--- In [email protected], "Anna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thus the government felt that it should not serve to express
political protests.
My response:
The government of the USSR did not allow political protest period.
$
You stated:
They cared for classical art and like most people everywhere
believed that art should be beautiful, not show ugliness.
My response: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
$
You stated:
In USA art is made for the sake of money and artist is judged but
his financial success. Thus there is no art at all, but a
commercial mass products called art.
My response: What about folk art? Folk art even in the U.S. was and
is generally not created by the artist for commercial purpose. In
fact the artists of much of folk art are unknown.
$
You stated:
In Russia artists were well taken care of. They had grants,
stipends, free housing and medical care, free critics and applause
for their spiritual endeavors.
My response:
That happened in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics but it was
not free. It was paid for by the work of others involuntarily.
Artists in the Union of Soviet Socialists Republics lived in housing
and received medical care as a result of the state robbing from
others to pay for it. That is morally wrong. The dictatorship of the
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was immoral as was the the
regime of the National socialists in Germany in the 30's - 1945.
$
You stated:
There is hardly any genuine American art, most what we have comes
from immigrants or is transplanted from Europe.
My response:
Hmm, is it your view that American Indians did not produce art or do
you believe that they copied art from the Europeans after Europeans
arrived in America? Do you really believe that prior to the 16th
century the Apache, Navajo, Cherokee, etc... in what eventually
became the U.S.A. had never produced art?
$
> Most we have is a kitsch called art.
> You cannot compare the Kirow ballet as it was in 50' to the same
ballet today, when finally free to fully express themselves. Now it
is at best mediocre. Commercialism kills art.
> So, are artists are going to be protected in the libertarian
capitalistic society? As you realize, true artists can rarely be
good capitalists, or even know how to make living.
> Anna
My response:
Have you heard of Maria Tallchief? She was one of the greatest
ballerinas of the 20th century and she was an American.
see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Tallchief
You make assumptions and generalizations. Nobody should be forced to
protect anyone. Why should people be forced to protect an artist.
Also there are many forms of art. Music, acting, sculpting,
painting, etc... Many artist btw make good livings in countries that
have at least a resemblance of capitalism. As for countries that
don't such Cuba they are not allowed the opportunity to make a good
living unless the state steals from others and gives them a good
living at the expense of others.
$
$
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/KlSolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
