Art in Public: a moral responsibility
I'm working on a blog post tentatively titled, "A Top 20 from the First Week." While I catch up on my mental wherewithal, however, I'll mention here a book review I wrote for Comment magazine. This is the opening paragraph of the review. And I've included an interview with the author below.
"When power corrupts, poetry cleanses."
—John F. Kennedy, "Remarks at Amherst College upon Receiving an Honorary Degree, October 26, 1963"
"I say . . . he is not an artist. He is a jerk. And he is taunting the American people, just as others are . . . And I resent it."
—Senator Jesse Helms, speaking about contemporary visual artist Andres Serrano and his work, "Piss Christ"
Is government funding beneficial to artists and their publics, or would it be better for artists to compete in the economic marketplace without government support? Should government funding come "with no strings attached" or should it uphold standards of decency and social order? Are contemporary artists progressive agents of social change or are they a decadent menace to society? These are the questions that motivate the argument of Zuidervaart's latest contribution to philosophy, Art in Public: Politics, Economics, and a Democratic Culture.
GRIID TV Interview with Lambert Zuidervaart from Girbe Eefsting on Vimeo.