Warning, strong sarcasm ahead, our tongue was firmly stuck in our cheek as the following flowed from our pen . . . .

Every time we turn on the television, we're shocked to learn about some other distressed soul who needs a handout from the government. Why is it that the government steps in to save the banks, the stockbrokers, the lenders, the borrowers, and the corporate financiers…but not the artists? Should there be a bailout for artists?

It seems to us that artists are as important to our society as the financiers. Artists provide beauty, hope, . . . . and sometimes propaganda!   Without artists, people would have to look at blank walls!  After all, the government already owns our houses . . . . why not put some art on our walls too?  It seems the government wouldn't want it's serfs . . .oops, sorry, citizens to live in barren shacks.   As a bonus, if Uncle Sam paid for all the art, he would be able to decide what art actually is....lord knows how great it would be to finally have an authority decide that issue . . .

So after the feds bailout the banks, the lenders, the borrowers, the insurance companies, the stockbrokers and the car manufacturers, surely they could throw in a few billion to bail out artists, galleries, art magazines . . . and, most importantly: those of us who publish daily email newsletters about art.

So, big brother, if you're reading, go ahead…make us an offer!


Related Posts:

Damien Hirst Getting Heat in the Blogosphere

Formerly Known as Museum Quality

Is There No Limit to Mans Ability to Make a Jackass of Himself?

Would You Pay $35 Million for THIS?

A $71 Million Dollar Fool?