This latest episode features CanCulture, a new online magazine that celebrates Canadian art and culture.
www.thisistorontopodcast.blogs
NEXT EPISODE: July 29, 2011
Showing posts with label Culture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Culture. Show all posts
Friday, July 15, 2011
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
The Future of Publicbroadcasting.ca
Publicbroadcasting.ca has been quiet for awhile now as I have been busy with other projects, but it's going to come back soon - hopefully in a big, big way.
About 7 weeks ago (2 months as of May 20) I launched NxEW.ca because I knew there was an underserved audience out there for Canadian music. It has taken off as a community - which now includes 75+ writers from 25 Canadian cities, 10 provinces and 1 territory. The writers include journalists and journalism students, bloggers and podcasters (who have their own blogs and podcasts), photographers, videographers, promoters, managers and, of course, musicians.
It has worked so well that I'm getting ready to re-launch publicbroadcasting.ca as the site for 'everything else' - the hope is to cover Canadian arts, culture and politics again with contributors from all over Canada. So if you're a Canadian and would like to write about progressive politics, current events, film, television, art, literature, or anything else within the broad umbrella of 'arts and culture' give me a shout at beach.justin@gmail.com.
I hope to have it up and going within the next few weeks.
About 7 weeks ago (2 months as of May 20) I launched NxEW.ca because I knew there was an underserved audience out there for Canadian music. It has taken off as a community - which now includes 75+ writers from 25 Canadian cities, 10 provinces and 1 territory. The writers include journalists and journalism students, bloggers and podcasters (who have their own blogs and podcasts), photographers, videographers, promoters, managers and, of course, musicians.
It has worked so well that I'm getting ready to re-launch publicbroadcasting.ca as the site for 'everything else' - the hope is to cover Canadian arts, culture and politics again with contributors from all over Canada. So if you're a Canadian and would like to write about progressive politics, current events, film, television, art, literature, or anything else within the broad umbrella of 'arts and culture' give me a shout at beach.justin@gmail.com.
I hope to have it up and going within the next few weeks.
Wednesday, May 06, 2009
On the Dangers of Walled Gardens and Locked Gates
Steve Pratt of CBC Radio 3 has an excellent post on 'walled gardens' vs Setting your content free (which is an old topic/rule but still totally relevant.) Canadian media companies, from my point of view anyway, still haven't fully grasped the concept, or they are still very resistant to it. You should definitely read Steve's post but this one is about something related, but slightly different.
Canada's media juggernauts have done such a terrible job of covering Canadian arts and artists that, in the free and open media environment that we currently live in, more and more of the artists are losing interest in the media Juggernauts. Over at NxEW I talk to musicians, promoters etc., daily that don't really care about the old rules, or even the old media much anymore. They are more than willing to ignore SoCan policies, and the advise of others who 'represent' them in Ottawa and elsewhere. They give their music away freely (to me and others) without restrictions or conditions. They don't care about or want a Canadian DMCA and, while most of them would be more than happy to get coverage from 'old media' they no longer count on or rely on it. Instead they (we) are building their own press, their own audience, their own contacts and this shadow media is growing by the day in terms of size and popularity while traditional media debates how it is going to survive. I've seen evidence of similar things happening in Canadian literature, film, and other areas of the arts.
By paying so little attention to Canadian art and artists, and by fighting so hard to protect their entrenched status, much of Canadian media has essentially alienated themselves. As I said in the comments on Steve's blog, rather than lock the barbarian hordes out, they have locked themselves in. Essentially they have decided to wall themselves away and take all of the 'gold shekels' with them with the assumption that without any shekels the 'hordes' would have to come back to them.
What they don't seem to understand is that media is organic and like Michael Crichton said in Jurassic Park 'life will find a way.' You cannot legislate how people consume media any more than you can legislate how people breathe, it's something people just do, not something they think about (except for a few odd ones like me). If you take away all their media people won't die, they won't even be particularly upset by it, they'll just create their own - which is exactly what is happening. Without any of those 'shekels' people have just created their own currency, their own 'economic system' and life is moving on just as it was before. Meanwhile the old kings behind their well fortified walls are starting to discover that they can't eat shekels and are getting hungry.
As I said above they have locked themselves in and rather than, as they expected, having the upper hand in any negotiations may well have to negotiate their re-entry into the culture, a culture that no longer cares about shekels.
Canada's media juggernauts have done such a terrible job of covering Canadian arts and artists that, in the free and open media environment that we currently live in, more and more of the artists are losing interest in the media Juggernauts. Over at NxEW I talk to musicians, promoters etc., daily that don't really care about the old rules, or even the old media much anymore. They are more than willing to ignore SoCan policies, and the advise of others who 'represent' them in Ottawa and elsewhere. They give their music away freely (to me and others) without restrictions or conditions. They don't care about or want a Canadian DMCA and, while most of them would be more than happy to get coverage from 'old media' they no longer count on or rely on it. Instead they (we) are building their own press, their own audience, their own contacts and this shadow media is growing by the day in terms of size and popularity while traditional media debates how it is going to survive. I've seen evidence of similar things happening in Canadian literature, film, and other areas of the arts.
By paying so little attention to Canadian art and artists, and by fighting so hard to protect their entrenched status, much of Canadian media has essentially alienated themselves. As I said in the comments on Steve's blog, rather than lock the barbarian hordes out, they have locked themselves in. Essentially they have decided to wall themselves away and take all of the 'gold shekels' with them with the assumption that without any shekels the 'hordes' would have to come back to them.
What they don't seem to understand is that media is organic and like Michael Crichton said in Jurassic Park 'life will find a way.' You cannot legislate how people consume media any more than you can legislate how people breathe, it's something people just do, not something they think about (except for a few odd ones like me). If you take away all their media people won't die, they won't even be particularly upset by it, they'll just create their own - which is exactly what is happening. Without any of those 'shekels' people have just created their own currency, their own 'economic system' and life is moving on just as it was before. Meanwhile the old kings behind their well fortified walls are starting to discover that they can't eat shekels and are getting hungry.
As I said above they have locked themselves in and rather than, as they expected, having the upper hand in any negotiations may well have to negotiate their re-entry into the culture, a culture that no longer cares about shekels.
Friday, May 01, 2009
The Inseparable Relationship Between Politics, Art and Culture
At the Betty Burke show at This Ain't the Rosedale Library on Wednesday and met co-proprietor Charlie Huisken for the first time. He's been following many of my online projects and comlimented me on my mix of arts, culture and politics. The thing is I don't really know how you separate them.
