Isn’t it ironic that the rethuglicans, who usually are against public support of the arts, suddenly want to force an artist to perform at a publicly supported venue.
The Von Trapp family fled from Austria rather than perform for Hitler. The only other alternative to performing on command would have been Dachau. The story of their escape, heavily romanticized, of course, in the musical and movie, has become a cultural icon. They did not actually flee on foot over the Alps, they got on a train to Italy, where they had dual citizenship, but they had to abandon everything -- their home, their property, their social status and Captain Von Trapp's career. That is why we remember them as heroic examples of artistic resistance.
Well I learned stuff from reading this. The travails of the Kennedy Centre for the Arts (I refuse to use the new name) don't make it to regional Australia where I live.
I'm a lot more sensitive to the world of the intellect than the world of the arts but it occurs to me that there is something to be said for a jazz musician to play to the public regardless of politics....but surely this is a decision for individual artists to make and they should be free to do as they think best? Not for the first time do I suspect that American conservatives don't really have much respect for the right of individuals to make their own moral choices.
There is a whole genre of art (musical and otherwise) that is political, usually as a form of protest. Art at it's core in an effort to communicate an idea, emotion, concept, feeling that can not be simply expressed in plain language... Comedy is an excellent example of that, where difficult, painful topics are talked about, in humor, so we can face them and process them, making sense of the world. Yes, Comedy is definitely an Art.
"There is a whole genre of art (musical and otherwise) that is political, usually as a form of protest."
I think ALL art is political—even if it's politics are "No politics, please!", because that tells you about the artist and what they hold dear...and what they mock.
Even if you think you're creating an apolitical statement, what you believe tells us your politics. When my (now-ex) wife and I were pitching comic book ideas to Marvel in the Aughts, the editors we pitched to immediately picked up on our loathing for The War Criminal Bush Regime given our choice of villains and the crimes we had the heroes fighting.
...They also picked up on our love of Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Godiva Chocolates, and Jack Kirby, but that's another story. 😬
I can see the attraction to what you are arguing (and agreeing to) but caution that if EVERYTHING is seen as having a particular property than you empty the usefulness and meaningfulness of applying the concept.
For example if you say that all humans are mortal pointing out that a particular person is mortal you are more likely to be saying something trite and pointless rather than meaningful or informative.
I'd also suggest that it's really pushiing the boundaries to say that instrumental music is political and if you insist on saying this, you actually obscure the distinction between blatant propaganda and instrumental music when you declare that it is ALL political.
I chose to find the point of common ground to agree to. Even Dr Dark admitted it is sometimes about "love of Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Godiva Chocolates, and Jack Kirby". But Politics is about more than Trump, more than conservative vs liberal. At it's essence, politics is about how we come together to solve or resolve issues that affect us and demand action on a larger scale than we can handle alone. Politics is how we organize and work toward common goals. It becomes 'political' when some of us disagree with other people. This is natural because we are all different. In fact the surprising part is when so many do agree on something.
Art is a form of communication, and while there are certainly a lot of love songs, there are also a lot of songs about how things should be (aka, political).
I am not trying to deal with absolutes here, I very rarely look through the lens of absolutes and tend to qualify most every statement I make, but neither do I insist that others think exactly as I do, for I know I am different from most.
Actually I do sometimes find myself saying simple and obvious things, but that is usually when it appears to me somebody has forgotten to take that simple obvious aspect into consideration. For instance, somebody young and feeling immortal might well benefit from that simple word of wisdom about, "we are all mortal". I have met people who either deny that simple statement, or ignore it. Still I try to help them in ways that I can. Is that wrong?
Speaking of duty and the freedom of speech, SCOTUS unanimously emphasized the duty of all citizens, artists or not. In New York Times Co. v. Sullivan in 1964, a unanimous SCOTUS emphasized the following and repeatedly emphasized that the First Amendment was essentially a call to duty.
Clearly, all “public officials” are “public servants” and “public men” are “public property,” so “discussion cannot be denied and the right” and “the duty” of “criticism must not be stifled.” The primary purpose of the First Amendment was to secure “the privilege for the citizen-critic of government. It is as much his duty to criticize as it is the official’s duty to administer.” No public servant can “give public servants” a “preference over the public they serve” by denying “critics of official conduct” at least “the immunity” that the people, themselves, “granted” to “officials.”
