The arts are a necessity, like food and water, for true civilization?

Answer 1

Of course. Sadly, the American lawmakers do not value it enough to include any budget for it. Soon enough all musical, physical and artistic ventures may be forgotten in lieu of trying to obtain some idiotic sense of supremacy.

Answer 2

I'm not certain which comes first. It's difficult to imagine a group of primates running around trying to find enough food and water to survive (while also trying to avoid predators who would think of them as food) and still having any real thoughts of 'capturing' something artistic. But, with the development of 'civilization' there also comes sufficient time for individuals to begin creating 'art (in some form) which conveys to the beholder the essence of an emotion (which is what -any- art form is supposed to do). Civilization also allows sufficient time for other things (such as philosophy, math, science, literature, etc. etc.) to develop.

Doug

Answer 3

The arts are a sign that the civilization has evolved to allowing the citizens enough free time and "profit" to be able to have fine arts. See Maslow's Hierarchy for more info on this-it's a good one.

Answer 4

Definitely! Art is present in everything we touch. From the design of cell phones to the actual schematic that is necessary for the electronic build.
Art goes beyond definition. It brings form, such as building a freeway to planning a parking space. It also is a release and a path for the spirit to roam. Words and how they are put together is art... etc. etc....

Answer 5

A long time ago I will agree with you but not anymore.
Art especially architecture has lost the social quality and end as a mere product of consumption. The same occurs to many of the other classical arts like painting or singing.

I admit I'm pessimist because I see that all around my profession.

Answer 6

You die without food or water. I think society could survive without "art." The earliest primate societies probably didn't have much of what we would identify as art.

Its just a loaded question to bloat the ego of "artists" and argue for greater government grants from NEA, etc. Like when art teachers argue that public art lowers the crime rate or some such BS, without having the intelligence to realize that of course public art is going to be more predominantly displayed in affluent, safe areas.

Answer 7

No. the arts are only a sign of excess in a civilization.

Answer 8

I think so. They give people a way to express themselves, which is important of any true civilization.

Answer 9

It's not a necessity (people will not die without it), but I guess it would depend on how you define "civilization".

Answer 10

Yes, they are.

But the true measure of a civilization is how well they treat their prisoners.