[TrickyRicky]

While I share the suspicion that these cuts are ideologically motivated and that funding of the arts is a good thing, I conversely don't think that all government funding programs for the arts are sacrosanct either. So what I'm saying is arts funding should be held to rigorous standards and should need to justify it's existence same as any other kind of program. I'm not suggesting that these cuts are appropriate or that the programs being disrupted aren't important. It just seems that the general argument is all arts programs are sacred cows and any meddling in the affairs of the arts by outside commoners is treated as a criminal violation. This is particularly juicy since one of the primary arguments in favour of strong arts support (which I also support) is an economic one. Well if you accept that argument than you also invite the accountant to become one of the primary arbiters of what constitutes worthy art.

 

[unimaginative2]

All of the major cultural institutions have fundraising initiatives that encourage such things as setting up future endowments through estate planning. Anyone can do so at the time they make their will - I've done it myself.

So if you take a tumble down the Stair of Wonders, I'll know to be suspicious!

 

[junctionist]

While I share the suspicion that these cuts are ideologically motivated and that funding of the arts is a good thing, I conversely don't think that all government funding programs for the arts are sacrosanct either. So what I'm saying is arts funding should be held to rigorous standards and should need to justify it's existence same as any other kind of program. I'm not suggesting that these cuts are appropriate or that the programs being disrupted aren't important. It just seems that the general argument is all arts programs are sacred cows and any meddling in the affairs of the arts by outside commoners is treated as a criminal violation. This is particularly juicy since one of the primary arguments in favour of strong arts support (which I also support) is an economic one. Well if you accept that argument than you also invite the accountant to become one of the primary arbiters of what constitutes worthy art.

There are rigorous standards, and groups respected around the world will be affected too, like Tafelmusik for instance. We know the government funds a solid group of artists, institutions and programs.

The problem with the rigorous standards is that the avant-garde never seems to be up to those standards. The impressionist wouldn't meet the rigorous standards of the conservative elite and wouldn't seem to be of much value. The experimental is typically worthless in the beginning, but it's the experimental which needs to encouraged to gain the kind international presence which Canadians can be proud of.

 

[Urban Shocker]

I think the real reason for the Tory cuts is that they know none of the artists will vote for them anyway, and that much of the audience for the arts has given up on them as well because of their notoriously anti-arts record. Also, have any of the yahoos in the cabinet ever been seen inside a theatre or an art gallery unless they were forced to go there to deliver a speech? When Jason Kenney droned on in front of the opening night audience at Luminato's A Midsummer Night's Dream a couple of months ago he was almost completely ignored.

 

[Hydrogen]

I see nothing wrong here, and see no reason why taxpayers must fund the arts, or sports for that matter. Taxpayers should never had footed the bill for Skydome, for example.

Why would you lump art and sport together? To me it's like lumping military budgeting and CPP together.

Look carefully at the cuts. In the larger realm of national budgets, $44 million is not much. But to the arts and culture, this is significant. Many of these cuts will not only directly affect the arts, but will have an impact on the promotion of culture and cultural education as well.

If tax payers are not to fund the arts, then why bother with art education in schools? That's publicly funded too.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Many of these cuts will not only directly affect the arts, but will have an impact on the promotion of culture and cultural education as well..

Why does culture need to be promoted. That's akin to promoting eating or promoting breathing. Culture is what people in Canada want it to be. Did Canada's native people have no culture until Ottawa provided cultural funding?

If tax payers are not to fund the arts, then why bother with art education in schools? That's publicly funded too.

For the same reason we fund mathematics, in order to provide a well rounded education. Some of my friends who took art with me in high school went on to OCA and now work for some of the top marketing and design firms in North America. That's why we fund art education.

 

[afransen]

Why would you lump art and sport together? To me it's like lumping military budgeting and CPP together.

A lot of arts funding is doled out by Heritage Canada, which incidentally, spends a lot of money on sports (it is one conduit for Vancouver 2010 funding). So, the two subjects are joined due to the vagaries of federal funding.

 

[adma]

Yeah, I sorta wonder if this is a Tory scheme to address Olympic underperformance, i.e. we win only a fraction of, say, Australia's medals, because all that potential Olympic funding goes to line the wallets of them Istvan Kantor types, anyway...

 

[afransen]

Australia comparisons aren't really fair. They have a very elaborate amateur sport development infrastructure, on which they lavish hundreds of millions. We could do it; it just takes money.

Also, keep in mind that we trounce the Ozzies in the Winter games. Expect some impressive things in about 550 days in Vancouver.

 

[adma]

Australia comparisons aren't really fair. They have a very elaborate amateur sport development infrastructure, on which they lavish hundreds of millions. We could do it; it just takes money.

Yeah, and the money has to come from somewhere. Thus my parsing of Tory logic: don't waste money on the pointy-heads...

 

[dowlingm]

except the Australians have 2/3 of Canada's population and no snow.

Apparently the $40m is going into stuff like the Olympic and Paralympic torch runs ($24m).

 

[Admiral Beez]

except the Australians have 2/3 of Canada's population

Hardly. Australia has only 29,000 folks from Canada's population. http://geo.international.gc.ca/asia/australia/news/media_releases6-en.aspx

 

[Hydrogen]

Why does culture need to be promoted. That's akin to promoting eating or promoting breathing. Culture is what people in Canada want it to be.

Promoting, preserving and presenting culture and its ideas and artifacts is about education. Opportunities to learn and to expand one's horizons need not be restricted to schools (which are publicly funded, too). As for culture being what the people want it to be, where would be people get their cultural ideas and values in the first place? The continuing change and expansion in the range of cultural ideas and artifacts necessitates an investment in preservation and understanding of those things.

Maybe you should protest the existence of public libraries, too? After all, they are government-funded cultural institutions.

Why does culture need to be promoted. That's akin to promoting eating or promoting breathing.

No, preserving, presenting and promoting culture is not the same as eating and breathing. But certainly the values surrounding how and what we eat can be shaped by the culture we live in or the things we are willing to explore with respect to food and its relationship to culture.

Did Canada's native people have no culture until Ottawa provided cultural funding?

Actually, take a look at the article in question and examine some of the cuts. However, it would appear from this sentence that you don't understand the nature of what is happening. Trust me, it won't translate into a tax cut for you.

For the same reason we fund mathematics, in order to provide a well rounded education. Some of my friends who took art with me in high school went on to OCA and now work for some of the top marketing and design firms in North America. That's why we fund art education.

And what we define as a well-rounded education is itself a product of cultural education and an effort to preserve and promote worthwhile ideas. Your assumption that a well-rounded education is something that is just so exposes a rather limited view of what culture is - or can be. Also, as I mentioned earlier, education is also a cultural activity - and a publicly funded one at that. It's not just only about facts, but appreciation, value and related ideas.

 

[Hydrogen]

A lot of arts funding is doled out by Heritage Canada, which incidentally, spends a lot of money on sports (it is one conduit for Vancouver 2010 funding). So, the two subjects are joined due to the vagaries of federal funding.

Just because a Ministry has orphan programming attached to its roster of responsibilities does not make them the same. Sport could easily be linked to Health Canada wherein the emphasis would probably reflect the promotion of health and not agonizing over the collection of medals at the Olympics.

 

[afransen]

I'm not arguing that it is the way things should be. I certainly am no apologist for the Harper regime. I don't find Harper's duplicity or contempt for parliament particularly endearing.