"Madison [emphasized vital principles that permeated every part of our system of national government, i.e.,] that the [original] Constitution created a form of government under which ‘The people, not the government, possess the absolute sovereignty.’ The structure of the government [prescribed by our Constitution] dispersed power in reflection of the people’s distrust of concentrated power, and of power itself at all levels."
SCOTUS in Sullivan (quoting Madison) emphasized that in our “Republican Government” (in which the people are sovereign), in general “the censorial power” necessarily “is in the people over the Government, and not in the Government over the people.” Clearly, our freedom of thought, speech and press flow from our sovereign power over our public servants.
Thank you. While there are many ways to justify the required freedom of speech, your post helps to show the intimate realtionship between it and our government. Further it points to a glorious time when SCOTUS did not have clearly corrupt members within it.
I remind readers regarding Mr. Redd and the cancellation of his jazz concert at the Kennedy Center that IT WAS FREE OF CHARGE. So, toady Grennell's threats are just an obvious SLAPP lawsuit as the Center suffered no financial damages (just another blow to our culture and dignity). If this goes to court, I hope some upstanding law firm offers its services to Mr. Redd free of charge.
"And to replace the artists who canceled … Klan clog dancing!"
Walton Goggins is polishing up his clogging shoes as we speak.
...Though maybe I shouldn't say that, given I don't know what his actual politics are—I just know he was VERY convincing as a NeoNazi and sometimes Evangelist on JUSTIFIED.
Well, Goggins can dance to their memories, given he's not only a hell of an actor, he's a hell of a clogger!
There was an episode of JUSTIFIED where they had some kind of clan get-together, and Goggins as Boyd Crowder just started clogging, and apparently it was him doing it. 😀
"Someone needs to remind Trump and Co. that we are allowed to disagree with him. It is our right, our duty, as Americans."
That's a part of the First Amendment Trump has never understood or comprehended, which is what makes him so utterly odious as a leader and human being.
Though Stephen Miller is, if possible, even worse as he clearly DOES understand, he just refuses to admit the truth.
The artists who agreed with “The John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts” to perform at that venue but now are expected to perform at “The Donald J. Trump and The John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts” might take a page from Hamilton and history.
Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton advised President Washington that the treaty the U.S. made with France before the French Revolution didn't bind the U.S. regarding France after its revolution had reached a certain point. See https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/cabinet-paper-to-the-president/
These artists standing up to these fascists is heartwarming. I think we all wonder what can we most effectively do to protest this lawless, repugnant regime. Love these artists saying no way we support these goons and said goons throwing a tantrum. I’m looking forward to seeing Chuck Redd perform here in January and join in giving him the extended ovation he deserves for standing up and saying NO to dump for all of us.
It is yet another sign of the cancer that infects American during this Dark Age when CBS/Bari Weiss nix a 60 Minutes expose about the notorious CECOT prison...yes, 60 Minutes!! This national treasure has won 138 Emmys and 25 Peabody Awards. It has been speaking truth to power since 1968 to great acclaim. In spite of the efforts of the goons at CBS/Ms. Weiss, the CECOT episode appeared on Canadian TV (bless them) and is also available with a simple internet search. This whole mess has renewed my interest in watching the show again.
The Kennedy Center renaming scandal is just another day of life in North Korea. The name and likeness of the insecure, narcissistic Dear Leader (the unhinged, doddering piece of s***) are proliferating like the COVID virus during the pandemic. Members of the cabinet shamefully slather praise all over the DL to make up for his numerous shortcomings. The House headed in name only by Little Mikie "Bible Thumper" Johnson (the DL is Mikie's puppet master, you know) sits idly by while the executive branch commits countless illegal acts and unbridled abuses of power. Our only hope is that the upcoming midterm election will send these compliant sycophants packing and a new era of accountability will begin. In the meantime, artists of all genres and "we the people" must give the middle finger to the DL as Chuck Redd, the Cookers, Doug Verone and the Dancers among a growing number of other artists have done.
