Is it the Gov't's job to support the Arts?
commanderkai @ Mon Mar 03, 2008 2:42 am
Depends on the artist. If we're talking about the Group of Seven Mk2 then sure...if we're talking about some ass pissing into a bottle and putting a leaf there...then no
sandorski @ Mon Mar 03, 2008 3:26 am
ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:
$1:
and without making judgements about what is good art and what isn't.
Bullshit. Too many people claim to be artists that have the creative abilities of a brain damaged chimp on acid. Performance Art (Interpretive Dance) is just an example of shit that deserves to be relegated to the garbage heap.
negative. Art is not Entertainment, although it can be entertaining.
ridenrain @ Tue Mar 04, 2008 2:03 pm
Streaker Streaker:
mtbr mtbr:
Streaker Streaker:
Yes, government should support the arts - and without making judgements about what is good art and what isn't.
Yeah...a couple of painted lines hanging in a museum is art
And the estimated value of that work has gone up quite nicely since then. The museum made a good investment.
At any rate, good artists aren't afraid to ruffle a few feathers.
I'm sure the'll have no problem finding generous patrons who would be willing to take such a chance on funding that puppy then.
The Canadian councel of the arts had a huge scandal over funding and they definately need a tune up:
$1:
Artist Cesar Saez has a dream. He dreams of a 1,000 foot-long banana flying over the great state of Texas. Saez plans to make a banana-shaped, helium-filled, synthetic-paper airship that will fly 20 to 30 kilometres above the Lone Star state for one month.
This story is about making sure people’s dreams come true and luckily for Mr. Cesar, the Canada Council for the Arts shares this dream. They wanted so much to ensure this movie got made that they kicked in $15,000 of taxpayers’ money for the project. The Quebec government’s Council for Arts and Letters threw in another $49,800. With governments firmly behind this Big Banana in Space Project, the film is sure to be a “success.” Yet taxpayers and officials from NASA are curious to know if the sequel will feature the banana being peeled by the Canada space arm? Stay tuned!
This story is about making sure people’s dreams come true and luckily for Mr. Cesar, the Canada Council for the Arts shares this dream. They wanted so much to ensure this movie got made that they kicked in $15,000 of taxpayers’ money for the project. The Quebec government’s Council for Arts and Letters threw in another $49,800. With governments firmly behind this Big Banana in Space Project, the film is sure to be a “success.” Yet taxpayers and officials from NASA are curious to know if the sequel will feature the banana being peeled by the Canada space arm? Stay tuned!
http://www.taxpayer.com/main/news.php?news_id=2496
BartSimpson @ Tue Mar 04, 2008 2:08 pm
romanP romanP:
To say that the government should not fund arts is about the same as saying that government should not support Canadian culture. I guess it's no wonder so many people have a hard time identifying Canadian culture.
"Supporting art" and "supporting Canadian culture" are not necessarily mutually inclusive terms.
mtbr @ Tue Mar 04, 2008 2:09 pm
ridenrain ridenrain:
Streaker Streaker:
mtbr mtbr:
Streaker Streaker:
Yes, government should support the arts - and without making judgements about what is good art and what isn't.
Yeah...a couple of painted lines hanging in a museum is art
And the estimated value of that work has gone up quite nicely since then. The museum made a good investment.
At any rate, good artists aren't afraid to ruffle a few feathers.
I'm sure the'll have no problem finding generous patrons who would be willing to take such a chance on funding that puppy then.
The Canadian councel of the arts had a huge scandal over funding and they definately need a tune up:
$1:
Artist Cesar Saez has a dream. He dreams of a 1,000 foot-long banana flying over the great state of Texas. Saez plans to make a banana-shaped, helium-filled, synthetic-paper airship that will fly 20 to 30 kilometres above the Lone Star state for one month.
This story is about making sure people’s dreams come true and luckily for Mr. Cesar, the Canada Council for the Arts shares this dream. They wanted so much to ensure this movie got made that they kicked in $15,000 of taxpayers’ money for the project. The Quebec government’s Council for Arts and Letters threw in another $49,800. With governments firmly behind this Big Banana in Space Project, the film is sure to be a “success.” Yet taxpayers and officials from NASA are curious to know if the sequel will feature the banana being peeled by the Canada space arm? Stay tuned!
