Joe!!! One of my favorite Ohio exports (sorry, FN, you haven’t left yet), and I’m definitely one of those rare people who if forced to listen to the Eagles, strongly prefers the Walsh years, notably The Long Run and “Those Shoes.”
Kit-
‘”When you spend so much money in a short amount of time … you’re going to have nonsense like this, and that’s why the stimulus should never have been done in the first place,” said David Williams, vice president for policy at Citizens Against Government Waste.’
I’m afraid the guy is right. None of the spend programs are doing very well. No way to track the money. It’s like they just poured it into a big wind machine. A couple of examples: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090731/ap_on_re_us/us_stimulus_bridges http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090731/ap_on_go_co/us_cash_for_clunkers
The only one that had a chance to work well is the C4C. It went more driectly to real people. It ran out of money fairly quickly, and with a lot of government confusion.
Joe is an all time fave of mine. One of the all too rare rock “stars” who didn’t take himself too seriously and seemed to appreciate just how lucky he was to make a hell of a livin’ playing guitar for 3 hours, twice a week.
Thanks for nailing the biggest reason I like this guy (ahead of even his slide work). ZZ Top’s got it, AC/DC’s got, Jason Newsted had it when with Metallica (guessing he still has mentality): kids in the candy store am they.
I’m not a huge Eagles fan, although I agree they were a hugely important band, but I certainly agree with your statement about Eagles avec and sans Walsh. I like the James Gang stuff and his solo stuff. I was thrilled last week when I heard “Theme from Boat Wierdos” on the radio, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1d4kgFRlQY
It’s been at least 20 years since I’ve heard it. Of course it was satellite radio, not terrestrial radio, but still it was cool to hear it. I always figured it came out of Joe playing around with a synthesizer, trying to fill out some tracks.
Regarding best, pure pop composition I’d have to go with “At the Station,” but Joe wasn’t really about pop.
I disagree in principle with federal tax dollars funding the “arts,” but there are some things the NEA does that I appreciate. I don’t think it’s wrong that we say, as a society, that art is important for the health and well being of our culture, and if we believe that then the government can have some role in promoting it. But, it gets pretty difficult to manage, and certainly examples like the one you cite are way across any line.
Even if there were no NEA the government would still be sponsoring “art.” Let’s say your state is using federal funds to build a new highway overpass. Some part of the cost will involve aesthetics. It won’t just be a utilitarian slab of concrete. The planners will ensure it is landscaped, maybe portions of it will be painted, maybe they’ll choose a more expensive guard rail that matches the “retro” look of the neighborhood… Art is all around us and government can’t help but be involved. I think the NEA goes way beyond what tax funded art should be.
1) Federal money shouldn’t be used to support the arts when there’s widdows and orphans and starving indians out there. And if *those* didn’t exist, there’s still space, which is a better place to spend money than the arts. This is coming from me: I’m massively in to the arts, but it’s just not the purview of the government. It would be like hippies taking up contributions to build more aircraft carriers, or churches funding pornography.
2) Can’t stand the Eagles. Never could. Can’t stand that whole california 1970s singer/songwriter thing. Pretty much it’s exactly what my generation was rebelling against. I *do* like Joe Walsh, however, for most of the reasons cited above, and also, of course, he’s just damn weird and that’s always enticing. I did go through a breif period where I liked Don Henley, but fortunately I got over it fairly quickly. (Though I admit the song “Sunset Grill” still has a strange power over me)
If the 10th amendment really existed, the NEA wouldn’t. Should the government support fine art? No. Should parents? Yes! Should it be taught in our schools? Absolutely!! After that, the marketplace decides. The most efficient transaction will always take place between me and the artist, not me paying the government, and the government paying the artist. Art wouldn’t suffer, as persistent artists would ensure that their work would find those who appreciate it. The lesser artists might have to consider art as their hobby, and adjust themselves accordingly. The world would not be poorer for their loss.
I don’t disagree with anything you write, and I would never, personally vote for a national endowment of the arts, but I do see the argument that art can be a government’s business. I’m certainly glad the Ancient Romans were so willing to fun arts with tax dollars, and with a name like yours I’ll bet you’re also grateful for that legacy.
