Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Economics

I Prefer to Think of the Stimulus Bill Itself As a Piece of Conceptual Art

Jesse Walker | 1.28.2009 9:06 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Artists demand their share of the loot.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Happy Followup on L.A.'s Bicycle Licensing Scheme

Books Editor Jesse Walker is the author of Rebels on the Air and The United States of Paranoia.

EconomicsCultureArt
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (45)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Derrick   16 years ago

    You will experience d?j? vu.

  2. Sean W. Malone   16 years ago

    I saw something like this on Facebook the other day, petitioning for a "secretary of the arts" and some dumbass on there said that "America is catching up with the rest of the world in so many other ways right now, why not this?"

    I am a professional artist (music industry), and I know how dumb my people can be most of the time... but this really goes above and beyond anything I'd ever really imagined.

    The nations that have Ministers of Culture & Art... are... let's think... China. Cuba... Iran...

    Good role models guys.

    Incidentally I went to Graduate School at New York University and studied music composition under Dinu Ghezzo - who is a pretty famous Romanian composer and who grew up composing when the Romania was controlled by Soviet Russia. He would have a freakin' fit if he heard about this.

  3. Mike Laursen   16 years ago

    Most of the signatures on the petition are poets. Now, I know I'm crass and uncultured, but I've gotta ask: wouldn't it be totally doable to hold down a full-time job and still have time to write several poems a day?

  4. MattXIV   16 years ago

    Well, at this point this petition has about 1700 more signatories. So congress, where's my Metal Gear Solid 4 bailout?

  5. Hugh Akston   16 years ago

    Mike,

    Writing a poem that people want to read (or will pay to publish) is another matter. But you're correct that good writing isn't a matter of funding, it is a matter of discipline and practice.

  6. Naga Sadow   16 years ago

    Mike,

    You fool! That kind of logic could KILL my profession!

    "I don't tip because society says I have to. All right, if someone deserves a tip, if they really put forth an effort, I'll give them something a little something extra. But this tipping automatically, it's for the birds. As far as I'm concerned, they're just doing their job."

  7. Naga Sadow   16 years ago

    On a more serious note . . . by what sort of logic are these . . . "artists" gonna earn a bailout? Will they somehow reach the masses? Turn the masses towards a more cultured nation? What is the cost/benefit of this artist bailout? Cuz economics already explains why artists typically don't earn much.

  8. Mark Borok   16 years ago

    Sean Malone,

    "The nations that have Ministers of Culture & Art... are... let's think... China. Cuba... Iran..."

    France, Norway, Brazil, Spain, India, Canada, Denmark...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Culture

  9. Orange Line Special   16 years ago

    O
    look!
    Reason forgot to
    tell us who the sponsor is
    will Reason
    report on that group's
    links to the BHO admin?
    will Reason
    look into that, or
    would that against
    cosmo rules?

  10. SIV   16 years ago

    Arts funding is handled by the Ministry of Truth in Oceania.

    I hate welfare artists but they never get the cash they think they will.
    Usually the arts funding goes to the opera,ballet,symphony,big museum type stuff so their patrons can "stimulate" some other part of the economy.

  11. Naga Sadow   16 years ago

    Chris!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    *shakes fist in air*

  12. Derrick   16 years ago

    You will experience d?j? vu.

  13. Naga Sadow   16 years ago

    SIV,

    You make an excellent point, my friend. Most colleges and universities take about 50% to 60% of all research grants. I would assume something along these lines would occur. It's funny that people who are the loudest about university funding don't understand that universities jack up tuition by the mean of the funding increase.

  14. juris imprudent   16 years ago

    Can we take it to the desert and burn it?

  15. Naga Sadow   16 years ago

    Whoa! I could swear I've read your post somewhere . . . in the past . . . maybe . . .

  16. SIV   16 years ago

    OLS,

    Down here in Georgia we don't need your flimsy "proof" to know the country is now in the hands of dirty commies.

    We know about commies here. We used to send Larry McDonald to congress, AS A DEMOCRAT, until the soviets blew him and the airliner he was in out of the sky.We

  17. Naga Sadow   16 years ago

    SIV,

    What the fuck was that?

  18. SIV   16 years ago

    Explanatary link about the late Rep McDonald

    There was hardly ever a Republican further to the right.

