Should the government fund arts?

[The New California Republic]

Conquering limbs astride from coal mine to coal mine.

Her feet On the throat of the Argentinean nation.

How many limbs does Thatcher have???

[Ethel mermania]

Her feet On the throat of the Argentinean nation.

How many limbs does Thatcher have???

At least 8.

[Ifreann]

How many limbs does Thatcher have???

At least 8.

More as needed.

[Puldania]

The sophistication of their arts is one of the ways a civilization's greatness is judged.

Yes, and most people who think spending money on the arts is useless are likely uncultured.

[San Lumen]

Yes absolutely.

As was said in Mr. Holland's Opus, You can cut the arts and focus on reading and writing all you want pretty soon you'll be raising a generation of kids who won't have anything to read or write about.

[Pope Joan]

Most of the great world masterpieces were made without government funding.

Counter-example: The Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.

But didn't they use slave power? That would not be replicable

[Pope Joan]

Most of the great world masterpieces were made without government funding.

They weren't made on artists salary, either.

Literally most or all Renaissance painters were funded through local lords, wealthy merchants, or the Church. Though most found themselves in the courts of the nobility and Church.

Basically the government.

I did not associate the word "salary" with "artist".

I guess the NEA does not actually provide all that much support, as a part of the total. But why is it that so many people in entertainment, cinema, music, seem to get by as independents, or cobbling together a deal at a time here and there, while the "fine arts" seem unable to do so?

[Free Arabian Nation]

Counter-example: The Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.

But didn't they use slave power? That would not be replicable

They were all payed, but they were not traditional art.

All 7 of them had some motive besides "The Arts" behind it.

Pyramids - Tomb
the Hanging Gardens - Gift to a wife
Statue of Zeus - To Honor Zeus
Temple of Artemis - Place of worship
Mausoleum at Halicarnassus - Tomb
Colossus of Rhodes - Statue honoring a victory
Lighthouse at Alexandria - It's a freaking lighthouse

[Ethel mermania]

At least 8.

More as needed.

We call her Octo-Marge.

[The New California Republic]

More as needed.

We call her Octo-Marge.

I actually envisioned her as a spider rather than an octopus.

[Ifreann]

Counter-example: The Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.

But didn't they use slave power?

Some might have been built with slave labour. The Hanging Gardens might not have existed. The Great Pyramid of Giza, contrary to popular belief, was not built by slave labour.

That would not be replicable

The government doesn't need to use slave labour to build wonderful things.

[Mike the Progressive]

Most of the discussion on the thread seems to have split into the two camps of "within reason", and "not at all". I have yet to see anyone argue for the government throwing money at artists, but I may be surprised. I support government funding of galleries for the displaying of artworks of significant importance, but I think government involvement in the creation of artworks should be extremely limited.

Is the statue of liberty art? What about the galleries themselves? What about places like the Kennedy Center or those police choirs? What exactly is meant by funding art?

Speaking of the Statute of Liberty, you realize is a gift from France, that received no federal funding (Cleveland actually vetoed two congressional bills to fund it). It was done through private donors and fundraising (particularly Pulitzer).

Isn't that interesting? The symbol of freedom in America funded by private individuals. The work that went into making that a reality. Now sits before us for over 100 years, a symbol of the liberty we hold so dear.

[Dinasinia]

No, It's simply a waste of taxpayer money. Besides, modern art is complete garbage anyway. If you want to put out good art, fund it yourselves.

[Right wing humour squad]

No. Thread/

[Ifreann]

Is the statue of liberty art? What about the galleries themselves? What about places like the Kennedy Center or those police choirs? What exactly is meant by funding art?

Speaking of the Statute of Liberty, you realize is a gift from France, that received no federal funding (Cleveland actually vetoed two congressional bills to fund it). It was done through private donors and fundraising (particularly Pulitzer).

Isn't that interesting? The symbol of freedom in America funded by private individuals. The work that went into making that a reality. Now sits before us for over 100 years, a symbol of the liberty we hold so dear.

Some of the fundraising sounds like mad craic. Like, the money they needed was to erect the statue. They had all the pieces. So they'd display the head around to whip up interest. Just the head. Imagine, few bits and you could have made out with Lady Liberty.

[Mike the Progressive]

Speaking of the Statute of Liberty, you realize is a gift from France, that received no federal funding (Cleveland actually vetoed two congressional bills to fund it). It was done through private donors and fundraising (particularly Pulitzer).

Isn't that interesting? The symbol of freedom in America funded by private individuals. The work that went into making that a reality. Now sits before us for over 100 years, a symbol of the liberty we hold so dear.

Some of the fundraising sounds like mad craic. Like, the money they needed was to erect the statue. They had all the pieces. So they'd display the head around to whip up interest. Just the head. Imagine, few bits and you could have made out with Lady Liberty.

Please I can take only so much freedom before I explode democracy.

[Imperial Conistinda]

No, artists should supply themselves. We can't just "force" something to keep going; if art isn't popular, it dies. In fact, nowadays there's a lot of art heritage from the past, so the need to create new art is at all time low.

[Ifreann]

No, artists should supply themselves. We can't just "force" something to keep going; if art isn't popular, it dies.

That's really not true. Artists exist and create art independent of whether people appreciate that art.

In fact, nowadays there's a lot of art heritage from the past, so the need to create new art is at all time low.

We've had a lot of art heritage from the past for slightly less than all of history. That's never stopped people from creating more art.

[Mike the Progressive]

No, artists should supply themselves. We can't just "force" something to keep going; if art isn't popular, it dies.

That's really not true. Artists exist and create art independent of whether people appreciate that art.

In fact, nowadays there's a lot of art heritage from the past, so the need to create new art is at all time low.

We've had a lot of art heritage from the past for slightly less than all of history. That's never stopped people from creating more art.

Then people should find ways to fund that art.

[Imperial Conistinda]

No, artists should supply themselves. We can't just "force" something to keep going; if art isn't popular, it dies.

That's really not true. Artists exist and create art independent of whether people appreciate that art.

In fact, nowadays there's a lot of art heritage from the past, so the need to create new art is at all time low.

We've had a lot of art heritage from the past for slightly less than all of history. That's never stopped people from creating more art.

I don't see why it has to be the government that funds the arts. If private companies do it, that's okay cause that way the taxes don't have to be increased.

[The New California Republic]

if art isn't popular, it dies.

False. I could make beautiful graffiti murals on the façades of buildings. It would be art, and their popularity is more or less immaterial to their continued existence.

Case in point: popular Banksy murals have been destroyed in the past, and yet a mural by an unknown artist just down the street survives for decades. Contrariwise, other popular Banksy murals have been very well preserved, while nearby murals by unknown artists are destroyed.

Popularity of an artwork or art form is not as crucial to its survival as you claim it to be.

[Ifreann]

That's really not true. Artists exist and create art independent of whether people appreciate that art.


We've had a lot of art heritage from the past for slightly less than all of history. That's never stopped people from creating more art.

Then people should find ways to fund that art.

They have. Electing governments that support the arts.

---

That's really not true. Artists exist and create art independent of whether people appreciate that art.


We've had a lot of art heritage from the past for slightly less than all of history. That's never stopped people from creating more art.

I don't see why it has to be the government that funds the arts. If private companies do it, that's okay cause that way the taxes don't have to be increased.

It doesn't have to be the government. But the government is in the convenient position of being able to fund art without regard for profit margins. And realistically, support for the arts is a trivial portion of a national budget, probably on the levels of pennies a year per taxpayer. You probably lose more money, drop it and never find it or accidentally tear it or whatever, than cutting support for the arts would save you.

[Mike the Progressive]

Then people should find ways to fund that art.

They have. Electing governments that support the arts.

Implying that has been the case for all artists or works of art.

Some of the best have sought their financing through private donors and sponsors.

[Internationalist Bastard]

I spent some time thinking about what would be considered as art by the government
I now have the mental image of our tax money funding sonic fan art

[Conserative Morality]

They have. Electing governments that support the arts.

Implying that has been the case for all artists or works of art.

Some of the best have sought their financing through private donors and sponsors.

And some of the best have sought their financing through public donation and sponsoring.

And some of the best have been denied by private donors and sponsors.

And some of the best have died penniless and unrecognized in their lifetimes because of private donors and sponsors.

But hey, whatever gives you that extra nickel in your pocket at the end of the year. =^)