Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
French vs. American Culture
From the always wonderful The Week magazine, a heartening summary of an argument made by French columnist Eric Le Boucher in Le Monde. (In The Week style, the internal quotes are from the original article that they are summarizing):
[The French] system, "which rests largely on public subsidizing of the arts and on massive unemployment insurance for artists," seemed intrinsically superior—even morally superior. Yet a new French study of the American culture industry says this caricature of the U.S. as McHollywood is way off the mark. The U.S. has 2 million people professionally employed as artists. Not only is that figure nearly three times the number employed as police in the U.S., but it’s also proportionately much larger than the artist population in France. Even more surprising, to French sensibilities, is "the diversity of the American art scene." Spurred by competition and lacking the complacency that government funding imparts, American artists have created independent theaters, studios, writing workshops, and alternative dance groups, even in small towns. The result is not a cultural scene ruled by money but one that is "profoundly democratic."
For the full summary, see
here and scroll down to the bottom. America's varied and vital
art scene, both high and popular--one of many things to be thankful
for this holiday weekend.
Larry A|11.22.06 @ 8:49PM|#
Spurred by competition and lacking the complacency that
government funding imparts, American artists have created
independent theaters, studios, writing workshops, and alternative
dance groups, even in small towns.
Yes indeed, there is art outside Hollywood and New York City. I
live in a small Texas town in a county of about 40,000 people, and
we have three different live theater companies, not counting those
at schools and the university.
edna|11.22.06 @ 8:50PM|#
french cinema will never be equaled by us. first, they call
movies "cinema," which seems ever so intellectual. second, they
have marguerite duras. third, they have absolutely perfected the
two hour understated exploration of the innermost angst suffered by
pretty 14 year olds who smoke.
then there's french rap music. because of their local content laws,
it's impossible to listen to french radio without being subjected
to this. as lame as the idea of french rap might seem, the reality
is far worse.
then there's french sculpture. my favorite is a huge statue of a
paper clip along the highway leading into lyon. i wonder how much
the french taxpayers got soaked for that one...
|11.22.06 @ 9:01PM|#
News item: American culture is better than the French think it
is, and is, in fact, better than French culture.
In other news: Experts say oceans go up and down with the tide.
Also, water is wet.
|11.22.06 @ 10:52PM|#
Actually, societies where artists must produce popular art do
produce more vibrant, stimulating, envelope-pushing and dynamic
art. It's essentially a fallout of artists having to earn a living
instead of depending on a patron to subsidize them.
I found the following lecture series from art historian Paul Cantor
on the History of Culture (from an Economic Perspective)
particularly illuminating. It also changed me into a more tolerant
man when it comes to art.
Just copy and and paste the following into a text file, save it
with the extension '.m3u' and open it with your favorite media
player.
http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/Cantor/Cantor-1.mp3
http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/Cantor/Cantor-2.mp3
http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/Cantor/Cantor-3.mp3
http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/Cantor/Cantor-4.mp3
http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/Cantor/Cantor-5.mp3
http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/Cantor/Cantor-6.mp3
http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/Cantor/Cantor-7.mp3
http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/Cantor/Cantor-8.mp3
http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/Cantor/Cantor-9.mp3
http://mises.org/multimedia/mp3/Cantor/Cantor-10.mp3
|11.22.06 @ 11:07PM|#
I can't speak for all French cinema, but the best movie that has come out in this century is French: Le Fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain, aka Amélie.
Justin Slotman|11.22.06 @ 11:49PM|#
I agree that the unsubsidized cinemas are definitely more vibrant cinemas--I mean, America, Hong Kong, and Japan all on average produce far more entertaining movies than the state-supported Euro cinemas. Then again the European cinemas have produced what are generally considered to be both important and influential films. Maybe the culture industry parallels the science industry in terms of there being a divide between for-profit science and state-subsidized science: there's a divide between for-profit culture and state-subsidized culture, and they influence and feed off each other but they have different aims. If that makes any sense at all.
|11.23.06 @ 12:53AM|#
The French are undone by their reputation. They had their moment. They gave us Escoffier and some great art. Post 19th century, it's just a laid-back country that's nice to visit.
|11.23.06 @ 2:34AM|#
Justin Slotman,
It makes sense. I guess some anecdotal evidence for that is
Tarantino dedicating Resevoir Dogs" to Godard.