This story is about making sure people’s dreams come true and luckily for Mr. Cesar, the Canada Council for the Arts shares this dream. They wanted so much to ensure this movie got made that they kicked in $15,000 of taxpayers’ money for the project. The Quebec government’s Council for Arts and Letters threw in another $49,800. With governments firmly behind this Big Banana in Space Project, the film is sure to be a “success.” Yet taxpayers and officials from NASA are curious to know if the sequel will feature the banana being peeled by the Canada space arm? Stay tuned!
http://www.taxpayer.com/main/news.php?news_id=2496
Freakinoldguy @ Tue Mar 04, 2008 5:40 pm
ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:
http://www.cbc.ca/arts/story/2008/02/26/arts-reax.html
I for one don't believe the government should be involved in this. It is not the governments responsibility to support artists .......or those who claim to be artists (seeing as what can be construed as Art is a highly subjective matter).
I for one don't believe the government should be involved in this. It is not the governments responsibility to support artists .......or those who claim to be artists (seeing as what can be construed as Art is a highly subjective matter).
It must be, otherwise we'd have no "arteeeeests", since most of them can't earn a living with their limited talent anyway.
Maybe we should just write it off as another form of welfare, for people with no actual lifeskills, payable talent or job ability.
Besides without them the Starbucks in Chapters books would go under.
sandorski @ Tue Mar 04, 2008 6:03 pm
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:
http://www.cbc.ca/arts/story/2008/02/26/arts-reax.html
I for one don't believe the government should be involved in this. It is not the governments responsibility to support artists .......or those who claim to be artists (seeing as what can be construed as Art is a highly subjective matter).
I for one don't believe the government should be involved in this. It is not the governments responsibility to support artists .......or those who claim to be artists (seeing as what can be construed as Art is a highly subjective matter).
It must be, otherwise we'd have no "arteeeeests", since most of them can't earn a living with their limited talent anyway.
Maybe we should just write it off as another form of welfare, for people with no actual lifeskills, payable talent or job ability.
Besides without them the Starbucks in Chapters books would go under.
Art has existed since we lived in caves. It may seem to be something made by someone "with no actual lifeskills", but I'd argue that a society that doesn't value Art is a Society that doesn't exist for long.
Freakinoldguy @ Tue Mar 04, 2008 6:13 pm
sandorski sandorski:
Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:
ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:
http://www.cbc.ca/arts/story/2008/02/26/arts-reax.html
I for one don't believe the government should be involved in this. It is not the governments responsibility to support artists .......or those who claim to be artists (seeing as what can be construed as Art is a highly subjective matter).
I for one don't believe the government should be involved in this. It is not the governments responsibility to support artists .......or those who claim to be artists (seeing as what can be construed as Art is a highly subjective matter).
It must be, otherwise we'd have no "arteeeeests", since most of them can't earn a living with their limited talent anyway.
Maybe we should just write it off as another form of welfare, for people with no actual lifeskills, payable talent or job ability.
Besides without them the Starbucks in Chapters books would go under.
Art has existed since we lived in caves. It may seem to be something made by someone "with no actual lifeskills", but I'd argue that a society that doesn't value Art is a Society that doesn't exist for long.
While I agree with the concept of art, what I disagree with is the simplicity of getting grants from the government for people with no talent or ambition who undertake projects that border on the ridiculous, just so they can claim they're artists and get free money instead of working for it.
It's unfortunate that there is no specified criteria for art because I'm pretty sure that over 90% of the people who call themselves artists wouldn't be able to meet it.
If you had to go before a board of the paying public (instead of bureaucrats and elitists) and shop you projects before getting a grant, I'm pretty sure we'd have alot more employees at McDonalds, and alot less grant recipients
ridenrain @ Tue Mar 04, 2008 6:20 pm
I think paul martin should have spent the money on water purification systems for northern native communities, rather than on spoiled, pretentious sons & daughters of bureaucrats and politicians.
woops, forgot an example:
$1:
Manitoba Arts Council put up $5,000 to fund Aliza Amihude's jewelry made with her toenails, pubic hair, mouse droppings and dead ladybugs. We are told one necklace sold for $360. No word yet if the "art" proceeds will be repaid to the Arts Council or dedicated to psychologist bills.
bobackwords @ Wed Mar 05, 2008 2:57 pm
yes and no