...to a new location. I can now be found on Wordpress at:
itsabouttheart.wordpress.com
Hope you are all having a wonderful summer! See you at the new site!
Monday, August 12, 2013
Friday, December 28, 2012
Just when you thought the economic argument for the Arts was gettng old...
...it isn't - at least in the United States. Just when Stats Can's Performing Arts survey is on its way out due to federal government cuts, the US Bureau of Economic Analysis is working with the National Endowment for the Arts to measure the full economic impact of the Arts. It's huge step forward.
If you'd like to read the Bloomberg article, it can be found here.
I've long wished for Canadian versions of the research that is available in the US on such things as Arts participation, economic impact, the measurable impact of arts activity and participation on communities, and so on. I'm going to keep wishing the governments and foundations will start to care enough to fund these, and that Canadian researchers will have the time and funding to do it.
A New Year's Resolution, perhaps? Or a wish?
(A quick "p.s.": Life and work have kept me away from blogging for a long while, and while they still might, I'll continue to post when I see things like the above...or have something worthwhile to say.)
If you'd like to read the Bloomberg article, it can be found here.
I've long wished for Canadian versions of the research that is available in the US on such things as Arts participation, economic impact, the measurable impact of arts activity and participation on communities, and so on. I'm going to keep wishing the governments and foundations will start to care enough to fund these, and that Canadian researchers will have the time and funding to do it.
A New Year's Resolution, perhaps? Or a wish?
(A quick "p.s.": Life and work have kept me away from blogging for a long while, and while they still might, I'll continue to post when I see things like the above...or have something worthwhile to say.)
Sunday, April 29, 2012
Happy International Dance Day!
Today - April 29 - is International Dance Day. Held world wide every year on the birthday of Jean-Georges Noverre, a French choreographer who revolutionized ballet production during the 18th Century, this day encourages all of us to engage with dance.
This year's International Dance Day message is by Flemish Moroccan choreographer Sidi Larbi Cherkaoui, and it's incredibly relevant to all aspects of our lives.
I also highly recommend the Canadian message, put together by the Canadian Dance Assembly and authored by Yvon Soglo, Crazy Smooth.
(The above is provided with a big nod to Victoria School of the Arts' weekly newsletter, for pointing me in this direction.)
Happy Dance Day, everyone!
This year's International Dance Day message is by Flemish Moroccan choreographer Sidi Larbi Cherkaoui, and it's incredibly relevant to all aspects of our lives.
I also highly recommend the Canadian message, put together by the Canadian Dance Assembly and authored by Yvon Soglo, Crazy Smooth.
(The above is provided with a big nod to Victoria School of the Arts' weekly newsletter, for pointing me in this direction.)
Happy Dance Day, everyone!
Friday, April 13, 2012
Vote Arts in Alberta
There are only 9 campaigning days left in Alberta's provincial election. I encourage everyone to cast a ballot, and, when you do, I sincerely encourage you to consider each party's Arts platform when you do. To help with this, here are a few websites, in no particular order:
Alberta Liberal Party Election Platform - the Arts Policy is on pages 24 and 25 of this .pdf
Alberta Party Creative Industries Policy
Alberta New Democrats' Arts Platform
Alberta Progressive Conservatives Platform - the Arts Policy is on page 32 of this .pdf
Wildrose Alliance Policy Green Book - I was unable to find a specific Arts Policy on their website, and this document does not seem to be searchable, but that could mean I missed it. I am providing a link here and will post an update if I do find anything.
There are several other, smaller parties running candidates in the provincial election and I am not aware of all of them, however, check out the following sites for further information, which is posted as it's available:
ArtsVote Calgary
Professional Arts Coalition of Edmonton (PACE)
PACE also has a facebook page and a twitter feed, so feel free to check these as well.
Again - please vote, and please consider the Arts when you do. Ask your friends and colleagues to do the same. Our society will only be richer when this happens.
Alberta Liberal Party Election Platform - the Arts Policy is on pages 24 and 25 of this .pdf
Alberta Party Creative Industries Policy
Alberta New Democrats' Arts Platform
Alberta Progressive Conservatives Platform - the Arts Policy is on page 32 of this .pdf
Wildrose Alliance Policy Green Book - I was unable to find a specific Arts Policy on their website, and this document does not seem to be searchable, but that could mean I missed it. I am providing a link here and will post an update if I do find anything.
There are several other, smaller parties running candidates in the provincial election and I am not aware of all of them, however, check out the following sites for further information, which is posted as it's available:
ArtsVote Calgary
Professional Arts Coalition of Edmonton (PACE)
PACE also has a facebook page and a twitter feed, so feel free to check these as well.
Again - please vote, and please consider the Arts when you do. Ask your friends and colleagues to do the same. Our society will only be richer when this happens.
Saturday, March 31, 2012
The Federal Budget
It's been a couple of days since the Federal budget, which has given me time for some rational thought and a chance for any knee-jerk reactions to settle into hopefully reasonable discourse. With that said, Thursday was not a stellar day for the Arts.
Yes, the Canada Council was spared any cuts. This is likely due to some hard work by Minister of Canadian Heritage James Moore. The same goes for the National museums and the National Gallery. Let us give credit where credit is due. On the other hand, cuts elsewhere will have significant impact on the Arts across the country and for years to come, and this is truly disappointing from a a government that let its Minister of Canadian Heritage (a staunch defender of the arts - again, let's give credit where credit is due) declared in January of 2011 that they would ensure stable funding to the Arts for the next 5 years.
As an example, let's look at the National Arts Centre, which received a cut in Thursday's budget. While the NAC is in Ottawa and, to be realistic, that's where it's primary audience lives, we have to remember two things: first, that Ottawa is home and host to representatives of nations from all over the world, hence the NAC has become one of the few remaining ways our government supports Canadian cultural expression on a world stage, given that the Department of Foreign Affairs no longer supports this activity; less funding for the NAC means less on their stages and less Canadian cultural presence in our nation's capital for the world to see. Second, the NAC actively presents the work of Artists from across the country, either through its regular seasons or via its annual "Scene" festivals - again, less money means possibly less of these activities and/or a drop in fees to Artists. Couple this with the fact that the Canada Council cannot fund touring to the NAC within its touring programs - because both organizations receive direct parliamentary allocations and therefore Artists cannot be seen to be "double-dipping" - and the potential ripple effect reaches across the country.
The CBC also received heavy cuts - a total of $115 million beginning in 2014. What this will mean to Canadian television production, local news programming and arts coverage, and indeed for Arts programming across the network (something done primarily by the CBC as opposed to other networks) isn't clear yet. However, it seems reasonable to expect that less money means less of the programming that generates lower advertising revenues, such as Arts programming. Again, Canadian Artists lose - on a national scale.
And then there is Canadian Heritage itself, which has received an approximately 10% cut. According to the Globe and Mail, DCH will try to do this through staff reductions instead of program cuts, but we are left wondering what less administrative ability will mean for the delivery of these programs. Will assessment times get longer? Will applications be properly read and evaluated? Will applicants have appropriate access to DCH staff to have questions answered and to seek advice so that they can submit their best application? It's also hard not to think that this kind of cut will not affect funding programs at some point. After all, even if DCH is spared future cuts, expenses will rise, inflation still occurs and overall that means less real money for programs such as the Canada Cultural Investment Fund and the Canada Arts Training Fund, to name but two.
And I haven't discussed the reductions to the National Film Board (10%), Telefilm Canada (more than 10%), and the National Archives (10%).
There will also be other impacts to the Arts from other areas of the budget. Aging Artists and Arts Administrators - along with every other Canadian under 54 - will now have to wait longer before qualifying for Old Age Security. In the case of the Arts sector, much of which has no pension (or at best a very minimal one), this means a loss of tens of thousands of dollars of much needed income at a time in their lives when they are more vulnerable.
And let's not forget new requirements for charities. In the name of "accountability" and "transparency", charities will now have even more reporting to do with regard to their so-called political activities. Let me say again that I have absolutely no problem with being accountable for public money. But these further requirements not only take time away from charities' ability to focus on actually serving their missions, but also calls into question the government's motives in terms of allowing organizations to advocate for themselves and those they serve, be they Artists, society's most vulnerable members, or our planet itself. is this accountability or an attempt to limit dialogue when it opposes government policy?
In the face of all this, it seems easy to throw up one's hands in despair and dive into a corner, waiting for better times...or to rip off the gloves and start yelling in uncontrolled anger. However, I believe that we really need frank, open and honest dialogue with anyone and everyone: politicians, audiences, patrons, the business community - everyone. In some cases, the cuts are phased in over time or are not taking effect for a year or two. There's still time to tell your government that you feel strongly about the importance of the Arts and the value of Canadians' continued access to a broad range of these experiences. The Arts continue to be a hugely vital and intrinsic part of our society. If we really care, we must have a dialogue: early, often, and always.
Yes, the Canada Council was spared any cuts. This is likely due to some hard work by Minister of Canadian Heritage James Moore. The same goes for the National museums and the National Gallery. Let us give credit where credit is due. On the other hand, cuts elsewhere will have significant impact on the Arts across the country and for years to come, and this is truly disappointing from a a government that let its Minister of Canadian Heritage (a staunch defender of the arts - again, let's give credit where credit is due) declared in January of 2011 that they would ensure stable funding to the Arts for the next 5 years.
As an example, let's look at the National Arts Centre, which received a cut in Thursday's budget. While the NAC is in Ottawa and, to be realistic, that's where it's primary audience lives, we have to remember two things: first, that Ottawa is home and host to representatives of nations from all over the world, hence the NAC has become one of the few remaining ways our government supports Canadian cultural expression on a world stage, given that the Department of Foreign Affairs no longer supports this activity; less funding for the NAC means less on their stages and less Canadian cultural presence in our nation's capital for the world to see. Second, the NAC actively presents the work of Artists from across the country, either through its regular seasons or via its annual "Scene" festivals - again, less money means possibly less of these activities and/or a drop in fees to Artists. Couple this with the fact that the Canada Council cannot fund touring to the NAC within its touring programs - because both organizations receive direct parliamentary allocations and therefore Artists cannot be seen to be "double-dipping" - and the potential ripple effect reaches across the country.
The CBC also received heavy cuts - a total of $115 million beginning in 2014. What this will mean to Canadian television production, local news programming and arts coverage, and indeed for Arts programming across the network (something done primarily by the CBC as opposed to other networks) isn't clear yet. However, it seems reasonable to expect that less money means less of the programming that generates lower advertising revenues, such as Arts programming. Again, Canadian Artists lose - on a national scale.
And then there is Canadian Heritage itself, which has received an approximately 10% cut. According to the Globe and Mail, DCH will try to do this through staff reductions instead of program cuts, but we are left wondering what less administrative ability will mean for the delivery of these programs. Will assessment times get longer? Will applications be properly read and evaluated? Will applicants have appropriate access to DCH staff to have questions answered and to seek advice so that they can submit their best application? It's also hard not to think that this kind of cut will not affect funding programs at some point. After all, even if DCH is spared future cuts, expenses will rise, inflation still occurs and overall that means less real money for programs such as the Canada Cultural Investment Fund and the Canada Arts Training Fund, to name but two.
And I haven't discussed the reductions to the National Film Board (10%), Telefilm Canada (more than 10%), and the National Archives (10%).
There will also be other impacts to the Arts from other areas of the budget. Aging Artists and Arts Administrators - along with every other Canadian under 54 - will now have to wait longer before qualifying for Old Age Security. In the case of the Arts sector, much of which has no pension (or at best a very minimal one), this means a loss of tens of thousands of dollars of much needed income at a time in their lives when they are more vulnerable.
And let's not forget new requirements for charities. In the name of "accountability" and "transparency", charities will now have even more reporting to do with regard to their so-called political activities. Let me say again that I have absolutely no problem with being accountable for public money. But these further requirements not only take time away from charities' ability to focus on actually serving their missions, but also calls into question the government's motives in terms of allowing organizations to advocate for themselves and those they serve, be they Artists, society's most vulnerable members, or our planet itself. is this accountability or an attempt to limit dialogue when it opposes government policy?
In the face of all this, it seems easy to throw up one's hands in despair and dive into a corner, waiting for better times...or to rip off the gloves and start yelling in uncontrolled anger. However, I believe that we really need frank, open and honest dialogue with anyone and everyone: politicians, audiences, patrons, the business community - everyone. In some cases, the cuts are phased in over time or are not taking effect for a year or two. There's still time to tell your government that you feel strongly about the importance of the Arts and the value of Canadians' continued access to a broad range of these experiences. The Arts continue to be a hugely vital and intrinsic part of our society. If we really care, we must have a dialogue: early, often, and always.
Saturday, February 18, 2012
As Promised: CCA Response to Charities Review
As promised, here is the text of the Canadian Conference of the Arts' response to the new proposed guidelines for charities, signed by National Director Alain Pineau, and reviewed by charity law expert Arthur Drache.
Overall, the CCA recommends expanding or broadening lists of acceptable evidence when appealing a CRA decision on charitable status. The brief also recommends expanding the lists of artistic practices that can be considered for charitable organizations to include new arts practices as they evolve as well as some that have been given charitable status in the past, such as craft, which do not appear on the current proposed lists. The lists, however, are not exclusive, and the changes are recommended so that the guidelines can be of better service to arts charities. The CCA further recommends that organizations not ask for further clarification that would lead to making the guidelines be more specific, in case that leads to further unnecessary scrutiny and guidelines that will be exclusive instead of inclusive.
The CCA welcomes letters of support for this brief, which can be sent to:
Neil Cochrane (Neil.Cochrane@cra-arc.gc.ca), Manager Common Law Policy and Public Education Section, Charities Directorate, Canada Revenue Agency.
Here then, is the full text of the brief:
Overall, the CCA recommends expanding or broadening lists of acceptable evidence when appealing a CRA decision on charitable status. The brief also recommends expanding the lists of artistic practices that can be considered for charitable organizations to include new arts practices as they evolve as well as some that have been given charitable status in the past, such as craft, which do not appear on the current proposed lists. The lists, however, are not exclusive, and the changes are recommended so that the guidelines can be of better service to arts charities. The CCA further recommends that organizations not ask for further clarification that would lead to making the guidelines be more specific, in case that leads to further unnecessary scrutiny and guidelines that will be exclusive instead of inclusive.
The CCA welcomes letters of support for this brief, which can be sent to:
Neil Cochrane (Neil.Cochrane@cra-arc.gc.ca), Manager Common Law Policy and Public Education Section, Charities Directorate, Canada Revenue Agency.
Here then, is the full text of the brief:
February 10, 2012
Mr. Neil Cochrane
Manager
Common Law Policy and Public Education Section
Charities Directorate
Canada Revenue Agency
Dear Mr. Cochrane,
RE : CCA Brief on CRA Proposed Guidelines on Arts organisations and charitable registration under the Income Tax Act
Introduction
The Canadian Conference of the Arts (CCA) is pleased to submit its brief for Revenue Canada’s consultation on the proposed Guidance on arts organisations and charitable registration under the Income Tax Act. We first want to thank the CRA for its flexibility on the deadline for the consultation and for accommodating the fact that the original deadline and the lack of awareness of the process amongst the arts and heritage communities made it almost impossible for proper submissions to be presented on time.
The CCA is Canada’s oldest and most broadly based cultural umbrella organisation. The CCA is the national forum for the entire Canadian arts, culture and heritage communities, from all disciplines and regions. The CCA’s mission is to provide research, analysis and consultations on all federal public policies or regulation affecting the arts and Canadian cultural institutions and industries. One of its key roles is to support the creation of broad-based consensus on issues of common interest to the cultural sector.
According to the figures we have found, there are over six thousand six hundred arts and heritage organisations with charitable status under the terms of the Income Tax Act. While the CCA itself is recognized as a charity under the provisions pertaining to national art service organisations (NASO) and we realize that these new guidelines will not apply to our organisation directly, the proposed Guidelines will have consequences for our members, which include many charitable organisations, and for the arts and heritage sector as a whole.
General Comments
This new guidance will be very helpful for new organisations in applying for charitable status as it provides a great deal of clarification of the process and conditions for new applicants, as well as of the obligations of arts organisations already recognized as charities. Overall, the document is well written and offers a clear explanation of the complex laws and regulations involved. We also welcome the flexibility shown for the circumstances of individual organisations as stated in the guidance.
We understand that the codification into one document does not alter the law and existing regulation or change jurisprudence. We recognize that there is a long history of case law and legal precedence being followed in this document and that in order to present the information coherently, a certain amount of interpretation of those laws must be done. It is our hope that these guidelines will be continue to be applied and interpreted in a manner that reflects the evolving nature of art forms and organisations, so as to foster growth in the arts sector and emerging artistic practices and styles. We also understand that this guidance is meant to assist new organizations in applying for charitable status and not intended to target existing registered charities or strip them of their status. We expect the guidance will have a minimal impact on the latter since they have already been found to meet the legal requirements of charitable registration.
As stated in the guidelines, most arts and heritage organisations are eligible for charitable status under two of the four criteria established in the Act, namely education and public interest. While the application of the education criterion is relatively straightforward, the majority of arts organisations fall under the public interest one and as such, they face a complex set of requirements. Accordingly, there is some considerable apprehension from organisations and public funders regarding some of the language used, such as “artistic merit”.
The interpretation of the criterion of artistic merit is particularly tricky and courts have been leery of setting themselves up as judges of what artistic merit is. As art forms evolve under the impulse of new technologies, the application of this criterion may prove even more difficult. In order to facilitate the process of evaluation of the artistic merit criterion and of meeting the accepted cannon of taste requirements, the CCA would like to propose the broadening of acceptable evidence and the addition of an intermediary process for applications before having to go to the Federal Court of Appeal in the case of a rejection.
Our recommendations aim at alleviating some of the concerns of arts organisations over the artistic merit requirements and the burden of proof which may be more challenging for emerging artists and styles to meet. We submit that allowing for additional evidence to be provided establishing artistic merit would be greatly beneficial to both parties as this would save arts organisations from having to appeal a CRA decision to the Federal Court, a lengthy and costly process which few organisations can afford, let alone fledgling ones.
The CCA would be happy to work with the CRA on developing this proposed process. We submit that were you to accept our suggestion, it could allow more arts organisations to enhance arts forms and styles, strive for improvement and promote excellence in the arts.
Specific Comments
Article 50: With regards to form and style, we suggest expanding the list of examples of acceptable evidence. We recognize that the list is not exhaustive and that these are presented only as examples; however a more comprehensive list would help to provide guidance for new organisations applying for status. We recommend as possible types of evidence that could be submitted by an applicant:
- the addition of Canadian Heritage agencies (including FACTOR/MusicAction) rather than only the department itself;
- the addition of recognition by NASOs;
- the addition of municipal level arts bodies in the list with provincial and federal bodies, as municipal bodies have the benefit of being closer to smaller regional communities and may recognize new emerging styles and styles that are specific to their communities.
Article 55:
In order to ensure that undue evidence not be required of organisations that are exhibiting and presenting these works, the CCA supports the request made by CAPACOA regarding clarification of how works would be “shown to meet the artistic merit criterion in their own right.”
Appendix B, Article 39:
The CCA also supports CAPACOA’s request to amend the following example by replacing “and” with “and/or”, so as to differentiate between self-presenting and presenting organisations. That section of the guidelines would then read as follows:
“Examples of activities that could further the advancement of the public’s appreciation of the arts include producing and/or presenting high-quality public dance performances…”
Appendix C:
As in the case of Article 50, we recognize that this is not an exhaustive list and that organisations can still provide evidence if their form and style are not included in Appendix C. However, in order to reduce the reporting burden for organisations applying for charitable status, we would like to stress the importance of having a list that is as comprehensive as possible.
There are currently a number of forms of professional and community related activities missing from this list that are widely accepted within the Canadian arts community such as crafts, world music, digital art, performance art, and a diversity of performing arts.
We propose that the list should be amended to include these missing styles and that any styles that have been accepted for charitable status in the past should be included on the list. For example, there are numerous craft organisations that already have charitable status, such as the Craft Council of British Columbia and the Alberta Craft Council, yet crafts has not been included in the list. Including styles that have already been proven and updating the list regularly will greatly reduce the burden on new organisations that are applying for status.
Conclusion
We appreciate the efforts of the CRA and how beneficial specific guidelines will be for arts organisations in applying for charitable status in the future and we hope that our comments will help you in finalizing this document.
We would like to thank the CRA for considering our comments, and we are available to discuss any of these points further.
Alain Pineau
National Director
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
On the Federal front - CCA, Charities Review and more...
I attended a very informative Brown Bag lunch with Canadian Conference of the Arts National Director Alain Pineau today. The CCA is in the midst of remaking itself to a) be more relevant to the Arts and to Canadians and b) adjust to the loss of the federal funding it has had for decades. Today's meeting was part of a larger cross-Canada tour, which M Pineau is blogging about here.
The long and short of it is that it is making me take a second look at the CCA. I had long thought that the organization hasn't been as effective as it used to be, but I think the new direction is worth a look. It's going to be a tough sell for organizational members, though, as their membership fees have had to increase substantially. With that said, a good portion of the CCA's relevance and clout, says M. Pineau, will have to come from individuals, and those memberships have actually come down in price. The depth and breadth of knowledge within the CCA on Federal Arts-related issues is clear, and I, for one, just might give them a second chance.
Another interesting facet of our conversation over lunch was an update on the review of Charities regulation and legislation, along with the issue of revised guidelines. After having the proposed guidelines reviewed by a lawyer with considerable expertise in this area, the advice is not to panic. There are no changes to current regulation or legislation. M. Pineau stated that their advice to Arts folk is that we simply need to exercise due diligence and ensure that we are up to date and aware of our obligations if we hold charitable licenses. He also advises those considering applying for such a designation to consider carefully whether it will be worth it for their organizations. He has offered to share the CCA's submission to the government on this matter and I hope to have his permission to share it here as well.
The next Federal issue on the horizon will be the budget, due in the coming weeks. I, for one, will be watching carefully as to whether and how much any cuts will be and how they will affect the Arts. I remember too well Minister Moore's announcement around this time last year at Edmonton`s Winspear Centre, when he indicated that the Conservative government strongly supported the Arts and pledged stable funding for the next 5 years. I also remember his colleague Minister Rona Ambrose's support for that commitment, both at that press conference and at a subsequent conference late last summer. To make sure I remembered, I blogged about both of these events here and here.
For me, the proof is always in the pudding. For the CCA, I'm cautiously optimistic that this organization is on the right path to make a difference once again. For the Federal government, and in particular the upcoming budget, while I'm sure they'll make a difference, I'm not sure it will be a good one.
Quick other notes: for anyone interested in some more research on Audience Engagement/Community Relevance/Entanglement (that last is a new term I heard last week), check out the Wallace Foundation's latest work here. I also haven't had a chance to check out ArtsJournal yet, but it sounds really interesting and I can't wait to do that. Of course, all of this makes me wish we had more Canadian sources similar to these about Canadian Arts. Maybe someday...
The long and short of it is that it is making me take a second look at the CCA. I had long thought that the organization hasn't been as effective as it used to be, but I think the new direction is worth a look. It's going to be a tough sell for organizational members, though, as their membership fees have had to increase substantially. With that said, a good portion of the CCA's relevance and clout, says M. Pineau, will have to come from individuals, and those memberships have actually come down in price. The depth and breadth of knowledge within the CCA on Federal Arts-related issues is clear, and I, for one, just might give them a second chance.
Another interesting facet of our conversation over lunch was an update on the review of Charities regulation and legislation, along with the issue of revised guidelines. After having the proposed guidelines reviewed by a lawyer with considerable expertise in this area, the advice is not to panic. There are no changes to current regulation or legislation. M. Pineau stated that their advice to Arts folk is that we simply need to exercise due diligence and ensure that we are up to date and aware of our obligations if we hold charitable licenses. He also advises those considering applying for such a designation to consider carefully whether it will be worth it for their organizations. He has offered to share the CCA's submission to the government on this matter and I hope to have his permission to share it here as well.
