In Raymond Williams’s piece “Culture is ordinary,” he writes :
But why, says Sir George Mammon, should I support a lot of doubtful artists? Why, says Mrs. Mink, should I pay good money to educate, at my expense, a lot of irresponsible and ungrateful State scholars? The answer, dear sir, dear madam, is that you don’t. On your own – learn your size- you could do practically nothing. We are talking about a method of common payment, for common services; we too shall be paying. (p. 90)
How does Raymond Williams consider art to be something that is for the common good? Is art a “common service” that should be paid for with a “method of common payment”? Should every artist that creates art be sponsored? Who should decide what art is worth public funding?
Shimon I don’t know whether or not you got the update on the blogging post. Groups 1 and 3 are now together and groups 2 and 4 are together. So depending on which group you were, you have to either post the question (groups 1 and 3 for this week) or comment (groups 2 and 4 for this week). Since you posted questions, I’m guessing you are either part of group 1 or 3. So the way we are going to post is that you comment under the post that Ben posts. So since you posted about William’s readings, you have to go find the post by Ben on Williams, and post your questions there. It’s going to be like a thread discussing from now on. Just thought I would let you know :)
thanks