The French system seems to allow for movies that couldn't get made
in the U.S. Which is why to my knowledge there has never been a
movie produced in the U.S. like Est-ouest. Whether that makes the
overall French film (getting into in the art scene in general would
be an even thornier issue) better or worse than that in the U.S.
well, seems rather subjective (based on the content of the art
itself that is). Of course in per capita artist terms it does seem
that the American way of doing things is better.
On the diversity issue, this in many ways depends on how you define
art, artists, etc. To be honest, there is a lot of local art done
by amatuers and the like in France that the discussion above
probably doesn't include.
|11.23.06 @ 2:42AM|#
There is an annoying irony about an artist who spends their days railing against society's conformist squares, styles themselves an anarchist, and then goes and picks up their govt. handout of the square's hard earned money at the end of the day.
gommm|11.23.06 @ 5:23AM|#
Well I don't know... but I tend to prefer for entertainment
value french or mainland china movies compared to american
movies....
American movies tend for 80 % of them to always be the same old
cliche movies with the same typical happy ending and scenario so
that the mass can watch the movie without thinking or being
disturbed (I did say 80% because some of the american movies out
there are amazing)....
In the french movie scene, the percentage of innovative work seem
higher.... ( and a nice plus side is that movie theaters showing
art movies from all over the world are cheap and easy to
access)
And don't get me started on japanese movies, of course there are
some amazing movies there and they get known outside of japan
rightly so... But a lot of japanese movies are not really
good...
Now of course this is just a subjective point of view and I guess
some people could have the complete opposite point of view and
favour the american system....
Now I wonder how a country could try to get the best of both
worlds.....
|11.23.06 @ 6:07AM|#
I'm always first in line to kick Frenchy when he's down, but do Americans need yet another reason to feel smug?
|11.23.06 @ 7:00AM|#
DavidS,
Well, there is always something ironic in Americans complaining
about the smugness of any other culture.
|11.23.06 @ 7:11AM|#
Well, it's to be expected, isn't it? Every Frenchman who's worth
a damn has already emigrated to the USA.
-jcr
|11.23.06 @ 7:23AM|#
Byronic,
In many instances it is. Shit smugness is part of what is at the
heart of the war in Iraq.
_________________________________________
I'll have to find the original article and see if it mentions
dozens of "squatter" art venues in Paris. I mean, I guess if you
compare "official" French art with that in the U.S. the U.S. might
be more diverse, but that doesn't take into account all the
underground, "squatter," etc. art going on in France.
|11.23.06 @ 8:26AM|#
At least it's not government subsidized smugness.
Uh, quite often it is. See, there's this government giveaway
program for artists here in the US called the National Endowment
for the Arts, which in the past funded masterpieces such as
Serrano's Piss Christ and soft-core porn "performance artist" Annie
Sprinkle.
This LBJ-inspired program just survived 12 years of heartless
Republican budget cuts intact and bigger than it was in 1994, so it
looks like many of our "edgy counterculturalists" will continue to
rail against conformity while cashing their fat government checks
for the forseeable future.
|11.23.06 @ 10:23AM|#
Alas, our concern with what the French think and this obssessive comparing of our "culture" with theirs smacks of a major inferiority complex. We should enjoy the benfits of our model (and suffer its defects) without evangelizing others and patting ourselves on the back about its merits and superiority. I've lived in France, and it's a wonderful place with great art. So is the U.S. But the two cultures are profoundly different. Vive la difference!
|11.23.06 @ 11:11AM|#
Speaking of government subsidies, Milton Friedman's TV series "Free to Choose" appeared on PBS.
eugene|11.23.06 @ 12:28PM|#
Here's a whole bunch of useless crap that the NEA funded in
2006. I'll bet a lot of it was highly French-influenced.
http://www.nea.gov/grants/recent/06grants/am_va06.php
Just look at this nonsense, for example :
Morehead State University
Morehead, KY
$30,000
To support the touring exhibition Slow Time: The Works of Charley
and Noah Kinney, with accompanying catalogue and education
programs. The exhibition will examine the work of the late Kinney
brothers, self-taught artists and musicians from Appalachia
That sure doesn't sound like "American artists have created
independent theaters, studios, writing workshops, and alternative
dance groups, even in small towns" to me. To the contrary, it
fairly reeks of Camembert and mime sweat.
okfuture|11.23.06 @ 12:34PM|#
When it comes to the arts, the French are history. Other than a blush of cinematic jinn in the 60's, what have they offered to the world, post- World War Two? Subsidizing the arts is like subsidizing anything else . . . it makes everyone a taker, or in this case, an artist, and thus demeans and diminishes the brilliance of the individual genius that must, by necessity, flourish in a free realm.
|11.23.06 @ 12:50PM|#
These conversations invariably turn into my country is better than yours displays, and tiresome claims about how the "old country" is in deep decline. I doubt any of us is qualified to make such broad claims.
|11.23.06 @ 1:01PM|#
"These conversations invariably turn into my country is better
than yours displays, and tiresome claims about how the "old
country" is in deep decline. I doubt any of us is qualified to make
such broad claims."
I agree, I also think the US is much better in this regard...
ed|11.23.06 @ 1:03PM|#
Funny thing is: many right-wing political types who argue against subsidizing the arts have no such qualms about subsidizing agriculture and other pet projects. It's easy to dump on the French; the Iowans and Kansans: not so easy.
|11.23.06 @ 1:10PM|#
What's weird is how people can view culture as a zero sum game; as if cool things that happen in Europe somehow hurt the U.S (or vice versa).
|11.23.06 @ 1:29PM|#
ed
I believe that is because France has zero electoral votes.
But I'm a totally equal opportunity dumper. Got anyone you want
dumped on?
|11.23.06 @ 3:11PM|#
Its true. I was on tour with my band last month and we played with this french group in NY, And they gave us the low down on how the government subsidizes artists %100. My economically retarded band mates ate it up like gold. All I could think was, 'god, your scene must suck'. Anyway, I know several people in Austin mutherfuckin Tejas who are doing well, from spoon to the Black Angels. Anyway, most of the best bands in this town you will never hear of cause the competition is so stiff, and thats what makes it good. Anyway, Im wasted, and I have a cobbler in the oven. A solid fuck off to all of you. I luv ya
|11.23.06 @ 8:05PM|#
I have always suspected that Americans who are very hostile to French culture flunked French in high school. The big pushers of English only laws probably flunked Spanish. I'm pretty sure that many libertarians who despise the "nanny state" rely heavily on their parents for economic survival. Raging anti-gay fundamentalist preachers turn out to be gay. It's a strange world.
|11.23.06 @ 9:48PM|#
Steveintheknow:
The scenes where there is a lot of competition are always the
shittiest scenes. Don't get me wrong, Austin was great, but jeez,
that was 10 years ago. Still hanging on to the past glories of
SXSW? NYC (my scene) is just gross.
What do you get when there is too much competition? Lots of jumping
on bandwagons. My advice? Subsidize your own art.
|11.23.06 @ 11:51PM|#
When it comes to the arts, the French are history. Other
than a blush of cinematic jinn in the 60's, what have they offered
to the world, post- World War Two?
Truffaut and Godard, right off the top of my head.
|11.24.06 @ 6:48AM|#
"When it comes to the arts, the French are history. Other than a
blush of cinematic jinn in the 60's, what have they offered to the
world, post- World War Two?"
"Truffaut and Godard, right off the top of my head."
Put Jean Cocteau at the top of that list.
|11.24.06 @ 9:09AM|#
I think the point of the article is more about whether subsidies are useful and effective not whether the USA is better than France.
|11.24.06 @ 10:52AM|#
I'm not really sure how this relates to French vs. American
cinema, but here goes.
The French consider Jerry Lewis a comedic genius, The Americans
consider Jerry Lewis a buffoon. No accounting for tastes, is there?
This indicates that "ART" has always been, and will remain
subjective.
If we concede that the art scenes in both cultures are of
comparable worth, then taxpayer subsidies for the arts are, at
best, a waste of the peoples hard earned dollars/francs.
|11.24.06 @ 11:34AM|#
The French consider Jerry Lewis a comedic
genius...
Not really. There was a sub-set of a generation of French people
who liked him a lot, but that was a generation or two ago. These
days your average French teenager is more likely to listen to
Outkast than anything.
|11.24.06 @ 11:36AM|#
BTW, if you are inclined, there are French radio stations which are broadcast on-line; they often have a lot of American or British content (especially those dedicated to pop music).
|11.24.06 @ 12:06PM|#
I'll bet more PBS viewers than reality TV afficianados know who Milton Friedman was. Most of Friedman's income came from tax sources, by the way. The completely privatized society right-wing libertarians waste their time dreaming about would be a cultural wasteland. On the upside, few would notice.
|11.24.06 @ 3:34PM|#
I'll bet more PBS viewers than reality TV afficianados know
who Milton Friedman was.
