Still with their snouts in the trough

[Bob38S]

Heard on the news last night that Amanda V has shares in a piggery.

ROFL :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Quote "Oh, Umh, but I'm not involved the the running of it."

more LOL :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Oh Dear, shades of Paul K and his piggery woes.

Just goes to show that the more things change -- the more they stay the same :(:(:(

Bob

[Zed]

yeah, i peesed meself too...

what do they say about people looking like thier pets ???:rolleyes:

[martrix]

Speaking of snouts in the trough, did you know that the Federal Government get 50 cents from every litre of petrol you buy?
A quick calculation off the top of my head..

1 Petrol Station say 100 people buy 30 litres of fuel in a normal day= $1500 to the government.

Multiply that x say 200 Petrol stations across Victoria= $300,000

Multiply that x say 7 States across Australia= $2.1 million, and dont forget to add on top the good old tax on a tax, 10%GST

that is all
PER DAY!
http://www.ubeaut.biz/grrr.gif

[RETIRED]

It gets more than 50 cents.

You are way out in your figures for the petrol purchased too.;)

[Lignum]

Poor `ol Amanda Twelve Stone, she keeps on coppin it big time;)

[martrix]

It gets more than 50 cents.

You are way out in your figures for the petrol purchased too.;)

should those figures be higher? if so, how much?

it was just stab in the dark...

[RETIRED]

should those figures be higher? if so, how much?

it was just stab in the dark...Try about 70% in tax and excise. The average city service station serves about 700-1000 cars per day during a normal work day (7-6).

If you average it out that every car takes about 40 Litres of fuel, the mind boggles.

Mobil (only one of about 6 Players) has about 340 service stations in NSW.

[Iain]

Poor `ol Amanda Twelve Stone, she keeps on coppin it big time;)
:confused: :confused: :confused:

[Felder]

She only had three courses for lunch today, Iain.

[Gumby]

I'm not jumping to her defense by any means but any poly having an interest in a piggery, clock company, chook farm or anything else, is NOT a snout in the trough. That's a business interest and whether there's a conflict of interest is a different matter. Snouts in the trough are those sucking money from the public purse which we contribute to in the form of many various taxes. If you want to look at snouts in the trough, try starting with arts council grants. People getting paid $40,000 to paint trees blue for example. That pisses me off more than an interest in a piggery.

[Felder]

People getting paid $40,000 to paint trees blue for example.

:eek::eek::eek:
And I've been doing it for free all these years!

Gotta keep the Blue Mountains looking their blue-est for the tourists.:cool:

[Andy Mac]

Gumby, I object!! I've had the odd arts grant, not $40,000 by any means. Snouts in trough it ain't. Called survival.

<zed - deleted text that vilified current Oz IR laws. this aint a political forum - apologies if this offends - please PM and ask if appropriate to be re-instated - I will then reinsert your text... (but you will need to tell me again what you said; I cant remember exact text {Embarrased} <EMBARRASED...>Cheers :) )

Back to arts grants for a sec, this country as whole does not appreciate the arts. Very few, and I mean very few artists, like count them on one hand, are able to support themselves fulltime with return from their practice. Nothing like Europe or the US, and I've heard it first hand the disgust these people express when hearing of the cr*p artists here have to bend to. Even paying to enter a competition, might seem measly at $20 a pop, but no one does that in the US. If the govt. here deems it fit to chuck some coins towards arts, it's only to keep some semblence of creative endeavour alive, so we all don't give it up and work in McDonald's. I can't be stuffed, but go and have a look at the budget for Australia Council/Arts Council and compare it to, say. keeping unwanted troops in another country's backyard. Pittance. The fact that some projects are odd, or marginal, isn't the issue....at least its something that wouldn't otherwise be attempted.

Cheers for now!!:p

[Gumby]

Sorry mate but I disagree completely. If my business fails then I go under. I don't get or expect to get any Govt assistance at all. If the arts can't support itself by either selling it's products, getting the paying public in to view them or filling theatres for plays, then tuff. They go.
I don't see why my taxes should support them. All govt funding of this stuff does is help perpetuate mediocrity.

[echnidna]

so is a woodie able to get an arts grant??

[Zed]

so is a woodie able to get an arts grant??

sure if tyou can convince the govt its art.... they do call home woodies "cottage craft industries".... at least that swhat little johnnie did when he was sputing about the tas forests recently...

[Auld Bassoon]

Heard on the news last night that Amanda V has shares in a piggery.



