[DrCaleb]

{pedantic} I think the word you were looking for in the title was 'weaning'{/pedantic}

[kettal]

Do I notice a new art style in the comics?

[lonewolf23k]

Sucros wrote:

And Quebec is very much in play right now, it's a pollster's nightmare. Quebec cares far more than the rest of the country about arts funding. The vast majority of their entertainment is homegrown, and gets help getting started with the help of the government. These cuts in quebec literally mean less variety on TV.

Yeah, I'll admit, we Quebecois are the ones most up in arms about the art budget cuts, because it really hits us where we live. Aside from homegrown entertainment, our only major sources for art, culture and entertainment comes either from English canada and the US, or from France. Our province's opinion for the former is well-known, but we're just too culturally detached from France for it's culture to truly connect with us as well.

[scarecrowe]

Tax breaks are necessary for Quebec's mimeing industry. Canada's economy is heavily reliant on mimeing.
Nickel mimeing.
Gold mimeing.
Potash mimeing.
Silver mimeing.

mimeing is part of the French cultural fabric and must be subsidized otherwise we will all starve.

Check it out http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-mime.htm.

[mixedfarmer]

weaning the artists who mostly dont make enouf to eat. Artists have given us pleasure with music, actors, and paintings. can u imagine a world with out art , it would be like hell with 10000 accountants in a room cyphering numbers or people working endlessly with no reason to live.

[Murray_Smith]

mixedfarmer wrote:

weaning the artists who mostly dont make enouf to eat. Artists have given us pleasure with music, actors, and paintings. can u imagine a world with out art , it would be like hell with 10000 accountants in a room cyphering numbers or people working endlessly with no reason to live.

That is a complete red-herring argument. Art existed long before government funding did. I plan on becoming an artist, but I'm going to get income from - get this - people who actually want to buy my art. And if that plan falls through, I'll find a job elsewhere, and draw for fun. Did you ever see Equilibrium? Art continues to exist even when it is forbidden.

[Thanos]

I don't see where being an artist costs so much in terms of supplies that require subsidizing. You can get a crucifix at a Catholic bible supply store for pretty darned cheapand it shouldn't take more than a week to make up your own gallon of urine to put the cross in either. Grocery stores are everywhere so buying raw meat to hang from trees should be all that costly. For thinking up something like "Shit-dress" or "Shit-on-canvas" or "Shit-on-GW Bush's portrait" all the cretive artist would have to do would be to eat burritos with hot sauce for a few days in a row, put of a respirator while working to take care of the fumes, and in a fortnight have something finished that would make Mendelson Joe go green with envy or the National Gallery very happy to display.

Art is expensive to live? Maybe I'm nutz I just don't get it.

[Zipperfish]

If you can't tell the difference between, say, shit-dress and teh NFB film The Hockey Sweater, then you probably don't get art. I mean for Chrissake, Harper is busy right now apparently handing over 25 billion to bunch of fat cat bankers and you guys would begrudge starving artists a few shekels.

[Thanos]

Zipperfish wrote:

If you can't tell the difference between, say, shit-dress and teh NFB film The Hockey Sweater, then you probably don't get art. I mean for Chrissake, Harper is busy right now apparently handing over 25 billion to bunch of fat cat bankers and you guys would begrudge starving artists a few shekels.

Hello, long time fan of everything ranging from Jacques-Louis David thru to Robert Bateman, and collector of pop art ranging from Jack Kirby thru to Todd McFarlane talking here.

I know art when I see it, so don't get all pushy-shovy with me, Captain TEH!

[Zipperfish]

Thanos wrote:

Zipperfish wrote:

If you can't tell the difference between, say, shit-dress and teh NFB film The Hockey Sweater, then you probably don't get art. I mean for Chrissake, Harper is busy right now apparently handing over 25 billion to bunch of fat cat bankers and you guys would begrudge starving artists a few shekels.

Hello, long time fan of everything ranging from Jacques-Louis David thru to Robert Bateman, and collector of pop art ranging from Jack Kirby thru to Todd McFarlane talking here.

I know art when I see it, so don't get all pushy-shovy with me, Captain TEH!

Certainly not the intention! My comment, upon rereading, was a little pretentious. (Pretentious...moi???!!!) And I admit to a bias here because my fledging writing career would probably be even more fledgling than it already is if it weren't for arts funding of some various small press magazines in which my stories have appeared.

It may that such funding is a waste of time. After all, the common point of view these days is that the short story, as an art form, is moribund. Jack Kirby--that brings back memories!

[Thanos]

Ten bucks says that if the arts subsidies went to things like The Hockey Sweater and not to those who's interest runs in the scatological then people in the non-arts world wouldn't get so upset about where the money went. Funding is one thing but if you asked 10 different people at least 9 would say to fund the good stuff and not the garbage.

Art challenging the intellect and the heart is always worthwhile. "Art" that merely promotes a sensation in the groin or triggers a viewers gag reflex isn't even worthy of discussion.

And good luck with the writer thingy. I tried once but it didn't go anywhere which truly sucks because I've got a kick-ass Cthulhu story rattling around in my brainpan that would be totally boffo if it ever saw print or got optioned for a movie,

[lonewolf23k]

I think a valid alternative to full-fledged government funding for the arts could be giving a tax break to companies and individuals providing funding for artists and entertainment production companies.

[scarecrowe]

lonewolf23k wrote:

I think a valid alternative to full-fledged government funding for the arts could be giving a tax break to companies and individuals providing funding for artists and entertainment production companies.

That's already the case.

[lonewolf23k]

scarecrowe wrote:

lonewolf23k wrote:

I think a valid alternative to full-fledged government funding for the arts could be giving a tax break to companies and individuals providing funding for artists and entertainment production companies.

That's already the case.

Oh? I had no idea.

[thealmightynarf]

I just don't buy that artists should get government money. Especially now adays. The internet has let even the most obscure and fringe artists make a decent living for themselves. If an artist can't make it on their own, chances are people just don't want what they're selling... or they're really bad at publicizing themselves.

I might not mind government funding getting new artists on their feet. But, if they need government money simply to stay viable, then it's really just a waist of money.