I know the whole chicken v. egg argument - does life imitate art or vice versa. As far as I can tell though it works like this: art generally emerges from subcultures of various sizes. If it is engaging and based on ideas that resonate the sub-culture around it grows and begins to have an influence on the broader culture. In the 20th century you can see examples of this in jazz, blues, rock and roll and punk. Each started in a subculture, grew that subculture and then was adopted by and had an influence on the larger culture.
With the art comes social and political ideas (certainly all of the musical schools I listed above had a broad influence on culture and politics.) By the time they become popular in the broad culture the new art and the ideas that come with it have been watered down to an extent, but the influence is still there. This is not only the case with music. Film, literature, television and even comedy (Will Rogers, Lenny Bruce, Richard Pryor, George Carlin, Jon Stewart ...) all had profound effects on culture in the 20th century and most new schools in each of these went through the same process: sub-culture to mass culture (with appropriate watering down.)
As with anything in the arts it's effect on culture, society and politics cannot be quantified, but 100 years ago we lived in a culture where racism was acceptable - now we live in a culture where it is not, but before there was a Martin Luther King, a Malcolm X or a Barack Obama there was blues and jazz which re-introduced people of European descent to people of african descent through the arts and made it increasingly more difficult to stereotype or hate.
If you go through the progress made in the 20th century a similar pattern emerges on almost every issue. It is hard to imagine the social reforms of the 1930s, or women's rights, or gay rights (we're not there yet but things are getting better), or environmentalism, or the peace movement, or the anti-cuclear movement or any one of a score of progressive victories happening without the ideas emerging from, and the support offered by the arts.
I should also note that by 'progressive' I do not mean any particular group or party. To me 'progressive' is that which makes the world a better place for everyone. One thing I think the 'me generation' got wrong is this: I believe that a person who seeks to make the world a better place for everyone makes the world a better place for him/herself. A person who seeks to make the world a better place only for him/herself makes the world a better place for no-one.
So this explains not only my view on the relationship between art, culture and politics but also the reason for my particular political point of view.
A political leader or party's support for the arts is directly related to their openness to new ideas. Conservatism is, by definition, the opposite of creativity. Creativity explores, it seeks progress, it challenges conventions and institutions - Conservatism is opposed to and in many cases offended by all of these things.
So, when Conservatives claim to support the "arts", to "like music" etc., they are invariably talking about entertainment more than art. When asked for examples they will give the names of musicians, authors, filmmakers and others whose work brings with it a minimum of creativity, or that is old enough so as to not be threatening (or challenging) any longer. If you look at 'artists' who support the Republicans in the U.S. it's a collection of bad actors and derivative musicians. It is also recently acceptable for conservatives to claim that they like 'jazz' now that it is no longer acceptable for them to be openly racist.
If you are a creative artists, you are a progressive and therefore not a conservative. If you are a political progressive you must support the arts because that is the medium by which progressive ideas are introduced to the larger culture, as far as I know this has been the case since we lived in caves.
I know the whole chicken v. egg argument - does life imitate art or vice versa. As far as I can tell though it works like this: art generally emerges from subcultures of various sizes. If it is engaging and based on ideas that resonate the sub-culture around it grows and begins to have an influence on the broader culture. In the 20th century you can see examples of this in jazz, blues, rock and roll and punk. Each started in a subculture, grew that subculture and then was adopted by and had an influence on the larger culture.
With the art comes social and political ideas (certainly all of the musical schools I listed above had a broad influence on culture and politics.) By the time they become popular in the broad culture the new art and the ideas that come with it have been watered down to an extent, but the influence is still there. This is not only the case with music. Film, literature, television and even comedy (Will Rogers, Lenny Bruce, Richard Pryor, George Carlin, Jon Stewart ...) all had profound effects on culture in the 20th century and most new schools in each of these went through the same process: sub-culture to mass culture (with appropriate watering down.)
As with anything in the arts it's effect on culture, society and politics cannot be quantified, but 100 years ago we lived in a culture where racism was acceptable - now we live in a culture where it is not, but before there was a Martin Luther King, a Malcolm X or a Barack Obama there was blues and jazz which re-introduced people of European descent to people of african descent through the arts and made it increasingly more difficult to stereotype or hate.
If you go through the progress made in the 20th century a similar pattern emerges on almost every issue. It is hard to imagine the social reforms of the 1930s, or women's rights, or gay rights (we're not there yet but things are getting better), or environmentalism, or the peace movement, or the anti-cuclear movement or any one of a score of progressive victories happening without the ideas emerging from, and the support offered by the arts.
I should also note that by 'progressive' I do not mean any particular group or party. To me 'progressive' is that which makes the world a better place for everyone. One thing I think the 'me generation' got wrong is this: I believe that a person who seeks to make the world a better place for everyone makes the world a better place for him/herself. A person who seeks to make the world a better place only for him/herself makes the world a better place for no-one.
So this explains not only my view on the relationship between art, culture and politics but also the reason for my particular political point of view.
A political leader or party's support for the arts is directly related to their openness to new ideas. Conservatism is, by definition, the opposite of creativity. Creativity explores, it seeks progress, it challenges conventions and institutions - Conservatism is opposed to and in many cases offended by all of these things.
So, when Conservatives claim to support the "arts", to "like music" etc., they are invariably talking about entertainment more than art. When asked for examples they will give the names of musicians, authors, filmmakers and others whose work brings with it a minimum of creativity, or that is old enough so as to not be threatening (or challenging) any longer. If you look at 'artists' who support the Republicans in the U.S. it's a collection of bad actors and derivative musicians. It is also recently acceptable for conservatives to claim that they like 'jazz' now that it is no longer acceptable for them to be openly racist.
If you are a creative artists, you are a progressive and therefore not a conservative. If you are a political progressive you must support the arts because that is the medium by which progressive ideas are introduced to the larger culture, as far as I know this has been the case since we lived in caves.