Most of those people would know who Milton Friedman was without
PBS.
Most of Friedman's income came from tax sources, by the
way.
Considering that he spent most of his life at the University of
Chicago and the Hoover Institution (both of which are private) I
find that doubtful.
|11.24.06 @ 3:48PM|#
Richard, most of American society already is privatized, the art world included. As much as we complain about stuff like the NEA, I would bet that they comprise only a tiny slice of what we could broadly consider "culture". You might want to consider that in your "wasteland" thinking.
R C Dean|11.24.06 @ 3:59PM|#
Other than a blush of cinematic jinn in the 60's, what have
they offered to the world, post- World War Two?
Truffaut and Godard, right off the top of my head.
Truffaut's "The 400 Blows" came out in 1959, and Godard's
"Breathless" came out in 1960, so I would regard them both as part
of 1960's French cinema and encompassed in the original
comment.
R C Dean|11.24.06 @ 4:01PM|#
The completely privatized society right-wing libertarians
waste their time dreaming about would be a cultural
wasteland.
Why?
The American music scene is about as privatized as it gets, and it
is insanely rich and diverse.
|11.24.06 @ 4:35PM|#
I think the vigor of American music and is part of the reason
that so many countries subsidize their arts, in the belief that
they are incapable of competing.
While the size of the American internal market does give an
advantage to American artists in terms of a greater degree of
promotion and accessibility, it is also a great opportunity to the
outsider with quality work to present.
Unfortunately, countries like mine [Canada] tend to see the
American vigor and power as a threat instead of an opportunity. I
wish we had more Cirque du Soliel's and fewer Margaret Atwoods.
|11.24.06 @ 4:42PM|#
"The American music scene is about as privatized as it gets,
and it is insanely rich and diverse."
Very true, but it also reflects the overall divide between rich and
poor. The difference, and the thing that gets under my skin, is
that success has very little to do with music, and very much to do
with a tight, cute ass. This is great for fashion, magazines and
fishing shows, but it's not awesome for music. Few major industries
are able to effectively market crap like the music biz. Still, on
an underground level and a pure diversity level, we've got the
world (except maybe Japan) licked. If we're talking about art,
rather than pop sales, our system seems to have worked.
|11.24.06 @ 4:51PM|#
Is science part of the culture?
Master List of Federally Funded Research and Development
Centers
[Last updated: February 2005]
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf05306/
|11.24.06 @ 4:56PM|#
Lamar
Disagree. I'm a confirmed classical/baroque fan and consider
C&W, rap, christian music, etc to be crap. However, I recognize
the vigor in these popular forms and know that some of it is highly
creative, even though it don't appeal to me in the slightest.
[Apologies if I have misinterpreted your point.]
|11.24.06 @ 5:02PM|#
R.C. Dean,
I'll repeat my point; it highly likely that neither you nor anyone
else here has the requisite knowledge to say what the French art
scene is like. I suspect that it is far more diverse than a lot of
Americans are inclined to admit.
Aresen,
The heart of the genre known as "World Music" is in Paris as far as
I know.
|11.24.06 @ 5:04PM|#
R.C. Dean,
If you really are interested in French art, well, Google is just a
few clicks away.
|11.24.06 @ 5:07PM|#
Aresen,
You have a point, and I think I even admitted as much in my earlier
post.
By the way, part of the problem in other countries, at least I had
this experience in Spain, is that decent musical equipment can cost
10x as much overseas. This doesn't account for other forms of art,
and probably has something to do with governments protecting their
own musical instrument markets. The effect is that nobody can own a
Gibson or even Epiphone Les Paul.
R C Dean|11.24.06 @ 5:51PM|#
Whatever, Zeno.
I was just pointing out that to most folks, Godard and Truffaut are
the very definition of '60s French cinema, so offering them up as
counterexamples to the claim that '60s cinema is about all splash
French culture has made in the last 50 years doesn't really get you
very far.
|11.24.06 @ 6:39PM|#
R.C. Dean,
I think Luc Besson fits your criteria then. I know a certain
portion of the American male population thinks that The
Professional is one of the greatest action films of all time.
