Cultural void at the debates

September 26, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Check out this smart Los Angeles Times piece about the "well, duh" observation that culture won't be a subject for any question during the Presidential debates.

"If I were moderating tonight's TV debate," writes Times art critic Christopher Knight, " I'd start with one question and a follow-up, and I'd wait for the flop-sweat: 'Senator, name one great civilization in world history whose government was not a major arts patron. Now, what can we learn from this?'"

In the piece, Knight also drops in the interesting idea that the National Endowment for the Arts (which, he notes, has an annual budget equal to "not quite five hours’ worth of the Iraq occupation") only allow its art museum exhibition grants for shows that are open free to the public.

Your thoughts?

And what arts questions would you ask if you were moderating the debate?
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Interesting debate question - even at the state and local level.
  • Great point Lou! I have to say that funding for the arts would never have gotten to be such a political football had the requestors for funds used some common sense and not tried to use those funds for projects that would most certainly have been patently offensive to the masses.

    It was Mr. Spock that uttered these words: The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. While that attitude would fly in the face of civil rights and rightfully so, it certainly applies to arts funding, which many would view as optional.
  • I am afraid that if the candidates were truly thinking, they might shoot back a reply something like Aside from civic monuments and royal portraiture, the largest patrons of the arts were in fact private individuals and the Catholic Church. Most great civilizations of the past produced objects and experiences at public expense which we now call art, but at the time were objects of utility or the state religion.

    However, this fact does not get the government off the hook for providing some support for the arts as part of its role as guaranteeing a certain basic standard of living for its citizens. In particular, public funding for art in public places should be supported, as it conveys to all of us a sense of who we want to be aesthetically, culturally and emotionally.
  • Interesting discussion. Before I read the LA Times article, I thought, I want to ask each of the candidates to tell about the last live theatre piece (or live dance or music concert) he went to see. I would also like to know what he reads for fun, or what he would read for fun if he had any free time.

    However, the questions in Knight's article are MUCH more thought-provoking, especially the one about rebuilding the Iraqi National Museum and the one about giving artists who donate their work a tax deduction same as collectors get, so now I feel a little silly.

    But I'd still like to know.

    Hope Baugh
    www.IndyTheatreHabit.com

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT