I’ve noticed for quite some time that most media web sites and newspapers do not have an Arts section. The closest you find is Entertainment. The meaning of these two is of course very different, not because art can’t be entertaining, it can be. But art often has more purpose to it than that. By sticking only to “Entertainment,” the media avoids discussion of any of the other reasons for art, or the cultural criticisms it might be presenting. It takes the easy route, sticking to celebrity gossip and celebrity fashion, and not a bigger cultural context, or inclusion of any artwork whose main purpose may be something other than Entertaining.
If your TV station or newspaper covers only Entertainment and not the Arts, write them and ask why, and ask them to change it (not just the name of the section, but what they cover.)
Some examples of “Entertainment” and no “Arts”:
Some great papers that still have an Arts section:
Related posts:
- If You Get Points, Is It Art?
- Artist Astronauts, Artist Cosmonauts, Artists in Space
- A New Wave for Japanese Art
posted by Trout Monfalco