  19. SIV   16 years ago

    I anticipated your question and prepared a timely hyper-link Naga.

  20. SIV   16 years ago

    OLS was self-linking to something about Leon Panetta being a KGB agent or something.

  21. SIV   16 years ago

    Yeah, I clicked on a lonewacko link
    I should watch TeeVee or something instead.

  22. Naga Sadow   16 years ago

    SIV,

    Insightful. Though I think you left this out.

  23. SIV   16 years ago

    Excellent Naga,

    I think most proponents of Austrian economics would find that information edifying.

  24. Naga Sadow   16 years ago

    Feedback would be appreciated! LOL!

  25. Naga Sadow   16 years ago

    By the way, SIV. OLS is to be referred to as Chris from now on. His name being Chris Kelly. I know, I know, "How do you know that Naga?" Someone on Reason figured it out and linked it to a Sullum post. Link.

  26. Jay   16 years ago

    What happens to the 101st special interest group that knocks on the door asking for 1% of the bailout money.

    I thought "gread" was what got us into this mess. Are these artists not being greedy?

  27. taz   16 years ago

    You'd think that they could find just one decent web designer in that mob of artists.

  28. Paul   16 years ago

    The WPA supported Jackson Pollock

    If there was ever a reason to not put public monies into art, I think we just found it.

    Unintentionally funniest interview question. Evar:

    Susan Stamberg of NPR to Ed Harris on his portrayal of Jackson Pollock: In the movie, you do your own painting and they look amazingly like Jackson Pollock's, how did you do that?

  29. Naga Sadow   16 years ago

    Paul,

    Are suggesting that Pollock's style did not include skills as well? Wasn't he dating/married to that art critic/rich woman? Give the man's networking skills some props.

  30. Sarah Hatton   16 years ago

    as an artist I must say I am totally against this, having gov funded art makes art, by default, turn into propaganda... what artist wants that? There is so much money and residencies out there for people doing cool art and creative things, like Creative Capital and then smaller grants, separate from the NEA... artists that want this bail out are just lazy bums who make crap and don't innovate... boo on them. I think art making needs to stay competitive because out of these programs comes innovation on occasion (people working in new media) There is no need for a "ministry of culture" to decide what is and isn't art. People can form their own cooperatives and programs and decide for themselves who to fund, and it means that great stuff will be made, NOT propaganda.

  31. Sean W. Malone   16 years ago

    ""The nations that have Ministers of Culture & Art... are... let's think... China. Cuba... Iran..."

    France, Norway, Brazil, Spain, India, Canada, Denmark..."

    Yes... I'm well aware that other nations have ministries of culture other than the ones I listed. And frankly... I don't care. At *BEST* this whole idea means tax-payer money goes to supporting nonsense that cannot under ANY circumstances be considered constitutional. At best... it's a silly waste of money for which there is no need and no value. At *WORST*, however..... we wind up with an amazing abridgment of free speech. My point, with mentioning Romania, Iran, China, etc. was that government deciding what is acceptable art and what isn't - or even choosing to put forth large sums of tax-payer money into art - will result in exactly what Sarah just said.

  32. Sean W. Malone   16 years ago

    Also... Jackson Pollock's work is completely useless...

    When I was younger, I was at a museum with my father with some abstract paintings, and it spurred this conversation about how the purpose of art in a lot of ways is to provoke some variety of reaction. And on that scale, at the time, the art succeeded in annoying the crap out of me. So, it did pass our agreed upon definition of "art"............ But Pollock provokes nothing in me at all. I look at his work and see mindless, random, sometimes splotchy, meaningless lines that do not invoke even irritation. At best, a Pollock painting gets "Hmm... there's more color on that wall than there usually is." or maybe "Someone might want to clean that mess up."

  33. NavinK   16 years ago

    At best, a Pollock painting gets "Hmm... there's more color on that wall than there usually is." or maybe "Someone might want to clean that mess up."

    Threadwinner!

  34. Jesse Walker   16 years ago

    I was down on abstract expressionism too -- until I saw what it looked like animated.

    Of course, Oskar Fischinger didn't rely on a ministry of culture for support. Indeed, when he lived in Germany, the ministry of culture was a threat to his livelihood. Fortunately, he was able to get support another way: making an ad for a cigarette company.

  35. ed   16 years ago

    The WPA supported Jackson Pollock...

