Posted on 04/10/2017 6:04:16 AM PDT by pabianice
Defends performers running and chasing sheep as moving piece on 'what it means to be a citizen of the world'
The New York Times is defending a taxpayer-funded production of "Doggie Hamlet," claiming the Washington Free Beacon missed the point that the outdoor sheepherding dance performance was really about "what it means to be a citizen of the world."
A 1,200-word endorsement of "Doggie Hamlet" published in the dance section of the print edition on Sunday argued the Free Beacon‘s report failed to put the proper context about the performance in which no lines of Shakespeare are spoken, but several people run around in a field with sheep and dogs.
"But Is It Art? In the Case of ‘Doggie Hamlet,' Yes," the headline for the piece written by Gia Kourlas reads.
The Free Beacon revealed the funding of "Doggie Hamlet" by the National Endowment for the Arts in December. Dartmouth College's Hopkins Center received $30,000 for a series of performances, including Ann Carlson's "Doggie Hamlet," which the Free Beacon described as featuring "actors yelling and running at sheep in a field in Vermont."
The Times bemoans that modern dance is "too easy to make fun of," and claims the Free Beacon did not delve deep enough into the performance that was inspired by the Oprah book club.
(Excerpt) Read more at freebeacon.com ...
It is a “bad review” NOT ‘defamation’!
Why is there public funding for this crud?
Is the grant request a pubic document? I’ll bet that is comedy.
This is the kind of performance the NEA is famous for and it shows why the NEA is unnecessary for funding “the arts”.
The group behind the performance likely went to the NEA grant process because they were unable to get direct, charitable funding from the many sources - individuals, individual, family & corporate foundations & charitable organizations - in the U.S. that dole out nearly $10 billion annually for “the arts”.
Promoters and defenders of the NEA have been indoctrinated to think “the nation”, or “the country” as the identifier attached to ANY federal outfit.
Meanwhile the actual nation, the actual country of the United States, through its private citizens and private organizations IS a big “charitable” giver to the arts. It just doesn’t have the “Federal Government” or it’s control & taxes associated with it.
It sounds like the usual spoiled “artists” thumbing their noses at the taxpayers. One of the most avant garde artists I knew personally, Judith Malina, of the wild and crazy Living Theater, refused to take government money. She spent herself broke refusing to do so because she didn’t want them interfering in her productions. As radical as she was, she was totally old school. These people are just creeps. Spoiled creeps.
There is no such thing as “citizen of the world”
But, but it’s on Oprah’s Book Club list!!!
Trump needs to defund “the arts” immediately. This isn’t art. It’s sheep droppings.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.