La Presse interviews ELAN’s Guy Rodgers: “Effervescence chez les artistes anglos”

Alexandre Vigneault has an excellent column in today’s La Presse about the vitality of Montreal’s anglo arts scene in recent years. He refers to the new book Minority Report: An Alternate History of Quebec’s English-Language Arts Scene (Available through Guernica Editions), and interviews ELAN executive director Guy Rodgers.

I’ve translated the article below. You can read the complete original article on LaPresse.ca.

-Posted by Geoff

* * * * *

Anglo-Montreal writers are not only numerous, many are popular internationally, including Trevor Ferguson, also known by his pseudonym John Farrow. PHOTO: ANDRÉ PICHETTE, ARCHIVES LA PRESSE

Translated from Effervescence chez les artistes anglos by Alexandre Vigneault for La Presse, 24 November 2011. (Translation by ELAN)

Renowned music scene, award-winning writers, bubbling theatre milieu, anglo-Montreal culture is experiencing a resurgence. This dynamism coincides with the first growth in the number of anglophones in Quebec in the past 30 years, according to the book Minority Report.

During the first half-decade of the 2000s, the number of anglophones rose by 2.7% in Quebec, according to 2006 Census data. The observation represents not only a reversal of the exodus begun in 1976 — it is also one of the factors contributing to the renewal of the Anglo-Montreal artistic scene, according to the essays collected in Minority Report.

“This increase isn’t limited to the artistic community, but among artists there has been enormous growth,” notes Guy Rodgers, director of the English-Language Arts Network (ELAN), an organisation founded in 2005 to bring together Quebec’s anglophone artists. The percentage of artists in the anglo-Montreal community (0.99%) is higher than the Canadian (0.65%) and Quebec (0.56%) averages, as noted in a Canadian Heritage report.

In recent years, the effervescence of anglo-Montreal creation has been emphasized by the international success of Arcade Fire. Minority Reports stresses that this phenomenon is not limited to the music milieu: the theatre scene experienced an unimaginable vitality 25 years ago, writes Marianne Ackerman, and this holds for the litterary community as well.

TORO Magazine curious about Montreal’s bilingual music industry: Excerpts from interview with M pour Montréal founder Sébastien Nasra

This article out of Toronto’s TORO Magazine has some interesting tidbits that underline a current trend towards an increasingly nuanced curiosity about Montreal ‘tel quel’… (Geoff)

Excerpts from TORO goes to Montreal (TORO Magazine, Nov. 16, 2011):

“This year TORO will be covering the sixth annual M for Montreal festival, an industry conference and music showcase series bridging the gap between Francophone indie rock and pop and Anglophone/international artists, including Active Child, M83, The Barr Brothers, and more.

That gap has narrowed in the past several years; Malajube and Cœur de pirate have achieved crossover success while retaining their native language, and Montreal has become known not only as a breeding ground for buzz bands, but a true Canadian centre for music culture and business.

La Presse on Agenda 21C initiative: ‘Culture is not the responsibility of a single ministry’

(Translation by ELAN. Original text below)

Culture should extend beyond the Ministry of Culture to become integrated in the decisions of other ministries—Health, Education and Economic Development for example. This is the vision of the members of Agenda 21C – pour la culture au XXIe siècle, a working group formed last year. Its members met yesteday in Quebec for a final discussion before submitted its report to the Minister of Culture, Christine St-Pierre.

The day’s debates remained abstract, circling around questions of Ministry of Culture budgets and the manner in which these moneys are spent. Among the few concrete ideas: putting art in hospitals. Although Minister St-Pierre will await the final repot before taking positions, she did express interest in this idea. “It’s interesting to allow patients to look at paintings instead of a dull wall!” she said. “The Agenda 21C process should bring us to new places,” she continued. “It shouldn’t just be a discussion of money for culture.”

Since the Charest government came to power in 2003, investment in culture has increased by 35%, while other spending has increased by 5%. Simon Brault, founding president of Culture Montréal and member of the Agenda 21C liaison committee, salutes this funding.

“This is good. We won’t cry wolf when there is need to do so. Now culture must be integrated in the overall decision-making of our society. One example, among many: in France art is offered in prisons, not only sports. That is an interesting idea.”

Read the original article on www.cyberpresse.ca/…/

- – - – - -

La culture n’est pas l’affaire d’un seul ministère

Paul Journet, La Presse

La culture devrait déborder du ministère de la Culture et être intégrée aux décisions des autres ministères, de la Santé à l’Éducation en passant par le Développement économique. C’est la vision des membres d’Agenda 21C – pour la culture au XXIe siècle -, chantier de réflexion lancé l’année dernière. Ses membres se sont réunis hier à Québec pour les discussions finales avant la remise de leur rapport à la ministre de la Culture, Christine St-Pierre.

Les débats de la rencontre sont restés abstraits, contournant la question des budgets du ministère de la Culture et de sa façon de les dépenser. Parmi la pincée d’idées concrètes: faire entrer l’art dans les hôpitaux. Même si elle attend de recevoir le rapport avant de prendre position, la ministre St-Pierre se montre ouverte à l’idée. «C’est intéressant de permettre aux patients de regarder un tableau au lieu d’un mur terne!» lance-t-elle. «La démarche d’Agenda 21C doit nous amener ailleurs, poursuit-elle. Il ne faut pas seulement parler d’argent en culture.»

