Artists protest looming cuts to UK culture budget

Boy am i going to get a pie in the face from my fellow pro0gressives on this entry.

I am not so sure government support of the arts is a good thing. Simply put, it is the party in power that will attempt to dictate content, and I don't want that from EITHER party. The only way to prevent it is to not fund it at all.

Which brings me to this position: The position or presence of the arts in a society is a reflection of the health of that society. If we build more football stadiums that museums, then we will likely get what we deserve in the future (oops, we are dioing that already). Art reflects the priorities and dreams of the society. If art is absent . . . .its our own fault.

It is something that should never have been started. When they get sick, not many people holler "Get me a poet!" Painting originally started out as a way to remember what somebody looked like after they were gone. Since this was replaced by photography, "art" became absurd, and then obscene. Bottom line: government giveaways for this nonsense should be zippo, zero, zilch.

Why should the tax payer give any money at all to the "arts"?

Most of it is rubbish.

In countries where the public funds the arts significantly, there are thriving scenes everywhere- very little that I have seen is rubbish or obscene. Funny too- these are the very countries that Americans tend to visit: France, The Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, the nordic countries, etc.

Have any of you ever seen the occasional news stories about "art critics" praising the deep, thoughtful intrigue of a work, only to find out it was made by a kindergarten child?

Which brings me to this position: The position or presence of the arts in a society is a reflection of the health of that society. If we build more football stadiums that museums, then we will likely get what we deserve in the future.... Students for best future in life.

http://online-insurance-quotes.org