BS: Capitalism and the Arts

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism and the Arts
From: folk1234
Date: 18 Nov 99 - 11:30 AM

Dear Vixen:
The whole community must still be sleeping. Its been 90 minutes since you've laid down this potentially hot gauntlet. Let me stir the pot by taking the devil's side.
First, assuming a reasonably low salary of $25K for a production worker, his/her CEO would have to make $10M to have a 400-to-1 ratio. I'm certain that at some place this actually has happened (considering a total CEO compensation package of salary, benefits, deferred income, and stock options, etc.), but its not the norm. Nevertheless, CEOs of our largest firms do receive, and usually earn, very high tangible rewards. If you drive a big ship, you rate to big comp. If movie stars, NFL quarterbacks, and NBL centers can make millions, so too should the leaders of our large multi-national corporations. These CEOs, like many of us Mudcatters, started as fresh-faced and eager recent graduates, primed to make the world a better place. Because of their skill, dedication, unique leadership abilities, they successfully climbed the ladder within their profession. I'm convinced that they could have become great folk musicians (is there such a thing?) if that had been their goal. These are people who would stand out in any organization.
Now, with respect to CEO's high compensation getting in the way of the Arts, I believe it is quite the opposite. Look on the program or newsletter of any arts organization, including NPR. It is the Corporations and their leaders who make the largest gifts and sponsor many of the truly great programs. Could they contribute more? Of course, but so could you and I.
What truly stands in the way of the Arts, is the shameful way in which our elected leaders have made this a political football. One political camp says art (as characterized by the recent, allegedly obscene, show in NYC)is the domain of the rich, left wing, elites who mainly reside East of the Hudson. And if these pinkos want art, they can pay for it! The other camp appears to cater to the Arts, but generally wants to control it from the great omnipotent Washington bureaucracy.
Bye the way, I have no dog in this race. I have a modest job with a state university engineering outreach program. I work very closely with CEOs of small (less than 200 employees), rural, manufacturing companies. Many of these CEOs make far less that some of their employees, work 20 hours a day, and face a never ending onslaught of regulations and road blocks from state and federal government. Nevertheless, they provide the parts and components that make our large corporations competitive in the global market, and more importantly, they provide the jobs and opportunities for our otherwise neglected rural population.
What's left for you and I? Because of our love of the Arts, we must continue to learn, perform, and be missionaries, not only for our folk music artistic segement, but also for Art as a whole. Art, of all types, is one of the life bloods of civilized culture.
Wow! I'm not usually so long-winded. I guess you hit a hot button. Ya' know, this sounds like a pretty good campaign speech. Maybe I should.......
Love, and Happy chords

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism and the Arts
From: katlaughing
Date: 18 Nov 99 - 11:26 AM

WOW! I would love to see those in person, Spaw.

He may have been right about not selling your hobby. I had a brilliant jazz musician uncle who opted for a secure job with the government. Hardly ever pursued his music interests after that. He was also a brill woodworker. When he retired he started making exquisite inlaid goods for sale; previously he'd just done a few as gifts. DIdn't make him happy even though he had sheiks from the Middle East and others buying his stuff for thousands of dollars. He committed suicide about 5 years ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism and the Arts
From: catspaw49
Date: 18 Nov 99 - 11:16 AM

Something about a couple of the comments here made me think of "Mooney." He was the greatest carver the world has ever seen and truly an artist. I grew up close by and was the last generation of kids that got to play in Mooney's yard. He was a true genius with virtually no education and also the town "Kook." But he was brilliant, an excellent historian, and a kind and gentle homan being. He carved a history of Steam that is so spectacular, words can never do it justice. The website is OK, but can't begin to give you the true man, but go have a look HERE.

One of the things that Mooney said was "Never sell your hobby"...and he never did. At one point the New York Central offered him a fantastic sum for some of his engines...enough to make him by far the richest man in the count. But he refused.

If you are EVER close to Dover, Ohio, you MUST go to the museum. I've never taken anyone there who did not walk away virtually speechless.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism and the Arts
From: Bert
Date: 18 Nov 99 - 10:35 AM

I don't think that capitalism has 'anything' to do with the arts. As Chet says " artists are going to do what they do whether they get rich at it or not,"

And to paraphrase Vixen's second point. The one thing that capitalists DON'T do to get rich, is to WORK for their money (because that's not in her list of 7 sins).

All good artists work bloody hard to produce their art.