Monday, April 06, 2009
The CBC is Cool Again in Rural Ontario
Take note Mr. Harper: The Conservatives, having all but given up on Quebec seem to have miscalculated on the reaction to their passive-aggressive attack on the CBC. The loudest cries against the recently announced CBC cuts are coming - not from Toronto (where Conservatives aren't even serious contenders) but from rural ridings that Conservatives will need if they have a payer of even seeing another minority. In Sudbury hundreds rallied on Sunday including many young people (not the CBC's core audience in recent years. From the Sudbury Star:
"On Sunday, however, scores of teenagers and young adults, such as Holson, represented one of the largest demographics in a boisterous rally at Sudbury city hall, where more than 400 people demanded a reversal of proposed cuts to CBC Radio service in Northern Ontario.Sudbury, as far as I know, is the only place with street protests but the editorials are turning against the conservatives in places like Guelph
"Half the people I hang out with are in bands and in the arts and they're connected to and supported by the CBC," Holson said during the rally at Tom Davies Square.
"CBC is the voice for a lot of Northern Ontario," he said. "And it's extremely important to keep local news intact in Sudbury and the rest of Northern Ontario, because (private) radio stations don't cut it."
"Over the past 25 or 30 years, so many public institutions have been forced to conform to a business model: public art galleries, universities, school boards, municipal governments, hospitals, and the CBC. But these institutions are not businesses. They are essential social entities, things we collectively need for our sense of identity, for our health, for our knowledge, for our life.and Brantford
We pay for these things through our taxes. We have a right to expect they will be available to us when we need them. And we have a right to expect governments will rescue them when they falter."
"The Canadian wing of the Fox News crowd can't wait for the demise of the CBC. These folks prefer to focus on pure cost and ignore all value that comes from a well-funded, truly national, public broadcaster. The Foxes really want control of news and commentary to pass from the professional editors and their staffs to the purveyors of advertising revenue. No thanks, Mr Gutfeld.The Conservatives, if they are going to have any chance in this country are going to have to get used to the idea that arts and culture are important to Canadians, that we value them and believe in government subsidies for them and that the CBC is an important part of the Arts and Culture spectrum in this country.
So if you were, in fact, having too good a day and counting on another rant against the CBC, you're probably disappointed. On the other hand, if you were looking to hook up with fellow supporters of public broadcasting, try the website www.friends.ca. These folks are pretty serious and well organized. Good luck to them. The sheer size, geography and history of our great country makes nation-building a complex and challenging enterprise. CBC/Radio Canada with committed long-term funding is the best vehicle we have to do this, warts and all."
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Writer's Guild Supports the CBC
Denis of Dead Things on Sticks has posted the statement from the Writer's Guild of Canada on today's cuts to CBC.
The problem isn't that the CBC is biased, the problem is that the CBC does journalism and investigative journalism. They ask questions and analyze answers and this can be problematic for those in power, whoever they are. So those in power tend to not want to give them more money so that they can do even more reporting.
Personally I believe that the extra money for the CBC should come from Conservatives since they are the ones who get the most benefit out of it. What would conservatives do for entertainment if they didn't have the CBC to bitch about?
"THE WRITERS GUILD OF CANADA is extremely disheartened by the CBC’s announcement today that it will cut 800 jobs in order to balance its budget. The WGC asks: why has it come to this? We have known for more than a decade, through successive governments and through a variety of official reports, that the CBC is underfunded – the economic downturn and the resulting decline in advertising revenues have only exacerbated what was already a tenuous financial situation."read the whole thing here. They point out, quite rightly, that this has been coming for awhile. There have been repeated calls by private and public studies, boards and commissions for years and that no government has done much about it.
The problem isn't that the CBC is biased, the problem is that the CBC does journalism and investigative journalism. They ask questions and analyze answers and this can be problematic for those in power, whoever they are. So those in power tend to not want to give them more money so that they can do even more reporting.
Personally I believe that the extra money for the CBC should come from Conservatives since they are the ones who get the most benefit out of it. What would conservatives do for entertainment if they didn't have the CBC to bitch about?
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Future of Media: An Idea Whose Time Has Come (apparently)
So I threw the idea out there about creating a forum for creatives, artists, content creators, journalists, media management folk, tech people and consumers to come together and chat about the things that need to be talked about. Namely how do we make it all work? How do we create a system that meets consumers needs, and is financially and technologically viable? Ideally all of this would be 'off the record' in the sense that if someone says "I download all the movies I watch" you can't report them to the MPAA, you have to engage them without being insulting and say "Ok, but how are the movie studios going to get money to keep making movies for you to download?" and "I don't know" is an acceptable answer. It's probably the truth and at least you've given them something to think about, if you go on the offensive they'll just go away and nothing has been gained. We also don't want people to be afraid to tell the truth, it would defeat the purpose - we need the real lay of the land here, not judgement or recriminations.
So far today I've heard from dozens of people who are interested in having this chat, a software engineer who wants to design some custom solutions to facilitate it and a few people who are interested in taking it live (public forums and roundtables.)
So it looks like it's all going ahead - details to come.
Sunday, March 08, 2009
Some Urban Thoughts
Maybe I'm not making sense yet here.
Today in the Toronto Star's print edition is a map of Toronto's neighbourhoods as envisioned by the staff of the paper with input - said input is still in progress and will be for some time - from the readership at large. An interesting exercise for me to read through that map.
A friendly acquaintance of mine here in Ottawa, David McClelland, is working between classes at university on a similar project covering Bytown and environs. It's looking rather promising. (I'd also recommend his weblog on Ottawa, the Ottawa Project, for close and ongoing attention.)
Both projects caught my interest for several reasons going back to childhood visits to certain filing cabinets at the Regina Public Library. These filing cabinets held city documents, including blueprints for entire subdivisions, lot plan-type stuff showing where and how big the lots were, where the firefighting infrastructure and streetlights and suchlike would be placed. Absolutely riveting stuff for a kid with the right mindset about maps already. And I had that, and a collection of maps that occasionally exasperated my parents with its scope.
(Name me one kind of collecting habit that didn't exasperate the parents of the kids practicing it, and you may literally kill me with my own disbelief-triggered laughter.)
Getting back to cities for a moment...
I looked at the latest issue of Playback Magazine, with the cover-featured interview with Paul Gross. He made some interesting comments about the nature and role of Toronto as a city, as a Canadian city...as a city where culture is made. I think he may be too close to it these days to see it, but the idea of Toronto in general and its arts community in particular sneering at the other cities of Canada whilst in the grip of some sort of envy of New York City? I'm wondering if maybe Toronto isn't recovering slowly and successfully from that.
I also think Mr. Gross has been partly instrumental in ensuring that slow recovery. He's been actively working on elements of the solution for some time, and being in the midst of all that work - which I've enjoyed over the years, so there's my bias right there - he may be too busy working to see the effect he's having in helping Toronto to truly become its own place, both in isolation and in the context of Canada as a whole.
