las wrote:
> > Larry, I completely agree with most of what you wrote about valuable
> > professions not being paid what they're actually worth.
>
> Dan, if I gave the impression that artists should not be paid for their
work,
> that is not what I meant to say. But do artists deserve the payments that
> they receive while our children are getting inferior education's because
we
> will pay Metalash!t millions of dollars a year and pay a great teacher $30
> thousand if they are lucky?
It's not like that, really. Anyone who spends more on Metallica
CD's/T-shirts/videos/concert-tickets/whatever than on hir's kids' education,
needs to get hir priorities straight, IMHO. But lots of people spend a
little bit of money on their CDs, hence they make millions.
> As far as sports go, I have no interest in sports at all and do not think
> that these people deserve to be paid very much for "playing".
But you're not paying their salary, so it's not really up to you, is it?
They get paid a huge amount of money, yes. But the people that pay them
still make a profit after paying that huge salary. That's how the system
works.
> Most athletes do not have to work that hard to accomplish what they do.
They
> are simply using God given gifts that come naturally to them. I feel much
> differently about artists of any kind.
I think you'll find that most artists do indeed work very hard to accomplish
what they do. If they limit their work to just the matches they play every
now and again, they'll be off the big paylist very soon.
> Like everything else, you have to have the God given skills to be an
artist.
> But being an artist, is much harder. Requires much more effort, time and
> work to accomplish what they did.
I doubt they're much different.
> My nephew was a video major. One day we were talking about something and
> somehow he mentioned how he felt that "Shidler's List" was the best movie
he
> ever saw. I'm don't know it is # one, but it would be hard to argue that
it
> was brilliant. Not just Spielberg, but Neeson and many other people.
>
> You don't get results like that without, in addition to the talents God
gave
> you, really feeling and working at what you are doing.
>
> Can we really call the Spice girls "Artists"??? I won't waste an MD on
> them. Maybe if they wanted to some of their other talents.........never
> mind.
Maybe "performers" is a better term.
I wouldn't waste an MD on them, either... But millions of teenage girls like
their music and badger their parents into buying it. And, surprise,
surprise... That's exactly the goal the Spice Girls' creators had in mind.
They did their job well, and got rich.
Remember, I might not like some or all of the same music you like. But that
doesn't mean the artists you like don't deserve to get paid a cent, or vice
versa.
> One last thing. I chose the term "God Given", as a generic term. I'm
not
> a some kind of religious fanatic that goes around mentioning God in every
> sentence. Perhaps nature's given gifts.
Well, thank god for that! ;-)
,xtG
.tsooJ
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
