From one distraction to another...

25.8.08

Problem with having wide ranging interests is the potential for the Butterfly Effect. (One small innocuous line of print, or words from a song can set the tone for the rest of my day & usually have large, unimagined consequences. Most of which leads me away from sitting at my desk.)

This has me trying to pour 1000's of grains of knowledge in my head. Hence the distractions...

Here is a perfect example; after a tirade (this is not uncommon in my head) about sport vs art funding. I find myself questioning the drive that our society has for things only have value if they are of 'use'.
Art funding is a huge victim of this thinking, even art for the public spaces is woefully under funded or even supported in a non-fiscal sense. Councils & government get skittish incase they have to cough up time/cash/concern that the art might need cleaning (the graffiti artist's need add their own take) or that it might need justification, surely money is needed elsewhere e.g to line the pockets of 'VIP' Council chums.
Sadly, business funding public art seems to taint it...a cynicism of the British character. And of course, the coy, eyes staring at the floor, feet shuffling squeamishness we have about money...especially in relation to Art.

So all this leads me in a roundabout way to this fantastic podcast Philosophy Bites. The Anton De Botton episode is particularly interesting in relation to the above gibber. Not only is art hidebound and potentially damaged by restrictive thinking, but philosophy (of all things) is held in check, too.
Of course that could lead us on to censorship....but let's not...yet!

But whilst listening to the podcast, I have started a series of butterfly prints....umm must get a scanner!

1 comments:

Susan Lloyd said...

Good posting! Also got me thinking about just who owns art. Is it the artist, the public, the family...

Vladimir Nabokov's Laura is to be published against his expressed wish. (Times Books 23 Aug)

When does a publisher, or a gallery owner or the public have the right to override the artist's experience, vision and often (it has to be said, sheer bloodymindedness!) in the choice not to give the work a wider audience. When does the work cease to be the artist's property and 'belong' to someone else?

Ma