no question] He mused about whether his creativity was in some way attached to sexuality, and similarly to his dyslexia. Thus, there were some positive outcomes, though there’d also been some very hurtful elements of it. 

01:15:42	Follow up [ME]: Being an insider or outsider? Answer: He observed that, by his definition, being a community arts developer meant being an outsider. He thought it an important role, since when an outsider comes in an either supports or opposes an idea proposed by an insider, it had a certain impact. New residents, on the other hand, needed to be very careful, since change could be perceived very negatively.

01:23:05	Follow up [ME]: Most important traits in a community arts development specialist? Answer: “Humility.” He emphasized the need to listen and learn from people, to have your ideas proposed by others without giving you credit, to say things in different and simple ways, to be patient. He shared several anecdotes about how slowly progress could happen, but how once a seed was planted, it kept going.

01:27:00	Follow up [ME]: What’s “the faith”? Answer: He quipped that “whatever it was, I lost it.” Though he got fed up with community arts development, he thought the faith was reserving the right to make mistakes, allowing things you foster to turn out in a different way, and knowing that what you do matters.

01:29:11	Follow up [ME]: “Altering the face and the heart of America”? Answer: He thought that these lines meant no more and no less than what it said, that if one could make the arts a part of daily life, that one could indeed change the face of America.

01:31:20	End of Fourth Interview Session

Second Oral History

First Interview Session (September 3, 2014): Digital File

Time	Keywords
00:00:00	Start of Interview/Interviewer’s Introduction

00:00:48	Question: Feeling towards same sex? Answer: Mike Warlum (MW) spoke of some childhood experiment, akin to playing doctor, as a pre-teen. He had a sexual experience with a male classmate as a teenager. 

00:02:49	Question: Feelings of being a loner connected to his sexuality? Answer: While his learning disability (cf First Oral History) aided in his feeling like a loner, his sexuality was another factor. He recalled being called “queer boy” on many occasions. 

00:04:12	Question: Growing up in the 1950s, what did he know about homosexuality? Answer: Not much, except it was a sin. He noted that there was no gay porn in the 1950s, at least none he could access. He dated girls in high school but felt no real attraction to them. He said he had hoped, at times, same sex attraction was just a phase. He did not date much, due as much to being shy as to being gay. He remarked that he did not understand how awful his teenage years were until later in life. 

00:08:22	Question: Why University of Wisconsin? Answer: MW only looked at two schools in Madison and Eau Claire. He explained why he chose Madison. He felt amazed that he never considered any private or out-of-state school. When asked about any undergrad sexual experiences, he mentioned one his senior year. MW explained why it “freaked him out.” 

00:12:49 	Question: Dates women as an undergrad? Answer: He lived at a boarding house and had little money, so he dated very little. He and some of his roommates would splurge by going to a movie. Plus, his parents espoused to him the idea that being a student was his job, so he took his studies seriously. 

00:17:17	Question: Changes between undergrad and graduate school? Answer: He noted that he began meeting and dating men while in graduate school, including his first live-in lover. He talked briefly about them. MW said he met these men from a writing group or through friends, not any off-campus bar or hangout. He mentioned a couple of bars he knew of but did not frequent: the 602 Club and the Velvet Swing. 

00:20:25	Question: More on first live-in lover? Answer: MW recalled being 25 or 26 when it happened. He noted an irony about this situation: he and this man grew up in the same community. When asked about other lovers, MW noted that he wanted to be in a long-term relationship, but his boyfriends did not.

00:23:39	Question: Professor Gard and MW’s sexuality? Answer: MW said his sexuality, by that time, would have been hard to miss. But Professor Gard and he never spoke of it. MW found him to be deeply homophobic. This led the interviewer and MW to talk about how MW reacted (or more precisely chose not to react) when he heard homophobic remarks or “gay jokes.” 

00:27:30	Question: Was his sexuality ever an issue while doing community arts work throughout Wisconsin? Answer: No. He never mixed work and play. When asked about coming out to his parents, he said he never really did. He offered an anecdote, however, about talking to his mother about it while in his mid-30s and moving to Seattle with his partner, Steve.

00:31:12	Question: Friends who supported him as he was coming out? Answer: He spoke of a life-long friend who always supported him and his sexuality. He noted it never came up with his colleagues while working at University of Wisconsin. 

00:33:47	Question: Meeting Steve, his long-time partner? Answer: MW had moved from Wisconsin to work at the Indiana Arts Commission. At first he dated a man who worked at Butler University. That man eventually introduced him to Steve. MW then offered the anecdote about their first meeting and how it led to their relationship.

00:36:48	Question: Sexuality and his job at Indiana Arts Commission? Answer: He noted that his relationship served as one factor in his decision to leave the Arts Commission. MW then discussed how he followed Steve to Michigan, where he went to graduate school, and how MW ended up with an arts-related job there. 

00:40:14	Question: Seattle Community College? Answer: Within previous discussions MW spoke of his dismissal from a teaching position at a community college and how it likely stemmed from his being gay.  He offered a detailed anecdote about hiring within the community college system. He then offered a brief overview of his work since leaving that system, including publishing books, and finally detailed his most recent job at Boeing. 

00:43:43	Question: Did MW and Steve go back to WI as a couple? Answer: He and Steve only went to his parents’ house once; he explained the circumstances. When asked if he wished to say anything else this session, he responded no.  

00:45:55	End of First Interview Session

Second Interview Session (September 17, 2014): Digital File

Time	Keywords
00:00:00	Start of Interview/Interviewer’s Introduction

00:00:48	Question: Active in gay community? Answer: No, only insofar as he lives openly. His membership in certain groups was mainly social. Follow-up: Participation in gay pride parades? Answer: Mike Warlum (MW) described stumbling onto a gay pride about 20 years ago and seeing a group called “dykes on bikes.” He watched the parade last year and saw them again. MW briefly mentioned watching a disappointing gay pride parade in Bologna. 

00:03:11	Question: Issue on which he has seen most change in his life time? Answer: MW described a change in general attitudes, citing the prevalence of gay issues in the news. Follow-up: Thoughts on changing tide around gay marriage? Answer: MW and his partner never anticipated marrying. Defining gay marriage as a civil rights issue helped create understanding. 

00:06:02	Question: He and Steve married? Answer: Yes, in January 2013. Follow-up: The ceremony? Answer: Another couple had broached the subject of marriage at a dinner party. They decided to do it. One friend was a Buddhist abbot and another was legally certified to officiate. They wed in their living room, surrounded by lilies. Follow-up: Attendance at other gay weddings? Answer: No. 

00:09:12	Question: Things that have not changed in his lifetime? Answer: MW talked about religious groups whose opposition to gay rights has only become more entrenched. He described the silence around sexuality that once prevailed in communities and how certain events (e.g. Stonewall) have forced people to take a stand on the issue. He added that he knows many accepting religious people. 

00:11:38	Question: Future changes he anticipates? Answer: Warlum described the genie as having escaped the bottle; people are unlikely to revert back from acceptance.

00:13:05	Question: Reflections on HIV/AIDS epidemic? Friends lost? Answer: MW said he had not lost anyone close to him, but noted that he and Steve do not have many gay friends. Warlum commented that being gay (like being black) is not an adequate basis for friendship by itself. He lamented Ronald Reagan’s failure to address (or even pay attention to) the problem of HIV and AIDS. 

00:15:34	Question: Effect of being gay on him, personally and professionally? Answer: MW speculated that his sexual orientation had cost him job opportunities. But mainly it proved detrimental to his self-esteem. Therapy helped him to accept and feel pride in himself. Warlum remarked that being gay is not a choice, but accepting yourself is a choice – one that helped him to open up creatively, socially, and intellectually. 

00:18:37	Question: Speculations about his difficulty talking about himself? Answer: He felt surprised that he had not thought deeper about certain parts of the past. In all, MW thought himself lucky compared to other people. He described the benefit of failing to recognize how bad a situation is except in hindsight. 

00:22:06	Question: Anything else to add? Answer: MW said he felt strongly about the work yet to be done in achieving acceptance. He decried the notion of homosexuality as a choice, as well as the notion of equal rights as special treatment. Warlum described the hardships gay people continue to face, including alcoholism, teenage suicide, and legal persecution across the globe. He reiterated that considerable work remains to be done and ended by thanking the interviewer. 

00:25:24	End of Second Interview Session

End of Oral History #1388