The confounding Political Economy with the Sciences and Arts to which it is subservient, has been one of the principal obstacles to its improvement.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
People have had certain assumptions in the past about Conservative governments, partly because of some of the things that happened in the 1980s, and partly because of the tone of some of the debate in the 1980s that appeared to say public spending on the arts was something you might want to progressively reduce.
Governments have always been wary of the arts because they're wayward and ambiguous and because they deal with feelings rather than facts.
A lot of politics in art is just institutional critique, which, in my opinion, is not all that political.
Unfortunately, the boards of art institutions tend to be populated with well-meaning supporters of the arts who often lack any business background or appetite for imposing appropriate discipline.
The arts tend to be more liberal. There tends to be more social relevance in the arts.
Politics is the art of the possible; creativity is the art of the impossible.
The arts are an integral part of the city's economic progress.
With respect to the first of these obstacles, it has often been made a matter of grave complaint against Political Economists, that they confine their attention to Wealth, and disregard all consideration of Happiness or Virtue.
I don't understand how any good art could fail to be political.
I think the problem with the arts in America is how unimportant it seems to be in our educational system.