    The petition notes this as an achievement?

  36. DADIODADDY   16 years ago

    A modes tproposal...ARTISTEs may have their bailout under the following condition; the signers of the petition must select a signer, and kill him/her on the Mall (such a dramatic piece of performance art don't you think?) as a symbolic sacrifice to their ART. Thinking of adding a rider that the remaining members must cook & consume said sacrifice to show their solidarity.

  37. JW   16 years ago

    Insightful. Though I think you left this out.

    ::Shakes fist in the air:: NAGA!!!!!

    That. was. just. wrong.

  38. P Brooks   16 years ago

    capitalist pig

    sees the trees not the forest

    greedy running dog

    Ize a ARTEEEEST! Gimme some money.

  39. Solana   16 years ago

    Go figure. I never knew I could blame Jackson Pollock on Roosevelt, too. Can't wait to throw that one around in debate...

  40. Naga Sadow   16 years ago

    JW,

    Hope you weren't at work when you clicked on it. LoL!

  41. Fresno Bob   16 years ago

    Naga,

    I'm at work. You suck. Fortunately, I don't currently have speakers hooked up to my computer. 🙂

  42. Bside   16 years ago

    Sarah Hatton - As an artist I also hate this. You are right about a lot of artists being lazy morons just looking for the next scam. And the artists I know are completely ignorant when it comes to economics.

    That said, I'm consistently disappointed by libertarians' opinions of contemporary art. You all sound like a bunch of rubes. Do we not like Pollock because his paintings don't look like something? Is that the purpose of painting, to render something realistically? Didn't the advent of photography (170 years ago) kind of take care of all that? Should everybody just keep painting like Jacques-Louis David or something? Pollock has his problems, but to suggest his work is worthless because it is abstract is totally ignorant stasist crap. Progress is a wonderful thing. May I suggest you get on board?

  43. economist   16 years ago

    Bside,
    Let me look at that Pollock painting again...Nope, still looks like crap. Then again, I've never been terribly artsy, so maybe that's the reason.

  44. Naga Sadow   16 years ago

    LMAO! Damn. I gotta remember those damn rick roll links are land mines just waiting to be stepped on by anyone, not just the intended victim.

  45. Sean W. Malone   16 years ago

    Hooray! I've been claimed "Threadwinner"...

    Awesome.

    Now. Bside... I think I covered your point in my earlier post in the discussion of the purpose of art. You may disagree with my assessment, but I tend to believe art is something purposefully created with the intent of eliciting a response from the viewer/listener/participant/etc. Some art is more masturbatory than others, abstract art - most modern art - tends to be extremely masturbatory. Sometimes it's cerebral and can be interesting if it's interesting features get conveyed to someone other than the creator.

    Take Penderecki's "Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima"... The title gives it political and intellectual weight which it originally didn't have. In it's creation, Penderecki just conceived of it as an abstract and personally interesting musical experiment, but when it actually got performed, he added the title. In this case - that was enough for the piece to jump from random, odd and often irritating noises (which is still evoking a reaction, albeit extremely general and mostly obnoxious) to poignant, sorrowful and ghastly emotional & historical significance.

    On the other hand... you have something like Jackson Pollock's "No. 5"

    Number Five... Thanks Jack. Not only does it not have any interesting characteristics intellectually, formally or in technique (is there any technique to random dripping of paint?) - he couldn't even be bothered to put a title on it that might make anyone think.

    So... Bside. I'm hardly ignorant or even wholly disrespectful of modern art, and I even find a lot of post-modern art to be very worthwhile. Jackson Pollock however, can suck it. And not just because he wasn't doing photo-realistic paintings.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Trump's Prescription Price Controls Would Lead to Fewer New Drugs

Joe Lancaster | 5.22.2025 12:55 PM

Congress Is Giving Energy Lobbyists a 3-Year Window to Keep Up to $2 Trillion in Subsidies

Jeff Luse | 5.22.2025 11:47 AM

A Giant Pile of Money Won't Fix Democrats' Joe Rogan Problem

Robby Soave | 5.22.2025 10:30 AM

Israeli Embassy Staffers Killed

Liz Wolfe | 5.22.2025 9:38 AM

Trump's FTC Chair Is Continuing To Push Lina Khan's Antitrust
Ideology

Jack Nicastro | From the June 2025 issue

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!