Or they think it is second to Nikita. I personally love
The Fifth Element.
|11.24.06 @ 6:43PM|#
R.C. Dean,
And I guess Jean-Pierre Jeunet might also be what you are looking
for. I mean, movies like Delicatessen and The City of
Lost Children are pretty kick ass. Alien IV wasn't
that great, but he had no control over the script as far as I
know.
|11.24.06 @ 8:07PM|#
Compare American TV cop shows with their British or French counterparts. American productions are adolescent drivel. Maybe American taste is just puerile. On the other hand, the market seems to pander to and reinforce the worst taste. I hope I don't sound like a snob.
|11.24.06 @ 8:13PM|#
And while we're dissing government funding, let's not forget that the Internet was originally a tax-funded government project.
|11.24.06 @ 9:52PM|#
Compare American TV cop shows with their British or French
counterparts.
There is private media in those countries and that is who is making
more and more of those critically aclaimed shows.
I hope I don't sound like a snob.
No, actually you just sound like someone who doesn't know what he's
talking about.
|11.24.06 @ 11:44PM|#
Actually, Isaac, I know a lot more about French TV and cinema
than you do.
As animation producers, buyers and distributors gather in Cannes
for MIPCOM this week, Christopher Panzner, exec. producer,
animation for Teva, sheds some light on the unique French system
for producing animation.
There is virtually no animated film or television program made in
France that doesn't benefit from government subsidies in one form
or another. While it's difficult for unsubsidized producers from
other countries to understand this phenomenon (and just as
difficult for those that do to understand the French system), the
system works, works well and has for some time.
The typical sources of funding from France are the TV sale, CNC,
cable/satellite, video/DVD, distributor (ROW) minimum guarantee,
regional subsidies and pre-sales. Films would include theatrical
distribution and, possibly, a SOFICA. Cumulative funding from
France can amount to anywhere from 30-35% government subsidies,
making French co-production partners particularly attractive.
The French Touch
If you think about the current state of "art" and "state of the
art," the new math favors the auteur approach and new media models.
With big studios laying people off in record numbers and industry
veterans bemoaning the so-called end of 2D, the French system
favors the unique vision, fresh approaches, new media and "la
boutique." There is no greater testament to this statement than the
recent release of Sylvain Chomet's groundbreaking masterpiece, Les
Triplettes de Belleville. It's only the end of 2D as we know it
(and story-telling, storyboarding, layout and possibly the entire
process including financing.) The French are re-thinking it all
from the ground up. And it makes economic sense.
A typical European budget for a 26x22 series is in the US$6-8
million range ($10,500-12,000/minute) and $6-10 million range for
an average 80-min feature. Series, however, are actually getting
cheaper to produce, due mainly to technological innovation. Films
are getting more expensive but sources of financing are
multiplying.
One of the biggest advantages of 3D or Flash (not to mention
stop-motion, cut-outs, mixed media, etc.) is that animation can be
done entirely in-house. An added advantage of the French subsidies
system is that if a significant amount of work is done in France on
a series, for example, the CNC will contribute 25% more. Combining
French funding with resources in Canada, Germany, Luxembourg,
Belgium, Ireland, Scandinavia, etc. can bring the entirety of the
budget to a technologically innovative program. The rest is a
question of alchemy: the worksplit and spending requirements. The
general rule of thumb dictates that the amount raised in a
territory must be spent there.
A pre-requisite for a series obtaining CNC funding, however, is
that a broadcaster must be on board. Once this is in place, the aid
is automatic. A French TV station is not a pre-requisite to
receiving CNC aid for a feature, which is automatic for established
film producers, but a TV sale is essential to the overall French
funding.
An example of the growing interest in feature production is the
recently announced creation of a SOFICA in the city of Angoulême
(Magelis). Essentially devoted to feature films (60% live-action
and 40% animation), 8 million Euros (US$9 million) will be divided
over a minimum of 12 projects per year with a ceiling of 800,000
Euros (US$900,000) per project.
Interest in feature film financing is on the rise throughout
Europe. There are conditions, specific to each country, for
benefiting from the various resources but it is simply a question
of finding the best fit. The French model is very complementary,
but there are also conditions that have to be taken into
consideration.
One of the conditions of working with France, and a source of
anxiety for foreign producers of film and television, are "droits
d'auteur." Authors of virtually anything drawn or written or scored
have substantial rights in France. For producers who think that
artists having control is their worst nightmare, it's less about
control than the "French Touch": attention-grabbing graphics,
visionary storytelling and an artistic collective devoted to
creating something unique, original, international and commercially
successful but where key talent shares in the success. (Amélie was
number 8 at the American box office!)
