Just for perspective...without aristocratic patronage (the de facto ‘public sponsorship’ back in the day) we would not be able to enjoy the music of Bach, Mozart, Beethoven...and quite a bit of classical literature, paintings etc. today.
That said, I believe a few centuries from now people will still enjoy the works of Bach, Mozart, Beethoven et al. ‘Piss Christ’ etc...not so much. There exists such a thing as absolute quality.
RE: Just for perspective...without aristocratic patronage (the de facto ‘public sponsorship’ back in the day) we would not be able to enjoy the music of Bach, Mozart, Beethoven...and quite a bit of classical literature, paintings etc. today.
I have often wondered though... what if the Europe of that time were ran more like free enterprise systems instead of ‘public sponsorships’, would there not be any PRIVATE wealthy patrons to support a Bach, Mozart or Beethoven? My guess is ‘YES’.
Think about it, the great Frederic Chopin had wealthy patrons (PRIVATE). Tchaikovsky’s patron was a wealth business woman, Nadezhda Filaretovna von Meck who supported him for 13 years so that he could work on compositions FULL TIME. Savva Mamontov, a famous Russian industrialist and patron of the arts, supported Sergei Rachmaninoff. Johannes Brahms never had to have a patron to support him financially; he was able to take care of himself by giving piano lessons, conducting, composing and having his music printed. I could go on and on and on.
America had her Gershwin, Berlin, Rodgers and Hammerstein, etc. were they sponsored by the public?
Van Gogh’s main patron was his own brother.
So, it is a huge leap to conclude that if there were no public sponsorship, great art or music would never be available.