The next Federal issue on the horizon will be the budget, due in the coming weeks. I, for one, will be watching carefully as to whether and how much any cuts will be and how they will affect the Arts. I remember too well Minister Moore's announcement around this time last year at Edmonton`s Winspear Centre, when he indicated that the Conservative government strongly supported the Arts and pledged stable funding for the next 5 years. I also remember his colleague Minister Rona Ambrose's support for that commitment, both at that press conference and at a subsequent conference late last summer. To make sure I remembered, I blogged about both of these events here and here.
For me, the proof is always in the pudding. For the CCA, I'm cautiously optimistic that this organization is on the right path to make a difference once again. For the Federal government, and in particular the upcoming budget, while I'm sure they'll make a difference, I'm not sure it will be a good one.
Quick other notes: for anyone interested in some more research on Audience Engagement/Community Relevance/Entanglement (that last is a new term I heard last week), check out the Wallace Foundation's latest work here. I also haven't had a chance to check out ArtsJournal yet, but it sounds really interesting and I can't wait to do that. Of course, all of this makes me wish we had more Canadian sources similar to these about Canadian Arts. Maybe someday...
Friday, January 6, 2012
Some Thoughts in a New Year
Simplicity. Honesty. Clarity. Calm. These four words were a kind of "mantra" I composed for myself several years ago, and along with taking deep breaths every day, trying to relax and allow for more creativity in my thoughts and actions, and to attempting to let things happen "at their own right speed" (to paraphrase Carl Honore, of whom I am a big fan), form the intentions I set for myself for 2012. I hope - as I always do - that these somewhat lofty ideals will allow me to be a bit less of a stressball and a more thoughtful person. But enough of that...
One interesting thing I discovered in conversations just before the holidays, was that it seems that some people still think that part of appreciating the Arts means that you have to like all of the Arts all of the time. When two self-professed "un-artsy" people asked me recently what I thought of a much-discussed piece of public art, I said that it was a great piece, and one of the wonderful things about it was that it was stimulating discussions both about it and about the Arts in general. I went on to say that the real value of Art doesn't come from people universally liking everything that's produced, but rather that the value comes from the discussions a given artwork stimulates. In other words, you don't have to like it to call it Art, or to think it has a value to the community. The mere fact that people are discussing not only Art, but also what that piece of Art might mean, and that this may lead to broader discussions about our Society, is thrilling to me, and exactly what the Arts are for. In both conversations, the people I said this to remarked that they had never thought about Art this way before and that this might change the way they thought about the Arts in general. Even if it doesn't, I was very excited to have had that moment with them, and grateful for their being open to hearing my answer to their original question. Perhaps this is part of the transformative experience of Art.
I've also been reading several other interesting things around the web, including some very good work by Wolf Brown on audience engagement and sustainability. The pre-Christmas pandemonium meant that I didn't have time to read these thoroughly, but I'll be giving both studies a thorough going over as soon as I'm able. The last two issues of On Our Minds also have some very good stuff in them, especially Marc Goldring's thoughts on "The Creative Economy", and his reference to some on-line discussions around this (which I agree with - I revel in the fact people are questioning Richard Florida) in the December 2 issue. I also loved Dennie Palmer Wolf's Christmas wish for a long-term study on the impact of Arts engagement over a lifetime, and Jennifer Novak-Leonard's interesting thoughts on taking a closer look at those who engage in dance only through recordings and broadcast (e.g. those who watch So You Think You Can Dance).
Gig Magazine is always interesting for international news, even though I often read them several weeks or months out of date. I highly recommend both the magazine and the website.
In the "items to watch" category for 2012, it appears that changes to the regulations and/or legislation around charities is on the horizon for the federal government. I wrote about this in an earlier entry here. I think this is something we all need to be quite concerned about. As with Bill C-470 (which I wrote about here), there are likely a myriad of unintended consequences that will result from some of the proposed changes. The deadline for feedback has been extended from mid-January to mid-March, and I encourage everyone to get as much information as they can and send their feedback if at all possible. I'll be using this space to update information and point out links as soon as I have time to educate myself. My main concern is that the Conservative government's misguided attitude that somehow charities are not accountable or viable will provide them an excuse to reduce government funding to the Arts and other sectors in the non-profit world.
Even though this last was not the cheeriest of notes to end an entry on, I still do have hope for 2012. Both the Arab Spring and the Occupy movement have given me hope that there is less apathy in the world than I had previously assumed, and this encourages me - and many others, I'm sure - to keep going.
Simplicity. Honesty. Clarity. Calm.
..and Hope.
One interesting thing I discovered in conversations just before the holidays, was that it seems that some people still think that part of appreciating the Arts means that you have to like all of the Arts all of the time. When two self-professed "un-artsy" people asked me recently what I thought of a much-discussed piece of public art, I said that it was a great piece, and one of the wonderful things about it was that it was stimulating discussions both about it and about the Arts in general. I went on to say that the real value of Art doesn't come from people universally liking everything that's produced, but rather that the value comes from the discussions a given artwork stimulates. In other words, you don't have to like it to call it Art, or to think it has a value to the community. The mere fact that people are discussing not only Art, but also what that piece of Art might mean, and that this may lead to broader discussions about our Society, is thrilling to me, and exactly what the Arts are for. In both conversations, the people I said this to remarked that they had never thought about Art this way before and that this might change the way they thought about the Arts in general. Even if it doesn't, I was very excited to have had that moment with them, and grateful for their being open to hearing my answer to their original question. Perhaps this is part of the transformative experience of Art.
I've also been reading several other interesting things around the web, including some very good work by Wolf Brown on audience engagement and sustainability. The pre-Christmas pandemonium meant that I didn't have time to read these thoroughly, but I'll be giving both studies a thorough going over as soon as I'm able. The last two issues of On Our Minds also have some very good stuff in them, especially Marc Goldring's thoughts on "The Creative Economy", and his reference to some on-line discussions around this (which I agree with - I revel in the fact people are questioning Richard Florida) in the December 2 issue. I also loved Dennie Palmer Wolf's Christmas wish for a long-term study on the impact of Arts engagement over a lifetime, and Jennifer Novak-Leonard's interesting thoughts on taking a closer look at those who engage in dance only through recordings and broadcast (e.g. those who watch So You Think You Can Dance).
Gig Magazine is always interesting for international news, even though I often read them several weeks or months out of date. I highly recommend both the magazine and the website.
In the "items to watch" category for 2012, it appears that changes to the regulations and/or legislation around charities is on the horizon for the federal government. I wrote about this in an earlier entry here. I think this is something we all need to be quite concerned about. As with Bill C-470 (which I wrote about here), there are likely a myriad of unintended consequences that will result from some of the proposed changes. The deadline for feedback has been extended from mid-January to mid-March, and I encourage everyone to get as much information as they can and send their feedback if at all possible. I'll be using this space to update information and point out links as soon as I have time to educate myself. My main concern is that the Conservative government's misguided attitude that somehow charities are not accountable or viable will provide them an excuse to reduce government funding to the Arts and other sectors in the non-profit world.
Even though this last was not the cheeriest of notes to end an entry on, I still do have hope for 2012. Both the Arab Spring and the Occupy movement have given me hope that there is less apathy in the world than I had previously assumed, and this encourages me - and many others, I'm sure - to keep going.
Simplicity. Honesty. Clarity. Calm.
..and Hope.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
The Royal Alberta Museum...we hope
After a weekend of finger-pointing and back-and-forthing and many members of the public and the press voicing their strong support for moving ahead with a badly-needed new building Royal Alberta Museum in Edmonton, there may be hope. Indications late this afternoon are that conversations are at least happening between the Province of Alberta and the Federal Government. The latest news (as of 6:30 pm Mountain Time, on November 2), from the Edmonton Journal, can be found here.
Although nothing is of course final yet, and funding still hangs in the balance as I write this, at least the finger-pointing seems - for the moment - to have stopped and politicians are trying to solve the problem.
In the meantime, several people have spoken up about this issue. Here are a few examples:
Edmonton Journal columnist Paula Simons, has been writing and blogging almost constantly on the subject. Some of this writing can be found here. Some of the latest work of her colleagues - with files from Ms. Simons, can also be found here and here.
