Sculpture Community - Sculpture.net  

Go Back  Sculpture Community - Sculpture.net > Community Announcements > Sculpture News and Events
User Name
Password
Home Sculpture Community Photo Gallery ISC Sculpture.org Register FAQ Members List Search New posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-22-2009, 10:07 PM
iowasculptor's Avatar
iowasculptor iowasculptor is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: midwest
Posts: 357
Exclamation SD cuts all arts funding

just announced today, south dakota has decided to cut ALL budget lines that support the arts in south dakota. No support for arts councils, no grants, no artists in schools, nothing. To say that the budget for the arts was adequate was an overestimation at best. South Dakota has not ever had an active percent for arts program and has operated a meager budget that allows local arts councils to host 1-2 arts events a year. This also takes all moneys away for support of art museums in the state as well. Many of the smaller schools have depended on grant money to bring in a visiting artist to teach their "art" program to the students as most do not have the budgets to hire an art teacher, these small rural communities also don't have funds to have an art center. So the void begins, and the dumbing down of the cultural awareness continues.
matt
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-22-2009, 10:25 PM
evaldart's Avatar
evaldart evaldart is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: easthampton, massachusetts
Posts: 5,637
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Dont matter. Its you against the world (against your culture) as it always was. Shouldn't change your plans one bit.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-22-2009, 10:56 PM
iowasculptor's Avatar
iowasculptor iowasculptor is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: midwest
Posts: 357
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

It doesn't at all, keeping the plans on the down low for now. Just wish people would wake up and see that life is more than finances and survival.
matt
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-23-2009, 12:51 AM
Aaron Schroeder's Avatar
Aaron Schroeder Aaron Schroeder is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Shelby, Ohio
Posts: 856
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Hear that GlennT, a progressive state.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-23-2009, 08:29 AM
evaldart's Avatar
evaldart evaldart is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: easthampton, massachusetts
Posts: 5,637
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Exaxtly Matt, finances and survival are the "regularities, the non-exceptional trifling, the daily ordeals. As artist we must be "super" enough to accomplish these feedings AS WELL AS the ever disuaded advancements into territories of personal illumination. Society, culture, career...all coddle and contain by their crippling permissions.
If South Dakota decides they dont want any Art, then move to NYC...Artists there dont need any damned programs or percents to prop them up because everyone is buying Art all the time.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-23-2009, 08:48 AM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

It is not necessarily true that "South Dakota decides it doesn't want art". Rather, they decided that the government cannot afford to meddle in that arena with the taxpayer's money.

I have been working for 20 years creating art with approximately zero involvement with any government-funded projects. What that means is that in addition to being an artist I also have to be an educator, helping clients or potential clients realize the value in THEIR supporting the arts. That process has allowed my vision to prevail by virtue of its merits rather than being constricted by the limited thinking of a prospectus clouded by the politics of the day.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-23-2009, 09:25 AM
Portoro Portoro is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 342
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Quote:
Originally Posted by iowasculptor View Post
Just wish people would wake up and see that life is more than finances and survival.
matt
Yes, and that's why the funding is important.

As for eduation, in the UK the government has swung the schools and university agendas away from the arts and towards the accumulation of business acumen and skills. So, a world of well-educated cultural morons. We need to FUND what we love here. It won't work if it's 'just us against the world'.
__________________
The forum member formerly known as Cantab
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-23-2009, 09:50 AM
evaldart's Avatar
evaldart evaldart is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: easthampton, massachusetts
Posts: 5,637
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Quote:
Originally Posted by Portoro View Post
Yes, and that's why the funding is important.

As for eduation, in the UK the government has swung the schools and university agendas away from the arts and towards the accumulation of business acumen and skills. So, a world of well-educated cultural morons. We need to FUND what we love here. It won't work if it's 'just us against the world'.
What wont work...humanity? Big surprise, dont align yourself there-in or you're finished. If the artists lead by example and demonstrate achieved profundities that have nothing to do with just eating and staying warm, individuals will prosper. Sustaining resources will become secondary, less in demand, the proper amount for everyone. Enrichened lives serve humanity better than sufficed lives. The (intellectual) wealth will get spread by intellectual flourishing. And that begins with the elevating of aesthetics to the primary function of existence. Crouch under a tree in the rain and wonder about the shape of its trunk and how you might re-interpret its girth with an axe or a chainsaw. Down the road, these thought will remain yielding, other thoughts just get chewed-up and swallowed, and...well you know the rest.

