Thoughtful, as usual. And it syncs up with my morning reading, from Vincent Massey: “We need public money for the encouragement of our cultural life, but we want it without official control or political interference. That is why a ministry of fine arts or a federal department of national culture would be regrettable. The very phrases are chilling. The arts can thrive only in the air of freedom.”
“We fully recognize that no government can call artistic excellence into existence. It must flow from the quality of the society and the good fortune of the Nation. Nor should any government seek to restrict the freedom of the artist to pursue his calling in his own way. Freedom is an essential condition for the artist, and in proportion as freedom is diminished so is the prospect of artistic achievement.” Lyndon Johnson, 1965, calling for the creation of the National Endowments.
It is curious that Quincy Jones would have any interest in the "Arts". After all, as someone involved with popular music, his work was mere entertainment, and as such was devoid of any serious artistic value.
To say something expressly that you hint at: that which some progressives have yet to realize, Trump and his team already know - once established, these government entities eventually get taken over by your enemies to the extent that they can't be reformed, and then you have to go through the trouble of unwinding them. Granted, Trump served an entire presidential term without realizing this, but he returns with the benefit of hindsight. You're more in favor of government per se than I am, and I don't mean to sound antagonistic, nor do I imply that the administration's actions are wholly disinterested. Rather, it explains a lot of what's going on at the moment.
Perhaps a general principle is this, which applies beyond the arts world: beware the politicisation of any otherwise non-political institution, even if the politics are to your liking, for with certainty one day the politics will turn against you.
Thoughtful, as usual. And it syncs up with my morning reading, from Vincent Massey: “We need public money for the encouragement of our cultural life, but we want it without official control or political interference. That is why a ministry of fine arts or a federal department of national culture would be regrettable. The very phrases are chilling. The arts can thrive only in the air of freedom.”
“We fully recognize that no government can call artistic excellence into existence. It must flow from the quality of the society and the good fortune of the Nation. Nor should any government seek to restrict the freedom of the artist to pursue his calling in his own way. Freedom is an essential condition for the artist, and in proportion as freedom is diminished so is the prospect of artistic achievement.” Lyndon Johnson, 1965, calling for the creation of the National Endowments.
It is curious that Quincy Jones would have any interest in the "Arts". After all, as someone involved with popular music, his work was mere entertainment, and as such was devoid of any serious artistic value.
To say something expressly that you hint at: that which some progressives have yet to realize, Trump and his team already know - once established, these government entities eventually get taken over by your enemies to the extent that they can't be reformed, and then you have to go through the trouble of unwinding them. Granted, Trump served an entire presidential term without realizing this, but he returns with the benefit of hindsight. You're more in favor of government per se than I am, and I don't mean to sound antagonistic, nor do I imply that the administration's actions are wholly disinterested. Rather, it explains a lot of what's going on at the moment.
Perhaps a general principle is this, which applies beyond the arts world: beware the politicisation of any otherwise non-political institution, even if the politics are to your liking, for with certainty one day the politics will turn against you.