Witwoud said:
Ukomba said:
JDKJ said:
You have no idea of what NEA grant money is used for. It doesn't merely fund the production of the artwork. Production costs bear no relationship to grant worthiness.
No, I understand that, but how is that an argument in favor of the NEA? The money didn't inspire him and the money wasn't needed for materials. Are you honestly going to tell me that he wouldn't have created it if the government hadn't given him money? That any artist wouldn't try to carry out their vision if the government didn't give them money? If that's true then they aren't artists. True artists would follow their passion regardless. All the NEA does is make it a little easier for the few artists they select. Are those artists better? No, they're just the ones government decided to promote, and in doing so they're stepping on the ones they don't. Is "Piss Christ" the best possible use for that money, space, and publicity? The government apparently thinks so. "Piss Christ" hurts the art world more than helping it my turning it into a joke, and that's what will happen to video games. The games that can't make it on their own merits thrust into prominence though government backing. I can't wait. At least Movie licensed games will finally have something to look down on.
Look, Ukomba, I think you should maybe read some information posted on previous pages in this forum (or even doing a minute's worth of research with Google) that explains what the NEA does because you are really, really, fundamentally misunderstanding how it operates. For one, it provides grants to organizations that have a project they want to make and hire an artist for, not directly to artists themselves. You also seem to be under the mistaken belief that the money goes to "companies" when it can only go to non-profits. Oh, and you seem to be one of those sentimentalists who thinks art is made with fairy dust and that artists don't need to eat. Well, I hate to spoil your Romantic fantasies, but yes, they do. An artist is someone who creates art (shocking, I know), and it has nothing to do with a willingness to starve for it. Not that that actually has anything to do with NEA funding, of course.
At the very least, take a glance at the Piss Christ wiki-page, because you're also misunderstanding how the creator received funds from the NEA in that case (i.e., incredibly indirectly).
Um, no. I know you can try to obscure what's happening by focusing on how it's filtered through a second, non-profit, party but it's essentially the same thing. For example, what project did Corporation of Yaddo have that they got NEA funding for? Answer, none, it's just a place that give artists free room and board. There are a lot like that. These aren't places commissioning artists to paint a mural. You can mince words but it's exactly the same as just giving money directly to the artist for food, rent, and supplies.
I am under the belief that the money will go to companies because that IS where it will end up. Again, don't try to spin some non-profit BS. Sure the NEA will go to a non-profit first, but you need a group of people to make the game, Unlike a lot of other art you need teams of people to make games. Are you saying it's impossible for EA to make an 'artsy game' team and have them put in for these grants? Hell, EA could even make a non-profit 'artsy game' wing, apply for the money them selves, and use it internally in that group. Lots of companies have non-profit side projects and charities. And there you go, money to a corporation for use in that corporation.
Hmm, so artist are the only people who have to eat? That's good to know. I guess having them do commission work or have a day job like anyone else would be asking too much of these special special people. The fantasy here isn't that artists don't have to eat, but that they are more deserving of free money than other people. There are plenty of good artists making a living right now by 'gasp' selling their work with no second hand NEA money.
Art wouldn't die if the NEA went away. Most of the non-profits wouldn't go away either, they would just be more reliant on donations. The NEA didn't even exist before 1965, are you going to try to claim that worthwhile art only started being made after that? Did the Renaissance only take place because of government funding? Look, if you want to donate money to Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art that's fine, I applaud you. Go ahead and personalty decide which non-profit group is worth supporting. Just don't make me give them money for promoting trash. You might as well just give that money to deviantArt.