I may be wrong here. I'm almost certainly rambling, and not even clear if I'm connecting all the involved dots in anything resembling a logical manner yet.
Today in the Toronto Star's print edition is a map of Toronto's neighbourhoods as envisioned by the staff of the paper with input - said input is still in progress and will be for some time - from the readership at large. An interesting exercise for me to read through that map.
A friendly acquaintance of mine here in Ottawa, David McClelland, is working between classes at university on a similar project covering Bytown and environs. It's looking rather promising. (I'd also recommend his weblog on Ottawa, the Ottawa Project, for close and ongoing attention.)
Both projects caught my interest for several reasons going back to childhood visits to certain filing cabinets at the Regina Public Library. These filing cabinets held city documents, including blueprints for entire subdivisions, lot plan-type stuff showing where and how big the lots were, where the firefighting infrastructure and streetlights and suchlike would be placed. Absolutely riveting stuff for a kid with the right mindset about maps already. And I had that, and a collection of maps that occasionally exasperated my parents with its scope.
(Name me one kind of collecting habit that didn't exasperate the parents of the kids practicing it, and you may literally kill me with my own disbelief-triggered laughter.)
Getting back to cities for a moment...
I looked at the latest issue of Playback Magazine, with the cover-featured interview with Paul Gross. He made some interesting comments about the nature and role of Toronto as a city, as a Canadian city...as a city where culture is made. I think he may be too close to it these days to see it, but the idea of Toronto in general and its arts community in particular sneering at the other cities of Canada whilst in the grip of some sort of envy of New York City? I'm wondering if maybe Toronto isn't recovering slowly and successfully from that.
I also think Mr. Gross has been partly instrumental in ensuring that slow recovery. He's been actively working on elements of the solution for some time, and being in the midst of all that work - which I've enjoyed over the years, so there's my bias right there - he may be too busy working to see the effect he's having in helping Toronto to truly become its own place, both in isolation and in the context of Canada as a whole.
I may be wrong here. I'm almost certainly rambling, and not even clear if I'm connecting all the involved dots in anything resembling a logical manner yet.
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
Some rambling on space exploration
Something else to thank Doug Drexler's blogging in recent weeks for here.
By way of introduction: Drexler's been an award-winning makeup artist, scenic artist and now CGI designer/animator - please forgive me for not getting the titles precisely, Doug? - on shows from Star Trek: All the Modern TV Series from Next Generation to Enterprise through to the current edition of Battlestar Galactica and, soon enough, Caprica as well if I remember a'right.
(Galactica, to my mind constitutes one of those happy accidents of "hands across the border" work. But I digress...)
Anyway, he got this note from Mike Okuda passing along excerpts from a speech from Jeff Hanley, manager of Project Constellation at NASA. And that thread on the Drex Files that followed from that posting, along with a linkage to a JFK speech of no small note and import, got me thinking about space exploration. What it means to me personally. What it means to people in a lot of different places.
Including Canada.
We don't idolize our men and women of the Right Stuff up here as has been done south of the border. At least not yet. I'd love to see a docudrama on Marc Garneau and/or Roberta Bondar one of these years, and see it well done. No idea if it's ever going to happen, given the state of our industry, although I'm sure the likes of Denis McGrath, Alex Epstein, Will Dixon, and others across the membership of the Writers Guild of Canada would jump at the chance to script that sucker were it offered to any of them.
Those stories, when they get told - are another kind of economic spinoff of the exploration that NASA - and our own Canadian Space Agency, as well - are doing. They force the people who work in the cultural industries to try to achieve things that so rarely get done in the real world as it is today.
More to the point...this exploration is worth doing, and worth doing to the best of our respective abilities is beyond doubt for this Canadian. What frustrates me - as I suspect it does many people elsewhere in more than a few nations - is that so many still have the doubts.
In my less charitable moments, I tend to call them another word: fears. Fear of change, and the consequences that it brings.
Given the state of the planetary economy right now, I can see how a lot of us can - do - rationalize the fears. Justify them. Use them to argue for an end to change. Or at least for a slowing down of it to a pace they can more easily match. I've been catching myself preparing similar arguments about some of the things now in place in my current day-job.
No, I won't be sharing the details of that particular issue. They don't really matter all that much, and they add little more than another chunk of noise at a time when we really need more and clearer signal.
We need to do more of that trailblazing that Hanley spoke of, and Kennedy before him, and Roddenberry and his colleagues and heirs in between and since. We need to do this both in concert with our neighbours near and far across this world, and we need to do it on our own as well.
This exploration can and must be done alongside everything else we need to do right now to remedy our economic and ecological woes...and maybe a few of our cultural woes as well.
By way of introduction: Drexler's been an award-winning makeup artist, scenic artist and now CGI designer/animator - please forgive me for not getting the titles precisely, Doug? - on shows from Star Trek: All the Modern TV Series from Next Generation to Enterprise through to the current edition of Battlestar Galactica and, soon enough, Caprica as well if I remember a'right.
(Galactica, to my mind constitutes one of those happy accidents of "hands across the border" work. But I digress...)
Anyway, he got this note from Mike Okuda passing along excerpts from a speech from Jeff Hanley, manager of Project Constellation at NASA. And that thread on the Drex Files that followed from that posting, along with a linkage to a JFK speech of no small note and import, got me thinking about space exploration. What it means to me personally. What it means to people in a lot of different places.
Including Canada.
We don't idolize our men and women of the Right Stuff up here as has been done south of the border. At least not yet. I'd love to see a docudrama on Marc Garneau and/or Roberta Bondar one of these years, and see it well done. No idea if it's ever going to happen, given the state of our industry, although I'm sure the likes of Denis McGrath, Alex Epstein, Will Dixon, and others across the membership of the Writers Guild of Canada would jump at the chance to script that sucker were it offered to any of them.
Those stories, when they get told - are another kind of economic spinoff of the exploration that NASA - and our own Canadian Space Agency, as well - are doing. They force the people who work in the cultural industries to try to achieve things that so rarely get done in the real world as it is today.
More to the point...this exploration is worth doing, and worth doing to the best of our respective abilities is beyond doubt for this Canadian. What frustrates me - as I suspect it does many people elsewhere in more than a few nations - is that so many still have the doubts.
In my less charitable moments, I tend to call them another word: fears. Fear of change, and the consequences that it brings.