...and former Mayor of Strathcona County Cathy Oleson, whose incredibly well-written Letter to the Editor was published in November 2's Edmonton Journal.
...and also Alice Major, Edmonton's former Poet Laureate, wrote an equally thoughtful and thought-provoking Letter to the Editor, also published in the November 2 Edmonton Journal.
...and let's not forget PACE, the Professional Arts Coalition of Edmonton, who sent letters to several top government officials at the federal and provincial levels, encouraging people to please just sit down and work it out so that this very valuable project could move forward. Check out their work on their facebook page.
As we all agree, the RAM's new building is long overdue. Fingers crossed that it will finally move forward.
Although nothing is of course final yet, and funding still hangs in the balance as I write this, at least the finger-pointing seems - for the moment - to have stopped and politicians are trying to solve the problem.
In the meantime, several people have spoken up about this issue. Here are a few examples:
Edmonton Journal columnist Paula Simons, has been writing and blogging almost constantly on the subject. Some of this writing can be found here. Some of the latest work of her colleagues - with files from Ms. Simons, can also be found here and here.
...and former Mayor of Strathcona County Cathy Oleson, whose incredibly well-written Letter to the Editor was published in November 2's Edmonton Journal.
...and also Alice Major, Edmonton's former Poet Laureate, wrote an equally thoughtful and thought-provoking Letter to the Editor, also published in the November 2 Edmonton Journal.
...and let's not forget PACE, the Professional Arts Coalition of Edmonton, who sent letters to several top government officials at the federal and provincial levels, encouraging people to please just sit down and work it out so that this very valuable project could move forward. Check out their work on their facebook page.
As we all agree, the RAM's new building is long overdue. Fingers crossed that it will finally move forward.
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
On Accountability...again...
Last week's Globe and Mail article on potential changes to the way the federal government deals with charities was quite disturbing. It appears that the federal government and in particular Minister of Human Resources Diane Finley does not feel that charities are accountable enough for the public monies they receive and that they cannot show adequate results or outcomes achieved through the use of this money.
As we all know, nothing is further from the truth, and this is certainly the case in the Arts. However, instead of me reiterating others' comments, I will simply point the way to responses to the article via the Globe's Letters to the Editor (and also the Letters here), as well as Imagine Canada's considered and thoughtful response. The only things I will add are that, at least for the Arts (and I'm sure other sectors of the charitable world), the accountability is already there, the reporting is thorough, and any new measures of accountability should be carefully considered before they are implemented. It's important for government and others to remember that, although most of us in the Arts and in the charitable sector have absolutely no problem being accountable for the money we receive from the public via government and donations, the time we spend doing this leaves us less time to focus on the missions this money supports.
I suggest that Minister Finley, her staff, and any other member of government and others who wish to know more about how accountable charities are should take some time and speak to their favourite Arts organization or other non-profit about how much time is spent on accountability. It is only through active, thoughtful communication and education that we can all really know and understand each other's worlds.
As we all know, nothing is further from the truth, and this is certainly the case in the Arts. However, instead of me reiterating others' comments, I will simply point the way to responses to the article via the Globe's Letters to the Editor (and also the Letters here), as well as Imagine Canada's considered and thoughtful response. The only things I will add are that, at least for the Arts (and I'm sure other sectors of the charitable world), the accountability is already there, the reporting is thorough, and any new measures of accountability should be carefully considered before they are implemented. It's important for government and others to remember that, although most of us in the Arts and in the charitable sector have absolutely no problem being accountable for the money we receive from the public via government and donations, the time we spend doing this leaves us less time to focus on the missions this money supports.
I suggest that Minister Finley, her staff, and any other member of government and others who wish to know more about how accountable charities are should take some time and speak to their favourite Arts organization or other non-profit about how much time is spent on accountability. It is only through active, thoughtful communication and education that we can all really know and understand each other's worlds.
Sunday, September 11, 2011
For The Record
On Friday, September 2, in the lobby outside the Ledcor Theatre at the Art Gallery of Alberta, Hon. Rona Ambrose reaffirmed the Federal Government's support for the Arts through an announcement of grants to Edmonton Arts organizations from Canadian Heritage. Of course, all of these grants are via existing programs and there was no announcement of any new money for these programs or anything else. However, Minister Ambrose, in conversation with the writer and other Arts organization representatives, who expressed their sincere hope that at least current funding levels could be maintained in this climate of deficit-reduction, did say, "...and we will."
Let's all hope this will be true amid rumours of a 5-10% cut to Canadian Heritage...and across all government departments.
Advocacy and lobbying are well underway at the federal level. The Canadian Arts Coalition is working on its annual Arts Day On The Hill events and meetings and has also submitted a briefing to the Standing Committee on Finance , and both PACE and ArtsVote Calgary are working hard to let candidates for the leadership of the Alberta Conservatives know of the importance of the Arts not only to our quality of life, but to our economy and our society. Check out the websites of all of these organizations for information on their efforts, and in the case of PACE and ArtsVote Calgary, for notes on their conversations with leadership candidates of all political stripes.
It's a hugely busy time of year, with seasons and programs starting up after summer. If we can participate in whatever way we're able and encourage as many conversations as possible between our audiences, patrons, sponsors and their elected representatives on the importance of Art, we can minimize any damage and create a climate for progress in the future.
Let's all hope this will be true amid rumours of a 5-10% cut to Canadian Heritage...and across all government departments.
Advocacy and lobbying are well underway at the federal level. The Canadian Arts Coalition is working on its annual Arts Day On The Hill events and meetings and has also submitted a briefing to the Standing Committee on Finance , and both PACE and ArtsVote Calgary are working hard to let candidates for the leadership of the Alberta Conservatives know of the importance of the Arts not only to our quality of life, but to our economy and our society. Check out the websites of all of these organizations for information on their efforts, and in the case of PACE and ArtsVote Calgary, for notes on their conversations with leadership candidates of all political stripes.
It's a hugely busy time of year, with seasons and programs starting up after summer. If we can participate in whatever way we're able and encourage as many conversations as possible between our audiences, patrons, sponsors and their elected representatives on the importance of Art, we can minimize any damage and create a climate for progress in the future.
Sunday, September 4, 2011
Ah...Paris
I did not post in August, in large part because I took a longer holiday than normal, the better part of which was in Paris. I had never been and although I knew I was going to be blown away, I was still blown away by the sheer amount of awe an inspiration I encountered.
The city, of course, beautiful. The architecture, of course, stunning. The Arts, even in August, during the traditional "vacances," were incredible and beautiful. Here I was standing in the middle of a society that values the Arts as the thing that truly identifies itself - the thing that makes it "tick." Beauty and thought resonated everywhere, in everything. It was transcendent and it reminded me that such a society is possible and desirable and not a mere dream.
I was also so impressed by a society that didn't feel it had to be open for business 24/7. Sundays (or another day/s of the week) are still closing days for many. People are unashamed of closing at closing time, as they are unashamed of taking a proper lunch break and closing up for a well-deserved vacation once a year. I love these qualities and I think they should be encouraged. In the end, I believe that society is richer for taking breaks and exploring life to its fullest. This is what gives us time for Art and makes us richer, fairer, better.
It sounds very romantic and idealistic to say this, but, like most people, I am in love with Paris and being there changed me. I really hope I can hold onto those changes and I really hope they make me better. What better way to kick off the fall season than with hope?
The city, of course, beautiful. The architecture, of course, stunning. The Arts, even in August, during the traditional "vacances," were incredible and beautiful. Here I was standing in the middle of a society that values the Arts as the thing that truly identifies itself - the thing that makes it "tick." Beauty and thought resonated everywhere, in everything. It was transcendent and it reminded me that such a society is possible and desirable and not a mere dream.
I was also so impressed by a society that didn't feel it had to be open for business 24/7. Sundays (or another day/s of the week) are still closing days for many. People are unashamed of closing at closing time, as they are unashamed of taking a proper lunch break and closing up for a well-deserved vacation once a year. I love these qualities and I think they should be encouraged. In the end, I believe that society is richer for taking breaks and exploring life to its fullest. This is what gives us time for Art and makes us richer, fairer, better.