I didn't know that the Senate was a listed body :D :D

[Andy Mac]

Seems the guts of my post was edited, and the result comes out like a spoilt prat. Oh well. But the essence is that pollies can vote themselves whatever increase they want, but normal Aussies...bad luck, you've got new IR laws, which you didn't vote for.. Obviously someone with a button here thinks that's the way it should be and don't dare express otherwise.:mad: (Incorrect please see above edit by me, Zed)
Gumby you're entitled to your opinion, but the fact that arts can't survive without some support makes it even more reasonable to continue. By your way of thinking, any creature or plant that can't survive without National Park protection is just bad luck/ bad management on its behalf.
BTW, woodworkers can obtain govt support through their State's craft councils, and in Qld at least the RADF fund...if they live outside Brisbane.

Have a good night!

[jow104]

Gumby,

The trees at the back of a painting are painted blue to distinguish them from the trees at the front;)

Can I get a grant when I visit in October?

[martrix]

Andy, I whole heartedly support what you are saying.


A question for the Moderators.

I have no problem being edited, or even having a post removed, but is there an option in this vBulletin software that can put a small note at the bottom of the post to say that this post has been edited and possibly by whom?

Like I said, no problem being edited, but it is a little frustrating having your say changed, and possibly misconstruing the point you are trying to express.
Also it might help by letting people know about what sort of things get edited, and help to modify the way people express their opinions? (me included).
Some other forums operate this way...........just a thought.:)

[echnidna]

I agree with Martrix

[Daddles]

Sorry mate but I disagree completely. If my business fails then I go under. I don't get or expect to get any Govt assistance at all. If the arts can't support itself by either selling it's products, getting the paying public in to view them or filling theatres for plays, then tuff. They go.
I don't see why my taxes should support them. All govt funding of this stuff does is help perpetuate mediocrity.

Gumby, you ought to think a bit before posting. There is a lot of assistance for businesses, and not just in funds. But at least with a business idea, you can very easily get funding worth $40,000 for the first twelve months, plus training, plus support. Of course, this has to be a new business, but a friend of mine who's just been through this just ... started a new one. Easy (and the powers that hand out dosh knew). Then there is a lot of support of businesses of all sorts who are struggling. Very, very few artists of any ilk get govt funding at all, let alone anything like $40,000.

Then there's the ongoing help you DO get. I don't know what sort of business you're in Gumby, but you do not have the product you produced dumped in bulk on the market at about 20% of the price it costs you to produce.

Yes, this does happen - why do you think there are all those shops selling books at a fraction of the price of normal retail. Those books are remainders from America - books that were over ordered and instead of being pulped as was the case before our govt removed the protection from our own industry, are now shipped here and sold. Oh, btw, the artist who wrote those books gets nothing for them, not a cent.

And, whatever business you may be in, it's almost certain that the vast majority of like businesses are NOT owned by huge, overseas conglomerates, who, for obscure reasons never explained, seem hell bent on killing the local product in favour of the product from their own country. Yes Gumby, that is the state of Australian publishing, it's why about the only thing you see from Australian authors is either from a 'celebrity' or is literary fiction (a genre not pursued in America). Example - Lothian Books, a hundred year old, Australian family owned publishing company. Last year, they decided to launch a new series of books by Australian authors only. In Jan, they were bought out by Time Life, and the local editor sacked. Then, a few months later, Time Life sold the lot to Hachette who killed the new Aussie series (lack of sales, mind you, the books weren't in existence and nothing had been pitched to the book sellers for pre-publishing sales;) ). This company has not gone on with a policy of serving up stuff published by its parent company.

But that isn't happening in your industry is it Gumby. Because it's not allowed to.

Are you in a trade Gumby? Or a profession of some sort? Doesn't matter. Wherever you started, you had to learn the business, learn the craft didn't you. You might have done an apprenticeship. You might have gone to uni, then found a job on a lower rung of the industry. In either case, you were paid while you worked your way up to being a master of your industry/craft/profession, whatever. That doesn't happen with the arts. Unless you are already a celebrity, you will receive NOTHING for your efforts until you are a master ... and then you are unlikely to receive much at all. In my art, writing, a ten year full time, utterly unpaid 'apprenticeship' is considered normal, and the 'apprentice' receives not a thing until it is deemed 'completed' - which is why nearly everyone pursuing this has to have another job and so the process takes longer.

So next time you go making simplistic comments like the one I quoted above Gumby, ask yourself why our television is full of American trash, why it is hard to find Australian authors in the book shops, why the movie theatres are filled with American product, why the only Australians doing well seem to be expatriates.