Given the state of the planetary economy right now, I can see how a lot of us can - do - rationalize the fears. Justify them. Use them to argue for an end to change. Or at least for a slowing down of it to a pace they can more easily match. I've been catching myself preparing similar arguments about some of the things now in place in my current day-job.
No, I won't be sharing the details of that particular issue. They don't really matter all that much, and they add little more than another chunk of noise at a time when we really need more and clearer signal.
We need to do more of that trailblazing that Hanley spoke of, and Kennedy before him, and Roddenberry and his colleagues and heirs in between and since. We need to do this both in concert with our neighbours near and far across this world, and we need to do it on our own as well.
This exploration can and must be done alongside everything else we need to do right now to remedy our economic and ecological woes...and maybe a few of our cultural woes as well.
Sunday, March 01, 2009
Canadian Content Can Be Supported But Can't Be Protected Anymore
The internet age is here. That means that despite the wishes of Sirius and others that we can no longer protect Can Con on the airwaves. That does not mean that it cannot be subsidized. It can and should get subsidies. In addition to arguing for increased government subsidies I've come up with a number of ways this can be done even a way to pay for free content online. But building a national firewall and deciding whether or not people can look at something on the internet based on it's 'Canadianness'. Just won't work. Even to try we would have to give up a great deal of freedom and choice and in a great many cases people would find a way around it anyway. Billions of dollars that could be spend on arts subsidies (as well as environmental programs, anti-povery programs, etc) would be spend, largely without benefit. For 400 years French Canada has managed to build, maintain and support it's own culture in the middle of a sea of English. Now it is time for English culture to do the same. If there is anything worth protecting in English Canadian culture then it is up to us to support it and insure that it lasts.
This means several things. I means that the CBC needs to be supported. Right now, out of 18 industrialized countries Canada ranks 15th in terms of it's financial support for it's public broadcaster. In exchange for this funding though the CBC needs to strengthen it's support for Canada. This means more Canadian programs, more local programs, and more coverage of Canadian arts and culture in the CBC's arts programming. It also means the CBC needs to give up some of it's advertising. Next we need more arts subsidies. The troglodytes who complain about taxpayer funding for the arts are working on stereotypes. They see the arts the way Harper does - a bunch of slackers sitting around coffee shops until it's time for their black tie gala in the evening. The reality is that artists work harder for their money and make less for their efforts than almost any other profession in this country. At the same time the arts contribute a tremendous amount to the economy even when the economy is bad. In this country provincial and federal governments spend a great deal of money subsidizing business. Conservatives need to learn that the arts are a business and (aside from the quite obvious other benefits) subsidizing small artists is like subsidizing other small business and it creates jobs and other economic activity.
Ultimately though it's up to you. No subsidies or special protections for Canadian artists and Canadian content will do any good if the Canadian public does not support it. If you don't listen to Canadian bands, watch Canadian TV, watch Canadian Film it won't survive. If Canada is going to be more than the 51st State, America Lite, etc., it is up to individual Canadians to protect the culture.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Will CBC Axe Radio 3?
In a Canadian Press article yesterday a CBC "spokesman" mentioned Radio 3 as a possible source of funding cuts. A CBC spokesman said such a plan could mean anything from unloading Radio 3 to putting a website up for sale.This may all be idle talk and speculation. A campaign to urge additional government funding for the CBC and an unscientific poll in the Globe and Mail yesterday showed overwhelming public support for additional Government funding.
Lacroix refused to delve into specifics, noting the drastic step was just one option as the corporation struggles with a financial crisis expected to plunge the CBC into the red next year.
In his speech, Lacroix said he has requested a meeting with Prime Minister Stephen Harper to ask for greater financial flexibility that would permit the Crown corporation to sell some assets. He's also seeking immediate access to the next fiscal year's funding for the CBC.
According to a report by Nordicity group the CBC ranked 16th out of 18 countries in terms of per capita government funding for public broadcasting.
"The per-capita comparison demonstrates that, among 18 major Western countries, Canada had the third lowest level of public funding for its public broadcaster in 2004. At $33 per inhabitant (all amounts in Canadian dollars, unless indicated otherwise), Canada’s level of funding was only ahead of New Zealand, and the United States (U.S.) What’s more, Canada’s funding for public broadcasting was less than one-half of the $80 average across the 18 Western countries. And Canada’s level of funding was about one-fifth of the level of the leading country – Switzerland – among those included in the comparison."Clearly there is a need for a substantial funding increase for the CBC, the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage clearly stated as much last year.
However, if the Government continues to be irresponsible in terms of Canadian culture, heritage and Canadians right to information the last place the CBC should look for cuts is Radio 3.
I don't think it is much of an exaggeration to say that Radio 3 is the bridge to the CBC's future.
In terms of technology CBC Radio 3 understands the internet and social media better than any other service the CBC offers. They are constantly aware of improvements in technology and shifts in internet culture and strive to keep up.
In terms of the audience Radio 3 is one of the few offerings the CBC has for young people. Sadly, in the CBC's case, when I say 'young people' I mean people under 40-45. The CBC, with the cancellation of Zed and jPod have already told this audience that they are not very important. Killing Radio 3 would be making this statement yet again with an exclamation point and a 'don't let the door hit you on the way out' on top of it.
In terms of the CBC's mandate none of the CBC's other arts and cultural programming (in my opinion) even meets the mandate. Radio 3 not only meets but exceeds the mandate. That mandate says that the CBC should:
I'll stop there, but again - Radio 3 meets the CBC's mandate better than any other CBC service.
So, along side the campaign to persuade Parliament to increase the CBC's funding a campaign is now underway to tell the CBC to leave Radio 3 alone. Killing radio 3 would take the wind out of the sails of the drive to increase CBC's funding and would be a clear, unequivocal declaration that the CBC is content to grow old and eventually pass away with the baby boomers.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
More Journalists Need Media Literacy
CBC Radio 3 points to a study by the American Journal of Preventative Medicine and picked up by the Canadian Press that says that there is an association between lyrics with degrading sex and early sexual experience. First of all there are so many flaws with this study that I hardly know where to start. They don't really know what the kids in the study were listening to, they just asked some 9th graders in Pittsburg some questions - so the kids were self reporting. It's a small sample and they apparently didn't ask them about other factors.
