Wednesday Morning Arts Roundup
1. ThinkProgress has posted a strange article by Alyssa Rosenberg on the "contradictions" of the free-market philanthropist David Koch's relationship with public art subsidies. I call the story strange because I've read it several times now and I still can't figure out what the contradictions are supposed to be. I think it's that Koch gives his own money to the arts but doesn't think the government should do the same thing with other people's money. Or maybe it's that he gives money to organizations that also take money from the government. Or maybe…uh…seriously, I'm coming up dry here. Read it yourself and tell me if you can find an actual contradiction in it.
2. Over The Wall Street Journal, Lucette Lagnado has a fun piece about suburban theater companies performing homicidal spoofs of sitcoms. (Sample title: A Very Brady Murder.) These tend to be dinner-theater groups, though "shows based on 'The Golden Girls' are a hit at retirement communities." Naturally, there have been rumblings from the owners of the original shows' copyrights, even though the plays are clearly constitutionally protected parodies; the producers of The Last Cruise of the SS Minnow received a warning letter this year from the law team at Warner Brothers.
3. Last weekend the Journal published a less impressive article arguing that young adult fiction has gotten too "dark." Mary Elizabeth Williams has replied capably over at Salon. The key line: "It's our job as parents to protect our kids, even as they slowly move out into the world and further away from our dictates. But there's something almost comical about raising them with tales of big bad wolves and poisoned apples, and then deciding at a certain point that literature is too 'dark' for them to handle. Kids are smarter than that."
4. Speaking of kid lit: Roald Dahl wrote some of the best children's books of the last half-century. But man, what an asshole.
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.
Please
to post comments
Here's what she sees as a contradiction:
"He clearly didn't make giving up government funding a condition of his generous gift to the Lincoln Center."
So like, if a libertarian donates books to the public school in his neighborhood, he's obviously a hypocrite. And Somalia.
In the depraved thinking of statists, a libertarian's objection to the government doing something means that the libertarian believes that NO ONE should do it, which is inherently false.
Don't like government funded schools? You want the children to grow up ignorant (not like the public school system is fixing that anyway, but I digress).
Don't like the government spending money on the latest in killer RC planes, aka Drones? You want America to be defenseless, you spineless pussy.
Don't want government to fund the crosses in jars of urine or shrimp on treadmills? You're against the arts and the sciences, Philistine!
"Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain." --Bastiat, The Law, 1850
Man these are some fresh new "progressive" ideas, alright.
And how did your hypothetical libertarian drive to the public school to donate those books? Huh?
ROWDS!!!!!!
Oh, and -- FUCK government artists!
Geeez dude, calm down. Seriously, too many people get too worked up over this stuff.
...and inspire STEVE SMITH's father, no doubt.
Too bad about Dahl. I liked a lot of his short stories.
I like the fact that "what an asshole" can be read in two distinct ways.
I remember some extracurricular (but school sponsored) thing in high school was on a book of his stories. Including the one where a factory slaughtered visitors to use as meat, and the one where a rich eccentric plans to use a gas bomb to drive the POTUS into an insane rape-frenzy in public. Or the one where a guy pushes a sex-starved recent widow to commit suicide. Fun stuff.
It's either this, or the fact that his limo used roads to get to the opera.
The contradiction is that, in the squishy progressive universe, the Kochs are Bad People, yet here they have done a Good Thing.
Does not compute.
James and the Giant Peach was one of my favorite children's books. Many of the poems (which I set to my own tunes and sung) are still stuck in my head 40 years later:
Look at me, I am freed, I am freed!
Not a scratch nor a bruise nor a bleed!
To his grave this fine gent
They all thought they had sent
And I very near went
Oh I very near went
But they sent quite the wrong centipeeeeed!
See?
Yup, 45 years later I can still recite the Veruca Salt poem from Charlie and The Chocolate Factory.
Veruca Salt, the little brute,
Has just gone down the garbage chute.
And as we very rightly thought
That in a case like this we ought
To see the thing completely through
We've polished off her parents, too.
Down goes Veruca, down the drain,
And here perhaps we should explain
That she will meet as she descends
A very different set of friends
To those that she has left behind,
They won't be nearly so refined.
A fishhead, for example, cut
This morning from a halibut...
I could go on, but it's a very long poem, you'll have to take my word that I know the whole thing.
I wonder if Alyssa Rosenberg's given name was Ayn Rand.
shows based on 'The Golden Girls' are a hit at retirement communities.
Longtorso! LINKS!
Squeeee!!!!!!!!!
There's really nowhere to go on the dark scale after Little Red Riding Hood.
LRRH and her grandma are both eaten by a wild animal.
That anthropomorphized wild animal is vivisected alive by the hunter, to allow LRRH and her grandma to drag themselves out of his entrails.
Everyone then piles rocks in the wolf and sews him back up again.
It's like a Cronenberg film.
IIANM, the hunter cutting LRRH and Grandma out were added later. I read somewhere that in the original they were just eaten. All because a little girl didn't listen to her mother.
I agree with you Grimm's Fairy Tales are truly dark stories. Most of them are warnings about the dire consequences that will come to disobedient children.
Most have been softened considerably by the modern publishing industry, though I may be wrong about the drastic revision to Little Red Riding Hood or Little Red Cap.
The comment in the Alyssa Rosenberg piece by Luis Pedro Coelho is fuckin' hilarious!
I guess I can post it:
"Isn't it ironic? The Koch brothers think that private money should support the arts and then support the arts with their private money. Good post, Alanis Morissette"
---LPC
Hahahahaha, that is awesome.
Never really thought about it like that before.
http://www.online-privacy.no.tc
Mr. Dahl was an asshole and it's time we burnt his books because of this:
http://consumptionblog.com/201.....oald-dahl/
Naturally, there have been rumblings from the owners of the original shows' copyrights, even though the plays are clearly constitutionally protected parodies
How is that obvious? A parody requires more than just being comedic. It has to be making fun of the source material itself, not merely adapting the source material to make fun of something else.
I would think murdering someone in the context of The Brady Bunch is by itself mocking the show's "Pollyanna-ish everything returns to normal at the end of the episode" gestalt.
I think it's just another attempt to smear the Koch name and make a non-budgetary argument for government supported art. She uses the word contradictory because she can't justify a claim that Koch is guilty of worse ? being hypocritical. But then she can't make a clear case that he's being contradictory either. There are two reasons behind her editorial. One is the final argument used by supporters of government funding of the arts after acknowledging the main libertarian points for ending it. That is, even if current government funding is miniscule and support for the arts will thrive without it, it is still needed as seed money for local projects. As she states:
I wonder if he can see the value of having groups like the NEA and the state arts commission do peer review on projects, and then providing small amounts of funding as a way to validate them and stimulate private giving?
The other reason is simply the progressive belief that "the right people" need to be cultural gatekeepers or our elites will be reduced to viewing Thomas Kinkade at The Met or suffering through Hee Haw at The Kennedy Center. She tips her cards with this quote immediately after pondering art supported only with private donations:
"Art is in the eye of the beholder. Some may enjoy Picasso or listening to Beethoven. Others may prefer a Dogs Playing Poker painting," he said. "Such organizations already rely on private funding; they are effective at seeking it and they'll still have help."
Uh. Do they post any other kind?
So, Koch is wielding his capitalist robber baron power to wipe out the thriving Kansas art scene, thereby depriving the world of sculptures made out of welded horseshoes. Is that the takeaway?
thanks