It sounds very romantic and idealistic to say this, but, like most people, I am in love with Paris and being there changed me. I really hope I can hold onto those changes and I really hope they make me better. What better way to kick off the fall season than with hope?
Sunday, July 3, 2011
Fair Notice is just fair
Summerworks has lost their Canadian Heritage funding this year and the only reason that has so far been made public is that the festival presented a play in 2010 that dealt with terrorism in a way that the Harper government didn't approve of, even though none of them actually saw the play. Canadian Heritage has not rushed to deny this charge of censorship thus leading us all to believe it is true.
I think it is very clear that this method of making funding decisions is wrong in a society that has enshrined freedom of expression in its constitution, so I won't belabour the point here except to say that I wholeheartedly endorse this freedom, especially as it pertains to Art and believe that censorship is wrong. I also won't belabour the point that our governments at all levels choose to fund a myriad of ventures that the majority of Canadians may or may not agree with, many times turning a blind eye to whether it is right or wrong morally (the export of asbestos to the third world, for example). That they have chosen to try to position themselves as some sort of moral guardian at this point is simply wrong headed. But enough said...this isn't what this post is really about.
This post is really about Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's statement, recently published in the Globe and Mail, that, "...No organization should assume in their budgeting that every year the government of Canada is going to give them grants..." Minister Flaherty, let's talk about a little concept known by funding agencies across the nation, at every level of government, as "Fair Notice".
Fair Notice is the way funding agencies let operating funding clients know that their grant may be reduced, the reasons why, and how much time they have to correct the identified issue. These reasons and the methods for dealing with them vary from agency to agency, according to their mandates, but one thing is common: these policies are designed as a warning system. Whether you agree with the principles behind the various Fair Notice policies or not, these policies usually ensure that there is time for discussion and dialogue and at the very least, for organizations to decide whether they can or want to rectify whatever issue has been identified. The idea is to give Arts organizations a chance to continue to make Art and a shot a some kind of stability. This is what operating grants were designed for in the first place and this is essentially at the heart of every funding agency's mandate. You may or may not agree with the methods, the criteria or the funding model, but at least the criteria are clear and the Fair Notice policies are in place and it's all in writing. Clarity and the potential for stability all around - at least as much as is possible in an ever changing political climate.
The other point I'd like to make about Minister Flaherty's comments is that they fly in the face of responsible planning. An application to the Canada Arts Presentation Fund, as we all know, takes many, many hours to complete. Why would any responsible Arts executive invest that much time if chance of any return on that investment is so risky? Admittedly it is very clear on all operating grant applications for Canadian Heritage that receiving funding one year does not guarantee funding in the future (and in fact you must sign a declaration that you understand this). However, this is rarely, if ever, the case in practice unless an organization is very clearly in danger or very badly managed. If it were not, the very idea of the Canada Arts Presentation Fund, or the Canada Arts Training Fund, for that matter, would be moot. It is impossible to "give Canadians access to a variety of artistic experiences in their communities," as the objective of the Canada Arts Presentation Fund states, if there are no stable organizations to do so. Nor is variety possible, for that matter, without the ability to take risk, including the presentation of Art about provocative and potentially controversial topics.
The third thing I'd like to point out to Minister Flaherty is that in the world of business, it is not generally deemed responsible to back out of a deal or to give notice that you won't be a part of a deal at the last minute, especially if you know that the train has already pretty much left the station, as it will have for Summerworks 39 days out of their festival. We are all very lucky indeed that this didn't shut the Festival down completely and that they are nimble enough to be able to respond quickly. Not every organization is. With that said, we don't yet know what the long term impact of this will be or how it will affect Summerworks' bottom line. Responsible organizations need responsible partners to deal with. In this respect, the long assessment time and late notification jeopardizes every CATF client every year unless there is a knowledge and respect for the need for Fair Notice.
Things need to change at Canadian Heritage. Turnaround and notification to organizations needs to happen faster, there needs to be a clear Fair Notice Policy, and if the goal is to provide operating funding, there needs to be a stable commitment to organizations so that they can plan responsibly for the future. Ultimately, though, I recommend that the Canada Council for the Arts be given the opportunity and the funding to oversee these grants. This is an agency that is well-known for its efficiency and its diligent stewardship of taxpayers' money in the service of the growth of Art and Artists in this country. It's arms length status will ensure that our right to freedom of expression under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is preserved and that Canadian Artists will have the opportunity to create and take their place, as they should, on the world stage.
All Canadians have a right to express themselves - and Canadian Artists share this right. It's time our government supported it properly and fairly.
I think it is very clear that this method of making funding decisions is wrong in a society that has enshrined freedom of expression in its constitution, so I won't belabour the point here except to say that I wholeheartedly endorse this freedom, especially as it pertains to Art and believe that censorship is wrong. I also won't belabour the point that our governments at all levels choose to fund a myriad of ventures that the majority of Canadians may or may not agree with, many times turning a blind eye to whether it is right or wrong morally (the export of asbestos to the third world, for example). That they have chosen to try to position themselves as some sort of moral guardian at this point is simply wrong headed. But enough said...this isn't what this post is really about.
This post is really about Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's statement, recently published in the Globe and Mail, that, "...No organization should assume in their budgeting that every year the government of Canada is going to give them grants..." Minister Flaherty, let's talk about a little concept known by funding agencies across the nation, at every level of government, as "Fair Notice".
Fair Notice is the way funding agencies let operating funding clients know that their grant may be reduced, the reasons why, and how much time they have to correct the identified issue. These reasons and the methods for dealing with them vary from agency to agency, according to their mandates, but one thing is common: these policies are designed as a warning system. Whether you agree with the principles behind the various Fair Notice policies or not, these policies usually ensure that there is time for discussion and dialogue and at the very least, for organizations to decide whether they can or want to rectify whatever issue has been identified. The idea is to give Arts organizations a chance to continue to make Art and a shot a some kind of stability. This is what operating grants were designed for in the first place and this is essentially at the heart of every funding agency's mandate. You may or may not agree with the methods, the criteria or the funding model, but at least the criteria are clear and the Fair Notice policies are in place and it's all in writing. Clarity and the potential for stability all around - at least as much as is possible in an ever changing political climate.
The other point I'd like to make about Minister Flaherty's comments is that they fly in the face of responsible planning. An application to the Canada Arts Presentation Fund, as we all know, takes many, many hours to complete. Why would any responsible Arts executive invest that much time if chance of any return on that investment is so risky? Admittedly it is very clear on all operating grant applications for Canadian Heritage that receiving funding one year does not guarantee funding in the future (and in fact you must sign a declaration that you understand this). However, this is rarely, if ever, the case in practice unless an organization is very clearly in danger or very badly managed. If it were not, the very idea of the Canada Arts Presentation Fund, or the Canada Arts Training Fund, for that matter, would be moot. It is impossible to "give Canadians access to a variety of artistic experiences in their communities," as the objective of the Canada Arts Presentation Fund states, if there are no stable organizations to do so. Nor is variety possible, for that matter, without the ability to take risk, including the presentation of Art about provocative and potentially controversial topics.
The third thing I'd like to point out to Minister Flaherty is that in the world of business, it is not generally deemed responsible to back out of a deal or to give notice that you won't be a part of a deal at the last minute, especially if you know that the train has already pretty much left the station, as it will have for Summerworks 39 days out of their festival. We are all very lucky indeed that this didn't shut the Festival down completely and that they are nimble enough to be able to respond quickly. Not every organization is. With that said, we don't yet know what the long term impact of this will be or how it will affect Summerworks' bottom line. Responsible organizations need responsible partners to deal with. In this respect, the long assessment time and late notification jeopardizes every CATF client every year unless there is a knowledge and respect for the need for Fair Notice.
Things need to change at Canadian Heritage. Turnaround and notification to organizations needs to happen faster, there needs to be a clear Fair Notice Policy, and if the goal is to provide operating funding, there needs to be a stable commitment to organizations so that they can plan responsibly for the future. Ultimately, though, I recommend that the Canada Council for the Arts be given the opportunity and the funding to oversee these grants. This is an agency that is well-known for its efficiency and its diligent stewardship of taxpayers' money in the service of the growth of Art and Artists in this country. It's arms length status will ensure that our right to freedom of expression under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is preserved and that Canadian Artists will have the opportunity to create and take their place, as they should, on the world stage.
