Wednesday, May 7, 2008

Art

Philosophos: Next topic, what is the purpose of art?

Nomodiphas: To create beauty.

Philosophos: How should the government interact with this field?

Nomodiphas: I believe it should allow art and free expression to a very large degree, even art that is critical of government (not that this is a Biblical right, it is just pragmatic—repression tends to be very ineffective). I don’t think there is a right to be vulgar or obscene or any reason to tolerate obscene expressions, but outside of that and extreme calls for the violent overthrow of the government, I don’t think that the government should censor art.

Philosophos: What about governmental support of art?

Nomodiphas: Again, the Bible does not say anything specific about this so my opinion is primarily prudential. I don’t think that the government should support art. For starters creating beauty is a separate function and is outside of the sphere of government. When government involves itself in art there is a tendency for the government to use art as propaganda—to force the artist to convey reality the way that is most favorable to the government (look at the advent of Soviet Realism as a recent example of this). Secondly art is degraded when the goal of art is to create something that the government desires and not create beauty for its own sake (just as art is tarnished when the goal of is to create a marketable product).

No comments: