English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

2006-07-09 05:25:32 · 7 answers · asked by april 1 in Arts & Humanities Performing Arts

7 answers

I disagree. Ideas which are harmful or contradictory to public stability are not necessarily good things. The good of the public is much more important than the good of the individual artist... but that statement might need a little clarification. Public safety and well-being is more important than the right of the individual to express himself.

2006-07-09 12:46:33 · answer #1 · answered by harmonslide 2 · 1 0

As long as no one is harmed (in other words, I *would* oppose performance art which injured either participants or audience members) I agree completely. Government should not restrict artists in any way.

Which, of course, says nothing about funding. Governments have no right to regulate artistic expression, but no obligation to fund it. That is an entirely different matter, and if governments do provide any funding for the arts, they must place some restrictions on that, if only to keep within a budget.

What restrictions *should* be placed on funding is debatable, and since it seems so hard for all sides to agree, perhaps the only way for government to 'level the playing field' is to stop funding art altogether.

2006-07-09 05:33:15 · answer #2 · answered by Riothamus Of Research ;<) 3 · 0 0

Yes. Yes. Yes. Governments should be taking care of important economic/social/diplomatic things instead of censoring the arts as in dictatorship.

EDIT: And I totally have to disagree with Sean P when he says (I quote) "art should imitate reality". That is the vision of someone who doesn't know the first thing about art.

2006-07-09 06:19:39 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yes they should be as free as possible, but if they step on the toes of other people rights/freedoms they also should respect that too!!!
**********************************************************************
What is freedom??? What is an artist???
**********************************************************************
Where are the boundries??? Isn't being artist (your at least some of them) try to push the boundries???
**********************************************************************
From Wikipedia:

Freedom is the absence of restraints upon our ability to think and act (except those restraints that are of natural cause).

Freedom as concepts may refer to:

Freedom (philosophy)
Freedom (political)
**********************************************************************
Artist is a descriptive term applied to a person who engages in an activity deemed to be an art. It is also used in a qualitative sense of a person creative in, innovative in, or adept at, an artistic practice.

Most often, the term describes those who create within a context of 'high culture', activities such as drawing, painting, sculpture, acting, dancing, writing, filmmaking, photography and music — people who use imagination, and talent or skill, to create works that can be judged to have an aesthetic value. Art historians and critics will define as artists those who produce art within a recognised or recognisable discipline.

The term is also used to denote highly skilled people in non-"arts" activities, as well — crafts, medicine, alchemy, mechanics, mathematics, defense (martial arts) and architecture, for example. The designation is applied to illegal activities, like a "scam artist". The term 'artist' could also refer to a con artist.

There is no consensus about what constitutes "art" or who is, or is not, an "artist". Often, discussions on the subject focus on the differences between "artist" and "technician" or "entertainer," or "artisan," "fine art" and "applied art," or what constitutes art and what does not. In addition, the French word artiste (which in French, simply means "artist") has been imported into the English language; in English-usage it has connotations (some of them derogatory) which differ somewhat from the English term artist.

The Oxford English dictionary, cites broad meanings of the term "artist,"

A learned person or Master of Arts.
One who pursues a practical science, traditionally medicine, astrology, alchemy, chemistry.
A follower of a pursuit in which skill comes by study or practice - the opposite of a theorist.
A follower of a manual art, such as a mechanic.
One who makes their craft a fine art.
One who cultivates one of the fine arts - traditionally the arts presided over by the muses.

2006-07-09 05:42:15 · answer #4 · answered by mother_t_of_wpg 2 · 0 0

Disagree 100%. You can't say "always." Some "creative" individuals like to take pictures of children being abused. You want to protect them?

2006-07-09 05:30:23 · answer #5 · answered by Neerdowellian 6 · 0 0

When the artist lies that result in slander. Speaking the truth is one thing, but actual lies are another. Art should imitate reality not distort it, or bring harm to others.

2006-07-09 05:29:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I AGREE...EVEN THO AMERICA IS FREE ITS NOT A TOTAL FREE COUNTRY....BUT WE COULD BE A WHOLE LOT WORSE...LIKE NOT EVEN BEIN ABLE TO SPEAK IN PUBLIC SO I THINK WERE PRETTY FORTUNATE

2006-07-09 05:30:10 · answer #7 · answered by kiddo=\ 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers