Oh No She Didn't!

Well, where do I start? The idea of a government is to advance society in many ways, including science and the arts. For example, the government must support scientists who are trying to discover a new and better energy source for two reasons, one to allow the government to access the discovery and two, to allow free and easy access for the citizens. It isn't cost effective for a business to spend all of it's time in inventing a new energy source, they will go broke. If they have no product to sell, how will the company continue to exist? The government must support these scientists in order for them to invent.

The same can be said of the arts. You may pay to see certain events, but do you really think the price of your one ticket will support the entire cast, cost of the building, rehearsal time, costuming, lighting, etc? And that's just the performance time, what about the time it takes to create something? That's why most artistic companies rely on subscription tickets, to get a large sum of money to operate with, plus any government subsidies. And yes, it is incumbent upon you as a citizen to support these arts. These artists are not any less important to this society than a scientist attempting to create a new product. All the good things that have come out of the space program have been supported by the Federal government thru NASA.

Government support of the arts has been historically the only way an artist can survive. Mozart, Beethoven, da Vinci, van Gogh, all lived hand to mouth from government patronage (i.e. taxes). Do you think Mozart died a wealthy man? And if Mozart had pursued a 'paying ' career, would we have any of his amazing works? The same with Beethoven, he didn't have any money when he died, but I can't imagine life without the Ninth Symphony (which he composed inspite of being totally deaf!). Government support allowed these people the creative freedom they needed, instead of being tied into a more traditional job. And what about the Renaissance? Government support of the arts brought about all that is wonderful about the Renaissance. Elizabeth I was a patron of Shakespeare, and how did she get her money? Taxes.

Yes, some people see some of these arts as crap, (Robert Maplethorpe comes to mind, just to name one), but one aspect of art is to induce thinking. So you don't like his photography, it gets you to think about what you don't like about it. If we were to depend on the commercial market to support what we listen to and see, look at network TV, listen to radio stations. All samness and bland story lines and reality TV (because it makes money). I don't know of any commercial classical station, but does that mean that classical music should just go away? What about Masterpiece Theater on public TV? What about public TV altogether? No Monty Python?

Government support of the arts allow people to create and not be dependant on commercial success. I don't think that's such a bad idea. If we all thought alike and no one came up with any new ideas, what kind of world would this be to live in? Communist and Socialist societies come to mind, but even Nazi Germany and communist Russia supported the arts. Having a healthy and thriving artistic community is the hall mark of a sucessful society. It is forward thinking and open to new ideas.