Beyond that it is flawed in it's basic logic. If you ask people what artists they like and discover that homosexuals are more likely to like artists who are gay that does not mean that the music made them gay. This is a broader cultural issue. People from cultures where promiscuous sex and violence are a common part of the culture will like music that reflects the culture, often the artists themselves came out of the culture. It's the ultimate chicken and the egg question, it's a loop. Art imitates life which imitates life, which imitates art.
Remember that popular music in the early 20th century had little to no violent or sexual content but those years produced two world wars.
Ultimately studies like this one are attention seeking behavior on the part of organizations. It sounds good, it will grab headlines, it will please parents who don't want to blame themselves and it will please politicians who will find it far easier to blame musicians than to actually seek solutions to social problems. The Canadian Press story also contains the following piece of blather:
"...we can teach what we call media literacy, which is to help kids be more critical media users, or more intelligent media users, so that they know it's not in their best interest to be modelling sexually degrading images."This quote is from "Jane Brown, a professor at the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill," It seems to me though that it is not kids, or musicians or parents who need an education in "media literacy" it is journalists and editors who have a responsibility to the public, to filter information, to be critical and ask questions and not just try to grab headlines. These stories, based on faulty science and logic, are all too common in social, cultural, psychological and medical studies and the media (for the most part) just seem to gobble it up and send it out (with a catchy headline) as truth.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Small Press at Risk - Quill & Quire via Robert J. Sawyer
Rob's one of our best-known SF writers, right up there with Gibson, Robinson, Hopkinson. He's got Hugos, Nebulas, Auroras(our homegrown version of the first two awards) to his name. One of his novels, FlashForward, is being converted into a long-term US-produced TV series as I type this.
Anyway, he's spotted something in Quill & Quire, one of our main lit-magazines, that has him...concerned...about small press operations across the country. Here's his posting on the subject:
http://sfwriter.com/2009/02/there-goes-canadian-small-press.html
Go take a look.
As for my POV?
Looks like the attempts at fiscal containment(starvation?) of homegrown cultural industries are still in play. As if that were still in doubt.
Anyway, he's spotted something in Quill & Quire, one of our main lit-magazines, that has him...concerned...about small press operations across the country. Here's his posting on the subject:
http://sfwriter.com/2009/02/there-goes-canadian-small-press.html
Go take a look.
As for my POV?
Looks like the attempts at fiscal containment(starvation?) of homegrown cultural industries are still in play. As if that were still in doubt.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
For the 1500th Time:
This is the 1500th post on publicbroadcasting.ca - which is alot of hand cramps. I tend to use these milestones to talk about what has been and what is coming on the site except I'm not sure what's coming. I'm always thinking about ways to make the site better, but I don't have any big changes under development. I'm also not sure about new writers. I had always intended that the site should have alot of writers contributing alot of perspectives, but it never really panned out. I have been accused, on a few occasions, of being too Torontocentric. I'm totally guilty, but then I'm in Toronto. I can't write with any authority about stuff going on in Edmonton or Halifax, or Hamilton or Vancouver. I've tried to get people to contribute from other places but for the most part it hasn't panned out. Dwight Williams has been doing some posts from Ottawa, but most contributors contribute rarely.
There are a few realities holding things back. One is that I have no budget. Publicbroadcasting.ca generates no revenue, nor is it likely to. If I had the money to hire writers I'm sure there would be more contributions. Personally though I write out of enthusiasm, not for money, and I'd hoped that there were other enthusiasctic people out there who might contribute. Most people though, who are that enthusiasctic already have their own blogs, so maybe, instead of trying to get new writers I should just keep adding to the aggregators.
The other reality is that there is just too much going on in this country to cover it all. It still amazes me that the press in this country (CBC, Star, Globe and Mail, CTV ...) devote so much time to international artists when none of them are even scratching the surface of what is going on all around them. Even CBC Radio 3, Chartattack and Exclaim, which focus exclusively on music, miss stuff all the time. What all of this means is that I can't imagine the number of volunteers or the size of the budget it would take to really do justice to arts and culture in this country (not to mention the forays into politics.)
At any rate, this is 1500, I'm sure 1501 will be along shortly and before you know it it will be 2000. I don't know what's next, but if you have any suggestions I'm always open to them.
Friday, February 06, 2009
You Can't Have a Creative Economy Without Creative People
Yesterday the Praxis Theatre Blog pointed to articles in the Toronto Star and the Globe and Mail on Canada's creative economy (especially as it relates to Ontario, but this is good general information wherever you are). The contradictory report calls for increasing Ontario's creative economy but at the same time points to falling incomes for virtually all artists. From the Globe:
"The study reports that artists over all are working for near-poverty-level wages, with an average annual earnings in calendar year 2005 of just $22,731, compared with $36,301 for all Canadian workers – a 37-per-cent wage chasm.They also include this handy chart to explain the current situation.
In fact, of the 140,000 artists analyzed, 43 per cent earned less than $10,000, whereas in the overall labour force that percentage was 25 per cent. The study notes that the $22,700 average is only 9 per cent higher than the $20,800 that Statistics Canada has identified as the “low-income cutoff” for a single person living in a city with 500,000 people or more.
What makes the situation even more distressing is that artist earnings have been decreasing since 1990 – a decline likely to intensify over the next two years. While average earnings for the overall labour force rose by almost 10 per cent from 1990 to 2005, artists experienced a slide of 11 per cent – to $22,731 from $25,433 – at the same time as the cultural-sector work force tripled in size. Actors experienced the sharpest decline in average earnings among artists, dropping 34 per cent to about $18,000 in 2005."
Now, when the report talks about the 'creative economy' they don't mean arts and culture alone. They are also talking about research and development, medicine, engineering etc., but to suppose you can have a 'creative economy' without strong support for the arts is like suggesting that you can have a strong food service sector without investing in agriculture. In order to have a creative economy there must be a creative atmosphere and you cannot have a creative atmosphere without a strong arts sector. Creativity breeds and inspires creativity and as Albert Einstein (rather bright and creative himself) said 'Imagination is more important than knowledge.' Sure you have to have people who know things, but the creative economy is built on people asking 'what if...' .
I've already offered a few suggestions that I believe would help considerably. One thing that should be very clear though is that the attitudes of Stephen Harper cannot be seen as less than an assault on Canada's future. Investment in sports, though it may fall under the broad category of culture does not contribute to the creative economy and with North American manufacturing continuing it's decades of decline it becomes more and more clear that what will be left going forward is the creative economy and the service sector (most of which will serve the creative economy.)
