Thread by @m_older

I'm reading @JincyWillett's very funny Amy Falls Down, which includes a lovely fantasy segment about someone paying for a bunch of writers to train their way across the US doing events with prosecco and some of these writers do not even have books about to come out, AND

I AM STILL MAD that we didn't get an arts stimulus package that, in addition to streaming plays and museum talks and remote concerts, would fund nightly talks and discussions by a wide range of writers and artists. I appreciate all that theaters and bookstore owners have done but

why should they (and we, because I've done lots of unpaid as well as paid events this past year) do it for free?! yes I realize that while the so-called govt is squabbling over the most basic of disaster assistance for stupid reasons we could not expect this but nonetheless we

should get it, and the individual cash grants ("stimulus" checks, because every fucking thing has to be about the economy) as well, because that would be better. We can imagine it, it is possible, it would be better, it should happen. #SpeculativeResistance

We could stimulate the SUBSTANTIAL arts segment of the economy (see previous 🧵⬇️), make shutdowns a little easier & people a little happier, and get art back into people's lives (hence further stimulating the fucking economy if that's all you care about)

https://twitter.com/m_older/status/1337350460823531521?s=20

Remind people that 🎭🖌🎨🎶art is not all "highbrow" and not all "highbrow" is difficult or pretentious. Talks w/ mystery writers & romance& thrillers, panels with writers' rooms from TV shows & reality show editors, do a massive chick-lit vs dick-lit comparison debate, Idc,

We could do controversy, craft, chismes, all sorts of shows. Do you know how much fun I would have chatting with other writers? Have you HEARD my brother talk? Remember that Hermitage movie years ago? Do that at the Smithsonian. Do a streaming deal with Netflix.

Instead we get WAHWAHWAH, should we give people a tiny fraction of what the would need to survive for 1 month or a slightly larger fraction? WAHHH, what if some people get it who don't neeeeed it? COMEMIERDA, none of that MATTERS! We need to change the way we govern.

I've studied economics, so bring it, h8rs. I worked in disaster response. 1 of the problems in response is getting people to shift their mindset from "normal" work to what is needed in crisis. NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO BE QUIBBLING ABOUT THE DEFICIT. This is what deficits are FOR.

All that said? IT'S STILL THE WRONG CONVERSATION TO BE HAVING. Because we shouldn't be talking about the stupid imaginary deficit in "normal" times either. If we governed for people, for the vulnerable, for art and joy and abundance, instead of for wild heartless profits for few,

for some stupid and unfounded and deeply unsustainable fictions about "growth", we'd be a lot fucking better off right now, even before we got to responding to the disaster.

All our ideas about what govt and politics and fucking statecraft should look like are, if not wrong EXTREMELY FUCKING LIMITED AND UNIMAGINATIVE and that needs to change right fucking yesterday.

Let that be the devastating critique of politicians: not that they are "soft on crime" (comemierdería) or "unlikeable" but that they are UNIMAGINATIVE. Having no empathy should be disqualifying. (Corrupt should also be a deal-breaker, but here we are.)

This thread has gone on a lot of curves but I'm saying we could be having a virtual and very real renaissance of the arts and not doing so is a choice

and let's not forget the most direct comparison with the public art performances I've been talking about. Throughout the pandemic we've been told that sports are TOTALLY NECESSARY to people's lives, which is fine except for the way athletes have been asked to risk their own lives

which again is exactly what happens in normal times, but it's more intense and visible during the disaster, we should be paying attention. I'm sure we could have found safer ways for these athletes to practice their arts and demonstrate their prowess

& we should be putting at least the same value on the arts, which a lot of people also need.

some will argue that it's not a decision, it's the market that says (certain kinds of) sports are more "valuable" than art. DO YOU THINK THEY WOULD BE MAKING THAT MUCH MONEY IF THE LABOR CONDITIONS WEREN'T FUNDAMENTALLY UNEQUAL?

When a few works of art garner ridiculous prices at auction it's all "oh the rich snobs" "it's not a REAL market" "it's a business" but when a few athletes get ridiculous deals?

We do some public art - and people love and appreciate it! why not much, much, much, more?

https://twitter.com/AudraEqualityMc/status/1344672236180025351?s=20