But hey, it doesn't matter. The arts reflect our culture. But in this country, we don't give a stuff about the arts. We value them less than the witterings of a mindless bimbo on television who has become a 'celebrity'. Gumby, thanks to attitudes like the one you displayed above, Big Brother is the level of Australian culture.

With attitudes like yours Gumby, the sooner we sign up as the 51st state of America, the better.

Richard

The above was sent in liu of a reddie. I am happy to oblige though

[workgoose]

I'm afraid I agree with Gumby, if you wanna do arts- you pay for it. If you are good enough, I'll be the first to buy your stuff. At the same time I don't like pollies voting themselves increases every five minutes either, or keeping troops in other countries for that matter. But what are we talking about - woodworking is infinitely more productive and interesting than all this rubbish, so let's get back to it...cheers Peter

[Andy Mac]

Thanks for the edification on your deletion, Zed. Yes I know we shouldn't delve into politics or religion, stick to woodwork as workgoose says, but the powers that be in Canberra have my eternal disdain, and sometimes the urge to shout something in their direction gets the better of me.
And thanks for the moral backup Daddles. There will always be people anti any support for the arts, and as I said before they're entitled to their opinion. The power of the market place should extend to all levels of endeavour perhaps, but I try to think of artists as sitting outside a little, looking in and reflecting what their culture is. And by doing that they set themselves apart from normal economic concerns.
Any level of government that supports the arts in way of grants etc, is always aware of being seen to be doing it, of a generous gesture to the arts makes them look 'cultured'! My only concern about that close connection between artists and govt. is the possiblity that freedom of expression is removed or at least tainted by towing a political line. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Cheers:)

[jow104]

With regard to editing of threads.

Here in the UK we have certain prominent people who have a fantastic second income, they sue people for deformation etc. (sometimes I think they provoke to create business)

So perhaps the moderators are doing a member a favour if they spot a problem likely to arise and do an edit.

I have found a very accomodating moderator:o

[martrix]

With regard to editing of threads.

Here in the UK we have certain prominent people who have a fantastic second income, they sue people for deformation etc. (sometimes I think they provoke to create business)

So perhaps the moderators are doing a member a favour if they spot a problem likely to arise and do an edit.

I have found a very accomodating moderator:o

totally agree.
It's just that sometimes you don't know you have been edited or stepped out of line.

[Clinton1]

The power of the market place should extend to all levels of endeavour perhaps, but I try to think of artists as sitting outside a little, looking in and reflecting what their culture is. And by doing that they set themselves apart from normal economic concerns.


Perhaps its a matter of too many artists and not enough arts buyers.
I sometimes think that we expect too much from a country of a relatively small population.
With only 20 million (54th largest population out of 239), we have a landmass that is the 6th largest country in the world. Thats a lot of roads for a relative few to maintain through taxes, and roads will always win the funding war over arts.

I quoted you in order to ask: is there any reason that "setting themselves apart from normal economic concerns" is something that is important to maintain?

[Andy Mac]

Hi Clinton,
In one way I meant it simply that artists are often too airheaded to be good financial managers:o, that fiscal reality is of no interest; and I also indicated later that money and art can be a bad mix, because freedom to say what you want is compromised, if all you are thinking is the bottom line. It is about maintaining an independance....and also a nod that money isn't always the main concern in life.
But I also mean, and I think serious woodworkers can agree;), that art will very rarely be appreciated (in monetary terms) for the input required. We aren't paid on an hourly basis!!:eek: Far from it. Therefore we consciously do it for love, or desire, or need, whatever that urge is. If the economic rationalists were in charge of art making, it'd be whambamthankyoumam...lower input as feasible, out it pops from a conveyor belt in quick time, and would you like that one in blue sir?
We should cherish it more, if only in a soft beauracratic way through arts grants. In saying that, it is from the public purse, and the allocation of grants should be well considered. I'll reserve my judgement on the blue painted trees because I don't know of the work!:D

Cheers,

[Gumby]

Then there's the ongoing help you DO get.

Before I consider whether your post is worth replying to or not, please explain this generalisation.

[Wood Butcher]

Maybe Richard should have said "could get" not "do get". I have a mate that started up a business for himself and once he started asking around, he found the is heaps of government (state and federal) funded support systems that people can access (obviously there are certain criteria like turnover etc).
Even my parents can get access to some stuff with a decent size small business. There is plenty of help (especially advice) you just have to ask!

[Ashore]

With regard to editing of threads.

Here in the UK we have certain prominent people who have a fantastic second income, they sue people for deformation etc. (sometimes I think they provoke to create business)

So perhaps the moderators are doing a member a favour if they spot a problem likely to arise and do an edit.

