Orion Ceramic Studios on mon 9 jun 97
"Freedom" means nothing if it's not exercised.
I'm so "conservative" I think freedom means making room for other people's
music (sometimes loud), for the open expression of ideas we may not all
share (sometimes nasty), and visions that may not fit popular concepts of
beauty (sometimes awful).
If our civilization directs a tiny percentage of public tax to fund arts, I
prefer that any failing in cash distribution should err in favor of
creativity and spirit.
The individuals and committees that decide where public art funds go have a
very difficult "row to hoe." If we feel mystified about how or why a
particular commission was awarded, I'm sure most grantor agencies will be
able to produce some record of their rationale. There generally is a
complex winnowing process in place; whether or not the public will find the
product palatable may not be the leading criterion. [I think about
projects like the Chicago Picasso, which was considered (and some still
consider) hideously ugly by many citizens and critics -- it's now a
landmark that most Chicagoans feel a real fondness for.]
I think it should be a worry to all of us that there are political groups
with significant power that feel it's their duty to legislate artistic
taste, not only in regard to private funding but in regarding to privately
financed art (as in shops, galleries, books, etc.).
It's not all the political "far right" I'm talking about. In the name of
"the public good" we see ever-increasing policy and law (advanced by the
political "left") restricting what we may legally eat, drink, and inhale.
Have you been watching in the last few weeks news' (PBS, CBS) the raging
debate about our "right to exchange private communications" (the
government's fight against the encryption of electronic messages)?
It makes my skin crawl to hear anyone, particularly the government, suggest
that freedom is a threat. (I think that civilization should have moral
sensibility to stay afloat, but I don't think any government's the place to
go for moral guidance!)
As the credo goes, "I believe that freedom's most precious possession." We
certainly should not give up one iota in regard to the arts.
One artist's/citizen's/woman's opinion!
Ellen Baker
orion@telcomplus.com
kinoko@junction.net on wed 11 jun 97
Dear Eileen, What do you think Capitalism is all about? The aim is to make a
profit no matter what the cost to the 'profitee'. Any ploy is useful if it
will avoid the falling rate of profit. If we are no threat to the corporate
state,we may be allowed the expression of human freedom. Whenever we become
a threat to the state,our free expression will be either subverted to the
purposes of the state or,if the threat becomes large enough....crushed. The
history of theworld as we know it,is a history of the rise and fall of
imperialisms...with only an occassional bright revolutionary light. Re: The
American Revolution. The english Revolution. The Cuban
Revolution,Russian,Chinese, and French
Revolutions.kinoko.>----------------------------Original
message----------------------------
>"Freedom" means nothing if it's not exercised.
>
>I'm so "conservative" I think freedom means making room for other people's
>music (sometimes loud), for the open expression of ideas we may not all
>share (sometimes nasty), and visions that may not fit popular concepts of
>beauty (sometimes awful).
>
>If our civilization directs a tiny percentage of public tax to fund arts, I
>prefer that any failing in cash distribution should err in favor of
>creativity and spirit.
>
>The individuals and committees that decide where public art funds go have a
>very difficult "row to hoe." If we feel mystified about how or why a
>particular commission was awarded, I'm sure most grantor agencies will be
>able to produce some record of their rationale. There generally is a
>complex winnowing process in place; whether or not the public will find the
>product palatable may not be the leading criterion. [I think about
>projects like the Chicago Picasso, which was considered (and some still
>consider) hideously ugly by many citizens and critics -- it's now a
>landmark that most Chicagoans feel a real fondness for.]
>
>I think it should be a worry to all of us that there are political groups
>with significant power that feel it's their duty to legislate artistic
>taste, not only in regard to private funding but in regarding to privately
>financed art (as in shops, galleries, books, etc.).
>
>It's not all the political "far right" I'm talking about. In the name of
>"the public good" we see ever-increasing policy and law (advanced by the
>political "left") restricting what we may legally eat, drink, and inhale.
>Have you been watching in the last few weeks news' (PBS, CBS) the raging
>debate about our "right to exchange private communications" (the
>government's fight against the encryption of electronic messages)?
>
>It makes my skin crawl to hear anyone, particularly the government, suggest
>that freedom is a threat. (I think that civilization should have moral
>sensibility to stay afloat, but I don't think any government's the place to
>go for moral guidance!)
>
>As the credo goes, "I believe that freedom's most precious possession." We
>certainly should not give up one iota in regard to the arts.
>
>One artist's/citizen's/woman's opinion!
>
>Ellen Baker
>orion@telcomplus.com
>
>
*****************************************
*****************************************
** Don and Isao Morrill **
** Falkland, B.C. **
** kinoko@junction.net **
*****************************************
*****************************************
| |
|
