Why Is Congress Attacking The Arts?

YO----plusaf
as long as your pro union, we have no bone of contention.

It's amazing how many people dismiss art - Mouli Cohen's got some interesting views on the importance of art and business. Worth checking out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nf0gADqUDNw&feature=related

i think that in current years all people have to become politicised, why? job market is so much important that every body knows it,congress members more.artistic jobs and paying fore it are very important.but remember that all employment opportunities are important because all the peoples are important,now,all job market are collapsed.congress knows it.now there is two questions.1_what would be the priority,2_what is or what are the basic cause or causes!?the peoples should thinks about instead of worry about.

Congress is attacking the arts because the government realizes that this is our last stand at truly free expression. Once the feds are able to successfully stifle our creative minds then they can take complete control.

We need more individuals, more creative thinkers, more independant people, who will stand for what is right.
We need balck sheep, and I don't mean political puppets, who promise change, and hope.

Years ago, the National Endowment for the Arts was rightfully attacked for funding some pretty offensive "art" (like Andres Serrano wonderful "Piss Christ"- a crucifix immersed in a jar of the artist's own urine....) Fortunately, that whole crazy period has passed, and with a new director, they were back on track! We don't need the arts defunded, not now, especially in these times. (by the way,Piss Christ was a wonderful piece of art to non-Christians- but would you appreciate a sculpture called "N****r Swingin' From a Tree"? Nobody would- Now you know how the "other half" feels.....).

man is worried about bread for lie not that of the soul. dollar for dollar it is hard for someone not into art to see the true value. and if they could then they probably would not be there to vote in the first place.

Business has taken over America!

Well I think a lot of people in congress never really gravitated towards the arts and a lot of times don't understand it and see it as quirky or wierd. People tend not to like what they don't understand.

I think its soo stupid to stop funding for the arts, shutting down performing arts schools doesn't better America it just makes every one depressed.

I can barely understand the response above mine, but my favorite part was the word "unedicated"

Anyway. This country has never placed a value on the arts the way the world's other superpower nations do.
In England, half of the theatre you see on their Fringe circuit (the equivalent of Off-Broadway) is government-subsidized. Here, it's not even close.

We are a country that spits in the face of it's own culture.

The greedy see art at an uppr class belonging. and the poor get the basics, reading , writing and arithmitic. If you can afford a 4 year art school then you can join the club. The want unedicated workers who can dothe basics. Meritocracy does not exist for them. GW Bush is the example of the priviledged poof ball who made iit to the top because of privilede and was a failure because he lacked the subsance.
Prividleged and he ability to go to good schools while more worthy people are shut out become of money leads to a lowering of standards.

Historically, conservatives do not support Public arts. They see ordinary people having access to the arts as a waste of money and unnecessary.
Why can't everyone pay 50.00 for a seat at the opera?

I don't suppose Congress is aware of the number of artists who make the community a central part of their work. Going to a major art school in Chicago, it seems pretty obvious that there is a new movement toward social projects that live less in the gallery and more in the "real world." Artists are incredibly creative, amazing problem solvers, collaborators, and researchers. These are all the skills of successful entrepreneurs.

The arts is the way that society can view itself in a metaphorical mirror. Without self-awareness, it's easy to get lost and confused.

The NEA is already funded, the question is whether the $50M earmarked as part of the stimulus package is warranted. I don't think it is unless there is an indication that $50M invested now will generate >$50M in the future.

Sadly, I think Europe's been hit by some art apathy. The Scottish government gave £17 million to help save one of the country's most prized paintings, and people are calling it a waste of money

A couple reasons art gets cut in my opinion. One reason is that Congress is made up of predominantly lawyers, not artists. Second because I don't think the country as a whole has an appreciation of art like in Europe. In America art is considered superfluous i.e. nice to have around as long as it doesn't cost anything.

While funding certainly helps the arts, lack of money won't stop people from making it. They'll just have to be a lot more creative and resourceful.

I'm a filmmaker who loved to shoot on 16mm, but at $23 per 100 feet (about 2.5 minutes of film) I couldn't afford to use it anytime I wanted. Independent cinemas in my area are in severe danger of closing. It's sad. Art is extremely important to me. If the funds aren't there, I'll find an alternative route, just like I've had to with the ridiculously high food prices and outrageous heating bills.

Funding of the arts contributes to the development and education of people that subsequently end up working in the advertising, design, music and publishing industries. All of which contribute considerably to society in the form of tax dollars. And these industries don't steal from the tax payer like banks do.
It has nothing to do with 'the constitution'. It's just common sense.

Show me, IN THE CONSTITUTION , where it is the Governments job, or the authorization to use Tax dollars for benevolent causes like this, Jefferson could not find it and you can't either!!

You bitched about Government spending all through Bushs term and now this. You crybabies want more!!!! Go to hell, I am not well enough off to play your stupid games with MY money.

jc n pp?

gg no re, thx
lol 0_o'

Life is art, it can never be taken from us. Just try to and see what happens...

cant stop the arts!

Art for art's sake; fuck art let's dance; dance or die.

Improving the quality of life is an investment in the cultural infrastructure.

We need more than bread; we need circus.

Art is awesome, and we should fund it.

At the same time though, art is something you don't NEED to fund. Artists will make art whether they are rich or dead ass broke. Artists would rather create than do anything else. Arts are "dispensable" because you don't need to encourage true artists with funding- don't get me wrong, we SHOULD encourage people to be creative, but creativity will exist, thrive and grow no matter what amount of money is dedicated to it.

Americans prefer toys and money to art in general and have no shame of it. The arts are almost always seen as dispensable. It does sort of paint a poor picture of this cultures value system.

Because the corporations don't want the government to give any of the money to something useful. They want it in their pocket.

I for one am a professional stagehand and havent worked for 2 weeks in San Francisco. things are tough right now, the economy is bad enough, and this is just another way the Fed Gov is pulling the rug, and what I know to be my world, out from under me.

Corporations like Livenation/ClearChannel aren't helping entertainment by monopolizing it.

Why Is Congress Attacking The Arts?
Because those chimps don't realize that the aesthetics of the world are what makes living bearable.