I have found a very accomodating moderator:o

Fair enough but I don't think was the moderator in this case


Gumby, I object!! I've had the odd arts grant, not $40,000 by any means. Snouts in trough it ain't. Called survival.

<zed - deleted text that vilified current Oz IR laws. this aint a political forum - apologies if this offends - please PM and ask if appropriate to be re-instated - I will then reinsert your text... (but you will need to tell me again what you said; I cant remember exact text {Embarrased} <EMBARRASED...>Cheers :) )



If the said text vilified current IR Laws then it should be deleted no question No arguement ever, but to then say I will reinsert your text if says its ok but I can't remember what I deleted exactly

I realise you added {Embarrased} and put your reasons for deleting in a civil and clear way, rather than just cutting the offending text and saying nothing
I know the moderators do a great job and are the reason that the forum is as good as it is and have no problem with them deleting and moving as they see fit but to delete and then state that they are not be sure what was deleted :confused:
Possibly a move to the orange room may have been more appropriate though I am not privy to what can and can't be done, so this is just my thoughts -apologies if this offends-

[Sturdee]

Andy, I whole heartedly support what you are saying.


Well I don't, I agree with Gumby.

Whilst there may well be deserving artists I also believe that most moneys spent subsidizing " The Arts" is wasted and can be put to better use.

When the Victorian Government spents over $ 10M a year on the National Opera Company and they do not perform in Melbourne I start to question the sanity of the people giving the money. When again our state government together with the Melbourne council was willing to spent over $ 100,000 to paint trees in the gardens blue for the Commonwealth Games I, together with most of Melbourne, saw blue at the waste. In fact when the annual list is made public the outcry at the waste on talk back radio is enormous.

By all means make a case for where you think the moneys ought to be spent rather than attack personalities :mad: but until then I maintain it is wasted and should not be spent.


Peter.

BTW Richard I do know what business Gumby is in, but I'm not telling.:D :D :D

Peter.

[bitingmidge]

The Nobleman held up his right hand.

Domingo began to grow excited.

The man had six fingers.

"You see?" the Nobleman began.

"Of course" Domingo interrupted, "the balance of the sword is wrong for you because every sword has been conceived for five."

"Clearly you understand the difficulties," the Nobleman began, but Domingo had travelled where other’s words could never reach him.

Inigo had never seen his father so frenzied, the measurements of course, each finger, and the circumference of the wrist, and the distance from the sixth nail to the index, and on and on he went until the Nobleman dismounted and had to take him by the shoulders to quieten him.

"You will make me the greatest sword since Excalibur."

"I will beat my body into ruins for you, perhaps I will fail, but no one will try harder."

"And payment?"

"When you get the sword- then payment."

"I insist on leaving something on account."

"Alright, one gold piece will be that, but do not bother me with money when there is work that needs beginning. Come back in a year." Domingo said, and with that he set to work.

Such a year, Domingo only slept when he dropped from exhaustion, he ate only when Inigo would force him to.

A year of the handle being right but the cutting edge too dull, of the cutting edge sharpened but that throws the balance out again. Such a year.

One night Inigo woke to find his father seated. Staring. Calm. Inigo followed the stare.

The Six Fingered Sword was done.



Even in the hot starkness it glistened.

"At last!" Domingo cried, (he could not take his eyes off the sword,) "After a lifetime Inigo, I am an artist."

The big-shouldered Nobleman did not agree, when he returned he merely looked at it a moment.

"Not worth waiting for" he said.

"You're dissapointed?" Domingo could scarcely get the words spoken.

"I’m not saying it’s trash you understand," the Nobleman went on, "but it’s certainly not worth 500 pieces of gold. I’ll give you ten, it’s probably worth that."

"Wrong" Domingo cried, "It’s not worth ten. It’s not worth even one. Here, the gold piece is yours, you have lost nothing". He took back the sword and turned away.

"I’ll take back the sword," the Nobleman said, "I didn’t say I wouldn’t take it. I only said I would pay what it was worth".
Domingo whirled back, eyes bright;

"You quibbled! You haggled!

Art is involved and you saw only money!

There is no more reason for you remaining here, please go."

"The sword," the Noble said.

"The sword belongs to my son," Domingo said, "I give it to him now, it is his forever, goodbye."

"You’re a peasant and a fool and I want my sword!"

"You’re an enemy of art and I pity your ignorance," Domingo said.

They were the last words he ever uttered. A flash of the Nobleman’s sword, and Domingo’s heart was torn to pieces......