The French system encourages not only creativity but subsidizes
just about everything from development to distribution. That's part
of the reason why France is the third-largest producer of animation
in the world, after the United States and Japan, a little-known
fact.
|11.25.06 @ 1:48AM|#
Well, Richard, you certainly do seem to know a lot more about
French TV and cinema than I do. But then I never actually claimed
to know anything about French TV and cinema at all. It was some of
the other assertions you have made on this thread that I was
referring to.
What I do know is a fair number of ordinary french people, a few
are even related to me. They are just as uncouth, uncultured, rude
and bigoted as any American. In some cases even more so.
The fact that French elites have suckered the government into
spending the money of regular taxpayers on shit they don't want is
no skin of my nose.
By the way, I happen to agree that American TV is crap. But then
from what I can tell so is most of what is made just about anywhere
in the world, with or without subsidy or local content rules. Hence
I watch very little of it.
And furthermore I am glad government subsidies are not any higher
in this country than they already are, because if they were the
result would be even more crap.
|11.25.06 @ 2:09AM|#
Richard seems to know what he's talking about, even if he has
some opposing views.
Did you know that crap like U-571 and Bridget Jones' Diary are
Studio Canal productions? In addition, they own films such as
Terminator 2 and Basic Instinct? They recently did the overly
thinker-esque (smugtion movie?)
Babel? Then there are always The Professional, Amelie, and a bunch
of other films as shitty as or slightly less stinky than many
American films. I guess my point in all this is that the French are
just as eager to cash in on crap as good old Hollywood Americans
are. Just because there is little inspiring in French art doesn't
mean that American films don't suck just as much. Caveat: We do
films better, and in more abundance. All I ask is that we don't
knee-jerk discount a country that makes more films than most. I
think we hate the French because they are too damn much like US.
Sure, their government is more paternalistic, and that probably
hinders their output. But jeez, they still do a lot of good shit
and bad shit and highly mediocre shit. Looking at movies today,
what more can you ask for?
|11.25.06 @ 5:07AM|#
it is silly to think that anyone here is in touch with
contemporary art in either country.
art that is really doing something different is understood by very
few people within very tight circles.
the rest of us, afficionados, critics and appreciaters just don't
get it or, more likely, don't see this art at all.
in the case of france: people in charge of granting funding for art
probably will not grant funding for stuff that they just don't
get.
in the case of the U.S.: market it however you want, the public
will not respond to art that they just don't get.
so what is really being compared here is not two international art
scenes, but on one hand art as accepted by a gov't collective; and
on the other hand, art made succesful by the acceptance of a
populace under the influence of a heavy bombardment of
advertising.
...it's like comparing a plastic apple with a plastic orange. it's
mute!
|11.25.06 @ 7:07AM|#
eric,
There is a lot of truth in what you are saying. If one were to have
judged French art 1860 by what went on the government sponsored art
shows it would have seemed quite, well, unchanging. That would have
of course missed the revolution in art that was just starting and
would eventually revolutionize the art world - French
impressionism.
|11.25.06 @ 1:43PM|#
Science fiction writer Harlan Ellison once said "90% of science fiction is crap. Of course 90% of everything is crap." Anyone disagree?
|11.25.06 @ 3:04PM|#
Well, 100% of crap is crap, so I guess I disagree. Absolutely loved The Deathbird Stories, though.
eugene|11.25.06 @ 7:37PM|#
J sub D, you thinking of Theodore Sturgeon who said (something similar to) that, not Harlan Ellison.
|11.26.06 @ 10:12AM|#
I know that I care much more about American animation and movies
than I care about French.
Heck, I can't even name a single French animation produced in the
last ten years that I liked. But I could name countless
American.
The German movie/animation sector is also subsidized and there are
very few good movies that we produce. It has been getting better in
the last few years but I don't think it correlates with the funding
received trough subsidies.
You could argue that subsidies are necessary to support niche
culture - but in Germany even big movies often get government
funding - seems to be the same for France. There is no benefit to
that.
|11.26.06 @ 4:27PM|#
Well, 100% of crap is crap, so I guess I
disagree.
I've read, don't remember where, that 25% (by weight) of crap is
actually e. coli bacteria. Useles info, I know. But I found it
interesting.
hanmeng|11.27.06 @ 10:44AM|#
L'exception culturelle américaine, par Eric Le Boucher refers to research by Frédéric Martel, from his forthcoming book, De la culture en Amérique.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245