How about the Capital building, or the Korean War Memorial? Are those art? What about Mount Rushmore? Sure, we don’t have to have busts of Presidents on Mount Rushmore, but it’s kind of cool we did that. What about music that is part of this nation’s heritage, and history, but no longer popular enough to be supported independently? I am grateful for the legacy provided by our government sending a bunch of folks around with tape recorders, recording old folk and blues musicians before they died off. We use government funds to keep the top hat Lincoln was wearing when he was assassinated in good condition. That hat is part of our heritage. Why isn’t the music cotton field workers sang at the turn of the century similar?
And, in case I wasn’t clear, the Capital building is a cool building. It’s architecture is artistic and it holds tons of works of art. All paid for with our federal tax dollars. Should the government have built it for 1/10 the price, and built one of those East German, grey, cynder block rectangles instead?
The Nat’l. Endowment for the Arts lost their credibility when they started funding statues of Jesus and Mary with various depictions and usage of feces and urine. Absolutely disgusting use of any money, much less taxpayer money! I think they need to go away as well as NPR.
Oh, damn, Rufus, there you have to go throwing facts in to my baseless, impassioned assumptions, and messing ‘em all up.
Yes, of course you’re right. I was actually prepared for the “What about the Capitol Building” one. I was going to say “Well, yeah, that’s a building, and architecture is an art, so any gingerbread and statuary and other fiddle-de-dits the architech wants to throw in are fine as part of that specific project, but not in general.” Then you throw in the monuments, and I’m screwed. You’re entirely right, and I’m entirely wrong. Not to mention The Smithsonian and National Fine Arts Museums, which are massive, impressive, important, and entirely tax-supported.
As I wrote earlier, if there wasn’t one, and it came to a referendum I probably would not vote to start an NEA, however, we can’t put our heads in the sand. I’m sure we all have some expectation of “art” in our federal government. When you visit a national park do you want the signage and ranger uniforms to have a nice aesthetic? I dig that National Park Service “look.” It was undoubtedly designed by an artist on the government payroll. Do you believe our country’s musical heritage prior to the recording industry is worth preserving? I do. Do you think we ought to make some recordings of the last native speaker of an obscure, Eskimo dialect? I do. When there is a state dinner at the White House I want a big band there playing the great music of my country; Ellington, Porter, Gershwin, Berlin, Basie…
Art is a part of our heritage and our culture. I don’t mind some of my tax dollars being used to preserve it, or help active artists create the culture that the next generation will preserve.
One of the reasons I love Paris is due to the French government’s attention to artistic detail in so much of what they do. The plan of the city, the landscaping, the signage, the gates, fences and walls… Beautiful! Does that beauty inspire French citizens to do great things, and if so, does the government benefit from the great things those citizens do? Hard to quantify, but societies that completely disregard art are not known for innovation.
And, to tie in with Republibot 3.0′s wishes, isn’t the Space Shuttle a beautiful piece of art? How many hundreds of thousands of photos taken by the Hubble space telescope were done for reasons of beauty, ahead of scientific discovery. The crab nebula as photographed by the Hubble is beautiful. If I want to study it I’m really only interested in observations done outside the range of visual radiation, but WOW! those pictures look cool!
It’s an area full of greys, and I don’t typically like my tax dollars funding “grey stuff,” but art in civic society does matter to me. I kind of like Mayor Giulliani’s take on what warrants government funding for art: “If I can do it, it ain’t art.”
The other tough thing about public art is all art is bound to offend someone, yet, when it’s publically funded, we all support it with our tax dollars. Some art offends 99% of us, like art that uses urine and feces as a medium, and that should not be funded with public money.
The Hurt Locker? Anybody, anybody? Amazing movie! If you don’t want to run out, hug those in the armed forces, and tell them how much you love and appreciate them, then there’s something wrong with you.
Not for nothin’, BarryO, but I don’t need to see any movie to make me wanna do that already. Frankly, and I don’t mean you specifically, there’s something wrong with someone who doesn’t love and appreciate our armed forces.
I agree with your sentiments, and have considered similar things for years. “Fine Art”. That was the phrase I used, so I wouldn’t be slinging mud at landscape art, architectural art, or, even aerodynamic art. I’m a musician, married to a sweet woman with a lovely voice and an amazing ability to take a plain white canvas and turn it into a thing of beauty. That sentence, alone, should reveal the approximate economic strata in which we currently survive. Do I understand the problems artists face? Sure. Do I favor gummit funding of these folks? No.
Well, what about the memorials? Why couldn’t they have been funded by private individuals? I suspect the nation would have received much more in return. Yes, the Capitol building and all the others are beautiful to behold; but, look at the contempt the taxpayers receive from those who occupy those stately buildings. Perhaps, if we located the nation’s capital to Des Moines, and placed the Congress, et al, in those East German, grey, cynder block rectangles instead, we’d have elected representatives who finally understand their place.
Yes, art is all around us, and I appreciate a lot of it. I also appreciate that music is being preserved for historical purposes, although, it seems as if most music collectors have that project well underway, without gummit handouts.
As for the ancient Romans, well . . .how is their government working out for them? Seriously, though, government funded art tends to amplify government power, not diminish it.
Rufus, I wish we could speak face-to-face on this subject, because I think we’re more alike than not. I could go on; but, since I don’t even read posts this long, my efforts would probably be wasted.
Print
Digg
StumbleUpon
del.icio.us
Facebook
Yahoo! Buzz
Twitter
Google Bookmarks
Google Buzz
LinkedIn
MSN Reporter
MySpace
Orkut
Ping.fm
Reddit
RSS
Slashdot
Technorati
Tumblr
Webnews.de
Joe!!! One of my favorite Ohio exports (sorry, FN, you haven’t left yet), and I’m definitely one of those rare people who if forced to listen to the Eagles, strongly prefers the Walsh years, notably The Long Run and “Those Shoes.”
I rent apartments, tear out the walls…life’s been good to me.
I have accountants pay for it all.
they say I’m lazy but it takes all my time
I love that song
My Maseratti does 185. I lost my license. Now I don’t drive.
I am an Eagles fan. Individually, they’re ok, but don’t do as well as when they are together.
They write Don letters, tell Glenn he’s great…
Close enough for the tweaking Walsh gave it on Eagles Live.
Jonh Nolte discusses NEA funds for porn films, one of them called THUNDERCRACK, which invlves a gorilla.
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2009/07/30/federal-stimulus-funds-support-underground-pornography/
Yer thoughts?
Kit-
‘”When you spend so much money in a short amount of time … you’re going to have nonsense like this, and that’s why the stimulus should never have been done in the first place,” said David Williams, vice president for policy at Citizens Against Government Waste.’
I’m afraid the guy is right. None of the spend programs are doing very well. No way to track the money. It’s like they just poured it into a big wind machine. A couple of examples:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090731/ap_on_re_us/us_stimulus_bridges
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090731/ap_on_go_co/us_cash_for_clunkers
The only one that had a chance to work well is the C4C. It went more driectly to real people. It ran out of money fairly quickly, and with a lot of government confusion.
I got nothin’.
Joe is an all time fave of mine. One of the all too rare rock “stars” who didn’t take himself too seriously and seemed to appreciate just how lucky he was to make a hell of a livin’ playing guitar for 3 hours, twice a week.
Thanks for nailing the biggest reason I like this guy (ahead of even his slide work). ZZ Top’s got it, AC/DC’s got, Jason Newsted had it when with Metallica (guessing he still has mentality): kids in the candy store am they.
E.P.,
I’m not a huge Eagles fan, although I agree they were a hugely important band, but I certainly agree with your statement about Eagles avec and sans Walsh. I like the James Gang stuff and his solo stuff. I was thrilled last week when I heard “Theme from Boat Wierdos” on the radio, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1d4kgFRlQY
It’s been at least 20 years since I’ve heard it. Of course it was satellite radio, not terrestrial radio, but still it was cool to hear it. I always figured it came out of Joe playing around with a synthesizer, trying to fill out some tracks.
Regarding best, pure pop composition I’d have to go with “At the Station,” but Joe wasn’t really about pop.
