Comments on: Why Michael Duffy’s wrong about arts in Australia

By: V Walker

V Walker — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

And don’t forget that artist who was the biggest sponger of them all! That Michelangelo fellow got so much funding and all he ever did was deliver stuff that his funders wanted as well.

Get rid of the subsidy for those bludging artists, I say.

By: Tom

Tom — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

I agree with Nick P’s assessment contemporary art however I can still think of several names which would qualify for Duffy’s test - if his artform awareness was brought up to date: Baz Luhrmann, Peter Carey, Nick Cave are all primary artists of the first rank AND household names. If you move on to actors… it’s getting harder to think of really good ones who AREN’T Australian!

By: Paul

Paul — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

“The logic does not apply to the SMH paying Duffy - as the audience (readers of the paper) is the main source of funds to the SMH (directly or via advertisers who pay for access to the audience).” ??

Don’t be so sure Nic. It appears that gradually Fairfax’s other subsidiaries are paying for those ‘funds’.

By: sandy

sandy — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

In fact, we DO spend like that on artists. See the article in crikey a few weeks ago on the national film school. I’d like to see the end of both of these wasteful elite slush buckets, but at least the sports people deliver some results and help large numbers of people feel good. And really, Nick, if you were running the news, would you replace the sports coverage with analysis and previews of the high art scene? Not if you wanted anyone to keep watching.

By: Nic

Nic — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Nick, you did not address his point at all. That is not a “wild claim” at all, but simple economics will tell you that you do your work to please the people that pay for it. Where the large percentage of funding comes from the government, the people who pay for it are the providers of those subsidies.

The logic does not apply to the SMH paying Duffy - as the audience (readers of the paper) is the main source of funds to the SMH (directly or via advertisers who pay for access to the audience).