Alliance's cultural position

Wed Nov 15 11:07:25 EST 2000

Dear Colleagues,

I am disturbed by some reactions to the Canadian Alliance's position on the
funding of the arts and culture. I am troubled that scholars or artistes would
refuse any questioning of the status quo as if the current system had some magic
God
given justification.

I might be wrong, but considering  the vehemence of quite a few attacks, Deborah
Greys response seems to me rather tame. Her only audacity is to ask for greater
transparency and accountability in the way of distributing public money.
This is hardly censorship. As a matter of fact one would like to know how much
public money went down in Garth Drabinskys sinking ship. Or how much did we help
the
owners of the Cinar film company to illegally become millionaires. It would be
rather
interesting to understand as well the intricacies of public support for the
Cirque du Soleil until it achieved its natural goal: joining Disneyland and Las
Vegas.

I am rather surprised that very few people seem to be willing to re-examine our
current system considering how badly it performs in some areas. For instance,
according to the 1996 census,  the average yearly earnings of musicians are 12,600;

that of dancers 11,900 and actors' 17,000.  Bad enough, but even worst if one
considers that
some internationally known artistes in the same categories make several times
these amounts for one appearance. I would understand these discrepancies if it
were the market place that decided that X is a100 times "better" than Y. However in

the world of subsidies it is the state or its arms length agents who make the
decision. Or do they? After all it might happen that no on really knows what is
going
on.

On the public's side I am troubled that a ticket to heavily subsidized events,
opera, classical concerts or even theatre could cost more than a day's salary at
minimum wage.

Finally, the main argument for peer judgment is of course not foolproof. Moliere
never made it to the Academie Francaise and the Impressionists were thrown
out of the Salon. And how much state support would receive today's violators of
taboos  not only Judeo-Christian taboos but politically correct taboos as well
-like Baudelaire or Wilde?

Would it be so bad to have a political debate about it?

Tibor Egervari

Moira day wrote:

>         I agree that this puts us back into the discourse of the "national
> theatre" and theatre being used to promote and represent the nation.  Not a
> bad idea as far as I'm concerned if it actually means continued government
> subsidization on the understanding that arts and culture are an intrinsic
> part of our fabric as a people - no less than health, education (though I'd
> better not speak too quickly about government support on those ones either
> these days)the economy, and social/political issues.
>         But of course, that concept is sensitive to the idea of
> "nationhood" being promoted, and I don't see that being very clearly spelt
> out in the letter.  It's also not clear how much Alliance intends to
> publically fund the arts, if it also intends to cut the tax base supporting
> that endeavour with the idea of encouraging volunteer and corporate
> sponsorship instead.  Without clear planning and particulars about how that
> is to be achieved, it sounds as if the arts could get badly caught in the
> middle struggling to cope with the worst of both worlds.
>         At this point, at least, I find Deborah's statement less scary and
> dangerous than banal and naive. At least she responded. Where there's
> dialogue, there's hope. Let's hope they get better. They can't get much
> worse.
>
> Moira
>
> At 3:28 PM -0600 11/10/0, Louise H. Forsyth wrote:
> >Hello to all,
> >
> >Thanks for posting this, Robert. Deconstructing the language of this
> >message from Deborah Grey even superficially suggests to me that this is a
> >very scary policy statement. I can see this country being drawn back to
> >pre-Massey Report days in terms of public support for arts & letters, along
> >with an intense censorship regime in place to further stifle the creative
> >community.
> >
> >We must not only defeat but also discredit the Alliance Party's discourse.
> >
> >Louise Forsyth
> >
> >At 04:20 PM 10/11/00 -0500, Robert Nunn wrote:
> >>         You may be interested to read this reply from the office of
> >> Deborah Grey
> >>to my e-mail asking for a response to Margaret Atwood's stinging attack on
> >>the Reform/Alliance cultural  policy, which appeared in the Globe a while
> >>ago.
> >>         The second paragraph invites one to read between the lines. It
> >> sounds like
> >>the principle of arms-length funding is called into question. Is Deborah
> >>Gray arguing that the Canada Council should only fund work that Canadians
> >>can be "proud of", otherwise they must be held to account? It sounds like
> >>an update of the attitude Dickens complained about, re the demand to avoid
> >>anything that might bring a blush to the cheek of a young person. This
> >>mythical person, Dickens observed, seemed to be all cheek.
> >>         It would be interesting to take a straw poll and see how many
> >> Alliance
> >>party members are "proud" of the results of the labours of Edmonton's own
> >>Brad Fraser.
> >>         As to the trickle-down theory of the benefit to the arts of all
> >> that extra
> >>money in wealthy people's pockets, have another slice of pie in the sky.
> >>
> >>Rob Nunn
> >>
> >>
> >> >Return-Path: <GreyD9 at parl.gc.ca>
> >> >From: "Grey, Deborah - Assistant 2" <GreyD9 at parl.gc.ca>
> >> >To: "'rnunn at spartan.ac.brocku.ca'" <rnunn at spartan.ac.brocku.ca>
> >> >Subject: Alliance's cultural position
> >> >Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 11:12:35 -0500
> >> >
> >> >O T T A W A
> >> >November 10, 2000
> >> >
> >> >Mr. Robert Nunn
> >> >rnunn at spartan.ac.brocku.ca
> >> >
> >> >Dear Mr. Nunn:
> >> >
> >> >This will acknowledge receipt of your e-mail dated November 3, 2000.
> >> >
> >> >The Canadian Alliance believes that art and culture can represent the
> >> >best of our country's creative energy and expression.  Throughout
> >> >Canada's history, distinguished painters, writers, and musicians
> >> >have interpreted Canadians to themselves and to the world.  We
> >> >view this creative heritage as a trust to be protected and fostered for
> >> >future generations.  We believe that the federal government should continue
> >> >to play a role in creating an environment that stimulates and encourages
> >> >artistic endeavour and excellence.
> >> >
> >> >We also believe that hard-working Canadians have a right to see their tax
> >> >dollars treated with respect.  When public funds are entrusted to talented
> >> >individuals for artistic endeavour, we believe Canadians should be able to
> >> >say they are proud of the result.  Grants and contributions must be awarded
> >> >impartially and fairly, with greater transparency and accountability.
> >> >
> >> >The Canadian Alliance believes that lower taxes - as well as other
> >> >incentives to
> >> >be provided through the tax system - would contribute significantly toward
> >> >stimulating voluntary sponsorship of the arts that would create the maximum
> >> >opportunity for artists to strive for excellence.  In this way we will
> >> >strive to increase corporate and voluntary sponsorship of the arts.
> >> >
> >> >In addition, the Canadian Alliance is committed to strengthening local and
> >> >aboriginal artistic heritage, museums, historic exhibits and libraries
> >> >across
> >> >Canada, including remote and isolated communities.
> >> >
> >> >Thank you for taking the time to write and share your thoughts on this
> >>issue
> >> >with me.
> >> >
> >> >Sincerely,
> >> >
> >> >Deborah Grey, M.P.
> >> >Edmonton North
> >> >
> >> >DG/lf
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>Robert Nunn
> >>52 Crescentwood Drive
> >>St. Catharines, ON
> >>L2N 4L2
> >>(905) 646-6597
> >>e-mail: rnunn at spartan.ac.brocku.ca
>
> Moira Day, Associate Professor of Drama
> moiraday at duke.usask.ca

--
MZ