This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: oday, especially among the new technology and media moguls. Second, government cannot possibly play an evenhanded role as arts patron. Inadequate resources call for restrictions, priorities, and choices. It is unconscionable to relegate normative decisions as to which art has “value” to a few legislators and jurists, who may be unenlightened in their notions about art. Also, legislators are all too likely to make choices in favor of the cultural agendas of those lobbyists with the most money and influence. Third, restricting artistic expression may in some cases encroach upon the constitutional right of free expression. In any case, governmental restriction may chill creativity, thereby defeating the very purpose of subsidizing the arts. In the final analysis, government cannot philosophically or economically justify its involvement in the arts, either by subsidy or sanction. Responsibility lies with individuals to determine what art has value and to support that art. 24. “A powerful business leader has far more opportunity to influence the course of a community or a nation than does any government official.”
, “@ * *...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 05/05/2009 for the course ECAS asdfasdf taught by Professor Asdfaf during the Spring '09 term at Academy of Art University.
- Spring '09