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism and the Arts
From: Vixen
Date: 18 Nov 99 - 10:29 AM

Quick clarification-- I'm not advocating communism or socialism over capitalism...I think they also have flaws when applied to art and artists. I'm too ignorant of economics to know any other economic systems. Any enlightenment is gratefully appreciated!

V

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism and the Arts
From: katlaughing
Date: 18 Nov 99 - 10:15 AM

Well, I have some other thoughts on this to state later, but, first...good thread and well put, V!

Success can also come from good attributes. While not specifically about the arts and capitalism, this illustrates what good motivation can do in a capitalist society:

My son works for a man in Louisville, KY, who owns hundreds of apartments and other properties. This man has been giving almost to a fault since day one. He gives regular, good raises to all deserving employees; once you've worked for him for two years, you get an extra week off to go on an all expenses paid group company trip with a guest of your choosing. Last year he took them all to Cancun; this next February it will be a cruise in the Carribean. He helped my son buy a new vehicle and then decided as part of a pay raise, the company would make the payments, since he uses it for work a lot. He likes to hire family of employees. He helped my son buy his first house a year ago, is so inspiring to my son and, my son has become so savvy learning from this man, that he just bought a second house on his own, with the idea of becoming more like his boss in buying, renovating, and selling property for a living.

His boss has regularly used kindness, open communication, and sharing of his wealth to treat his employees with respect, compassion, and genuine caring for each individual and their families. This in turn has made him a multi-millionaire and I don't know of anyone who knows him who begrudges him that at all.

The negative thing I would say about capitalism and the arts is that too many of the great artists go unnoticed for lack of funding, for not being the art du jour, etc. I still think capitalism gives artists more of chance than other programs. I had a friend whose sister lives in Holland. There the government bought all of her paitings, giving her a living. They did this with most professional artists. She was very unhappy about this, though, because the gov. wound up with so much, they could nothing with but store it in big warehouses. It hurt her deeply to think of her paintings never being seen or shared.

Whew! Dont' know any answers, it can suck both ways, but I do think intention or motivation can have a huge effect.

Thanks,

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Capitalism and the Arts
From:
Date: 18 Nov 99 - 10:15 AM

Vix, I've discussed this subject many times, and you're right about number 1 above and I think I agree with you on number 2, with some qualification of what success really means.

First, the arts have always been defined, unfortunately too much, by the market that may consider partaking of them. That certainly would seem to stifle creativity, but those artists who research the market before they create probably would not have been great artists in the spiritual sense anyway. George Benson (once a great Jazz guitarist) used to make notes of the chord changes in top of the chart songs, and then use the same changes in his new material. I think, unfortunately again, though, that arts can only* be viable in a capitalist system, if making a living is the goal. "True" artists are going to do what they do whether they get rich at it or not, and if they can at least make a meager living off of it, or even only do it in their spare time, you can't force taste or insight onto an increasingly self-absorbed public. They'll pay to see the Nutcracker every Christmas as long as they live.

Second, if we are truly going to try to be artistic, expressive, spiritual etc in all the good senses of those words, we do ourselves no good by being bitter that others of less talent made more money. I choose to do what I want, and when it makes money I'm glad and when it doesn't I'm still satisfied. Not that I wouldn't write Barry Manilow some songs for a few million dollars if I had that opportunity, but I've reconciled with that. If we're comparing capitalism with communism, there certainly was a lot of stifling of art and artists going on there, unless you were a serious butt-kisser.

No I don't think you have to partake in sin to be successful, but you probably do to get rich at it. If real big money is the goal, probably arts are not the way to go.

Good idea for discussion, Chet

Subject: Capitalism and the Arts
From: Vixen
Date: 18 Nov 99 - 08:47 AM

D' Cats--

This thread may get political, so beware and keep your courtesy caps on!

Anyway, the topic came up on the Urban Rap thread, about how money and greed tend to get in the way of music, and artistic success.

Two things I'd like to throw into the arena.

1) I just heard recently that CEOs now make about 400 times what the average production worker makes. I'm finding this hard to believe, and I may have misheard it. It was on NPR, so if someone else can confirm or correct my impression, I'd be grateful.

2) It seems to me that the economic success of an individual under capitalism in one way or another requires an unhealthy cultivation of one or more of the 7 deadly passions (sins). (Pride, Envy, Wrath, Sloth, Avarice, Gluttony, and Lust).

My $0.02, fwiw. Mileage may vary.

V