Re: And Speaking of Stinky Paper -- caused by politics and the church

From: SteveS ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 12/14/04-12:58:59 PM Z
Message-id: <003401c4e20e$fa0222c0$7104e4d8@VALUED65BAD02C>

Well, it was both, NY State and Federal funding for the artts. And the
discussion that followed on this list and others brought out the fact that
was in question was 'should government pay for art that degrades or combats
local community standards?' Operative point here was 'who's paying?'

The argument held that there were other artists denied subsidies who had a
positive message, probably personal and nothing to do with challenging
community standards. Personally, I'd rather pay for ME and let the
challenge of community standards rot along with all the other artists who
get subsidies who aren't . . . well, who aren't me.

It's my money. I want it! But I'm not going to piss on Jesus or put
Elephant dung on the virgin Mary because I don't get the money. And, if I
did get it, I wouldn't let those biases influence me anyway.

It certainly raised the awareness as to how much the church influenced these
artists to take the time and make a statement of church/state opression.

Why do they have to get their support from the government? I go to rich
people, individuals and get my support so as to offend the local and global

----- Original Message -----
From: "Schuyler Grace" <>
To: <>
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 9:57 PM
Subject: RE: And Speaking of Stinky Paper

> Oh, I agree Rudy had a huge part to play in casting stones in his big old
> glass house, but Sen. Helms was also pushing a bill to cut off Federal
> funding for any art project that didn't meet "community standards" for
> decency and acceptability.
> ...sometimes I wish I had the wisdom to look out for everyone else and
> decide how they should think and what they should see/hear/read. (not
> really)
> But one of these days, maybe everyone will realize they can speak out
> against that which offends, without having to save everyone else from the
> offending thing. That they can best keep their kids from coming to harm
> participating in the world along with them, not demanding everything they
> think might harm children be removed. That a whole, vital, beautiful
> body is a wonderful thing, and one being torn violently apart is a
> vulgarity.
> Well, (sniffle) a boy can dream, can't he? (sniffle)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Judy Seigel []
> Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 3:24 PM
> To:
> Subject: RE: And Speaking of Stinky Paper
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004, Schuyler Grace wrote:
> > Yes, that is what I was referring to, but I really hope this isn't
> elephant
> > dung paper, high alpha or not. I might want to print something with
> > religious meaning on it, and the last time something like that happened
> > the States, the far right-wingers tried to cut off all government
> sponsored
> > arts funding. I wouldn't want that weight on my shoulders.
> Schuyler, I think you've got that a bit garbled -- the main "far
> right-winger" trying to cut off funds was NY's vaunted Mayor Rudy
> Giuliani, the fellow some folks thought would make an ideal presidential
> candidate. And it wasn't all arts funding, it was simply closing down the
> Brooklyn Museum, one of our city's, in fact, our country's most splendid
> institutions. (And folks doing New York's Museum tour shouldn't miss it --
> aside from the special exhibitions, including often photography, they have
> wonderful things like early American furniture and appliances, early
> Egyptian furniture and appliances, sublime sculpture and artifacts of
> North American native peoples .... and so forth.)
> Some early Philistines were in it with him, but Rudy was leading the band
> (in his time out from flaunting his mistress around town).
> Judy
Received on Tue Dec 14 13:01:09 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 01/03/05-09:29:44 AM Z CST