All Canadians have a right to express themselves - and Canadian Artists share this right. It's time our government supported it properly and fairly.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
The Time for Advocacy is Now
The election has come and gone, the Conservatives now have a majority, the NDP is the Official Opposition, the Hon. James Moore is still the Minister of Canadian Heritage, and the federal budget is about to be re-introduced. Despite the fact that a majority government usually doesn't have to worry about the opposition bringing it down, and that, in contrast to previous minority governments, it is likely to become less responsive and more ideological, it is important to remember that they are our government and that they work for us - for the good of the people of Canada.
Why am I saying this? The re-introduced budget is unlikely to contain anything different in respect of the Arts, and it will broaden the Child Fitness Tax Credit to include Arts activities. This is not bad news at all. However, that is this year's budget. What happens next year, especially in view of the Conservatives' election promise to eliminate the deficit in four years - instead of five, as in the pre-election budget forecast? Where will that money come from? Rumours already abound regarding potential program cuts, corresponding with the repeated election promise that this government will achieve the necessary "savings" without raising taxes.
Thus, the need for advocacy continues. The need for dialogue - open, honest, dialogue - remains. And not just for us - we as organizations must learn how to use our creative power to encourage our audiences, our sponsors and donors, our board members, and our volunteers to raise this issue every time they happen to have contact with a politician. We, as Arts workers, know the benefit we bring to our communities. We know, for example, that in Alberta, according to the Alberta Foundation for the Arts' own statistics (see page 6 of the report at this link), that for every government dollar that goes to the Arts, TWELVE dollars (yes, 12) are returned, directly and indirectly to the economy. We know that the Cultural Industries in Canada employ over 630,000 people and return over $46 billion to our economy (as quoted from Minister Moore himself on The Arts Advocate Blog - April 20, 2011 post). And we know that Minister Moore himself (via that same blog and also in Edmonton at Winspear Centre in January of this year) has said,
"In our Economic Action Plan, we stood up for and stood with our cultural communities and increased our support to record levels.
We did so because we know how fragile arts organizations are. How quickly they can disappear if support isn't there.
And, also, we increased our support because we know how much Canadian artists do for Canada. "
In Edmonton at that Winspear speech, my colleagues and I also heard Minister Moore pledge stable funding for the Arts for the next five years. This makes a lot of sense, both for our economy and for our society, and at the time, I was very heartened to hear it. However, I am traditionally skeptical of all things political, and in the face of a potential double-dip recession, and governments who now think that speedy deficit reduction will save the day, I remain so.
With that said, a promise is a promise, and I strongly feel that the only way to ensure that this promise is kept is to keep reminding Minister Moore and his colleagues that this one is important. The more our politicians hear this from us, and especially from our audiences, the better our chances at ensuring this is one promise that is kept.
Why am I saying this? The re-introduced budget is unlikely to contain anything different in respect of the Arts, and it will broaden the Child Fitness Tax Credit to include Arts activities. This is not bad news at all. However, that is this year's budget. What happens next year, especially in view of the Conservatives' election promise to eliminate the deficit in four years - instead of five, as in the pre-election budget forecast? Where will that money come from? Rumours already abound regarding potential program cuts, corresponding with the repeated election promise that this government will achieve the necessary "savings" without raising taxes.
Thus, the need for advocacy continues. The need for dialogue - open, honest, dialogue - remains. And not just for us - we as organizations must learn how to use our creative power to encourage our audiences, our sponsors and donors, our board members, and our volunteers to raise this issue every time they happen to have contact with a politician. We, as Arts workers, know the benefit we bring to our communities. We know, for example, that in Alberta, according to the Alberta Foundation for the Arts' own statistics (see page 6 of the report at this link), that for every government dollar that goes to the Arts, TWELVE dollars (yes, 12) are returned, directly and indirectly to the economy. We know that the Cultural Industries in Canada employ over 630,000 people and return over $46 billion to our economy (as quoted from Minister Moore himself on The Arts Advocate Blog - April 20, 2011 post). And we know that Minister Moore himself (via that same blog and also in Edmonton at Winspear Centre in January of this year) has said,
"In our Economic Action Plan, we stood up for and stood with our cultural communities and increased our support to record levels.
We did so because we know how fragile arts organizations are. How quickly they can disappear if support isn't there.
And, also, we increased our support because we know how much Canadian artists do for Canada. "
In Edmonton at that Winspear speech, my colleagues and I also heard Minister Moore pledge stable funding for the Arts for the next five years. This makes a lot of sense, both for our economy and for our society, and at the time, I was very heartened to hear it. However, I am traditionally skeptical of all things political, and in the face of a potential double-dip recession, and governments who now think that speedy deficit reduction will save the day, I remain so.
With that said, a promise is a promise, and I strongly feel that the only way to ensure that this promise is kept is to keep reminding Minister Moore and his colleagues that this one is important. The more our politicians hear this from us, and especially from our audiences, the better our chances at ensuring this is one promise that is kept.
Sunday, May 1, 2011
On the Eve of an Election
I have been quite silent throughout the election campaign, which is odd, since I usually have strong opinions about the necessity of participation in the democratic process. With that said, I write today with the simple message that it's important not only to vote, but to cast a thoughtful, informed vote. As Artists and stewards of the Art (which is what we as administrators essentially are) it's important for us to say what we think, not only about the Arts, but about our society as a whole. This is, after all, the purpose of artistic expression in many ways.
Some of my colleagues have been asked why Artists have been less vocal this election. I believe there are two main factors:
1) Current federal funding levels are not openly threatened and for the Arts to lobby for increases in a time of restraint among governments will very likely make us look like whiners. Nevertheless, many groups, including PACE and the Canadian Arts Coalition, among others, continue to pursue an ongoing dialogue with politicians at all levels of government. This helps not only to raise awareness and educate them about the intrinsic value of what we do, but also serves to remind politicians that their constituents care about the Arts.
2) This year there has been a greater need to focus on survival. Many Artists and Arts organizations across North America (and beyond) have faced severe revenue challenges from several quarters. It seems that no one is immune. Many have faced declines in donations, sponsorships, grants, and earned revenue as the economy remains tight, despite the optimism from time to time in much of the media. With expenses already cut to the bone, there have already been hard decisions to make. After such a dramatic economic downturn, recovery is slow and cautious. The world - and audiences - are changing in ways we couldn't have predicted even 5 years ago, and it is taking time and vast amounts of energy to adapt. I, for one, am tired as I near the end of a long season, and I'm sure I'm not alone. All of this has left little room to focus on anything but the task at hand, despite the need.
Of course, this probably sounds overly dramatic and indeed things aren't completely hopeless. Adaptation isn't, after all, a bad thing. However, realities remain and the one way we can all effect change is to get out and cast a thoughtful vote. Thankfully, there are organizations such as the Canadian Arts Coalition (see link above), who have put together good information to make sure we can head to the polls with the right information. Along with the websites, don't hesitate to check out each organization on facebook, and/or follow them on Twitter. There's also this lively political debate on Arts from Thursday's edition of Q, on CBC.
Some of my colleagues have been asked why Artists have been less vocal this election. I believe there are two main factors:
1) Current federal funding levels are not openly threatened and for the Arts to lobby for increases in a time of restraint among governments will very likely make us look like whiners. Nevertheless, many groups, including PACE and the Canadian Arts Coalition, among others, continue to pursue an ongoing dialogue with politicians at all levels of government. This helps not only to raise awareness and educate them about the intrinsic value of what we do, but also serves to remind politicians that their constituents care about the Arts.
2) This year there has been a greater need to focus on survival. Many Artists and Arts organizations across North America (and beyond) have faced severe revenue challenges from several quarters. It seems that no one is immune. Many have faced declines in donations, sponsorships, grants, and earned revenue as the economy remains tight, despite the optimism from time to time in much of the media. With expenses already cut to the bone, there have already been hard decisions to make. After such a dramatic economic downturn, recovery is slow and cautious. The world - and audiences - are changing in ways we couldn't have predicted even 5 years ago, and it is taking time and vast amounts of energy to adapt. I, for one, am tired as I near the end of a long season, and I'm sure I'm not alone. All of this has left little room to focus on anything but the task at hand, despite the need.
