Author Topic: Government funding of the arts: For or against? (Read 5345 times)

JB88 · « **Reply #120 on:** August 19, 2007, 10:23:47 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by moot
JB88 you know there's no end to the elasticity (pardon my french) of the limits of "Art". Art is just engineering unrestrained from reality (think that one thru, trust me ).
So anyone could be qualified as an artist. Lazs definitely isn't in any blurry middle ground: he builds customs.
To really bring this debate out from theory and principles into concrete reality, you would have to find some artistic criterias worth govt subsidies (and the like) that aren't just abstractions. Like XYZ (as precisely and concisely defined as any other no-nonsense legislature) sort of art has ABC effects on MNO parts of the public. MNO target audience is worth TUV funds because it fits into the rest of the budget big picture [...]

it is a nice way of looking at it moot.

so, by your arguements, we should apply harsher engineering constraints to publicly funded art?

lazs2 · « **Reply #121 on:** August 19, 2007, 10:24:38 AM »

I am not an artist jb.. anymore than you are. I have talents that you could never achieve tho. I can work metal and I make it into what I seen in my head.

I make no claims to being an artist any more than the downs syndrome kid down the street who makes that funny noise with his mouth.

I have spent decades learning to do what I do and sometimes... I do something that others like me admire... mostly I am mediocre tho compared to them.

Lots of people like what I do. I get them coming up to me and telling me. I certainly do not think that they should be funding me with money extorted from them by my government.

I don't do what I do for the money... the truth is that I "suffer" for my art... it costs me a fortune and If I am able to sell it... it is for a fraction of what it is worth in time and material..

If you were to be truly fair then everyone is an artist... in which case...

everyone deserves equal funding wouldn't you say?

In that case... everyone pays 6 cents and everyone gets 6 cents.

nope... I don't know what art is and I don't think I am an artist... but.. I admit it.

Can you say the same?

lazs

moot · « **Reply #122 on:** August 19, 2007, 10:28:59 AM »

I would say so, but the real question is what are the criteria?
I definitely don't mean to strangle the artistic process with rules and regulations, rather to separate the art from the economics. Economics are engineerable because they are real. When you put the brush to the canvas (figuratively), you aren't thinking of which IRS form it may or may not satisfy, but how to engineer your vision (unbound from the constraints of reality) into whatever medium you're working with.

Quote

Originally posted by JB88
by your arguements, we should apply harsher engineering constraints to publicly funded art?

Not to the art, but to the funds.

AKIron · « **Reply #123 on:** August 19, 2007, 10:34:23 AM »

I brought up religion earlier because I knew there were some who would object to any of their funds being used to support religous "art" and indeed it was dismissed as an "agenda". Does no one else find it interesting or at least amusing that so many of us insist on separating religion and government but not art and government?

culero · « **Reply #124 on:** August 19, 2007, 10:36:50 AM »

OK 88, sorry, didn't mean to make you work your fingers so hard in reply. FWIW, I pretty much completely agree with you in detail (now that you spent some time detailing

)

All I'm here trying to say is that no matter how ridiculous you think others' opinions are (and some of them seem absurd to me) there is a serious point being made by the diversity of opinion being expressed here. Public spending, if allowed any discretion, is a dangerous thing. Scrutiny is necessary, and open discussion is important. Its easy to become impatient with others, but if we don't all talk about it then politicians will certainly do whatever they want - and its obvious what the result of that is/will be.

culero · « **Reply #125 on:** August 19, 2007, 10:40:06 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by moot
Jsnip
Art is just engineering unrestrained from reality (think that one thru, trust me ).

Trying to think that through makes my brain hurt.

My gut doen't agree with you, though. Engineering can be taught. Art requires innate talent. IMO, anyway.

AKIron · « **Reply #126 on:** August 19, 2007, 10:42:12 AM »

Principles determine your destination. What seems reasonable today will no doubt suffer corruption and/or excess tomorrow if the underlying principle is false or corrupted.

JB88 · « **Reply #127 on:** August 19, 2007, 10:42:59 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
I am not an artist jb.. anymore than you are. I have talents that you could never achieve tho. I can work metal and I make it into what I seen in my head.

I make no claims to being an artist any more than the downs syndrome kid down the street who makes that funny noise with his mouth.

I have spent decades learning to do what I do and sometimes... I do something that others like me admire... mostly I am mediocre tho compared to them.

Lots of people like what I do. I get them coming up to me and telling me. I certainly do not think that they should be funding me with money extorted from them by my government.

I don't do what I do for the money... the truth is that I "suffer" for my art... it costs me a fortune and If I am able to sell it... it is for a fraction of what it is worth in time and material..

If you were to be truly fair then everyone is an artist... in which case...

everyone deserves equal funding wouldn't you say?

In that case... everyone pays 6 cents and everyone gets 6 cents.

nope... I don't know what art is and I don't think I am an artist... but.. I admit it.

Can you say the same?

lazs

yes i can. and i know lots of things that art can be. including what you do. i have no problem thinking like that. its easy.

i have also spent a great many years on what i do and like you, there are things that i can do that you cant even begin to consider doing. i mold all sorts materials into all sorts of things every day of my life and make things come from out of my head and into reality every single day. i spend most, if not nearly all of my time searching for ways to plug them into the grid in a way that will further my work. i think of nothing else most of the time.

say yah. i'd say i'm an artist. so what?

not because it is some special thing, but because it is my chosen vocation and i work very hard at it and frankly i resent the notion that i would be somehow elitist to make such a claim. (which you seem to infer by your words) or that there is some right or wrong way to be. whatever lasz.

i dont ask for grants. never have. never will. i have just made an arguement that the NEA and various grant agencies do serve a purpose that gets missed by people like you who fixate on minutia to further your bull in a china shop tactics.

i dont have a problem making money as an artist either. i fully intend to for the rest of my life.

so what.

AKIron · « **Reply #128 on:** August 19, 2007, 10:43:47 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by culero
Trying to think that through makes my brain hurt.

My gut doen't agree with you, though. Engineering can be taught. Art requires innate talent. IMO, anyway.

I would argue that the ability to learn anything is an innate talent. I don't mean that everyone can learn anything, but that anyone's ablility to learn at all is innate and appropriately called talent.

JB88 · « **Reply #129 on:** August 19, 2007, 10:47:34 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by culero
Trying to think that through makes my brain hurt.

My gut doen't agree with you, though. Engineering can be taught. Art requires innate talent. IMO, anyway.

lol.

true. but also in reverse.

i come from a bunch of engineers.

i can safely say that i am nothing like them.

tho we think similarly on things from time to time.

i lack the precision, but i have purpose in droves.

JB88 · « **Reply #130 on:** August 19, 2007, 10:51:21 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKIron
I brought up religion earlier because I knew there were some who would object to any of their funds being used to support religous "art" and indeed it was dismissed as an "agenda". Does no one else find it interesting or at least amusing that so many of us insist on separating religion and government but not art and government?

i always like the manger scenes. remind me of my mishapen youth. fund them. dont care. just dont go over 10 cents for every dollar spent. then ill get upset. we have to be responsible here you know.

AKIron · « **Reply #131 on:** August 19, 2007, 10:55:56 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by JB88
i always like the manger scenes. remind me of my mishapen youth. fund them. dont care. just dont go over 10 cents for every dollar spent. then ill get upset. we have to be responsible here you know.

No way do I want 'em funded by our government. Anything the government touches loses it's independence. This was why the nation's founders separated the church and state.

I like art and do pay for what I like. That's how it should be.

moot · « **Reply #132 on:** August 19, 2007, 10:56:06 AM »

It's all Design. Design restricted to reality, or not. It's not likely you could learn to duplicate Michaelangelo (his art or himself), but it's not impossible. Creativity and the linearity of strictly real engineering are both a matter of discipline.

Put JB88 on 5kg of acid and you will see things start to go a little crooked from their intended forms..

About the funding, I'd say it's safe to suppose that funding the means to do art can only turn out for the best?
If a population willingly buys into junk art rather than everything else above floor level, then what can you do?

JB88 · « **Reply #133 on:** August 19, 2007, 10:57:33 AM »

i want me one of these customs.

http://www.thefishman.net/flamed_fish_sharks.htm

JB88 · « **Reply #134 on:** August 19, 2007, 11:01:16 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by moot
It's all Design. Design restricted to reality, or not. It's not likely you could learn to duplicate Michaelangelo, but it's not impossible. Creativity and the linearity of strictly real engineering are both a matter of discipline.

Put JB88 on 5kg of acid and you will see things start to go a little crooked from their intended forms..

i always draw straighter when i am screwed up. something about ADD and reverse effects and things.

ive since quit all recreational drugs. they made me try to engineer things too much...which sucked because while my skill increased, the attention span tended to lessen and i would find myself eating a cheeseburger before i realized that the saw was still running and that it was two days later and i was still working on that perfect edge.

p.s. i was kidding about the manger.

im not sure how much clearer i can put this.

okay. ya'll watch antique roadshow right?

thats the level of controversy that the NEA is tackling right now. that crowd of people.