Canadians, or those Canadians who do not already know, have to stop thinking of the arts as a combination of star studded galas and slackers lounging in coffee shops and see it for what it is. It is the sector of Canada that asks 'What if..' and that trades in and inspires creativity. In short it is the segment of Canadian life that will pave the way to the the future if supported, or abandon Canada and head to the states to make a living if it is not supported.
Also keep in mind...
Thursday, January 22, 2009
My Platform: Arts and Culture
This is primarily going to be a rehash of things I've already written. It is, after all, one of the primary focus' of this blog. But just to make sure all my points are clear:Arts and culture are vitally important, not only to the economy but to civilization itself. This is how we tell our stories and express who we are and what we want to one another and to future generations. We would know very little about our ancestors were it not for the art and literature and music that they've left behind for us.
So, if given the power I would:
There are also a few arts and culture aspects to the technology and internet part of this that I'll discuss when I get there.
Previous:
My Platform: Introduction
Friday, January 09, 2009
Hedy Fry on the Creative Economy
This was passed on to my by Lynette at the Edmonton Small Press Association I'm not sure if it was posted anywhere or just sent out via email so I thought I'd put it up in it's entirity:The following is an Op Ed article written by the Honourable Hedy Fry M.P. Vancouver Centre & Opposition Critic Canadian Heritage
THE CREATIVE ECONOMY
Stephen Harper's government woke up a few days ago to realise that Canada is in a full-blown recession. The warning signs that were so visible to everyone else, including the opposition parties, did not seem to register in the PM's peripheral ideological "blind-spot".
The slow but steady loss of jobs in the failing forestry, manufacturing and automotive sectors, obviously were similarly too "subtle" for the Industry and Finance Ministers to heed. Questions by the Liberal Opposition on these issues were too "partisan" to bother Stephen Harper's arrogant minority government.
Now, the penny has dropped, and an irresponsible, incompetent economic update is too late. When the House of Commons should still be in session, returning early in January to deal with these critical national issues, we, MPs, are "cooling our heels and heads" at home because the government wanted to save its hide rather than face a vote of non-confidence.
The die has been cast. But I hope that the Prime Minister and his economic ministers heed the plan put in place by the three opposition parties. It is a sensible, practical set of strategies designed to create and keep medium-term jobs while Canadamakes its overdue transition to a 21st century world of productivity and competitiveness.
The decisions made today must include long-term strategies for building Canada's new economy; one that must focus on building our creative and human capital. This means investing in learning, education and skill-building, with a goal for the best and brightest workforce; something the Conservatives have ignored since 2006.
We must shift to industries based on creativity, innovation, and technology. This means investments in Research and Development, in Arts and Culture. We must open our doors and place the welcome mat out for the "creative class" that Richard Florida has been writing about: those people who can bring with them the creativity and intellect that feeds innovation; those people who can choose to live anywhere in the world but are attracted to societies with vibrant cultural sectors, with progressive social values and diverse and tolerant populations.
These are all criteria which once made Canada so attractive but which have been diminished by an ideological and punitive Conservative government.
As a first step the government should restore the cuts to Arts and Culture, and invest in that sector as an economic driver, which currently contributes $84.6 billion to the GDP, and can do more. Think cultural tourism, think creative class and all of its intellectual gifts.
They say that crisis brings danger and opportunity. It is time to seize the opportunity to bring Canada into the 21st century, and become once more the "small nation that could".
Hon. Hedy Fry, P.C., M.P.
Vancouver Centre
Critic for Canadian Heritage
BC Caucus Chair
************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
Le gouvernement de Stephen Harper vient de s’éveiller il y a quelques jours pour voir que le Canada est en pleine récession. Les signaux d’alarme, qui étaient bien visibles à tous les autres, notamment aux partis d’opposition, semblaient ne pas avoir été captés dans l’étroit champ visuel idéologique du Premier ministre.
Les pertes d’emplois lentes mais constantes dans les secteurs forestier, manufacturier et automobile, en difficulté, étaient trop « peu évidentes » pour que les ministres de l’Industrie et des Finances en tiennent compte. Les questions posées à ce sujet par l’opposition libérale étaient trop « partisanes » pour émouvoir le gouvernement minoritaire arrogant de Stephen Harper.
Maintenant que le dollar a chuté, il est trop tard pour effectuer une mise à jour économique irresponsable et incompétente. Pendant que la Chambre des communes devrait encore siéger puis revenir au début janvier pour étudier ces questions nationales urgentes, nous, les députés, devons « nous tourner les pouces » à la maison car le gouvernement voulait sauver sa peau plutôt que d’être confronté à un vote de non-confiance.
Le sort en est jeté. Toutefois, j’espère que le Premier ministre et ses ministres chargés de l’économie tiendront compte du plan mis en œuvre par les trois partis d’opposition. Il s’agit d’une série de bonnes mesures concrètes, conçues pour créer et conserver les emplois à moyen terme, pendant que le Canada fait une transition qui a déjà trop tardé vers le monde deproductivité et de compétitivité du XXIe siècle.
Les décisions prises aujourd’hui doivent prévoir des mesures à long terme pour bâtir la nouvelle économie du Canada, et mettre l’accent sur le développement de notre capital humain et de notre créativité. Pour cela, il faut investir dans la formation, l’éducation et l’acquisition de compétences dans le but de former la meilleure et la plus brillante main-d’œuvre, ce que les conservateurs ont mis aux oubliettes depuis 2006.
Nous devons réorienter nos efforts vers des industries qui reposent sur la créativité, l’innovation et la technologie. Il faut notamment financer la recherche-développement, les arts et la culture. Nous devons ouvrir nos portes et faire bon accueil à la « classe créative », comme l’a écrit Richard Florida, c’est-à-dire aux gens qui peuvent nous offrir la créativité et l’intellect qui encouragent l’innovation, aux gens qui peuvent choisir de s’établir n’importe où dans le monde, mais qui sont attirés vers des sociétés qui ont des secteurs culturels dynamiques des valeurs sociales progressistes et une population diversifiée et tolérante.
Ce sont tous des critères qui jadis ont rendu le Canada si intéressant, mais l’idéologie et l’attitude punitive du gouvernement conservateur ont changé tout cela.
