Apparently, the RISD president hasn't been to the Pawtucket DMV lately. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a Trabant sitting in one of the cubes.

I suppose this had its genesis in the requirement that 5% of the cost of federal buildings had to be dedicated to art. This sometimes reaches unusual extremes, one might visit the Federal Building in Boston which houses the Bankruptcy Court. In the atrium is an enormous "light fixture". This could only have been created to meet the art budget. There could have been a great deal more floor space without it.

Although I fear being labelled a Philistine, I have never understood why good art cannot support itself. I can easily understand why bad art cannot. Perhaps artists are simply wedded to the idea of living in a garret. On the other hand, although his art is a mystery to me, Picasso did well during his lifetime.

Does the Governor not change his mind on anything? He was cutting state employee wages, but then backed down and gave deferred days off. He was keeping money from car taxes, then changed his mind and sent it to the cities and towns. Sure there is plenty of blame to go around to the General Assembly, but Carcieri's leadership is laughable at this point.

Between subsidies for the arts, subsidies for movie production, and subsidies for historic preservation, I think Rhode Islanders should step back, smell the coffee and realize that something stinks.

The right way to build an economy isn't to subsidize all sorts of stuff, it's to back off and let artists, production companies, and developers do what they do naturally (within reason, of course). 'Economy' happens when people meet a need for a product or service, not when the state finally gets around to subsidizing something.

I support the arts, I donate bits here and there, I go to see live shows, and I buy art when I can afford it. But I don't believe that the state needs to be so involved.

"Public art is a very special thing ... What would the world be like if we removed all of these from our environment? It'd basically be like visiting East Germany prior to the Berlin Wall coming down,"

Actually... Having the state prop up an industry by commissioning expensive art from 'connected' artists that the people themselves can't afford seems pretty 'Soviet' to me. The state buildings and subways of Moscow were considered some of the most well-kept and adorned in the world. I really don't like to be the guy to draw a 'Rhode Island = Soviet Union' line, but Maeda is wrong about that. Arts are evidence of a vibrant society with time and money to spend on enrichment and leisure, not a precursor to said society.

Think about this: Every dollar break given to the arts is another dollar that has to come from the pocket of a plumber, or a cop, a business owner, or a twenty-something trying to buy a house here.

Can Rhode Island really expect that the same cast of characters on Smith Street is capable of managing the entire state's economy, in addition to the day-to-day of running a government? Can we keep on going with the idea that the government can sucker-punch every business, and then offer band aids to those who are 'good' industries?