Socio-cultural Degeneration and State Patronage of the Arts: Mapplethorpe, Cultural Crisis, and the NEA

The goal of this paper is to investigate how the Untied States federal government, specifically through the National Endowment for the Arts, or NEA, has acted in the position of an arts patron in the past few decades. Specifically, this paper will focus on the past decade and a half since the 'arts crisis' of the late 1980s and the social and political backlash against the art community in the 1990s, which was only against ‘offensive’ art that was seen as morally and culturally corruptive. I explore the political, social, and economic forms the backlash took, particularly rooted in a perceived fear of degenerative arts as a corruption of and a catalyst for the eventual collapse of American culture and values. Additionally, I analyse the role the federal government played in ‘ameliorating’ the situation. I investigate how state arts patronage has affected and continues to affect both the concepts behind and the manifestations of art, as well as who is encouraged, sanctioned, or neglected in the production of art. To accomplish this, I explore how and why the federal government employs the arts to define and redefine morality and culture, and how does it express/allow the expressions of these through art.

Oxford movement: its themes and their significance

In retrospective, the Oxford movement of nineteenth century England provides one with an interesting study of the struggles between the spiritual and secular worlds. However, repeated abstraction in an interpretation of its significance has tended to distort accurate understanding of its historical development. Often this also has resulted n a misinterpretation of the nature of its major themes and their significance to the world. For these reasons, this study has attempted to describe the origin, maturity, and dissolution of the series of events which strictly speaking may be considered to be the Oxford movement. In conclusion, liberty has been taken to comment on the nature of the Movement's themes and their significance in their own age and to man today.

Intent and Method: A Study of Female Characters in Aeschylean and Euripidean Drama

Aeschylus and Euripides used tragic female characters to help fulfill the purpose of religious celebration and to achieve the motivation of public reaction. The playwrights, revising myths about tragic woman and redefining the Greek definition of appropriate femininity, supported or questioned the very customs which they changed. Originally composed as part of a religious festival for Dionysus, the god of wine, revelry and fertility, the tragedies of Aeschylus and Euripides were evaluated by Aristotle. He favored Aeschylus over Euripides, but it appears as if his stipulations for tragic characterization do not apply to Aeschylean and Euripidean women. Modem critics question both Aristotle's analysis in the Poetics as well as the tragedies which he evaluated. As part of the assessment of Aeschylus, the character of the Persian Queen, Atossa, appears as a conradiction the images that Greeks maintain of non-Greeks. The Persians is discussed in relation to modem criticisms and as on its function as a warning against radical changes in Athenian domestic life. The Oresteia, a trilogy, also charts the importance of an atypical woman in Aeschylean tragedy, and how this role, Clytaemnestra, represents an extreme example of the natural and necessary evolution of families, households and kingdoms. In contrast to Aeschylus' plea to retain nomoi (traditional custom and law), EUripides' tragedy, the Medea, demonstrates the importance of a family and a country to provide security, especially for women. Medea's abandonment by Jason and subsequent desperation drives her to commit murder in the hope of revenge. Ultimately, Euripides advocates changes in social convention away from the alienation of non-Greek, non-citizens, and females. Euripides is, unfortunately, tagged a misogynist by some in this tragedy and another example-the Hippolytus. Euripides' Phaedra becomes entangled in a scheme of divine vengeance and ultimately commits suicide in an attempt to avoid societal shame. Far from treatises of hate, Euripidean women take advantage of the little power they possess within a constrictive social system. While both Aeschylus and Euripides revise customary images and expectations of women in the context of religiously-motivated drama, one playwright intends to maintain civic order and the other intends to challenge the secular norm.

Ethics in a capitalistic society

The problem of semantics is inherent in any discussion of ethics. The general term "ethics" is itself commonly confused. In addition, systems of ethics must be built upon assumptions, and assumptions are necessarily subject to lengthy debate. These two problems are encountered in my investigation of the ethical practices of the modern business community and to remedy the situation I have taken two steps: the first being an attempt to clarify the meaning of terms used therein;-and the second being a clear description of the assumptions utilized to further my analysis. To satisfy those who would disagree with these assumptions, I have attempted to outline the consequences of differing premises. The first assumption in my discussion is that the capitalistic economy is powered by the motivation supplied by man's self-interest. We are conditioned to basing our courses of action upon an orientation toward gratifying this self-interest. Careers are chosen by blending aptitude, interest, and remuneration. of course, some people are less materially inclined than others, but the average member of our capitalistic society is concerned with the physical rewards derived from his employment. Status and happiness are all-important considerations in pursuing a chosen course of action, yet all too often they are measured in physical terms. The normal self-interest natural to mankind is heightened in capitalism, due to the emphasis placed upon material compensation. Our thinking becomes mechanistic as life devolves into a complex game played by the rules. We are accustomed to performing meaningless or unpleasant duties to fulfill our gratifications. Thought, consequently, interferes with the completion of our everyday routines. We learn quickly not to be outspoken, as the outspoken one threatens the security of his fellow man. The majority of the people are quite willing to accept others views on morality, and indeed this is the sensible thing to do as one does not risk his own neck. The unfortunate consequence of this situation has been the substitution of the legal and jural for the moral and ethical. Our actions are guided by legal considerations and nowhere has this been more evident than in the business community. The large legal departments of modern corporations devote full time to inspecting the legality of corporate actions. The business community has become preoccupied with the law, yet this is necessarily so. Complex, modern, capitalistic society demands an elaborate framework of rules and regulations. Without this framework it would be impossible to have an orderly economy, to say nothing of protecting the best interests of the people. However, the inherent complexities, contradictions, and sometimes unfair aspects of our legal system can tempt men to take things into their own hands. From time to time cases arise where men have broken laws while acting in good faith, and other cases where men have been extremely unethical without being illegal. Examples such as these foster the growth of cynicism, and generally create an antagonistic attitude toward the law on the part of business. My second assumption is that the public, on the whole, has adopted an apathetic attitude toward business morality. when faced with an ethical problem, far too many people choose to cynically assume that, if I don't do it someone else will. "The danger of such an assumption lies in that it eliminates many of the inhibitions that normally would preclude unethical action. The preventative factor in contemplating an unethical act not only lies in it going against the "right course of action", but also in that it would display the actor as one of the few, immoral practitioners. However, if the contemplator feels that many other people follow the same course of action, he would not feel himself to be so conspicuous. These two assumptions underly my entire discussion of modern business ethics., and in my judgment are the two most important causal factors in unethical acts perpetrated by the business community. The future elimination of these factors seems improbable, if not futile, yet there is no reason to consider things worse than they ever have been before. The heightened public interest in business morality undoubtedly lies in part in the fact that examples of corporate malpractice are of such magnitude in scope, and hence more newsworthy.