Last edited by evaldart : 01-23-2009 at 11:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-23-2009, 10:42 AM
Portoro Portoro is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 342
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

These are profound thoughts, and inspiring ones, Evaldart - but I can't give up on humanity, I just can't. It would be like giving up on myself too somehow. It's naive, old fashioned religion working in me perhaps, it's the communism, it's the belief that all can be right, or if not, repaired....somehow. Art and aesthetics can be open to a lot more people than currently access them and their importance - I still say fund that.
__________________
The forum member formerly known as Cantab
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-23-2009, 11:17 AM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Quote:
Originally Posted by Portoro View Post
Art and aesthetics can be open to a lot more people than currently access them and their importance - I still say fund that.
I think a lot of the blame, if you are going to lay any, on the declining interest in public funding for arts, is that there has been such a plethora of sorry-looking works that have emerged from that process that its value is no longer perceived, and rightly so. That is not to say that great works have not also been produced by such means, its just the preponderance of bland or meaningless to anyone but the artist types of works do not inspire.

As evaldart hints at, you must make your own art experience relevant and produce works so compelling that the value is apparent. Trust "humanity" to respond to something worth responding to, and if the work is not filling the hungry need for an inspired aesthetic, why should it be supported with undeserved funding?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-23-2009, 04:09 PM
Ries's Avatar
Ries Ries is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Edison Washington
Posts: 1,154
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennT View Post
I think a lot of the blame, if you are going to lay any, on the declining interest in public funding for arts, is that there has been such a plethora of sorry-looking works that have emerged from that process that its value is no longer perceived, and rightly so.
The vast majority of public arts funding has ALWAYS gone to major museums, symphonies, ballet, opera, theater, and arts education for children.

A TINY amount of it goes to public art, which Glenn finds so offensive. Probably well below 1% of all public art monies, nationwide, go to individual artists to make public artwork.

So his logic is flawed- most people do not think that impressionists, or King Tut's tomb, or Bach, or Swan Lake, or trips to the museum for third graders, are "sorry looking".

Nope, the declining interest in public funding for the arts, IF SUCH A THING EXISTS- and I have seen no proof it does- is because we are broke.
And we are broke because Bush spent $10 Billion a month in Iraq, then gave away a Trillion to his Wall Street Buddies, while cutting taxes.

When you dont have money, you cut perceived luxuries first- and most people do think that classical music, or ballet, or Shakespeare, are more of a luxury than food stamps, or Medic One, or safe drinking water.

That said, its been proven in studies time and again that for every dollar spent on art, you get about one and a half times the impact, in jobs, boost to the economy, and so on, that you would for a tax cut of the same amount.
Art doesnt COST- IT PAYS.

And that isnt even beginning to describe the non-monetary, and, to my mind, more important positive affects of art.
__________________
Been There.
Got in Trouble for that.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-23-2009, 05:00 PM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ries View Post
So his logic is flawed- most people do not think that impressionists, or King Tut's tomb, or Bach, or Swan Lake, or trips to the museum for third graders, are "sorry looking".
The mistake was not in my logic, it was in assuming we were discussing publicly funded sculpture projects. It is disingenous to link my comments to classic works in museums. If we were talking about museum funding, one would need to focus on controversial exhibits like Piss Christ and the cow dung madonna in order to seriously address my [point.

But I was not talking about museums. I think people take for granted the existence of museums. But something new commissioned with public dollars, placed in a public context of daily interaction like a downtown street, rather than where one expressly chooses to go for a specific art experience...that is what I am talking about. The percentage of arts budget is meaningless here. What matters is the cummulative effects of unispired art foisted upon on all of us.

How do you expect people to rally around more such expenditures if that is all they might expect to see as a result? Especially, as you point out, during a time of excessive money having being spent on such things preventing another 9-11 type of attack from occuring here in 8 years, preventing wall street scammers from having their private jets repossesed, or preventing labor unions from having to re-configure their manipulative and hurtful demands to reflect market realities.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-24-2009, 10:43 AM
Ries's Avatar
Ries Ries is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Edison Washington
Posts: 1,154
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Quote:
Originally Posted by iowasculptor View Post
just announced today, south dakota has decided to cut ALL budget lines that support the arts in south dakota. No support for arts councils, no grants, no artists in schools, nothing.
Seems pretty clear that this topic is about ALL art funding, not public art sculptures.

And ALL art funding is mostly musuems, opera, and so on.

So we are not discussing rallying people around spending money on "uninspired art"- we are talking about the current reality of public funding for the ARTS. And as I mentioned, only a tiny percentage of public funding goes to those horrid modern sculptures you hate so much.

Most of what is being cut is being cut from stuff people "take for granted", and that is exactly what IowaSculptor is reporting.
The stuff people take for granted is being cut.

I think thats a bad thing.

As I have said before, again and again, the VAST MAJORITY of public funding goes to very conservative, traditional art.
No public money has gone to Piss Christs in over 20 years.
Public money paid for the museum in Brooklyn in which Chris Offili's paintings were exhibited- but NO public money actually went to Offilli.
So the "elephant dung" argument is another of your straw men.

And the elephant dung paintings are beautiful, and inspiring, to me, even if no public money was actually spent on them. Every group show in a museum has a couple of pieces I personally dont like, but your logic that somehow a musuem should get no public funding if a group show includes art you dont like seems somewhat limiting to me.
Either we all pay for some stuff we dont like, like me paying for those crummy cops who give me speeding tickets, or we live in anarchy and lawlessness- because SOMEBODY doesnt want to pay for absolutely every element of government.

So if we let people veto public spending they personally dont like, there would be none left.
__________________
Been There.
Got in Trouble for that.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-24-2009, 11:28 AM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ries View Post
your logic that somehow a musuem should get no public funding if a group show includes art you dont like seems somewhat limiting to me.
The incidents in question were not effected by what I like, nor is that my argument. The incidents I mention were found to be intentionally and expressly offensive to a large group of people, primarily those who honor Jesus or Mother Mary. The public, not I, reacted loudly and negatively to these exhibits. To say that my point is about art that I don't like is the type of straw man argument that you accuse me of making.

Art that has at its core an intention to court controvery by attacking or being extremely disrespectful to the majority of its viewers is art that I question as being worthy of recieving funding from the public that is disturbed by it.

That does not mean it should be censored, just that its funding should be coming from those who support using art primarily to promote their own politics.
And I'm not sure how funding for constitutionally mandated, basic, proper functions of government such as defense and public infrastructure has any bearing on funding non-mandated non-essentials.

The larger point that I hope you are not missing here, is that such projects, while having caused short term noteriety for the artists, have had the cummulative effect of creating a public distaste for public money supporting the arts, whether deserved or not. Even if such projects no longer happen, the sour memory lingers. These artists and the curators have made themselves very poor ambassabors for furthering the cause of public funding of the arts. It is too bad that such behavior drags down the rest of the positive areas of public art funding.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-24-2009, 11:45 AM
craigktx's Avatar
craigktx craigktx is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Port Aransas tx
Posts: 1,153
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

i wonder now what art is being shown at these museums.
iam in a black hole here so what are the Warhol machine type works being shown at the museums now?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-24-2009, 11:49 AM
Ries's Avatar
Ries Ries is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Edison Washington
Posts: 1,154
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Since the artist, Chris Ofili, is a practicing Roman Catholic, he would have to be included in your group of people who "honor Jesus and Mother Mary".
And, obviously, he did not find the painting offensive.

My point being, opinions differ.

My opinion, which is seemingly reflected by the majority of New Yorkers, as the Brooklyn Musuem is STILL publicly funded, is that the painting in question has a place in publicly funded exhibitions.

Again, you are focusing on one sensationalistic event that took place in 1999, which is NOT representative of 99% of public funding of arts, and is certainly not representative of public art funding in South Dakota.

I suggest you read this exhaustive analysis of the Ofili painting, written by a Jesuit Priest, in which he one by one takes apart the criticisms of the painting, and reveals them for the silly tabloid shouts for attention they are.
If you actually look at the painting, and then read this article, there is a lot less scandal there than the right wing radio talk show hosts would like us to believe.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...36/ai_58360850
In fact, he uses the Ofili painting, and the issues it raises, to reflect on his and our own compassion, faith, and hypocrisy.
Interesting stuff.