...from THE PRINCESS BRIDE, S. Morganstern’s classic tale of true love and high adventure,(the good parts version), abridged by William Goldman.

[bitingmidge]

For me, the above quote summarises it all, from both sides of the fence.

In reading the previous posts, I am afraid that there is a little truth in all of them, however:

I have discounted all the posts written by accountants as they simply know nothing about art.

I have discounted all the posts by artists as they simply know nothing about business.

Throughout history, the arts have relied on it's patrons for it's survival. Some artists have become well known and dined with kings. Court jesters did that every day.

Some artists became celebrities in their own right.

Of course in those days there were no books, scribes simply worked in dark rooms till they went blind, musicians wrote palms and sang them to their sheep, painters decorated walls of noblemen's apartments, sculptors laboured for the pay of common labourers.

Today, some arts companies (not struggling artists) expect to be supported in the manner that Elton John has become expected.

Was painting trees blue worth $100 grand? Yes, whether you liked it or not.

Why?

Because it gave you a sensory experience that you are still talking about. It lit something in your inner being, (or tried to) you don't have to get it, or even appreciate it. You just have to think things like "that's awful" or "I could have done that" and you have begun to change!

Why is $100 k worth of blue paint worth any less than a fireworks exhibition, or a street full of Christmas lights. The impact is similar. Who pays for them?

I'm going to take a breath now, and go and sharpen my spear, in the hope that you buggers produce a target or two for me!

Cheers,

P (Making money not art!)
:D :D :D

[Harry II]

I think there are some people content in living in grey boxes and prefer if everyone else does too so it doesn't disturb their grey lives. Aesthetics will always influence our lives because we have feelings which respond to them. Take away all things to do with aethetics (art, fashion, music, design, dance, yes AND SPORT, etc) and ya got DULL NEAUTRAL GREY.

[Andy Mac]

If the said text vilified current IR Laws then it should be deleted no question No arguement ever

I have no problem really, apart from it being the first time I've been edited!!:p I am interested though in people's opinion (or knowledge) here, of my right or otherwise to "vilify" a law.
Have no doubt that I consider the IR legislation as particularly odious, and didn't vote for it (or GST for that matter)...in fact have never voted for this government at all! The fact that our leaders then set about and voted themselves a payrise on the back of it makes me seethe.
But to return to villifying a law you don't agree with. I know freedom of speech is not enshrined by our constitution (http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rn/2001-02/02rn42.htm)

and the best that can be said is
"Since 1992 decisions of the High Court have indicated that there are implied rights to free speech and communication on matters concerning politics and government, e.g. permitting political advertising during election campaigns.⁽⁷⁾ This is known as the 'implied freedom of political communication'. Issues arising from these decisions include defining when communication is 'political' and when the freedom should prevail over competing public interests.^(8)"<sup>But when it comes to openly attacking any law, verbally or in written form, does anyone know what law or regulation is being transgressed?
Just interested, that's all.:)

Cheers,
</sup>

[bitingmidge]

But when it comes to openly attacking any law, verbally or in written form, does anyone know what law or regulation is being transgressed?
Ubeaut's first law of the forum, which can be summarised in three No's:
Politics, Religion and something else I've forgotten.

However, these three laws are overridden when a thread is opened in Open Slather, where the only overriding NO is pawn.

Cheers,

P

[Studley 2436]

So much art that I have seen is craft or tradesmans work. It is just done on an individual piece basis and priced accordingly. From there you have a dillemna. Should I charge what it's worth or what the market will pay? Properly appreciated it is worth a lot perhaps but to get it to sell in a reasonable time you might have to give someone a bit of a bargain. My reply to this is it is better to work and get some pay than get nothing even if you are not getting much.

So far as snouts in the trough I would tend to look more in the bureaucracy and government. Those such as Mike Ranns 100+ staffers who work in his media unit!!!!!!!!!! They get paid 80 to 125,000 each for reading the paper and watching the TV news making sure his face gets out there all pretty. 8,000,000 each year lets say to maintain the premiers image. It stinks.

You can always point at some artist who is getting a motza from handouts and paint the lot black. What about the people who work on the Arts Council administering the "handouts" I bet they are doing allright. However there are many many artists who never succeed beyond their immediate circle and that is business.

How do you succeed. First you have to decide what success is. Pro Hart did a lot made a lot too but is still yet to be hung in the National Gallery. So what is your aim do you want popular success or the acclaim of the art worlds insiders? However before you can get anywhere you must have a clear picture of where you want to go.

