|
i will say at the outset that i almost agree with a portion of a sentence that ace wrote in that last post. more once fistf ran it through buckminster fuller.
to my mind, the question that follows is: how do these artists live? you know, eat day to day? where's the funding come from? conservatives oppose funding for the arts for some reason...no doubt there's a preference for landscapes involving important people following through on their golf swing as opposed to formal experimentation or other stuff....but fact is that without funding---and trust me there's very little----being an artist is basically something you talk to yourself about as you go to your day job. so unless this idea of other kinds of labor being rendered unnecessary is accompanied by some proposals about how to make the lives of these new artisans viable, i think it's just more gas from the right.
but i'd prefer that there were far more money available for far more artists to have lives in which they can do far more work because they have time and access to resources than american cultural barbarism allows for now. and this is even more the case if the trend buckminster fuller pointed to turns out to be accurate.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|