Replies

The Washington Monument. Works of Mozart. Michaelangelo. Though these may not necessarily benefit each of us personally and directly, they were accomplished with the assistance of funding that would not be available were it not for the decisions of kings, princes, and the like (e.g. government).

Be thankful that this request is coming from one who would be the last to fund "Piss Christ," and understand that the arts are a part of life we should enjoy during our short stay here.

Better yet, take up art yourself and produce something to benefit the rest of us in such a way as the above and see if you can do it without assistance while still feeding yourself and your family.

Though these may not necessarily benefit each of us personally and directly, they were accomplished with the assistance of funding that would not be available were it not for the decisions of kings, princes, and the like (e.g. government).

Kings, princes, and the like are NOT equivalent in any way to constitutional government. Kings and princes rule over subjects, while I am no one's subject.

The Medici family and the Pope at the time bankrolled much of Michelangelo's work - let modern-day patrons step forward and do the same. But don't ask me to do it with my tax dollars.

F.C. wrote:

"The Washington Monument. Works of Mozart. Michaelangelo. Though these may not necessarily benefit each of us personally and directly, they were accomplished with the assistance of funding that would not beavailable were it not for the decisions of kings, princes, and the like
(e.g. government).

Be thankful that this request is coming from one who would be the last to fund "Piss Christ," and understand that the arts are a part of life we should enjoy during our short stay here.

Better yet, take up art yourself and produce something to benefit the rest of us in such a way as the above and see if you can do it without assistance while still feeding yourself and your family."

Valid points, but...

The N.E.A. is bad for art. Has any form of art in this country gotten better since the N.E.A. started? Take theater, a field I know something about. In the forties and fifties, with Tennessee Williams and Arthur Miller, American theater was the greatest in the world. Now, what do we have? The best we can do is Mamet's curse-filled productions. And truly awful playwrights like Tony Kushner get awards.

Subsidies for art can come in three forms:

1. Rich people giving money. This is hit or miss, but since different rich people have different criteria, competing standards exist. Competition is good. Also, the rich people themselves are often not artists, thereby forcing the artist to appeal to someone outside his or her field.

2. Government paying for highly visible public art. This method is usually not too bad. Politicians aren't going to want the embarrassment of something disgusting that gets written about on page 1 of every newspaper. This art can range from merely bland at worst to pretty good at best.

3. Government paying for art that few people see. This method is the worst, because politicians don't have to accountable and turn the decision over to artists. Artists tend to be depressed and bitter people, so what artists think is art is usually ugly and adolescent. Oddly enough, artists do a better job when they have to appeal to the market, although artists would protest this fact.

Here's a thought experiment. Imagine if the N.E.A. had been given the job of designing the Vietnam War Memorial, and were basically told that whatever their artists' panels came up with was fine. We'd have a statue of some soldier raping a vietnamese women on the mall right now.

I manage to write plays just fine while working a full-time job. Most playwrights have other jobs. The ones who don't tend to spend a lot of time staring at their walls and writing pretty depressing stuff.