Subject:
|
Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 5 Jan 2000 09:34:17 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1829 times
|
| |
|
|
"Scott E. Sanburn" wrote:
> Dave Schuler wrote:
> > There's no way to support one artist while denying another without
> > establishing an artist-of-the-state, but the NEA could be beneficially applied
> > to libraries and similar forums (fora?) without endorsing a single artistic
> > agenda. However, as you correctly point out, Scott, it's wrong to require the
> > taxpayer to support an artist--especially a sensationalistic and, frankly,
> > uninteresting one--whose work is patently offensive to that taxpayer. Or, at
> > the very least, the taxpayer should be able to choose where those taxes go, so
> > that a devout Catholic taxpayer, for example, doesn't have to worry about
> > funding a seemingly deliberate affront to Catholicism.
>
> Correct. See Dave, I am not that bad! :)
Now, if the NEA is funding the Virgin-Mary-statue thieves in Texas (if they're ever
caught!), then I'll have a real problem. ;) But as far as a fund that doesn't
cover artistic endeavours, but rather local libraries and other fora, what are you
envisioning? To a certain extent, a fund like that without an artistic agenda does
exist, called the NEH (National Endowment for the Humanities).
But as far as deciding "where your $1.50/whatever goes" in the NEA, think of the law
of averages--for a project like the elephant-dung portrait, the money could just be
shifted to cover the "lack" from that sector or group. The net result wouldn't be
any different; it would just add more bureaucracy, because there's no simple or
efficient way to micromanage tax expenditures for a quarter-billion-plus people.
What's more effective is to write to the NEA; if they're anything like the NEH, they
take cogent, reasoned feedback that someone has bothered to target specifically to
them very seriously. Here's why:
The NEH is a rotating board of prominent scholars and professors who do much of the
committee work gratis (at least my advisor did it gratis); I'd gather that the NEA
is much the same, only with a few academics and many seasoned artists (not
necessarily exclusive categories, granted), also working gratis while doing their
regular work as well. However, both groups have a veritable quintillion of grant
applications to go through, and they're looking for *any reason* to thin that number
out. If they have feedback from the public at large that opposes a particular level
and type of expression, they'll be less likely to fund it without very serious
consideration, which is something an NEH/NEA reader isn't going to want to do after
12 hours looking at applications. At least the NEH ones are generally well-written;
I understand that some of the NEA grant proposals are written
"stream-of-consciousness." That's got to wear really thin after a while. At least
the NEH gets to throw those out right away.
Anyhow, just an insight into how the NEA probably works--don't know if it helps.
best
Lindsay
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
| (...) I am not really interested in how the NEA, NEH, etc. work. I don't think they should be there, period. Any funding to the arts should be through private organizations. Artists have somehow survived and thrived before the advent of socialistic (...) (25 years ago, 5-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
| (...) It happens, really! :) (...) Hmmm...I think so. I will have to check on that. (...) That's for sure, but I would rather have the states have any money targeted to arts come their way instead, even to local areas, if possible. (...) Correct. (...) (25 years ago, 4-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
473 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