The attempt to rename the Kennedy Center is outrageous, but it's also pathetic. Poor arts-impaired Donald couldn't hold a candle to President Kennedy, or to his First Lady, Jackie Kennedy Onassis, a committed patron of the arts. (I've long thought of the Kennedy Center as named as much for her as for him.)
It's worth bearing in mind that this issue implicates our First Amendment freedom of association as much as our freedom of expression. "We have repeatedly held that freedom of association is protected by the First Amendment. And of course this freedom protected against federal encroachment by the First Amendment is entitled under the Fourteenth Amendment to the same protection from infringement by the States." Williams v. Rhodes, 393 U.S. 23 (1968).
The words of SCOTUS in NAACP v. Button in 1963 protecting the First Amendment rights and freedoms of people who perform in court are relevant now regarding other public performers. Our public servants "may not prohibit" constitutionally-protected "modes of expression and association" even by actual attorneys and even by invoking the general "power to regulate the legal profession." "[I]t is no answer" that "the purpose of" any "regulations" (including court rules or rulings or mere letters from judges) "was merely to ensure high professional standards." The "liberties" in the First Amendment, including "speech, press, or association" are "indispensable." Even actual courts "may not," even "under the guise of prohibiting" actual "professional misconduct" by actual attorneys, "ignore" (knowingly violate) "constitutional rights."
In a comment on Margaret Sullivan's journalism-related "American Crisis" Substack, I connected freedom of speech to freedom of the press. Thank you for helping prove my point! <g> These Trump toadies (and current Republicans in general) don't begin to understand what the founders had in mind when they drafted the First Amendment. They, after all, had had firsthand experience with the denial of all those freedoms.
Isn’t it ironic that the rethuglicans, who usually are against public support of the arts, suddenly want to force an artist to perform at a publicly supported venue.
At last! Stalin-era art is making a comeback!
The Von Trapp family fled from Austria rather than perform for Hitler. The only other alternative to performing on command would have been Dachau. The story of their escape, heavily romanticized, of course, in the musical and movie, has become a cultural icon. They did not actually flee on foot over the Alps, they got on a train to Italy, where they had dual citizenship, but they had to abandon everything -- their home, their property, their social status and Captain Von Trapp's career. That is why we remember them as heroic examples of artistic resistance.
Ughhhhh....
That's right, I'd blanked on THE SOUND OF MUSIC being based on a true story.
Well I learned stuff from reading this. The travails of the Kennedy Centre for the Arts (I refuse to use the new name) don't make it to regional Australia where I live.
I'm a lot more sensitive to the world of the intellect than the world of the arts but it occurs to me that there is something to be said for a jazz musician to play to the public regardless of politics....but surely this is a decision for individual artists to make and they should be free to do as they think best? Not for the first time do I suspect that American conservatives don't really have much respect for the right of individuals to make their own moral choices.
There is a whole genre of art (musical and otherwise) that is political, usually as a form of protest. Art at it's core in an effort to communicate an idea, emotion, concept, feeling that can not be simply expressed in plain language... Comedy is an excellent example of that, where difficult, painful topics are talked about, in humor, so we can face them and process them, making sense of the world. Yes, Comedy is definitely an Art.
"There is a whole genre of art (musical and otherwise) that is political, usually as a form of protest."
I think ALL art is political—even if it's politics are "No politics, please!", because that tells you about the artist and what they hold dear...and what they mock.
Even if you think you're creating an apolitical statement, what you believe tells us your politics. When my (now-ex) wife and I were pitching comic book ideas to Marvel in the Aughts, the editors we pitched to immediately picked up on our loathing for The War Criminal Bush Regime given our choice of villains and the crimes we had the heroes fighting.
...They also picked up on our love of Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Godiva Chocolates, and Jack Kirby, but that's another story. 😬
I agree.
I can see the attraction to what you are arguing (and agreeing to) but caution that if EVERYTHING is seen as having a particular property than you empty the usefulness and meaningfulness of applying the concept.
For example if you say that all humans are mortal pointing out that a particular person is mortal you are more likely to be saying something trite and pointless rather than meaningful or informative.
I'd also suggest that it's really pushiing the boundaries to say that instrumental music is political and if you insist on saying this, you actually obscure the distinction between blatant propaganda and instrumental music when you declare that it is ALL political.