A bit of market pressure on artists to produce to a price is not going to hurt them. In fact the pressure will most likely make them better. Having to do something to a budget and get it out the door on time will only heighten their creative process as they seek ways to satisfy their artistic standards but do it on time. Too much drifting along in the art world for my liking.

When I was a chef I did all my work in 5 Star hotels. I saw many restaurants go bust. You get a chef who buys it so he can cook his way. Might be popular with the customers but who is managing the place and so on. The owner is hidden in the kitchen. Might last a year. If you own something you should be running it rather than doing the donkey work. Big Hotels went bust on me just about everyone that I worked in. That was more of an accounting type thing. Owner sucks all the money out of it says oops gee it's bust sells and the whole thing starts over again. So what do you want from your art and business? It is a vehicle to something. What is the something?

There is a lot to be said for the promoters of the world. Pro Hart with his cannons or Wolf Blass who used to call up the Adelaide Airport when a flight from Sydney and Melbourne came in and say can you put out a call for Wolf Blass. So they put it over the PA phone for Mr Wolf Blass. Now Blass had his shed in Nuriotpa and painted his name as big as a house on the side of it by the main highway his wines were pretty average schlock but they drank well straight from the bottle shop and that is how he built a shed into a huge Winery. Do a count of all the little struggling wineries around the place. I think it is a fair comparison to the art world. They go in with big dreams and lots of passion and think that is enough. Sadly it is not.

Studley

[Zed]

if ida moved this thread to the orqange room on the basis of one comment then this very pertinant and intersting discussion would have suffered...:)

[bitingmidge]

Fair call Z, (unless there was art involved! ;) )

P

[Sturdee]

I have discounted all the posts written by accountants as they simply know nothing about art.

P (Making money not art!)
:D :D :D

:D :D :D

That's an Architect talking, always designing the big (but ugly) concept of what a building should look like without any regards to cost or reality or public opinion. Just like all these artists people.:D

My main point is not that I'm against art or subsidizing it but at the idiocy of a state government supporting an opera company that never performs for its own citizens but in other states. If it needs support let their own state support it. Similarly the grand stupidity of painting trees blue with a water paint so that when it rains it washes away. At least public opinion stopped that one.

There are many more examples that are beyond belief. A look at the grants that the Arts council gives out is an eye opener. Even local government has been getting on the bandwagon spending ratepayers money on extraordinarily expensive pieces of junk that grace the entrances to our suburban city entrances and calling it art.:mad:

But as I said I look forward to hearing what art is appropriate for subsidy, but if opera or ballet cannot get enough paying patrons we should not have them.

May be that is a grey world, but at least it's affordable.

Peter.

[Wood Butcher]

The three No's are Politic's, Religion and Sex (I'm married too Peter, took me a while to remember what it was too:D)

The reason Politics is a touchy subject at the moment is that we have been spammed repeatedly lately by idiots claiming to be uni students from Malaysia. I think that we (the supermods) have banned around a dozen political spammers and they just keep coming back.

So....there are reasons we do what we do, sometimes there are better ways to do it but we are human and therfore not perfect!

[Daddles]

So....there are reasons we do what we do, sometimes there are better ways to do it but we are human and therfore not perfect!


As if we're going to accept that excuse, we're woodies remember ... no, hang on, if we're woodies, of course we're going to accept that excuse :rolleyes:

Richard

[bitingmidge]

My main point is not that I'm against art or subsidizing it but at the idiocy of a state government supporting an opera company that never performs for its own citizens but in other states. The art of not being there to cop the flak?
I'm sure someone appreciates it Peter! Besides, we give you a round of our State of Origin, and that's close to art in some eyes!

Similarly the grand stupidity of painting trees blue with a water paint so that when it rains it washes away. At least public opinion stopped that one. But "public opinion" that grand judge of what is right and wrong and what is best for me, doesn't mind the stupidity of simply burning money in the form of fireworks! "Public opinion" turns out in it's millions to watch that!

Yet if I was to take a 1,000,000 pile, and burn it in the name of art. (It's been done by the way:- Watch the K-Foundation Burn a Million Quid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watch_the_K-Foundation_Burn_a_Million_Quid) "public opinion" would see it differently. There's no "art" in "public opinion", that's one thing the "art" of the Soviet Era really showed!


There are many more examples that are beyond belief. A look at the grants that the Arts council gives out is an eye opener. Some things I admit, are a little difficult to get one's mind around, however the grants also help to get artists, education and exposure to a great many people outside of those two great sources of culture in this country, Melbourne and Yoplait Yoghurt.


