Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Posts
That's more like promoting the arts then. If we start from a place where none of the artists are starving, then you really just need to promote, which is relatively cheap and easy.
but are video games art
and if so, how much should you tip the developer
I guess I take "supporting the arts" to mean "funding spectacular works of art" the same way I take "supporting the sciences" to mean "supporting new and innovative research"
And those things would, I hope, continue even if we provided support at a baseline for the entire population
does people have citations about the space boner thing
because that is important
He's not saying he'd use 300 Hoover dams to place in rivers for hydroelectric power.
He's saying build 300 Hoover dams in the middle of the desert as a massive public works project. Unemployment ended!
Is the strong female protagonist empowering women and breaking down stereotypes or pandering to men and reinforcing them?
we are all clear on that point, yes?
brofist
or in a simpler way, the people has deemed that it is in their best interests to have it this way since they like culture and shit.
No.
It should not be a place you want to be though.
I would rather we pay talented artists well for state sponsored projects than say that artists should just rely on welfare until they are George RR Martin / Stephen King / Kinkade. It costs so little and the end results of having statues / paintings / compositions and other assorted works of art are a net positive to society.
I am glad we do not live in a bleak gray hellscape, and a large part of the reason why is because governments, churches and royalty have paid artists to make pretty things for them.
supporting the arts isn't the same thing as supporting the artists!
like, if a starving artist went to get some welfare here he would be required to be looking for a job too - and take any job that they found for him
because the point of welfare is to remedy the "starving" part, not to make it easier to live off being an artist!
I think that's clear, but I think it's important to note that throwing a festival every once in a while or providing permission/materials for larger public works is all that expensive or a tough sell to the public if it doesn't also come with paying a living wage to everyone involved.
Word. At this point you should be able to draw a living wage whether you do anything or not. Art is purely supplementary :bz
lifting is better for you
and you look less stupid while doing it
win win
no
Dis mothafucka right here
weights first, though. nobody ever dropped 100 lbs on their throat fucking up their form during jumping jacks
oh gooby 8->
It can be, albeit at a remove.
In that by supporting the arts generally by funding venues, performances, etc. an industry which supports a number of people is caused to exist when it may not otherwise.
I'm pretty sure I would recall that fucking shit.
so the nea is really cheap and i don't really care one way or another whether it gets funded
i can't really think of a place where the nea has had an impact on my life, personally
like, i know mapplethorpe did some nea stuff, but he was already a famous, self-sufficient artist by that point anyhow and didn't really need nea money
also, nea is really biased towards classical and non-populist artwork in the us. we shit on the canadian govenrment bankrolling nickelback and avril levigne but they hit a lot more ears than whatever the nea funds.
I was shitting specifically on Josh Lyman's terrible argument in that awful West Wing clip.
I support the arts leave me alone NPR.
But what if 0.01% of those on benefits receive more money than they would while employed? We can't take that chance!
we (through the state) straight give money to artists just as a hey keep doing that you're being rad.
if you're very good you might be so lucky as to live in the state's official honorary residence for artists, free of charge.
reason we do this is because... well, because we always have been? It's been just one of those things governments do for a very long time now.
Oh.
Okay then my mistake!
boo!
i thought that dams are exactly how to mitigate seasonal flooding from things like monsoons.
didn't the nile do this?
and the ganges?
and the yangtse?
and the upper mississippi?
yeah and it is, literally, supporting the artists, but like, the artists as artists and not just as people. Which is the difference between it and social security. Which I still think are absurd things to compare.
I support a basic guaranteed income, yeah.
Or, if we don't want to give the poors cash money because somebody is afraid they'll spend it on bubble gum and crack, then guaranteed housing, food, and medical care.