Quote:
Originally Posted by octothorp
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.
|
No idea what this has to do with what i said. Though I will say "force fed" was the wrong term. Any government funding for anything however, is yours and mine whether or not we enjoy it. If money is used to give Canadians a competitive advantage over others, then yes I can certainly see the benefit in that. Im just not sure how much.
Quote:
|
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.
|
there are always the success stories of government funded programs much like the Cirque de Soleil story earlier. There are likely a 100 times more failures too...though that isnt a problem either as things dont ever occur without taking a chance at times.
That doesnt change the crux of the argument though. Any dollar funded by the gov't is a dollar funded by everyone. Not everyone enjoys hockey. Not everyone enjoys arts. But if one gets it...both should.