Dean wrote:
> The first thing I found applicable (on just the
> *first* amendment, mind you) after doing a google
> search was a page done by the NEA, the guys who use
> our tax dollars to make pictures of a whip up a guy's
> *ass* and call it art.
Nice inflammatory rhetoric, but no cigar. The NEA does not produce art. It
provides grants to artists and organizations that create, perform and
exhibit art. Some - a tiny fraction - are given to artists like Karen
Findlay (a performance artist whose talent seems to escape me). The lion's
share of their money goes to symphony orchestras, community theatres,
museums and the like. The cost to you, as a citizen for this? A measly
$0.35 each year according to the last estimate I ran across. Dean, I'll pay
your share - Hell, I'll buy you a beer, we'll call it even and you can be
guilt free about the NEA for 10 years!
The National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the
Humanities serve a function in our society - they ensure that we as a people
do not lose touch with the artistic history of our culture, and that we can
learn more about ourselves by keeping that contact.
You may object to some art exhibitions funded by the NEA, and you're more
than free to do so. Just make sure you get your facts straight before you
rant about it.
BTW, I think Robert Mapplethorpe has made some damn fine art.
Adam C. Lipscomb
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ# 32384792