Even local government has been getting on the bandwagon spending ratepayers money on extraordinarily expensive pieces of junk that grace the entrances to our suburban city entrances and calling it art.:mad: In some Qld centres, all developers of commercial buildings have to provide public artwork to a percentage of the value of the buildings. This isn't doing anything for the art community, apart from providing work for some businesses.

i am presently involved in a small apartment project, which has as a condition of it's approval, Public Art to be provided in the street to a value of $120,000. (It's OK Andy, we'll talk later!) That's $6,000 per unit. Yes Mr Sturdee, we'll let you live in this street but you'll have to spend $6,000 on an piece of art first!

Who puts the value on it? One of my little carvings has to be worth that, doesn't it?

I'd rather see a starving sculptor subsidised for 12 years at $10,000 per year, than fork out for one piece that a commercial "gallery" will produce an invoice for! On the other hand, art is involved, so why quibble? :D


But as I said I look forward to hearing what art is appropriate for subsidy, but if opera or ballet cannot get enough paying patrons we should not have them. Anything that provides instruction or contact with those who would otherwise not be exposed is a good start.

A "top up" for people genuinely living their craft is another. For instance some of the best known luthiers in this country are extremely successful in their craft, but cannot possibly survive financially. Allowing them a small (means tested) grant can only provide a future reference for similar artisans.

Much as I love their work, the Left Handed Lesbian Surfboard Designers don't have a place in this scheme, and I don't see why Opera should be any more entitled to dosh than punk rock. Both have equal opportunity to record and attract an audience. Musicians are used to struggle!

However, Ted Egan, playing only his empy beer carton, has a lot more chance of getting to audiences in remote centres than a cast of 50 with sets attached, so..... .Well actually he has a lot more chance of recovering his costs of getting there without a grant doesn't he?


May be that is a grey world, but at least it's affordable. I've visited grey worlds. Now that the wall is down they are less grey.

One may be able to survive in them, but I don't think they really ARE affordable!

Cheers,

P:D

[Lignum]

Two things that get everyone hot under the collar is Sharpening and The Arts. Remember this one http://www.woodworkforums.ubeaut.com.au/showthread.php?t=31343 :D

I have no problem as a tax payer that some of my money goes to Artists wether their strugling or not. It would be nice if woodwork was classified as Art, but its not so we have to look else where to get it. Trouble is its their, but hard to find and secure. Thats ok, i dont get all twisted over it. If i did i would go harder at getting a little slice of the pie.

And one of my great dissapointments of recent times was the blinkerd one eyed grumpy people who loudly objected (with the constant and LOUD help of certain radio talk back hosts) to the painting of 100 trees for the Comm games. Ok 100k is a fair wack but it was a drop in the ocean compared to the massive Comm Games buget and he ended up getting 56k for something else anyway. But because of that public "censorship" we missed out on seeing something truley spectacular. Imagine 100 old Elms (i think they were the elms) painted blue all lit up at night, wow, it would have been something else. Interactive art at its best.

Anyway the funding is a % thats allocated in both Bugets regardles and is to go to Artists and Community Arts projects of all descriptions, so who are we to decide if the Art is Arty enough for our taste to qualify. Its the various bodys who decide where its alocated that need to come under more scrutiny and be more accountable. But thats the trouble, they can keep alocating in the inner sanctum like they do and largly avoid public scrutany, or be more accountable (going more public) and risk loosing works like the Blue Trees. I know which one id prefere.




However, Ted Egan, playing only his empy beer carton, has a lot more chance of getting to audiences in remote centres than a cast of 50 with sets attached

Not so Midge:) I know it was a one off, but remember 1998, Cats was publicly funded to take the full show on the road to all remote outback locations. And it was very sucsessfull.

[Clinton1]

Andy,
I think you have identified the problem.
If artists were educated on the importance of getting themselves economically viable then there would be less instances of the "starving artist in the cold water garret"

I think it is a bit pretensious (and an important part of the image of being an artist) to think that you should be able to do whatever you want, and because you decided to be an artist, that the community should subsidise your life.

Is there something wrong with an artist deciding to produce a body of work in order to make a living, and a body of work that is purely an expression of their artistic free will?

Most of us have to draw a line between what we do in order to pay the bills, and what we do in order to make paying the bills worthwhile.

In any case, the poor artist works a 'real' job to finance their art anyway.... usually at minimum wage.

SO, I'm proposing that each year of a B. Arts there are lessons on "running a small business", "investment principles"... delivered by accountants! ;)

Lignum - didnt the "100K for painting trees blue artist" get the 56K for having the contract reneged on and for the paint they bought.... i.e. 56K for nothing!:D

[bitingmidge]

Lignum - didnt the "100K for painting trees blue artist" get the 56K for having the contract reneged on and for the paint they bought.... i.e. 56K for nothing!:D
Bargain!