Ofili is a serious, thoughtful and skilled artist, who has consistently painted beautiful, yet challenging paintings, which I would proudly hang in my house if only I could afford them.
__________________
Been There.
Got in Trouble for that.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-24-2009, 12:01 PM
Ries's Avatar
Ries Ries is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Edison Washington
Posts: 1,154
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

To bring this back to reality, here is a link to the actual South Dakota Arts that were funded last year-
http://www.artscouncil.sd.gov/about/08annualrpt.pdf

No Piss Christs, no elephant dung, no lesbian performance art- Instead, what they are cutting is stuff like -

Swiss Choral Society
South Dakota Symphony Orchestra
Black Hills Playhouse
Singing Boys of Sioux Falls
South Dakota Friends of Traditional Music

and grants like $240 to Madison Elementary School.

They also gave $17,000 to the South Dakota Art Musuem.
Which hosted such insidious and transgressive shows as:
Harvey Dunn - realistic paintings of South Dakota from 1902 to 1950
Landscapes by Jenny Braig- http://www.iowa-artisans-gallery.com...ennybraig.html
Glass sculpture by Stephen Knapp- http://www.lightpaintings.com/
and shows of South Dakota woodworking, and embroidered linen flowers from Madeira.

Scary stuff.

This is what public funding of the arts really is.
Not Offili and Serrano.
__________________
Been There.
Got in Trouble for that.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-24-2009, 12:09 PM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ries View Post
No Piss Christs, no elephant dung, no lesbian performance art- Instead, what they are cutting is stuff like -

Swiss Choral Society
South Dakota Symphony Orchestra
Black Hills Playhouse
Singing Boys of Sioux Falls
South Dakota Friends of Traditional Music

This is what public funding of the arts really is.
Not Offili and Serrano.
So, what we may have learned is that when the pendulum swings too far to the left, the laws of physics tell us that it will swing back too far to the right, and in both instances it is the people in the middle who suffer.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-24-2009, 03:23 PM
Ries's Avatar
Ries Ries is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Edison Washington
Posts: 1,154
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Glenn, you arent seriously trying to say that because, in 1990, the NEA gave a grant to the South Eastern Center for Contemporary Art, a small portion of which was used to fund an Andre Serrano Show, the result is that NOW, 18 years later, South Dakota cuts funding to boys choirs in retaliation?

Sorry, the pendulum NEVER swung to the left- the grant was revoked 18 years ago.

The current cuts have NOTHING to do with your silly idea that the american public is fed up with radical art- Its all about being broke, as I said before.

No backlash against modern art occurred in South Dakota, and, in fact, despite the best efforts of people like the Rev. Donald Wildmon or that hack, Dana Rohrbacker, there has not been a backlash against modern art by the american people. Or against arts funding.

You are inventing one, but it never happened.

Most people believe in funding the stuff that government arts programs fund, like the stuff that is being cut in South Dakota.

Arts funding is being cut because EVERYTHING is being cut, because, in the last 8 years, we spent a lot more money than we have. We gave away a few hundred billion here, and a few hundred billion there, to Halliburton and Wall Street and AIG, and suddenly, our economy is in the toilet- surprise, surprise, surprise, as old Gomer Pyle used to say.

It has nothing to do with the american people suddenly seeing the light and coming around to your taste in art, much as you would like to hope it did.
__________________
Been There.
Got in Trouble for that.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-24-2009, 03:42 PM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Alright, let's go with that then. It covers at least half the truth, and avoids having to face responsibility for the other half.

As far as the American people coming around to my taste in art, I have never claimed that to have occured, nor stated that as being my goal, good idea though it may be. Making up things like that in order to paint a false and unappealing picture of me does not advance your arguement, it only weakens your credibility despite the good points you make.

Again, the claim that I am making, is that when various incidents, many more than one or two isolated examples, occur in which government funding of arts results in "in your face" types of projects, or even just distinctly unappealing ones, the tastes of the American public, irrespective of any congruence with my own personal tastes, is turned off from the idea of having its money so wasted. Thus, albeit the current situation is propelled by an economic downturn, public support for government funding of the arts has lost campaigners on its behalf who have been so alienated.

Last edited by GlennT : 01-24-2009 at 05:12 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 01-24-2009, 04:26 PM
Ries's Avatar
Ries Ries is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Edison Washington
Posts: 1,154
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

If that is true, then why has government support for the arts increased every year, until this year?

