> I think you are mixing several issues. I think you are confusing "good
> art" with "socially desirable art". And the issue of minimum basic
> income is a seperate one.
>
> 1) There is no objective way to tell good art from bad. But there is a
> way to tell "socially desirable" art from not. To be socially desirable,
> someone besides the artist has to like it.
i didn't confuse 'good' with 'socially desirable'...i mean for someone other than the artist to like it then someone else has to consider it 'good' right? if you are describing 'socially desirable' in that manner then steven spielberg would get paid more than jean luc godard? there would be an intense bit of fraud and pandering that wouldn't be any different than say with capitalism. in that sense you are letting the 'invisible hands' of the market decide allocation. no change....
> To take the art I'm most
> familiar with - writing is an individual act, publishing is a social
> act. There is no reason you should be paid for your writing unless
> someone besides the writer likes the output well enough to pay for it.
> It does not have to be a majority.
this is determined by an 'invisible hand' of a market then and not effort and sacrifice. you are just equating market value with social value. see why i brought this up? how would social value be decided?
> A really tiny minority could like
> something well enough to make it worth paying for.
then this is still market allocation. if this is what 'participatory planning' is then it's just another word for invisible market hands. so obviously 'social value' has to be determined a different way....how?
> Or for that matter
> even if something is not commercial, some sort of intellectual or
> academic foundation might like it well enough to pay for your labor in
> producing it.
so 'social value' is determined by an academic elite?
> Or some museum or culture center might think it should be
> included to give people a chance to educate their tastes.
> But if nobody
> likes it well enough to pay for it, not individuals, not an institution,
> then there is no reason you should be compensated for your labor in
> creating it.
so an artist that spent a huge amount of effort and sacrifice attempting to do something of social value should not be compensated? so a physicist that spent much effort and sacrifice attempting to discover something that could be very valuable to society but failed but his failure contributed to other scientists success should not be compensated? why the 'special' treatment for artists in parecon?...that is if you are describing it accurately. what if an artists 'failure' to produce anything of 'social value' as you describe it inspired a scientist to come up with some discovery that was a huge benefit to mankind. the artist shouldn't be compensated? what if he died miserable and broke....how would you compensate his 'sacrifice' and 'effort'?
> Nothing to stop you from doing it in your spare time of course. And
> you probably would have more spare time than in our society. (I can't
> see a Parecon society in as rich a nation as the U.S not instituting a
> 30 hour workday with a couple of months vacation a year.) In terms of
> the social utility of bad are - I think in any society with art, there
> will be plenty of bad art for critics to criticize and satirists to make
> fun of. I don't think we need to make special institutional arrangements
> to encourage it; although our own society has certainly experimented
> with this.
yet obviously it requires uh money to produce art. film costs money cameras cost money (hey paychecks for artist produce more equipment sales)....it doesn't require any special institutional arrangements...just do it the same as you would for science. scientist that produce failed expirements...or a body of work to review still drew a paycheck right? but obviously not as much as someone that read his work and improved upon it.... that might be fair. why not do the same for art?
~M.E.
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com