Perspectives

[Denis Salter]

                          4965, avenue Connaught
                            Notre Dame De Grƒce
                             Montr‚al, Qu‚bec
                              (514) 487 7309
                           cyws at musica.mcgill.ca
_________________________________________________________________

14 March 2000


Dear Colleagues:

We live in the Age of the Acronym. Remember the Globe and Mail
editorial that was a list of acronyms and nothing else?  That's
worthy of the genius of Terry Mosher, aka Aislin.

I have read the most recent issue of Perspectives.  I am writing
asking if you would help me to understand the implications that the
issue lays out in relation to the liberal arts, and fine and
performing arts.

1) What is CFI?  I didn't know that it was clear to everyone that
Ottawa is planning to link CFI's initiatives with the 20th C Chairs
programme.  (Where was this information published?) How will this
holy alliance benefit the la., f & pa--LAFPA--that is to say, the
liberal, fine, and performing arts?  If I knew what CFI is, I could
make some inferences.  According to Perspectives, CFI will support
some of the funding for the 20th C Chairs: does this mean that CFI
initiatives will be privileged?

2) What is CURAS? [Don't tempt me: I could choose to make a wicked
pun here.]  And of the 22 new centres of research that it
established last year, what is the distribution of these centres
across the disciplines?

3) I note that 20% or 400 20th C Chairs will be dedicated to the
Social Sciences and Humanities over the next 5 years. How will all
this shake down? Does anyone know David Foot to ask for his very
intelligent prognostications?

4) Does anyone have any details about the internal consortium of
researchers?  Is it something where we ought to have a place at the
table?  Is this also connected to CFI explicitly? (Sometimes the
wording of these documents leaves out essential links, buries its
content in the subtext, and makes assumptions that all of us
understand what subjects are being referred to. Wrong.)
Is there a Dummies Guide to How to Survive Acronyms and Learn to
Love Them?

5) I cannot understand, as I explained in one of my PCC reports
published in the Newsletter, exactly how the humanities will
benefit from CIHR (the Canadian Institute for Health Research).  I
know of theatrical studies of the body,  being carried out by a
range of researchers, including those in theatre, neurolinguistics,
neuroscience, etc., at several universities in Europe.  Theatrical
investigations of the body have already made significant
discoveries that relate to health.  Is this the kind of thing that
CIHR might be interested in?  What sort of role could other fine
and performing arts and liberal arts programmes play?

6) What is the research objective and expected results of these
genome projects?  Isn't the mapping of genomes being undertaken at
MIT meant to be definitive? as well as ahead of schedule?

7) The setting up of various kinds of research projects that will
be linked to many universities around the world sounds promising.
Sounds. Again, how can LAFPA learn about, and perhaps participate
in, these kinds of initiatives?  There have been several
experiments in Canada to link theatrical rehearsals by
videoconferencing and other technological wonders.  I don't know if
they would be willing to give us an update.

8) I urge you to read an article in the March Atlantic about how
U.S. universities--or at least many of them--are going corporate,
big-time.  In some cases, they are doing this while dumping the
disciplines that come within the purview of LAFPA.  Can Canada be
far behind?--surely not, with the anticipatory talk of performance
indicators (we'll use these at auditions in deciding who to cast),
accountability factors, etc.  This article is the kind of smart,
detailed, accurate investigative reporting that Stevie Cameron has
done.  How many Stevie Camerons are there?  And what journal with
the subscription size and profile of the Atlantic exists here?
Saturday Night?  As you know, Lord Wannabe Black doesn't interfere
in matters of content. Rather, he hires staff and editors with a
preference for the far right side of the ideological scale.
Canadian Forum?--it is still going strong, it's still savvy, but
who reads it? (I do.)

9) Orwell's brilliant prescience is staggering. (I note that the
50th anniversary of his death passed by mostly unnoticed.)  This
issue of Perspectives has statements that are in the vicinity of
bafflegab, doublespeak, and newspeak (or is that Newsweek?).  Their
mystifying techniques are aided and abetted by Acronyms.
I had a little trouble with, for example, "technology platforms."
Translation much wanted.


Denis Salter

     p.s. my spell checker objected to bafflegab and doublespeak.
      But it went with great speed right past newspeak.
      We also live in the Age of Surveillance.