<p>The arts are important. Just not as important as reading/writing/arithmetic. Economic growth/development (ie: standard of living) is not really related to “art development”. The fastest growing economies of world in the 20th century were undoubtedly the East Asian ones. Certainly areas that are not ‘known’ for art development.</p>
<p>If I had a choice to cut art or science. I’m cutting art without a second thought.</p>
<p>my thoughts regarding the arts and accessibility doesnt have to do with technology but censorship.
If it is all on DVD/air, who decides what is worth airing or recording?
What about experimental works that involve the audience?</p>
<p>One of Ds best friends won an Obie award ( was it last year?) for his participation in an ensemble piece off-broadway at the Living Theatre.
[The</a> Living Theatre](<a href=“http://www.livingtheatre.org/]The”>http://www.livingtheatre.org/)</p>
<p>The fastest growing economies of world in the 20th century were undoubtedly the East Asian ones. Certainly areas that are not ‘known’ for art development.</p>
<p>[600</a> Universities begins to Enroll Art Students in Hunan](<a href=“http://english.rednet.cn/c/2009/02/04/1701283.htm]600”>http://english.rednet.cn/c/2009/02/04/1701283.htm)</p>
<p>[Art</a> Radar Asia](<a href=“http://artradarasia.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/]Art”>http://artradarasia.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/)
[Chinese</a> Art Sets Record Sales in Hong Kong](<a href=“http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2007-10/2007-10-09-voa8.cfm?CFID=108421842&CFTOKEN=78471879&jsessionid=8830d8824b9fd8a6e5ee8d4b85f4e3618705]Chinese”>http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2007-10/2007-10-09-voa8.cfm?CFID=108421842&CFTOKEN=78471879&jsessionid=8830d8824b9fd8a6e5ee8d4b85f4e3618705)</p>
<p>China is one of the few places on earth that HIGHLY values its arts and history. Look at the movies they have been producing in the past decade.</p>
<p>societies have survived without reading and writing- but they cannot survive without artistic expression</p>
<p>Speaking of the arts, it’s one of the main reasons why public education in urban areas is so poor. If there are budget deficits in a district, the arts programs are among the first to be eliminated. Kids need to be able to express themselves. It’s really sad.</p>
<p>“It isn’t a lack of technology that prevents the broadcast of theatre. It’s the licensing rights. Susan is right, and I would add, it is not even a case of “much” theatre not being available, it’s MOST! Every Broadway show is filmed for archival purposes but those tapes sit in a library at Lincoln Center and can only be viewed under certain circumstances, and certainly not broadcast. Some shows make arrangements with a few organizations/PBS to have the show filmed and then broadcast on tv, or released in dvd format after the show closes on Broadway, as was the case recently with RENT. However, the vast majority of live performances do not permit taping, either video or audio, and thus, the only people who have access to them are those in the audience. You can’t even tape a high school musical legally. I don’t see this changing anytime soon.”</p>
<p>Anything can be monatized. It just requires the motivation of the owner.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I absolutely agree with you EK! Musicals are just mesmerizing in person.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, I don’t see that we’ll be coining theatre into money but if you mean that, for enough money, the rights to anything can be made available, the chances of that are still slim when it comes to theatre. There’s a reason that that archival footage sits in a vault at Lincoln Center under strict controls. Actually, ticket sales for theatre, in NYC and other major theatre centres, have not had the kind of issues that some may have predicted with the current economic conditions. People still want to go to the theatre, just as they always do. The real problem is that the $$ isn’t available for new projects the way it has been in previous years. Currently running shows, however, are doing just fine. There is no comparison between viewing a show live and seeing a taped version on tv or dvd. </p>
<p>There will always be ways to expose kids to the arts, even if there aren’t specific arts programs in the school curriculum. It may take some creativity to find volunteers and funding but it can be done.</p>
<p>The Met has been broadcasting live Operas nationwide at movie theaters. It is definitely not the same as being at a live opera, BUT…it is a fantastic way to get to see an opera…even if you have a big screen, etc…a dvd, just isn’t the same at home. I think live theater would be very wise to try to do something similar, to reach a broader audience. </p>
<p>Another fact regarding why our kids NEED the arts…music students have a higher acceptance to med schools when they apply then all other majors. Part of the reasoning is because of how complex learning music is. It requires using every part of the brain. I can’t speak about painters and sculpters, poets etc…but, I can see how the creative mind would be more open to learning complex material, then some logical minds…who are not able to think outside the box.</p>
<p>Of course reading, writing, and rithmatic are crucial…but, I to this day have never heard of a school planning on cutting those subjects out. I’m just curious…mind you my kids did play sports…but, why aren’t the sports teams, cheerleading etc…even up on the same table for cutbacks? Thats purely for entertainment too at the end of it all. The odds are probably even slimmer for high school athletes to ever make a career out of being the hometown star of “insert sport”. People who pursue music, can always give lessons, sing or play in orchestras or churches…on and on…it may not be their final career, but it is something they will have with them for life. Once you blow out a knee or back…thats the end of that dream. I actually have no interest in having sports cut either…i think its very important for our kids to be well rounded. There are ways to cut costs without ruining our kids “well rounded” schooling.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>What a shame that we would accept “good enough” for the arts…but not for sports, or academics, or most anything else. Sorry…I don’t support this notion. </p>
