Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99
I think the other thing I dont quite grasp is the "look at Paris" thing.
Paris is over 2000 years old and has a completely different culture than anywhere in North America never mind Calgary or Edmonton. Calgary is only 35 years older than my still living grandmother fer chrissakes. If I go to Paris, sure I want to see what they have, but when I get back to Calgary I dont want to see a bunch of stuff that was sculpted 9 years ago just because it was done locally.
This kind of stuff tends to form its own path and history and should not be force fed to anyone. Canadians will decide what Canadian culture is....not some government grants to build a nice place to show stuff from elsewhere, though i do understand the value in that as well, but importance to the majority of people? Not so much.
|
Nobody is being force-fed any culture. You have the option to stay at home, watch American TV, listen to and buy American music, and read American or European books, or not read at all. Canadian arts funding is not based on the concept of choosing a few Canadian artists who typify the genre and funding them so that they become part of a national canon of work. Instead, it has a much greater focus overall in creating an environment where emerging and mid-career artists are allowed the chance to develop and promote their work. Beyond that, market forces determine which music individuals listen to, what books are bought, and what paintings or sculpture are highly valued.
That said, I'm talking specifically here about funding for individual artists and arts organizations. Museums are definitely different, but they're still subject to market forces; the success of and popularity of exhibits will have a major role in determining what is exhibited. Group of Seven works are highly exhibited through Canada not because of government funding, but because audiences support such exhibits by purchasing tickets.