Each year, more and more dollars have been spent on art.
More states and cities have adopted 1% for arts laws.
More states and cities have instituted artists in the schools programs, outdoor concerts, festivals, and so on.

I see no evidence whatsoever that the public, which, after all, elects the politicians that have been consistently funding MORE art, not less, has changed its mind as you state.

Please, what is your proof that public support for government funding has decreased? All evidence I can see, that is, actual spending, passing of laws, and so on, would tell me that, until last September, when extraordinary times hit us, the public has consistently supported MORE spending.

Which politicians were voted out of office based on spending more on arts?
Which grass roots state initiatives have been passed cutting arts spending?
Which petitions have been sent to politicians demanding less spending on arts?
__________________
Been There.
Got in Trouble for that.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-24-2009, 06:55 PM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Okay, then, it's all good: once the economic downturn blows over you should have no trouble rallying the citizens to re-establish their right to pay the government more money for the government to spend on the arts.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-25-2009, 05:45 AM
EJB EJB is offline
ISC Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: LA/NY
Posts: 360
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

I don't usually chime in on the political discussions here because they tend not to be productive. In this case I think it is important to back up Ries who is spot on regarding public art funding. The disconnect is when people rely on news headlines and emotional knee-jerk reactions to base their opinions on. Very, very little public money goes to 'controversial' art. Even most of that is merely hype of media outlets, church groups and just plain angry people that often have no first hand knowledge of the projects but use them to advance their own agendas. If the real fear is that someone may undeservingly receive taxpayer dollars for something useless, well there is a mighty long list of expenditures that have nothing to do with art whatsoever. When talking about cutting funding for the arts, you might as well say you are cutting funds for education since that is what it amounts to. A number of arts programs have evolved in order to fill the void created by the systematic elimination of arts, music and athletic programs in public schools in an effort to 'trim costs'. The argument is usually that outside organizations can pick up the slack and government can save a ton of money by merely subsidizing as opposed to running the programs themselves. Of course the short term relief in spending is offset by using the savings to hire more administrators and implement more testing. As more kids get frustrated and drop out of school, school funding based on attendance also declines and the cycle progresses. But no one wants to close down schools to save money do they? (Well, except for the school for the deaf that the SD governor wants to shut down).
In the case of South Dakota, they undoubtedly face severe budget shortfalls as do many government agencies and individuals do at the moment. This is why this subject is relevant to this forum. Budget cuts that affect your communities may be next. As an artist I have not and have no plans to apply for a government art grant. As a taxpayer I fully endorse supporting public art programs because it makes for a better community and better citizenry. The reason I got into this biz was a firm commitment to quality of life. Arts organizations are major tools in revitalizing depressed areas and exposing the public to ideas and forms of expression that might not otherwise be available to them. As Ries stated, art is a money maker! South Dakota has been the beneficiary of one of the largest public art works in American history which brings millions of tourist dollars every year. Before Mount Rushmore, South Dakota's biggest claim to fame was not being North Dakota. Granted, government oversight hamstringed that project through most of its existence but now is considered a National Treasure. (Unless you happen to be Lakota). By the way, the original proposal (by a government official) was to carve cowboy and indian figures out of the nearby rock formations (which are now considered a National Treasure). Another example of why I agree that you do not want an unwieldy bureaucracy dictating what is and is not art. Public art funding is the mechanism by which citizens dictate the course of their culture.
To the best of my knowledge the SD budget cuts have yet to be voted on. The Arts budget is less than $700,000. Perhaps a more 'creative' solution will be arrived at before all is said and done.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-25-2009, 07:36 AM
sculptorsam's Avatar
sculptorsam sculptorsam is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: MN
Posts: 823
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Very well said, EJB. And I second the +1 Ries.
__________________
www.sculptorsam.com
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-25-2009, 04:14 PM
outsider outsider is offline
Level 9 user
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 265
Re: SD cuts all arts funding

Government funding of the arts is the same as children having to eat their vegetables. It's all nourishment. Sometimes it gets down to almost being force fed. Art precedes life. You must feed art to obtain richness later. Maybe I'll be a shining example of such when my teleportation machine becomes common place.

http://www.y-16.com
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Sculpture Community, Sculpture.net
International Sculpture Center, Sculpture.org
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Russ RuBert