[rollei_list] Re: OT: Corporate Responsibility and PublicGiving
- From: "Neil Gould" <neil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 09:23:26 -0600
Hi group,
> From: Marc James Small <msmall@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> At 12:54 PM 2/2/05 -0500, Fox, Robert wrote:
>> [...]
>> The only reason anyone outside of the NYC art community ever knew
>> about Serrano's exhibit was due to right-wing ideologues in Congress
>> who were looking for a good scapegoat to deny any public funding to
>> arts of any kind. They found a great scapegoat in Serrano.
>>
> Robert
>
> With all due respect, that is bull shit. The voters in THESE hustings
> (central Virginia) were in an uproar as they were in many other parts
> of the nation.
>
The question that Robert addressed is how voters in central Virginia even
knew of the existance of Serrano's exhibit? By the same token, are you
aware of Appalshop? If not, then discovering it may shed some light on the
political nature of public funding of the arts.
> Around here, though, the voters are upset because they see no reason
> for taxpayer dollars to be spent on arts projects. In the end, this is
a
> sensible attitude, as there is no way to justify taxpayer support for
> such an idiosyncratic area as art, where your likes and my likes can be
so
> very different.
>
Which emphasizes my point. If the voters were aware of the actual uses of
public funding for arts projects rather than only the sensationalist
blatherings of those wishing to manipulate them, perhaps we'd be better
off as a nation.
> The solution is to adopt the Fair Tax Plan, do away with
> the income tax, and revert to private funding.
>
Why not do away with public funding of highways, airports, and any other
aspect of the infrastructure? Or, are you suggesting that art is not a
part of the cultural infrastructure? Perhaps you just don't like art;
perhaps others just don't like roads. However, both contribute to the
quality of life on a regional and national basis, and as both can exceed
the ability of private funding to maintain them, there is merit to the
idea that larger common pools of money should be made available for such
things.
Your earlier comments that arts institutions are inefficient and those
that manage them are being overpaid suggests to me that you haven't spent
time serving on an arts council and/or reviewing the actual budgets of
these organizations. Yet, you propose taxing methods to "correct" these
"problems". I'd think that having some facts prior to suggesting a
"solution" may be a more reasonable approach.
The problem that I have with this kind of discussion is of the same nature
as when discussing such things as our involvement in Iraq; it starts in
the middle, presuming certain "facts" that just aren't so. The amount of
money spent on public arts funding *in total* is a pittance far below that
of many pork-barrel projects that offer *nothing* in return of national
relevance (and thus could justify national funding). Why focus on the
pennies, and disregard the use of big dollars on these kinds of projects?
Once again, the conversation is guided by those who want to manipulate us
rather than improve our lot in life or as a nation. I just find it
disappointing that we are so ready and willing to swallow such drivel.
Regards,
Neil Gould
--------------------------------------
Terra Tu AV - www.terratu.com
Technical Graphics & Media
Other related posts:
