Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader was just reviewing some news and came upon a piece that made him think a little bit.

It seems as though there is a strike in Italy right now. (No surprise there right?) This particular strike is among actors and actresses. You can read about it here and here. Milan’s famous La Scala is cancelling performances of The Barber of Seville. And organizers of the Venice Film Festival (which your Maximum Leader is told is the oldest in the world) are saying that this year’s festival might have to be cancelled.

Why you may ask? Well, because the Berlusconi Government (a center-right government remember - the meanies!) are proposing an 8 million Euro cut in the budget for the arts. According to the various articles this is about a 30% cut overall to the arts budget of the central government. (No mention is made of regional support of the arts.)

This caused your Maximum Leader to get to thinking… Now he cannot recall if he has proclaimed as much in this forum, but he has been a constant foe of federal funding for “the arts” in this country. Now in case this revelation causes astonished gasps in the audience allow him to clarify a few things. Your Maximum Leader is against federal funding of “the arts.” This doesn’t mean he is against “the arts.” Indeed, he is something of a (small-fry) patron of the arts. He goes to operas regularly. He donates to a Shakespearian troupe in DC (and sees plays there too). He’s even been known to make donations to the National Gallery of Art. He’s even bought art at galleries! (He’s even bought crappy pieces by artists he thought had talent just to keep them going.)

Frankly, your Maximum Leader doesn’t object in the least to state and local funding of the arts. He is all in favour of “Arts” education in schools. In fact, he thinks it is essential to teach music and fine arts to children all through school. He has paid money to the Villainettes’s school’s PTA so that his progeny will have three full-time art and music teachers. (As he understands it the county pays for one and a half and the PTA picks up the tab for the other one and a half.)

Excursus: One of the art teachers at the Villainettes school is awesome. She is creative. She is engaging. The kids love her. The other day Villainette #1 (the Princess Villainette) came home and asked if your Maximum Leader had ever heard of Michaelangelo. H said that he had (of course). Then he popped out an art history text he had laying around (for just such and occasion) and showed her pictures of David, the Pieta, and the Sistine Chapel (both restored and unrestored). To which Villainette #1 said, “Humm… Yeah. Mrs ______ said he was great. All that stuff you showed me was pretty good.” Your Maximum Leader suggested that the next time she saw her art teacher that Villainette #1 should tell her that Titian could have painted her hair. * To illustrate the point your Maximum Leader got to show Villainette #1 a few Titian portraits too. He hasn’t heard if that message was relayed yet…

Anyho…

Your Maximum Leader doesn’t think that our federal government should be in the art business. He believes this for two reasons. (Niether of which will come as a major shocker to anyone he thinks.) The first is that he doesn’t believe that it is a wise application of tax revenues. (Especially given the spending habits of this Congress.) The second is that he believe it promotes bad art.

By bad art he means “art” by the talentless for the tasteless.

(Your Maximum Leader doesn’t know if he actually made up that last line or if it jumped out of his subconscious after hearing or reading it elsewhere. If it deserves attribution - let your Maximum Leader know…)

Now not all art that receives some federal funding is tasteless. But enough of it is that it shouldn’t be funded federally. Some of you out there may be saying to yourselves, “Oh my Maximum Leader is so right on so many different things; but on this! This! He may be a bit off key.” No, no my minions. Your Maximum Leader doesn’t want to fund art that doesn’t have private sector appeal. And if art has private appeal - it shoudn’t be funded.

You see… The reason that Michaelangelo, Titian, Raphael, and the other greats never did a “Piss Christ” or crafted a Madonna out of elephant dung is twofold. The first fold is that they probably would have been burned alive as heretics. But the second fold is the main point, namely that they knew what their patrons would go for - or what they could convince their patrons to go for.

And now we come back to Italy…

Your Maximum Leader is a bit conflicted about Italy’s cutting of the arts budget.

Wha? But… You were just… Have you gone completely ’round the bend? (You all ask yourselves.)

No. Not at all. You see. Italy has a long-standing tradition of state support of the arts. Of course, for centuries “state support” meant “paint what Cosimo de Medici wants on his palace wall” or “sculpt that new sexy Madonna for Julius II” or even “Lorenzo the Magnificent wants a portrait of his worstest enemy done up like John the Baptist brought before Salome.” **

So Italy, unlike the United States, has a history of supporting artists. In the old days it might have been hard to tell the difference between “the state” and “the Doge.” But if the Doge liked you, well then state support was headed your way. But that long history makes state support less objectionable to your Maximum Leader. At least a little bit.

Until he read that part where Franco Zeffirelli said that the budget needed to be cut to get rid of the horrible hangers-on. Then the cuts seemed okay.

And after all that thinking about Italy and Italians…

Your Maximum Leader’s thoughts turned to one of his favourite Italians, Niccolo Machiavelli. Specifically, your Maximum Leader mused on two stories concerning ole Nick’s passing. Both of which he will relate here to you…

The first goes like this… Niccolo Machiavelli is on his death bed and is having a recurring dream. He tells his friends (those who still visit) that in the dream he sees two lines of people walking in opposite directions. The first line consists of shabbily dressed peasants and common folk walking. He asks who they are and they respond something to the effect of, “We are the meek. We are the blessed. We are on our way to heaven.” The second line (going in the opposite direction) consists of well-dressed people. Tey are talking amongst themselves and obviously well-off and educated. He asks who these people are and they respond, “We are the philosophers, writers, theologians, and thinkers of our times. And we are the damned of hell.”

In relating this story to his friends, Machiavelli said that he would rather spend eternity in hell. Because the conversation would, at the least, be better.

The second Niccolo on his death bed story goes like this… Machiavelli is dying. His eyes have been closed for a while and his breathing is laboured and shallow. From time to time Machiavelli asks for water. A priest is summoned to perform Extreme Unction. At the point in the ritual when Machiavelli is asked if he renounces Satan he is silent. The priest asks a second time if Machiavelli renounces Satan. Again silence. The priest asks a third time, “Niccolo, do you renounce Satan and his empty promises?” Niccolo opens his eyes and says quietly, “Father, this is no time to make enemies.”

Your Maximum Leader is told that only one of these stories is vaugely true. But your Maximum Leader prefers the other one.

Carry on.

* - Don’t get the reference? There is a shade of red called “Titian” after the painter… To see some examples Clicky here.

** - What? This one also a bit obscure? Clicky here.