Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Trex
The Canadian govt has introduced legislation which would give the Minister in charge of such things the right to refuse the current govt subsidy to Canadian filmmakers if the work in question is deemed not to be in the public interest, eg mere pornography or containing excessive violence.
The artistas are - predictably - up in arms, screaming about 'censorship' - which this is of course not. The art world would still be able to produce whatever it wanted to, but the govt would not subsidize, oh, take an extreme example, a movie about somebody urinating on a Koran. (At present, provided that there was sufficient Canadian content, such a flick would automatically be entitled to taxpayer funds.)
Oh, the artistic angst! The shame of it all! How unfair!
How delightful!
|
A very good point. It is not censorship when the government does not subsidize art. It is censorship when the government prohibits art.
No one is saying that an Canadian artist can't do their art. They are just saying that the government ain't payin for it.
A very sound policy.
Personally, I feel that the government (USA) should not sponsor/subsidize any art. Let the artists get their sponsorship from corporations or the public.
If their art is good people will pay for it. It it stynks people won't. Thats the way art should work.
We can save a lot of money ditching the NEA.