It's still being talked about and it saved the taxpayer 44K !

Now how much better off are you all with that in your pockets?

What have you achieved with the balance?

Peter?


P
:D :D :D

[jow104]

Surely everyone here knows that politians and local council officials love spending money (other peoples), after all they wouldn't have a job if not so.

Our local council keeps remodelling the tennis courts in our local paark, but I never see anyone playing. The pavillion is permantly locked up I assume because they can not afford an employee on the site, etc.etc.

Painting tees blue sounds even better. :D

[Iain]

Painting tees blue sounds even better. :D
What does golf have to do with art;)

[johnc]

[quote=bitingmidge]For me, the above quote summarises it all, from both sides of the fence.

In reading the previous posts, I am afraid that there is a little truth in all of them, however:

I have discounted all the posts written by accountants as they simply know nothing about art.

I have discounted all the posts by artists as they simply know nothing about business.

Midge,

You cruel bugger as an accountant I also have an understanding and a soft spot for the arts, although I would add the creativeness of artists seems to get in the road of profitability.

The world would be a dull place without art and the arts, and if subsidising it keeps it alive I'm all for it. We are all subsidised one way or another be it our education, access to the health system or safety nets that the government provides.

We have an imperfect system and at times funding goes to groups or individuals that probably shouldn't and could be better spent elsewhere. Of course we could do better but shouldn't the argument be how to subsidise more effectively rather than should we fund at all.

I really don't think the system is that bad just that a few individuals running it sometimes make really odd choices that are influenced by their prejudices or ignorance, but that is not sufficient to say that we shouldn't support the arts through government financial assistance.

John.

[echnidna]

Inresting how this thread is concentrating on the waste of society and some want to eliminate grants for the arts.

As well as bumping off the arts why not eliminate footy too? :D :D :D

[Sturdee]

It's still being talked about and it saved the taxpayer 44K ! Now how much better off are you all with that in your pockets?



It isn't that we are better off with it in our pockets but it could be better spent on say a struggling author or up and coming painter. It is the waste that I'm objecting to.



i am presently involved in a small apartment project, which has as a condition of it's approval, Public Art to be provided in the street to a value of $120,000. (It's OK Andy, we'll talk later!) That's $6,000 per unit. Yes Mr Sturdee, we'll let you live in this street but you'll have to spend $6,000 on an piece of art first!

Who puts the value on it? One of my little carvings has to be worth that, doesn't it?


For a reasonable fee I could set up a few companies that can provide the necessary valuation and exhibition certificates with supporting receipts of similar work that would satisfy your council that the little carving by a Mr. P. Bitingmidge, a poor and struggling artist:D :D , is worth the $ 120,000 that is required. After all accountants might not know about art but we do know how to create a value for it.:p An art form in itself.



Peter.
( who is now of to participate in another art form being the art of dance, which is not subsidised by the Arts Council.:rolleyes: )

[Lignum]

It isn't that we are better off with it in our pockets but it could be better spent on say a struggling author or up and coming painter. It is the waste that I'm objecting to.


How do you know he wasnt going to keep 50k and give 30k to a Painter to paint the tree and 20k to an Author to write about it

[Clinton1]

Andy,
One of the reasons that business is supported financially is in the hope that it will create more taxation opportunities.... i.e. through business growth and employing more workers.

I reckon you could work out a way to achieve this through an arts based business, and bitingmidge has just identified a need... public space arts for the bloated property developer. :)

Of course perhaps not too many artists will sieze the opportunity as they won't have the contacts or awareness of the issue, being seriously engaged in navel gazing. See the idea floated above. ;)

[echnidna]

For a reasonable fee I could set up a few companies that can provide the necessary valuation and exhibition certificates with supporting receipts of similar work that would satisfy your council that the little carving by a Mr. P. Bitingmidge, a poor and struggling artist:D :D , is worth the $ 120,000 that is required. After all accountants might not know about art but we do know how to create a value for it.:p An art form in itself.



Peter.
( who is now of to participate in another art form being the art of dance, which is not subsidised by the Arts Council.:rolleyes: )

hmmm sounds like a good opportunity there for a few of us to get their snouts in the trough. :) :)

and we might even have an international artist in residence soon if we co-opt jow104 !!!!!

[jow104]

Yes please Bob. Airlines do not seem to appreciate granting a subsidy on my ticket applictations at the moment.:)