• starkillerfish [she/her]
    ·
    1 month 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]
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month 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]
        ·
        1 month 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]
          ·
          1 month 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]
      ·
      1 month 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]
      ·
      1 month 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