I chose to find the point of common ground to agree to. Even Dr Dark admitted it is sometimes about "love of Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Godiva Chocolates, and Jack Kirby". But Politics is about more than Trump, more than conservative vs liberal. At it's essence, politics is about how we come together to solve or resolve issues that affect us and demand action on a larger scale than we can handle alone. Politics is how we organize and work toward common goals. It becomes 'political' when some of us disagree with other people. This is natural because we are all different. In fact the surprising part is when so many do agree on something.
Art is a form of communication, and while there are certainly a lot of love songs, there are also a lot of songs about how things should be (aka, political).
I am not trying to deal with absolutes here, I very rarely look through the lens of absolutes and tend to qualify most every statement I make, but neither do I insist that others think exactly as I do, for I know I am different from most.
Actually I do sometimes find myself saying simple and obvious things, but that is usually when it appears to me somebody has forgotten to take that simple obvious aspect into consideration. For instance, somebody young and feeling immortal might well benefit from that simple word of wisdom about, "we are all mortal". I have met people who either deny that simple statement, or ignore it. Still I try to help them in ways that I can. Is that wrong?
Speaking of duty and the freedom of speech, SCOTUS unanimously emphasized the duty of all citizens, artists or not. In New York Times Co. v. Sullivan in 1964, a unanimous SCOTUS emphasized the following and repeatedly emphasized that the First Amendment was essentially a call to duty.
Clearly, all “public officials” are “public servants” and “public men” are “public property,” so “discussion cannot be denied and the right” and “the duty” of “criticism must not be stifled.” The primary purpose of the First Amendment was to secure “the privilege for the citizen-critic of government. It is as much his duty to criticize as it is the official’s duty to administer.” No public servant can “give public servants” a “preference over the public they serve” by denying “critics of official conduct” at least “the immunity” that the people, themselves, “granted” to “officials.”
"Madison [emphasized vital principles that permeated every part of our system of national government, i.e.,] that the [original] Constitution created a form of government under which ‘The people, not the government, possess the absolute sovereignty.’ The structure of the government [prescribed by our Constitution] dispersed power in reflection of the people’s distrust of concentrated power, and of power itself at all levels."
SCOTUS in Sullivan (quoting Madison) emphasized that in our “Republican Government” (in which the people are sovereign), in general “the censorial power” necessarily “is in the people over the Government, and not in the Government over the people.” Clearly, our freedom of thought, speech and press flow from our sovereign power over our public servants.
Thank you. While there are many ways to justify the required freedom of speech, your post helps to show the intimate realtionship between it and our government. Further it points to a glorious time when SCOTUS did not have clearly corrupt members within it.
I remind readers regarding Mr. Redd and the cancellation of his jazz concert at the Kennedy Center that IT WAS FREE OF CHARGE. So, toady Grennell's threats are just an obvious SLAPP lawsuit as the Center suffered no financial damages (just another blow to our culture and dignity). If this goes to court, I hope some upstanding law firm offers its services to Mr. Redd free of charge.
Donald J Trump will forever be a smear and a stain on our nation’s history.
Thanks, Noah. Daravi is totally screaming “Dance, monkey, dance!”
And to replace the artists who canceled … Klan clog dancing!
Marching bands from West Virginia
Playing “Put the Blame on Mamie” (Chorus: “Or anyone but me!”)
"And to replace the artists who canceled … Klan clog dancing!"
Walton Goggins is polishing up his clogging shoes as we speak.
...Though maybe I shouldn't say that, given I don't know what his actual politics are—I just know he was VERY convincing as a NeoNazi and sometimes Evangelist on JUSTIFIED.
Excellent choice! I do love me a good character actor … and Goggins is terrific.
But let’s have a dance to that wonderful Southern character actor, Strother Martin!
Better yet, Gabby Hayes and Fuzzy Knight!
Well, Goggins can dance to their memories, given he's not only a hell of an actor, he's a hell of a clogger!
There was an episode of JUSTIFIED where they had some kind of clan get-together, and Goggins as Boyd Crowder just started clogging, and apparently it was him doing it. 😀
Really?? That’s worth seeing. An excellent series (I borrowed copies from the library).
Someone needs to remind Trump and Co. that we are allowed to disagree with him. It is our right, our duty, as Americans.
