?
Over here, many millions have been wasted on "essential artists" as well, particularly by leftist city governments. It's the height of degeneracy. Even if you're a world-class soprano, your services are not "essential". The world will be able to make do for a year without the opportunity to pay for the privilege of listening to your marvellous voice.
However, if you're merely a mostly self-declared artist who strong-arms local councils into public contracts for exceedingly forgettable sculptures, you have no business comparing yourself to hard-working nurses and grocery cashiers. What's even more annoying to me is how those types seem to think it's beneath them to seek unemployment benefits.
In Germany, artists of all stripes and colours have begun to refer to themselves as kulturschaffende, which (roughly) translates to "shapers of culture". No microphone is safe from their portentous rhetorical questions anymore: "What does it say about our country if the shapers of culture have to eke out a living with social benefits?" Why, how is that different from the status quo?
What I'm trying to say is, perhaps I'd be more appreciative of their situation if I didn't know how bloated the heavily subsidised art scene truly has become (particularly in the inner cities). The truth is, I couldn't care less if your market for "feminist paintings" produced with menstrual blood is crumbling. Now kindly pull your socks up and swallow the same bitter pill which the rest of us is being fed.
bariweiss.substack.com
www.standard.co.uk
