art bailout

[KoldKut]

//

 

[Golding]

See: National Endowment for the Arts

 

[heavenlyboy34]

I am quite ashamed of my fellow artists who live on government tribute er...money. It shows quite a lack of character.

 

[CUnknown]

BS. The NEA is a wonderful use of taxpayer money. Without art, life is only barely worth living. Go after the bad stuff the government does, not the good stuff.

 

[Meatwasp]

To me that are not good artists if they have to have government support them . If they can't sell their works on merit they should get another job.

 

[CUnknown]

Artists have a tough road, even if they are extremely talented. Those who can get government grants are the more talented ones. Besides, not everything should be based on the market. Do you want to live in a country without (or with just a little) art?

 

[slacker921]

Jesse Helms did a favor to the art world by shining the light on the NEA and making the cockroaches scatter. Trust me when I say there was a LOT of shenanigans going on there. It's not a good thing when the government gets involved in art.

 

[angelatc]

Artists have a tough road, even if they are extremely talented. Those who can get government grants are the more talented ones. Besides, not everything should be based on the market. Do you want to live in a country without (or with just a little) art?

Great art does not need government support. America does not need the NEA.

Taking my money and giving it to an artist is welfare, I don't care how freaking talented he is.

Somehow I doubt you care if I would choose to live in a world without art, so I won't even go there.

Where does the Constitution say that the feds should use tax money to support artists? Why shouldn't art be based on market, exactly?

 

[Meatwasp]

Artists have a tough road, even if they are extremely talented. Those who can get government grants are the more talented ones. Besides, not everything should be based on the market. Do you want to live in a country without (or with just a little) art?

I ran an Art gallery and the good stuff always sold. The bad ones usually got grants from the government. I know there are some great artists that the government grants but still it should be by private purchase

 

[TonySutton]

an artist is a small business person, if they can not sell their wares for a reasonable price they should find a new business (period)

I produce handmade crafts as a side business, I would love to be able to do this full time because I LOVE crafting but I can not. Even if I make the very best in the world, I should not get a government hand out. If the market can not support me then I must find another line of work. Which I did. My LOVE is my hobby/second business which supplements my income while allowing me to do what I love. I still hope to do it full time one day

 

[fisharmor]

BS. The NEA is a wonderful use of taxpayer money. Without art, life is only barely worth living. Go after the bad stuff the government does, not the good stuff.

Horseshit.

First of all, art goes on all around you without government grants.
When my wife and I break out the calligraphy supplies and do a framed quote for a graduation, that's art.

When our neighbors slave for an entire summer to get their landscaping just right, that's art.

When my friend refuses to take schlock pressboard-estate architecture jobs in a crap market because he has resolved only to design new and interesting buildings, that's art.

When an old lady hand stitches a new quilt for the new baby at her church, that's art.

When Revolution volunteers paint pictures of RP holding babies to post on the internet, that's art.

Second of all, I fucking resent you statists telling me it isn't. Because that's what you're doing - saying that since none of that is government funded, it is not art. You're saying that if it's functional, in demand, and done by a regular person, it's not art.

All of those people are having their earnings confiscated to support your "genuine" artists. If they all had that money, they would be generating hundreds or thousands of times more art than the few artists who are on government grants. So you are advocating a situation where less art is created, making you art's enemy.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Artists have a tough road, even if they are extremely talented. Those who can get government grants are the more talented ones. Besides, not everything should be based on the market. Do you want to live in a country without (or with just a little) art?

Not necessarily. Plenty of good musicians don't get grants for whatever reason. For example, since I play electric guitar rather than a "traditional" instrument, the grants are so scarce I've never seen one.

Everything should be based on the market, sir-if you are concerned about liberty, of course. Non-profits do wonderful work in the arts, FWIW. If government would leave us alone, we artists could find myriad ways to make fine art profitable! (we tend to be a creative lot, despite a silly bunch who live on government grants and such)

For example, the IP laws have done more damage to the arts than you can imagine. Under the law, corporations can now hold the rights for art work-and the artist can be paid little or nothing for a popular piece. Indeed, government continues to crush the life out of humanity every day.

 

[Meatwasp]

an artist is a small business person, if they can not sell their wares for a reasonable price they should find a new business (period)

I produce handmade crafts as a side business, I would love to be able to do this full time because I LOVE crafting but I can not. Even if I make the very best in the world, I should not get a government hand out. If the market can not support me then I must find another line of work. Which I did. My LOVE is my hobby/second business which supplements my income while allowing me to do what I love. I still hope to do it full time one day

I feel that way exactly. My family makes jewelry and we keep above our heads on it.

 

[jbrace]

Look up the NEA's money donated to private contributions. Ron Paul mentions it in his book.

 

[gls]

BS. The NEA is a wonderful use of taxpayer money. Without art, life is only barely worth living. Go after the bad stuff the government does, not the good stuff.

So I assume you're sending in a check to the NEA every month with "donation" in the memo line? Or is it just a wonderful use of other people's money?

 

[LATruth]

I am quite ashamed of my fellow artists who live on government tribute er...money. It shows quite a lack of character.

I second this. I am an artist who turned to graphic design to make money, in essence I am whoring out my art IMO while not feeding off the government tit. If I can do it, so can they. You think an "artist" wants to make websites? Logos? GTFO

 

[angelatc]

I second this. I am an artist who turned to graphic design to make money, in essence I am whoring out my art IMO while not feeding off the government tit. If I can do it, so can they. You think an "artist" wants to make websites? Logos? GTFO

I knew a guy who went to medical school then got a degree in psychiatry - he makes tons of money - but uses a large chunk of it to run a shop that I discretely call a "vanity gallery." He sells his own stuff, and only his stuff, from his own gallery / studio.

He'd happily give up dealing with the loonies (my word, not his!) all day if he could pay his bills with his art.