To be fair, I think the issue was tax payers paying for Mapplethorpe and the innovative use of a whip, not whether or not he could create....whatever it is he created.
Is that not a distinction without a difference?
To be fair, I think the issue was tax payers paying for Mapplethorpe and the innovative use of a whip, not whether or not he could create....whatever it is he created.
Is that not a distinction without a difference?
So, when did the right turn PC and decide what art is acceptable and what is not?
That should never happen ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Which - spending taxpayer money on art?
I can see the value of that position.Yes.
Commissioning a public monument, for instance.I can see the value of that position.
Being related to artists, I also do believe there is a place for government patronage of the arts, but it is quite limited and narrow.
Are you trying to imply that the market for his art may have been a bit soft... unlike the subjects of his art?
That should never happen ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The bulk of Mapplethorpe's work is not even terribly controversial
Do the Google image search for [mapplethorpe flowers color] (wife is a Master of Fine Arts)
C'mon man, INGO isn't THAT bad. Most here would look for something that contrasted with the wall color in neutral tones....You mean the art should match the draperies and the furniture?
For what it's worth, the subreddit dedicated to this entire topic has been banned from Reddit
(Reddit is run by hard leftists, and "monitored" by Democrat-run "Correct the Record")
https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditD...agate_a_controversial_subreddit_dedicated_to/
For what it's worth, the subreddit dedicated to this entire topic has been banned from Reddit
(Reddit is run by hard leftists, and "monitored" by Democrat-run "Correct the Record")
https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditD...agate_a_controversial_subreddit_dedicated_to/