Monday, April 14, 2008

The governments sponsorship of art I believe is for the most part a good thing.  Because the public is drawn to art.  It is undeniable that when the government creates the opportunity for artist to create art for public viewing, it becomes part of the community.  
In fayetteville there is the public library, and the flower benches in Wilson Park.  These are just examples. These are both places that people regularly visit, and in large part the visit is enhanced because of the artistic design applied to them.  This I believe is the sort of art everyone is behind.  Art the public can admire or use. Which I think is suppose to be the main part of art anyway.  Though I am a fan of art museums, I do not understand why more artist do not have art we can see and use every where.  I think it should be something experienced when you walk down a road or go to pay your taxes.  And in that sense I am fully behind the government supporting artist.  There of course is the possibility of a government starting to want to control art, and I can't imagine many people who would support this either.
The control of art is sure to head for disaster, and Hitler is proof of this.  I do not really have a fear of this happening in America.  Mostly because sadly art isn't that big of a deal in most of country.  Many people seem to see art as a dying art so to speak.  Art seems to be something that is only understood by artistic people, and the rest is just clueless.  I've met many people who feel this way about art, and little seems to want to change their opinion.  Perhaps if more art were sponsored by the government the idea of art being unreachable by everyone would be minimized.  


Stephanie Lewis said...

"Art as a dying art"? LOL I think you may have coined a new phrase.

Stephanie Lewis said...

Turns out there's a link.