Found this while wandering around youtube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jfPCUGVjp8
Weird.
Kit,
I disagree in principle with federal tax dollars funding the “arts,” but there are some things the NEA does that I appreciate. I don’t think it’s wrong that we say, as a society, that art is important for the health and well being of our culture, and if we believe that then the government can have some role in promoting it. But, it gets pretty difficult to manage, and certainly examples like the one you cite are way across any line.
Even if there were no NEA the government would still be sponsoring “art.” Let’s say your state is using federal funds to build a new highway overpass. Some part of the cost will involve aesthetics. It won’t just be a utilitarian slab of concrete. The planners will ensure it is landscaped, maybe portions of it will be painted, maybe they’ll choose a more expensive guard rail that matches the “retro” look of the neighborhood… Art is all around us and government can’t help but be involved. I think the NEA goes way beyond what tax funded art should be.
1) Federal money shouldn’t be used to support the arts when there’s widdows and orphans and starving indians out there. And if *those* didn’t exist, there’s still space, which is a better place to spend money than the arts. This is coming from me: I’m massively in to the arts, but it’s just not the purview of the government. It would be like hippies taking up contributions to build more aircraft carriers, or churches funding pornography.
2) Can’t stand the Eagles. Never could. Can’t stand that whole california 1970s singer/songwriter thing. Pretty much it’s exactly what my generation was rebelling against. I *do* like Joe Walsh, however, for most of the reasons cited above, and also, of course, he’s just damn weird and that’s always enticing. I did go through a breif period where I liked Don Henley, but fortunately I got over it fairly quickly. (Though I admit the song “Sunset Grill” still has a strange power over me)
If the 10th amendment really existed, the NEA wouldn’t. Should the government support fine art? No. Should parents? Yes! Should it be taught in our schools? Absolutely!! After that, the marketplace decides. The most efficient transaction will always take place between me and the artist, not me paying the government, and the government paying the artist. Art wouldn’t suffer, as persistent artists would ensure that their work would find those who appreciate it. The lesser artists might have to consider art as their hobby, and adjust themselves accordingly. The world would not be poorer for their loss.
By “NEA”, I’m referring to the National Endowment for the Arts, not the National Education Association. I’ll save that for another show.
Magnus,
I don’t disagree with anything you write, and I would never, personally vote for a national endowment of the arts, but I do see the argument that art can be a government’s business. I’m certainly glad the Ancient Romans were so willing to fun arts with tax dollars, and with a name like yours I’ll bet you’re also grateful for that legacy.
How about the Capital building, or the Korean War Memorial? Are those art? What about Mount Rushmore? Sure, we don’t have to have busts of Presidents on Mount Rushmore, but it’s kind of cool we did that. What about music that is part of this nation’s heritage, and history, but no longer popular enough to be supported independently? I am grateful for the legacy provided by our government sending a bunch of folks around with tape recorders, recording old folk and blues musicians before they died off. We use government funds to keep the top hat Lincoln was wearing when he was assassinated in good condition. That hat is part of our heritage. Why isn’t the music cotton field workers sang at the turn of the century similar?
And, in case I wasn’t clear, the Capital building is a cool building. It’s architecture is artistic and it holds tons of works of art. All paid for with our federal tax dollars. Should the government have built it for 1/10 the price, and built one of those East German, grey, cynder block rectangles instead?
The Nat’l. Endowment for the Arts lost their credibility when they started funding statues of Jesus and Mary with various depictions and usage of feces and urine. Absolutely disgusting use of any money, much less taxpayer money! I think they need to go away as well as NPR.
Oh, damn, Rufus, there you have to go throwing facts in to my baseless, impassioned assumptions, and messing ‘em all up.
Yes, of course you’re right. I was actually prepared for the “What about the Capitol Building” one. I was going to say “Well, yeah, that’s a building, and architecture is an art, so any gingerbread and statuary and other fiddle-de-dits the architech wants to throw in are fine as part of that specific project, but not in general.” Then you throw in the monuments, and I’m screwed. You’re entirely right, and I’m entirely wrong. Not to mention The Smithsonian and National Fine Arts Museums, which are massive, impressive, important, and entirely tax-supported.
