Re: The value of public funded art
 

Lottery funding is not the answer. I personally would rather see lotto funds going to, sports centres,keeping kids fit and healthy, and care for the frail,disabled and elderly folk.

If you are so artistic you make your own way:cool:

Re: The value of public funded art
 

But can it be knitted?

Let's try and make some 'creativity' out of this wool, I've just bought with my government subsidy.

:rolleyes::D

Re: The value of public funded art
 

A question I often ask myself :D

Re: The value of public funded art
 

Ok already, you don't like the crotchet, I get it! :D

Re: The value of public funded art
 

Sport is not for everyone. You've got to keep minds fit and healthy as well.

Re: The value of public funded art
 

No it has to be spun, just like the cause for " Public Funded Art ".;)

Re: The value of public funded art
 

A stated, I don't personally care what lottery funding gets sprent on.

I'd argue that many recipients aren't 'worthy causes' in my opinion.

Therefore I refuse to buy tickets.

My argument is that governments shouldn't be spending revenue, raised from tax payers, to fund art.

Mainly because most 'art' produced this way is dross.

Re: The value of public funded art
 

It can be done with sport ! :D

Elderly can jog their way to mental fitness - News - The Independent

Re: The value of public funded art
 

Fit and healthy kids = better educated children. Whereby education about being healthy doesn't actually mean taking part in a recreation.

Re: The value of public funded art
 

Crocheting caterpillars keeps Mr. Dementia from your mind's door?

Fair enough, if that's what you believe, but it isn't art, and they should be buying their own wool.

Quite amusing really, one of these art projects being crochet, as most of the arguments for state funded arts seem very wooly.

Re: The value of public funded art
 

I agree with you on every one of those points.

But if you don't care about what lottery funding is spent on, why do you continue to keep making pops at the film and crotcheting?

Re: The value of public funded art
 

I Think minds of many, many, people young middle aged and those close to retirement would be fitter and healthier if monies were invested in worthwhile jobs within the community.
Without the Chemists producing the Materials to make his paints or yarns, (if we MUST crochet a point), without the engineers designing and producing the machines to make his brushes and twist his yarns, the artist would be nowhere. Invest in the do-ers of this Country, the Artisans, give them the skills and the chance to produce beautiful materials to sell to the World, and the riches produced can then be used in part to commission worthwhile artists with worthwhile talents. Re-open the mills and get all those that would be craft workers doing a 12 hour shift weaving, they'll soon tire of their pretentious ideas and leave art to the people that can really do it and do it well.
:)

Re: The value of public funded art
 

'Pops'?

You mean what I thought of it critically?

Not much, as posted elsewhere. I never mentioned the cost of the thing, in earlier posts, both remaining and vanished.

I just think the film's a bit introspective, and not very vital.

Was it soley funded by the Lotto?

What were the costs of all three projects, and where did the funding come from, now you've brought it up?

Re: The value of public funded art
 

Seems to be quite a lot of interest.

Could we attach a poll, to see how we think these project are (were) funded?

1/Do you think community arts projects should receive funding from central or local government?

2/Do you think community art projects should benefit as one are of the Lotto's worthy causes?

etc...

Re: The value of public funded art
 

Anyway, off to watch The Apprentice now.

Or as it's commonly known, You're Fired.

:D