Of course, this probably sounds overly dramatic and indeed things aren't completely hopeless. Adaptation isn't, after all, a bad thing. However, realities remain and the one way we can all effect change is to get out and cast a thoughtful vote. Thankfully, there are organizations such as the Canadian Arts Coalition (see link above), who have put together good information to make sure we can head to the polls with the right information. Along with the websites, don't hesitate to check out each organization on facebook, and/or follow them on Twitter. There's also this lively political debate on Arts from Thursday's edition of Q, on CBC.
Sunday, March 6, 2011
This Man Will Rock Your World
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Advocacy and Some New Websites to Check Out
I have long been a proponent of initiating an open, frank, constructive and positive dialogue with our communities and politicians about the importance of the Arts to our society. I've also spoken with colleagues about the importance of this becoming part of the training of new Arts Administrators, so that they become aware of the issues and can engage constructively.
There are currently two advocacy organizations in Alberta who have undertaken what I believe are constructive, positive campaigns to let politicians know that the Arts really matters to Albertans. If you're interested in supporting these campaigns (and I sincerely hope you are, particularly if you live and work in Alberta), check out the I Love Alberta Arts campaign by the Professional Arts Coalition of Edmonton and the work underway at Save Our Fine Arts.
Thanks to Wolf Brown's bi-weekly On Our Minds newsletter - you can sign up via their site to receive your own copy - I also discovered an amazing American Arts blog, Createquity. It's a fascinating read and a great resource for the latest in US policy and research. It's a truly inspiring model that one day I hope I can emulate through this blog - if I ever have time...
There are currently two advocacy organizations in Alberta who have undertaken what I believe are constructive, positive campaigns to let politicians know that the Arts really matters to Albertans. If you're interested in supporting these campaigns (and I sincerely hope you are, particularly if you live and work in Alberta), check out the I Love Alberta Arts campaign by the Professional Arts Coalition of Edmonton and the work underway at Save Our Fine Arts.
Thanks to Wolf Brown's bi-weekly On Our Minds newsletter - you can sign up via their site to receive your own copy - I also discovered an amazing American Arts blog, Createquity. It's a fascinating read and a great resource for the latest in US policy and research. It's a truly inspiring model that one day I hope I can emulate through this blog - if I ever have time...
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
On Speaking The Truth
A colleague said in a meeting last week that we must be able to speak the truth to each other and to those we enter into dialogue with. In this climate of hard times, where we are constantly trying to maintain good relationships, survive and ensure sustainability into the future, it's something all of us can and should carry with us.
But what does speaking the truth mean? To me, the truth:
But what does speaking the truth mean? To me, the truth:
- is what the speaker believes to be the honest, clear reality at the time he or she speaks it;
- is frank, open and honest;
- is not always easy to hear or to speak;
- is not spoken in a mean or mean-spirited way;
- can change during a dialogue, if the discourse is open-minded and ego-free;
- is not taken personally by the listener, although it can be challenged providing the listener is also frank, open and honest, and willing to be open-minded and ego-free.
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Happy New Year!
When it seems as though things will never go well, disaster is all around me, and those around me are also down, I am often fond of saying, "It's only theatre/a festival/ballet! It's not world peace." And this is true. Nobody will die or lose a limb because of what I do or don't do that day - things are rarely that urgent. HOWEVER, what we do in the Arts is vital for our society and I feel truly fortunate to be able to work towards this every day and be a part of the transcendent, joyous, profound and beautiful process that is ART.
Wising everyone the very best for 2011. May better times be ahead.
Wising everyone the very best for 2011. May better times be ahead.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Wading In...
Although there are so many voices in the whole debate about ballet dancers and body image issues right now, as a former dancer, I feel compelled to weigh in and say my piece. Over the past several days, I have read the National Post article on Alastair Macaulay's comments in the New York Times about one of the Sugar Plum Fairies in New York City Ballet's The Nutcracker, I have read several comments on-line and from colleagues and friends, I have read and heard the hype about the new film, Black Swan, and this morning, I listened to the interview CBC's Jian Gomeshi did with Suzanne Gordon (author of the 1984 book Off Balance) on his show, Q. Following are my comments.
On Mr. Macaulay's view:
In my opinion, the comments made in that review about Jennifer Ringer were just wrong. The dancers in the photo that accompanied the National Post piece showed beautiful artists with healthy, athletic bodies. I cannot fathom what could be wrong with that. They are gorgeous people and in no way anywhere close to overweight.
On the interview with Ms. Gordon on Q:
I cannot deny that eating disorders still exist among some dancers. As a former dancer who currently works in the arts and has a close relationship with dance, I can say that things are different. Where I work, I see healthy dancers who are very careful about maintaining that health and I see Artistic Directors and dance companies who support that. Things are changing.
Ms. Gordon's statements that many dancers (especially young girls) are coerced into staying in ballet by their parents and do not feel they can quit absolutely do not reflect my experience and that of my friends. I trained in Toronto and Montreal with young men and women from across North America. By the time we were training seriously, almost all of us had to fight for our passion. Instead of coercion, we faced opposition from our parents, our schools, and our friends and neighbours. Becoming an artist was not considered a viable career and we had to work very hard to convince those around us that this was the right thing for us to do. Ms. Gordon should not sell dancers short. They are intelligent, passionate people and to imply that they are in dance for anything but the love of it is almost insulting to these artists.
On the Black Swan film:
I need to be clear that I have yet to see the movie, or even the trailer. However, I do know that it is a fictional story, so I believe it is important to remember that whatever is or is not portrayed on screen may or may not be a true reflection of reality. Like any film, it is a director's interpretation of a story, so perspective is important.
And on the subject of perspective, I will only say in closing that it is important for anyone who really wants to know about ballet and dance to take the time to form their own opinions. So ultimately, my recommendation would be to go and see a ballet - or any dance - and form your own opinions about the art form. For me, it is an art form that transcends all boundaries of language and can convey the deepest, most profound emotions in the simplest of gestures, allowing dancers and choreographers to communicate in the universal language that is human movement.
On Mr. Macaulay's view:
In my opinion, the comments made in that review about Jennifer Ringer were just wrong. The dancers in the photo that accompanied the National Post piece showed beautiful artists with healthy, athletic bodies. I cannot fathom what could be wrong with that. They are gorgeous people and in no way anywhere close to overweight.
On the interview with Ms. Gordon on Q:
I cannot deny that eating disorders still exist among some dancers. As a former dancer who currently works in the arts and has a close relationship with dance, I can say that things are different. Where I work, I see healthy dancers who are very careful about maintaining that health and I see Artistic Directors and dance companies who support that. Things are changing.
Ms. Gordon's statements that many dancers (especially young girls) are coerced into staying in ballet by their parents and do not feel they can quit absolutely do not reflect my experience and that of my friends. I trained in Toronto and Montreal with young men and women from across North America. By the time we were training seriously, almost all of us had to fight for our passion. Instead of coercion, we faced opposition from our parents, our schools, and our friends and neighbours. Becoming an artist was not considered a viable career and we had to work very hard to convince those around us that this was the right thing for us to do. Ms. Gordon should not sell dancers short. They are intelligent, passionate people and to imply that they are in dance for anything but the love of it is almost insulting to these artists.
On the Black Swan film:
I need to be clear that I have yet to see the movie, or even the trailer. However, I do know that it is a fictional story, so I believe it is important to remember that whatever is or is not portrayed on screen may or may not be a true reflection of reality. Like any film, it is a director's interpretation of a story, so perspective is important.
And on the subject of perspective, I will only say in closing that it is important for anyone who really wants to know about ballet and dance to take the time to form their own opinions. So ultimately, my recommendation would be to go and see a ballet - or any dance - and form your own opinions about the art form. For me, it is an art form that transcends all boundaries of language and can convey the deepest, most profound emotions in the simplest of gestures, allowing dancers and choreographers to communicate in the universal language that is human movement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)