• starkillerfish [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    2 months ago

    it is still a thing lol, majority of the arts are still funded that way. it seems like a very US-online thing to not engage with state funding for artistic projects.

    • GaveUp [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      tbh you would never know arts in America are often state funded without being one yourself because it’s not enough for artists to live

      • starkillerfish [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        2 months ago

        for sure. basically everyone I know has a “”“”“real”“”“” job on the side to pay for rent, but they still use the state funds to pay for their projects.

        • GaveUp [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 months ago

          yea from what my friends have told me about their grants, it pays way less than their minimum wage “real job” too…

    • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      It is a very US thing. Back in the 80’s Reagan started an attack on public arts budgets in the US that never stopped. As a result US public arts funding is a shdaow of what it was a few generations ago.

    • GenderIsOpSec [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      the person in the screenshot is a finn, judging by the name at least. We do have publicly funded art but they’re constantly lowering the budget because right wingers hate art unless it’s hitlerite in character