Arts Jobs are Jobs Too
0
Sports ...generate money.
They generate money from a far greater audience. It is also harder to be a player in a sport, then it is to be an artist. The training in intensive, practice is rigorous and the competition is much more then in something subjective as art.
Sport is widely more appreciated because there is no different opinion or subjectiveness on what is good and bad. Winning is winning. A "marvelous" piece of art could be hated by half the viewers and loved by the other half. Everyone enjoys their team winning.
Sports also enrich your body, something the American population is struggling with right now. You admittedly do not need to be smart even to be a good artist, just inspired. Art does not quite ...enrich you like sports does, in the body aspect.
Art Jobs -> Getting Govt funding
What part of public welfare does art achieve? You can't even create a single piece of art everyone will appreciate, because of the nature of art. The closest thing to artistic funding is memorials or statues, because they stand for or commemorate something.
They generate money from a far greater audience. It is also harder to be a player in a sport, then it is to be an artist. The training in intensive, practice is rigorous and the competition is much more then in something subjective as art.
Sport is widely more appreciated because there is no different opinion or subjectiveness on what is good and bad. Winning is winning. A "marvelous" piece of art could be hated by half the viewers and loved by the other half. Everyone enjoys their team winning.
Sports also enrich your body, something the American population is struggling with right now. You admittedly do not need to be smart even to be a good artist, just inspired. Art does not quite ...enrich you like sports does, in the body aspect.
Art Jobs -> Getting Govt funding
What part of public welfare does art achieve? You can't even create a single piece of art everyone will appreciate, because of the nature of art. The closest thing to artistic funding is memorials or statues, because they stand for or commemorate something.
0
Wishbreaker wrote...
Art Jobs -> Getting Govt funding
What part of public welfare does art achieve? You can't even create a single piece of art everyone will appreciate, because of the nature of art. The closest thing to artistic funding is memorials or statues, because they stand for or commemorate something.
There's a sport that pleases everyone?
0
Not all art is a job. So of it is people trying to make a living off their hobby. If your Art isn't commercially viable, it isn't making money, and it isn't helping the economy, it isn't a job.
Making paintings in your house that get put on display in places that don't pay you to display your art isn't a job. Getting a commision to create a mural downtown is. Getting city money to put on a play that people pay to attend or is free because it is beneficial to the city is a job. Working at starbucks during the day and practicing with your band at night does not mean you have two jobs if your band doesn't take in more money then you spend on it. It only means your TRYING to get another job.
And why are people bringing Wars into this? Just because money is spent somewhere else, American politics have shown it doesn mean we won't spend money in another place as well. The point is should government fund artist - specificly when that art isn't contributing but only stimulating the economy indirectly?
Making paintings in your house that get put on display in places that don't pay you to display your art isn't a job. Getting a commision to create a mural downtown is. Getting city money to put on a play that people pay to attend or is free because it is beneficial to the city is a job. Working at starbucks during the day and practicing with your band at night does not mean you have two jobs if your band doesn't take in more money then you spend on it. It only means your TRYING to get another job.
And why are people bringing Wars into this? Just because money is spent somewhere else, American politics have shown it doesn mean we won't spend money in another place as well. The point is should government fund artist - specificly when that art isn't contributing but only stimulating the economy indirectly?
0
I guess it boils down to society and the mentality of individuals.
Perhaps it is due to the fact that arts do not receive as much media coverage as compared to other industries. Whenever one watches the news, industries such as banks, manufacturing, etc, get mentioned all the time. Sports also has its own segment on the major news channels. However, I don't see the arts being discussed much.
As a result, arts might be regarded by many to be more of a hobby, rather than a job.
Perhaps it is due to the fact that arts do not receive as much media coverage as compared to other industries. Whenever one watches the news, industries such as banks, manufacturing, etc, get mentioned all the time. Sports also has its own segment on the major news channels. However, I don't see the arts being discussed much.
As a result, arts might be regarded by many to be more of a hobby, rather than a job.
0
The vast majority of those persons listed in the spoil received some form of "government" sponsorship or had Patrons during their climb to fame. I put the word government in quotes because the sponsors or grants came from Kings Popes and other members of the church Other assorted royalty and on one case a number of very rich attractive women who vied for his attentions
Many of the Americans listed went to collage on grants or loans
ll of these people brought joy or enlightenment or wisdom or laughter to the world that we might otherwise not have experienced And no one died
Job or Hobby?
The other side of the coin is Football Hockey Rugby and other "games of violence"
that are nothing more that a way for people to experience, vicariously, the thrill of war and combat with out the fatalities. (well except for the occasional running back, lineman or guard)
Chess is a game of war in fact it is taught in many war collages as a way to learn tactics. Problems is it takes brains to play
Many of the Americans listed went to collage on grants or loans
ll of these people brought joy or enlightenment or wisdom or laughter to the world that we might otherwise not have experienced And no one died
Job or Hobby?
Spoiler:
The other side of the coin is Football Hockey Rugby and other "games of violence"
that are nothing more that a way for people to experience, vicariously, the thrill of war and combat with out the fatalities. (well except for the occasional running back, lineman or guard)
Chess is a game of war in fact it is taught in many war collages as a way to learn tactics. Problems is it takes brains to play
0
If you think about it, both sports and art are inherently "useless," and both are for entertainment value only. Actually, sports are even more useless, because at least art can produce objects you can use (like pottery, for example, or woodworking arts) but sports do not. Yet sports still get way more funding in schools.
0
According to my dictionary, a job is a piece of work, esp. a specific task done as part of the routine of one's occupation or for an agreed price. Not a word of gov't in that definition, ne?
If you guys are talking about visual arts, then I understand what you're complaining about. But if you're talking about art as in performing arts, filmmaking, photography, interior design, and many other artistic mediums, then we have a problem.
Why yes, they're both apparently useless to us humans for entertainment value only. Without art, we'd be using rocks instead of a pigskin. The sports help keeps kids from becoming this, if they play it right [no steroids, pills and shit]. Sports get funded more because it teaches strategy, and teamwork, yet if art is cut off they'll have no workroom for patience, creativity or most importantly, thought.
If you guys are talking about visual arts, then I understand what you're complaining about. But if you're talking about art as in performing arts, filmmaking, photography, interior design, and many other artistic mediums, then we have a problem.
Nekohime wrote...
If you think about it, both sports and art are inherently "useless," and both are for entertainment value only. Actually, sports are even more useless, because at least art can produce objects you can use (like pottery, for example, or woodworking arts) but sports do not. Yet sports still get way more funding in schools.Why yes, they're both apparently useless to us humans for entertainment value only. Without art, we'd be using rocks instead of a pigskin. The sports help keeps kids from becoming this, if they play it right [no steroids, pills and shit]. Sports get funded more because it teaches strategy, and teamwork, yet if art is cut off they'll have no workroom for patience, creativity or most importantly, thought.
0
I'm not saying they are useless, just that by some people's definitions, they can be considered as such. Both are necessary, IMO, but sports get way too much funding and the arts get little to none.
0
Takerial
Lovable Teddy Bear
Again, it's because sports tend to increase enrollment, especially within the universities. And well, they need a pool to pull from.
Arts...well there are few that art specific but that's pretty much it. Most schools don't get increased enrollment because of their art program.
So funding gets pushed to something that would increase cash flow.
Arts...well there are few that art specific but that's pretty much it. Most schools don't get increased enrollment because of their art program.
So funding gets pushed to something that would increase cash flow.
0
Advertising is a mutli-media art job.
If you could wow or get people to look at your works (constantly) above all competition, and if you enjoy getting attention, try this.
Whether its photography in a brochure of Greece, or the next decorative homepage of Vogue Magazine, or streaming your graphic design on the next commercial half-time in the televised Super Bowl to capture the audience of your product.
But I concur I just mentioned the high end jobs, haha.
There is some decent pay in Freelance advertising pieces, but its hard pressed haha.
Billboards and televised commercials are where its at, but since I don't know much on it, ask a friend or an acquaintance (or anyone friendly enough to give info on the matter haha) who knows the business.
If you could wow or get people to look at your works (constantly) above all competition, and if you enjoy getting attention, try this.
Whether its photography in a brochure of Greece, or the next decorative homepage of Vogue Magazine, or streaming your graphic design on the next commercial half-time in the televised Super Bowl to capture the audience of your product.
But I concur I just mentioned the high end jobs, haha.
There is some decent pay in Freelance advertising pieces, but its hard pressed haha.
Billboards and televised commercials are where its at, but since I don't know much on it, ask a friend or an acquaintance (or anyone friendly enough to give info on the matter haha) who knows the business.