Patrick Stewart, "Let them eat Shakespeare."

[billc]

the phenomenon of rich actors wanting the government to subsidize their profession isn't just an american problem. Patrick Stewart is complaining to the British government about cuts to funding the arts. Sure, Britain is in tremendous finanial straits, but that shouldn't interfere with actors getting paid.

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni9400244/

From the article:

"The arts should not have been cut at all. It is one of the ongoing success stories of the UK. Our ballets, operas, theatres and so on are the reason 80 per cent of people come to the UK. We're a great money-earner. Cutting back on funding makes no sense.

End of excerpt.

It only makes sense to an actor. If all of those things bring in so much money, they wouldn't need government subsidies in the first place.

 

[Sukerkin]

I happen to agree with Sir Patrick on this. Funding of things that enrich the culture should be encouraged rather than the reverse.

Like medicine for a society, 'high brow' arts might not taste good to the Chav Layer in the way that 'reality TV' does but it has a beneficial effect in terms of keeping the lowest common denominator from dropping any further than it already has.

The BBC used to have Shakespeare seasons, Play for Today, broadcast serious examinations of cinema et al. Not any more. They play the ratings game just like commercial TV, lord knows why.

The arts used to be supported by the rich as a way of displaying their taste as well as their wealth - now the wealthy are largely bereft of a social conscience, taking on board a somewhat amoral "I'm all right Jack" attitude, so the government has to fill the gap.

 

[granfire]

The involvement of government in the fine arts has always been a measure of civilization - and wealth.

 

[billc]

You would probably find Sukerkin that if the government stopped supporting the arts, the wealthy would once again become patrons, the way they were before money was taken at gunpoint to fund King Lear.

 

[granfire]

You would probably find Sukerkin that if the government stopped supporting the arts, the wealthy would once again become patrons, the way they were before money was taken at gunpoint to fund King Lear.

We'd be stuck with Snooky...