Dammit!
Fritz,
As I wrote earlier, if there wasn’t one, and it came to a referendum I probably would not vote to start an NEA, however, we can’t put our heads in the sand. I’m sure we all have some expectation of “art” in our federal government. When you visit a national park do you want the signage and ranger uniforms to have a nice aesthetic? I dig that National Park Service “look.” It was undoubtedly designed by an artist on the government payroll. Do you believe our country’s musical heritage prior to the recording industry is worth preserving? I do. Do you think we ought to make some recordings of the last native speaker of an obscure, Eskimo dialect? I do. When there is a state dinner at the White House I want a big band there playing the great music of my country; Ellington, Porter, Gershwin, Berlin, Basie…
Art is a part of our heritage and our culture. I don’t mind some of my tax dollars being used to preserve it, or help active artists create the culture that the next generation will preserve.
One of the reasons I love Paris is due to the French government’s attention to artistic detail in so much of what they do. The plan of the city, the landscaping, the signage, the gates, fences and walls… Beautiful! Does that beauty inspire French citizens to do great things, and if so, does the government benefit from the great things those citizens do? Hard to quantify, but societies that completely disregard art are not known for innovation.
And, to tie in with Republibot 3.0′s wishes, isn’t the Space Shuttle a beautiful piece of art? How many hundreds of thousands of photos taken by the Hubble space telescope were done for reasons of beauty, ahead of scientific discovery. The crab nebula as photographed by the Hubble is beautiful. If I want to study it I’m really only interested in observations done outside the range of visual radiation, but WOW! those pictures look cool!
Republibot 3.0,
It’s an area full of greys, and I don’t typically like my tax dollars funding “grey stuff,” but art in civic society does matter to me. I kind of like Mayor Giulliani’s take on what warrants government funding for art: “If I can do it, it ain’t art.”
The other tough thing about public art is all art is bound to offend someone, yet, when it’s publically funded, we all support it with our tax dollars. Some art offends 99% of us, like art that uses urine and feces as a medium, and that should not be funded with public money.
And I just hope those urine and feces artists don’t try to write that bodily waste off on their taxes as business expenses.
The Hurt Locker? Anybody, anybody? Amazing movie! If you don’t want to run out, hug those in the armed forces, and tell them how much you love and appreciate them, then there’s something wrong with you.
Not for nothin’, BarryO, but I don’t need to see any movie to make me wanna do that already. Frankly, and I don’t mean you specifically, there’s something wrong with someone who doesn’t love and appreciate our armed forces.
Not for nothin, Eric, nor do I need a movie to do that. But go see it anyway. Very powerful.
No offense, BarryO, but I’ll at least wait for video. John Nolte’s reviews have yet to steer me wrong.
Rufus,
I agree with your sentiments, and have considered similar things for years. “Fine Art”. That was the phrase I used, so I wouldn’t be slinging mud at landscape art, architectural art, or, even aerodynamic art. I’m a musician, married to a sweet woman with a lovely voice and an amazing ability to take a plain white canvas and turn it into a thing of beauty. That sentence, alone, should reveal the approximate economic strata in which we currently survive. Do I understand the problems artists face? Sure. Do I favor gummit funding of these folks? No.
Well, what about the memorials? Why couldn’t they have been funded by private individuals? I suspect the nation would have received much more in return. Yes, the Capitol building and all the others are beautiful to behold; but, look at the contempt the taxpayers receive from those who occupy those stately buildings. Perhaps, if we located the nation’s capital to Des Moines, and placed the Congress, et al, in those East German, grey, cynder block rectangles instead, we’d have elected representatives who finally understand their place.
Yes, art is all around us, and I appreciate a lot of it. I also appreciate that music is being preserved for historical purposes, although, it seems as if most music collectors have that project well underway, without gummit handouts.
As for the ancient Romans, well . . .how is their government working out for them? Seriously, though, government funded art tends to amplify government power, not diminish it.
Rufus, I wish we could speak face-to-face on this subject, because I think we’re more alike than not. I could go on; but, since I don’t even read posts this long, my efforts would probably be wasted.