"Someone needs to remind Trump and Co. that we are allowed to disagree with him. It is our right, our duty, as Americans."
That's a part of the First Amendment Trump has never understood or comprehended, which is what makes him so utterly odious as a leader and human being.
Though Stephen Miller is, if possible, even worse as he clearly DOES understand, he just refuses to admit the truth.
For sure. Only Trump has rights. The rest of us are serfs.
He should be careful before we decide to "serf" on him! 😈
Remind him? He didn't forget. We, however, must remember that his mission is to destroy our democracy.
The artists who agreed with “The John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts” to perform at that venue but now are expected to perform at “The Donald J. Trump and The John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts” might take a page from Hamilton and history.
Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton advised President Washington that the treaty the U.S. made with France before the French Revolution didn't bind the U.S. regarding France after its revolution had reached a certain point. See https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/cabinet-paper-to-the-president/
These artists standing up to these fascists is heartwarming. I think we all wonder what can we most effectively do to protest this lawless, repugnant regime. Love these artists saying no way we support these goons and said goons throwing a tantrum. I’m looking forward to seeing Chuck Redd perform here in January and join in giving him the extended ovation he deserves for standing up and saying NO to dump for all of us.
It is yet another sign of the cancer that infects American during this Dark Age when CBS/Bari Weiss nix a 60 Minutes expose about the notorious CECOT prison...yes, 60 Minutes!! This national treasure has won 138 Emmys and 25 Peabody Awards. It has been speaking truth to power since 1968 to great acclaim. In spite of the efforts of the goons at CBS/Ms. Weiss, the CECOT episode appeared on Canadian TV (bless them) and is also available with a simple internet search. This whole mess has renewed my interest in watching the show again.
The Kennedy Center renaming scandal is just another day of life in North Korea. The name and likeness of the insecure, narcissistic Dear Leader (the unhinged, doddering piece of s***) are proliferating like the COVID virus during the pandemic. Members of the cabinet shamefully slather praise all over the DL to make up for his numerous shortcomings. The House headed in name only by Little Mikie "Bible Thumper" Johnson (the DL is Mikie's puppet master, you know) sits idly by while the executive branch commits countless illegal acts and unbridled abuses of power. Our only hope is that the upcoming midterm election will send these compliant sycophants packing and a new era of accountability will begin. In the meantime, artists of all genres and "we the people" must give the middle finger to the DL as Chuck Redd, the Cookers, Doug Verone and the Dancers among a growing number of other artists have done.
The attempt to rename the Kennedy Center is outrageous, but it's also pathetic. Poor arts-impaired Donald couldn't hold a candle to President Kennedy, or to his First Lady, Jackie Kennedy Onassis, a committed patron of the arts. (I've long thought of the Kennedy Center as named as much for her as for him.)
It's worth bearing in mind that this issue implicates our First Amendment freedom of association as much as our freedom of expression. "We have repeatedly held that freedom of association is protected by the First Amendment. And of course this freedom protected against federal encroachment by the First Amendment is entitled under the Fourteenth Amendment to the same protection from infringement by the States." Williams v. Rhodes, 393 U.S. 23 (1968).
The words of SCOTUS in NAACP v. Button in 1963 protecting the First Amendment rights and freedoms of people who perform in court are relevant now regarding other public performers. Our public servants "may not prohibit" constitutionally-protected "modes of expression and association" even by actual attorneys and even by invoking the general "power to regulate the legal profession." "[I]t is no answer" that "the purpose of" any "regulations" (including court rules or rulings or mere letters from judges) "was merely to ensure high professional standards." The "liberties" in the First Amendment, including "speech, press, or association" are "indispensable." Even actual courts "may not," even "under the guise of prohibiting" actual "professional misconduct" by actual attorneys, "ignore" (knowingly violate) "constitutional rights."
In a comment on Margaret Sullivan's journalism-related "American Crisis" Substack, I connected freedom of speech to freedom of the press. Thank you for helping prove my point! <g> These Trump toadies (and current Republicans in general) don't begin to understand what the founders had in mind when they drafted the First Amendment. They, after all, had had firsthand experience with the denial of all those freedoms.
Are there Go Fund Me pages for any of these artists who have cancelled their performances? Where?