<p>It’s amazing to me that in Europe, the arts, particularly live orchestra performances, are so highly regarded and well received. We went to an orchestra concert at the Royal Albert Hall which seats over 5000 people. It was sold out. OH…and it was the 10th night or so of the SAME performance. We were lucky that we were able to even GET three tickets to this. It was amazing. AND it wasn’t the only classical (and sold out) orchestral concert happening in London that evening. Also, notable was the number of young players in the orchestras we saw there. </p>
<p>Live performances are amazing…and there is no question in my mind that they cannot be duplicated in the home…not at all.</p>
<p>I’ll also speak to dance…or theater (and I go to these arts events frequently). They are so much better IN PERSON, than on TV.</p>
<p>I don’t know where you live but “good enough” would be a huge improvement at far too many public schools in the United States. We accept less than good enough for basic education everyday. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>One of the main reasons? You would put it on the same level as things such as poor access to healthcare from pre-natal on, nutrition instability, chronic underfunding and difficulty with retaining experienced teachers?</p>
<p>I was a fine arts major. I support the arts. I think it is horrible that it’s had to be cut. But the idea that there must be another way is not the same as there actually being another way.</p>
<p>pugmadkate, yes because the art teachers are among the first to be laid off. Many kids enjoy coming to school because they have ELECTIVES besides math, english, science and social studies. Testing 24/7 isn’t the answer. I remember years ago I saw a kid wrote down his name on the test and just slept through it. He was sick of high-stakes testing. Now if you bought up music class or drawing class, he was very alert.</p>
<p>I have no idea why you would think that questioning if lack of arts classes is a “main” problem would mean that I think testing 24/7 is the answer.</p>
<p>The reason that the arts thrive in Europe is because there is institutional and government support for artists. There is some here on the state level, and it’s no coincidence that the states with active arts councils and grant giving have the liveliest cultural offerings. </p>
<p>I see no reason to prioritize either math, science, or the arts, including literature, or sports, for that matter. This seems to me a false construct and compartmentalizes intelligence, never a good thing for the development of an individual or a nation. We should go back to the Greek model – honor the statesman, the athlete AND the poet.</p>
<p>Music, books, and art have given me some of the most moving, inspirational experiences of my life that is readily accessible. (falling in love, and the birth of my children were tops, but these are not every day occurrances!) Remember that all these things, a great book, for example, are created by people who need the same things as you, namely a livelihood (usually by teaching at the high school or college level, and usually as an adjunct, a cost cutting measure by the college. That means no benefits and no health insurance). Cutting out school funding for arts education, selling off a museum collection,-- these all have direct effects on the ability of the working artist to be able to bring us beauty and joy. Even these days, or especially these days, a life of grim practicality would be dark, indeed.</p>
<p>I’m an English major and, hopefully, a future literature professor, and so it always upsets me when people undervalue the arts. In a thriving society, I think the arts should be given equal status to more “practical” disciplines.</p>
<p>However, if there is a choice between cutting art and cutting math, I’m sorry, but the art program has to go. I think that because schools don’t value the arts enough, they frequently cut their art and music programs while still spending money on programs and technologies that the students could much better do without. But if the school is really in such crisis that it comes down to cutting math or cutting art, I think the choice is clear.</p>
<p>Mr. Payne with all due respect your quotes almost speak for themselves without me making a case against them. You said:</p>
<p>“The East Asian. Certainly areas that are not ‘known’ for art development.”
“If I had a choice to cut art or science. I’m cutting art without a second thought”</p>
<ol>
<li>The East Asian art may not be your kind of art, but it is a “developed art.” I’m not sure even what this statement means. </li>
<li>Straw man argument. Either cutting between art and reading. One never has to do this and this is not Brandis had to do. We were talking about Brandis.</li>
</ol>
<p>my impression was Brandeis was cutting back on their support of arts on campus, in order to continue to offer good merit based aid.
I can see their point, but as many schools with similar student body do not offer merit aid- instead need based only- it gives me the impression , which may be false I don’t know as I have never visited, that they are concerned about their ability to attract students without offering merit aid.</p>
<p>I heard they lost $800,000,000 dollars due stock market drop and/or B. Madoff. (Can this number be true? A true mind numbing number!) I think they have more problems than merit aid.</p>
<p>
Okay, lets take Japan. On an global level “Japanese” culture/art etc has very little play. In fact, I’d say the biggest artistic contribution to the average human from Japanese artists is anime. Nothing wrong with that at all. On the literacy/numeracy they are very competitive. And have the first world economy to go with it.</p>
<p>
No, we are talking about the value of art. Literacy is more important than art. Numeracy is more important than art. It doesn’t mean art is valueless, just less valuable than basic educational skills. Lose literacy and numeracy and our country devolves into some economic weak hellhole.</p>