Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Crip Dyke's avatar

I saw this when it was released:

"Any artist cancelling their show at the Trump Kennedy Center over political differences isn’t courageous or principled—they are selfish, intolerant, and have failed to meet the basic duty of a public artist: to perform for all people."

But of course there is no such public duty. And if there was a public duty to perform one's art for all people, then there would be a public duty of ALL people to pay for the art. But I seem to remember a slight kerfuffle at paying Andres Serrano with public funds.

And speaking sotto voce of entartete Kunst, how can one claim that the artist (or "public artist" if one prefers) has a duty to perform for all people, yet also oppose drag artists providing dramatic readings of Fox in Socks for 3 year old library patrons?

Framing the artist as duty bound to the public with no reciprocal duty from the public to the artist is part and parcel of the age old conservative project, to create law that binds out groups without protecting them while protecting in groups without binding them.

Strip away the misleading rhetoric to examine what Grenell and the Trump regime *do* it becomes plain. Far from supporting the arts, they are declaring artists an out group they intend to bind.

Expand full comment
Martini Glambassador's avatar

For just about fucking forever, the right has been complaining that The Arts is just too full of filthy liberals. Ok, you guys have decided that now that you are “in charge” you can impose your politics on the rest of us. Don’t be too surprised that anybody with character decides not to comply.

Expand full comment
930 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?