Dans un premier temps, le gouvernement devrait rétablir le financement des arts et de la culture et prévoir des fonds pour ce secteur, qui devrait être un moteur économique, puisqu’il contribue actuellement pour 84,6 milliards de dollars au PIB et peut faire encore mieux. Pensez au tourisme culturel, pensez aux classes qui encouragent la créativité et à toutes leurs possibilités intellectuelles.
On dit que les crises amènent souvent le risque et les possibilités. C’est le moment de saisir l’occasion de préparer le Canada pour le XXIe siècle afin qu’il devienne encore une fois « le petit pays qui a su réussir ».
L’honorable Hedy Fry, C.P.
Députée de Vancouver-Centre
Porte-parole chargée du patrimoine canadien
Présidente du caucus de la C.‑B.
*********************************************************************************************************************************************************
Barb Snelgrove
Senior Special Assistant & Communications Advisor
Office Of The Honourable Hedy Fry, P.C., M.P.
Member of Parliament for Vancouver Centre
Opposition Critic for Canadian Heritage
Chair of the B.C. Caucus, Liberal Party of Canada
1030 Denman Street West (Denman Mall)
Vancouver, B.C. V6G 2M6
Ph: 604-666-0651
Fx: 604-666-0114
fryh1b@parl.gc.ca
www.hedyfry.com
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Canadians Rally for Arts and Culture Over the Holidays
Eight days ago, three days before Christmas, I urged people to take a moment out of their holiday preparations and contact new Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff in defense of Canadian arts and culture. Although getting people's attention over this period is a tall order the response has been good. So far, that I know of, more than 280 people have contacted Iggy and urged him not to allow Harper's conservatives to take politically motivated hacks at arts and culture while he prepares a 30 billion dollar stimulus for every other industry. My hope is that every message sent over the holidays will carry extra weight. That the fact the people are willing to take time over the holidays to stand up for the arts will send the message that this is vitally important to us. It is a safe bet that there are ongoing discussions between the Liberals and Conservatives about what needs to be in the budget to prevent the government from falling on January 26. I think it is also a safe bet that attacking arts and culture is not important enough to Harper that he is willing to sacrifice his government and potentially his political career over it.
There is really no telling, at this point, what will happen at the end of January but for those concerned about arts and culture this is an opportunity to insure that the cuts that brought Harper under fire before the last election and whatever new ones he is thinking of do not go ahead. If a coalition government takes over there will be no cuts. If there is an election it is anyone's guess but there will be no cuts at least until a new government is formed, this is our opportunity to make sure that if Harper remains in power that there are no cuts to the arts.
Please take a moment, if you have a Facebook account to add this event, invite like minded people and, whether you have a Facebook account or not contact Michael Ignatieff using this feedback form or by emailing Ignatieff.M@parl.gc.ca
Remember, even if you don't consider yourself a supporter of the arts, we are in an economic recession and this is a huge industry in Canada
According to the Board of Trade arts and culture, both directly and indirectly employ 1.1 million people, generate 84 billion in economic activity and accounts for 7.4% of GDP.
Arts and culture, according to the Canada Council employs "roughly the same number of jobs as agriculture, forestry, fishing, mining, oil & gas and utilities combined".
According to the Government of Canada's website for Trade Routes Canada's cultural exports equal 5 billion dollars annually.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Tell Mr. Ignatieff to Block Arts Cuts
So there is apparently a big stimulus package coming from Ottawa. The general guestimate at this point is that it will be around 30 billion dollars with money for auto makers, forestry, oil companies, and just about everyone else. I've pointed this out multiple times already but, beyond it's many less tangible benefits arts and culture is also an industry and a big one:
My purpose here is not to disparage aid to other industries, or even to call for more money for arts and culture (although arts and culture investment reliably brings strong returns on investment.)
What I would like to see in the budget though is no new cuts and a return of the government dollars that the Conservatives previously cut, including cuts to PromArts, Telefilm's New Media Fund, the Trade Routes Program, the A-V Preservation Trust, the Canadian Independent Film and Video Fund, the National Training Schools program, and a rumored $200 million dollar cut to the CBC that the Conservatives would like to sneak in.
These cuts (real, proposed and rumored) were all politically motivated to begin with and would come to less than 250 million at a time when the government is planning a 30 billion dollar bailout. The cuts will not result in much savings, and will certainly cost jobs and economic activity.
Additional funds would be nice but I would urge Michael Ignatieff and the Liberals not to pass a budget that includes a politically motivated kick at arts and culture during an economic downturn.
Please use the feedback form at http://www.michaelignatieff.ca/en/get-involved/feedback to urge Mr. Ignatieff not to allow the Conservatives to attack the arts and culture industry while handing out billions to every other industry.
You Can Also Use the Facebook Event page to urge others to act: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=54663788216
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Can We Bring Communities Together in 2009?
For the last 3 + years I have maintained publicbroadcasting.ca to 'preserve and strengthen the independent and emerging Canadian voice'. As a part of this I have promoted public broadcasting, community and university radio, a free and open internet, home grown arts and culture, and progressive politics. There is alot of overlap and common ground between all of these areas. Public broadcasters tend to support home grown arts and culture in a way that large commercial broadcasters do not. Artists (of all stripes) tend to come out in support of progressive politics, and progressive activists tend to support public broadcasting and independent local talent.
I should also not that when I talk about 'progressive politics' I am not talking about right or left. Progressive politics in Canada is about centrist themes that enjoy almost universal support in this country. Things like the environment, education, poverty reduction, health and safety (broadly defined - from public health to crime prevention), equality and human rights, and public support for arts and culture. I believe that calls for things like electoral reform grow out of a frustration that nothing ever seems to get done on a broadly supported, progressive, centrist agenda.
Strangely though public broadcasting, arts and culture, progressive politics and new media overlap and intersect they all seem to have their own unique communities and lack the numbers to strengthen the whole. Even within arts and culture the music community, the film community and the literature community have their own groups and do not (to a sufficient extent) support one another - leaving each in a financially precarious situation.
I currently run more than 20 groups on facebook alone all with some overlap, but all separate and distinct. One of the things I would like to work on in 2009 is building bridges: finding ways to bring together artists, media folk (old and new media), progressive activists, etc in a single community dedicated to mutual aid and support.
If such a community could come together we would have a better country altogether with a better environment, better education system, safer streets, healthier communities, lower poverty rates and a strong well funded arts and culture sector that would have, but increasingly wouldn't need, government support.
If you are interested in sharing ideas on how to bring such a community together please get in touch. Initially, I think, a handful of dedicated people sharing ideas would be a good place to start.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