Depuis l’arrivée du gouvernement Charest en 2003, les investissements en culture ont augmenté de 35%, alors que les autres dépenses ont augmenté de 5%. Simon Brault, président-fondateur de Culture Montréal et membre du comité de liaison d’Agenda 21C, salue ce financement.

«C’est bien. On ne criera pas au loup quand on n’a pas besoin de le faire. Maintenant, il faut intégrer la culture dans l’ensemble des décisions de notre société. Un exemple parmi plusieurs autres: en France, ils offrent de l’art, et pas seulement des sports, dans les prisons. C’est une idée intéressante.»

Lizez l’article original sur www.cyberpresse.ca/…/

“L’art est le ferment du nouveau capitalisme/Art is the yeast of new capitalism…”: HEC prof responds to Elgrably-Levy questioning of public investment in the arts

In today’s Devoir, we find another interesting response to Nathalie Elgrably-Levy’s columns denouncing public patronage of the arts and  the validity of economic impact numbers to quantify the value of public investments.

Jean-Jacques Stréliski (associate professor at the École des hautes études commerciales de Montréal)  plumbs the depth of Elgrably-Levy’s positions by talking to professionals in economics, creative economy and communications:

L’inacceptable raisonnement
(Scroll down for translation)  Source: www.ledevoir.com

(…)Pour Pierre Ballofet, professeur agrégé et responsable pédagogique du DESS en communication marketing, «il faudrait dire un mot sur la pensée “économiste”, et non économique, qui sous-tend le raisonnement de la chroniqueuse. En fait, c’est une pensée inerte qui émane surtout d’une pure spéculation intellectuelle. Partir de quelques principes présentés comme lois ou vérités premières, puis se laisser dériver au fil d’un raisonnement qui relève du sophisme conduit à la barbarie ou au ridicule, ce qui est plutôt le cas ici»

«Les cyniques, disait Oscar Wilde, sont ceux qui connaissent le prix de tout et la valeur de rien.»

Il existe d’autres modes de décision que ceux des marchés dans nos sociétés. Les choix de politiques faites en matière de culture, comme de santé ou d’éducation sont de cet ordre.

«Après tout, conclut-il, le terme économie ne désigne-t-il pas, dans son étymologie, la règle de la maison? Comprendre ceci, c’est aussi comprendre que tout ne peut se réduire à cette dimension. Aucun économiste sérieux ne l’affirmerait au demeurant. Il ne s’agit donc pas tant d’argumenter sur le caractère “rentable” ou non de la culture. Le domaine culturel comporte certaines dimensions économiques, le réduire à celles-ci est non seulement réducteur, mais conduit à des non-sens tout à fait étrangers à une discipline économique bien comprise.»

(…)Il nous faut aller là où le propos de Mme Elgrably-Lévy ne s’est jamais rendu: au centre du savoir et de la connaissance de la nouvelle économie, dite économie créative, celle qui, précisément, hybride la créativité des artistes aux innovations technologiques de l’heure, pour créer des entreprises et des managements de type nouveau et fécond.

(…)Laurent Simon, quant à lui, conclut que «le monde qui vient fait peur aux traditionalistes, car ses modèles sont moins maîtrisables que l’analyse d’une économie centrée sur les schémas classiques de production et de rendement». Et, se référant à son tour à l’étude d’un autre réputé chercheur français, Pierre-Michel Menger, Portrait de l’artiste en travailleur, il affirme que «l’art est le ferment du nouveau capitalisme»(…)
Continuez votre lecture sur www.ledevoir.com 

—

Unacceptable reasoning
(Excerpts, translated)

(…)For Pierre Ballofet, professor and head of pedagogy in the communication and marketing program, “a few words must be said about ‘economist’ as opposed to economic thinking, because this underpins the columnist’s thinking. In fact, this thinking is stale and derives from purely intellectual speculation. To begin from the few principles presented as if they were law or primal truths and then follow a thread of reasoning based on sophistry leads to barbarism or silliness. The latter is more likely the case here.”

“As Oscar Wilde said, ‘What is a cynic? A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.’”

In our society, realms of decisions exist beyond those of the market.  Political choices related to culture, like choices on matters of health and eduction, are of this nature.

“After all,” Ballofet concludes, “doesn’t the etymology of the word economy derive from management of the home? To comprehend this, is to also understand that not everything reduces to that single dimension. Moreover, no serious economist would argue as much. It is not a question of debating the ‘profitability’ of culture. The cultural domain does comprise some economic facets, but to limit it to that alone is not only reductive but leads to nonsensical conclusions completely foreign to any accepted economic discipline.”

(…)We need to go where Ms Elgrably-Levy has not gone: to the centre of knowledge and an understanding of the new economy, a.k.a. the creative economy, the one that hybridizes artistic creativity and cutting-edge technological innovation to create new and fecund businesses and management models.

(…) Laurent Simon, for his part, concludes that “we’re moving into a world that frightens traditionalists, because its models are less easily analysed than the classical production and yield matrix.” And, referring to Portrait de l’artiste en travailleur (Portrait of the artist as a labourer) by Pierre-Michel Menger another respected French researcher, Simon affirms that “Art is the yeast of new capitalism…”

Read the complete article in its original language on www.ledevoir.com
Read Google Translate’s treatment here: translate.google.com

For further context, read Nathalie Elgrably-Levy’s columns:

• Non au mécénat public (i.e. No to Public Arts Patronage, Google Translate version here)
• L’art de tromper (i.e. The Art of Deception, Google Translate version here)

Or, read our Sampler of print and online responses here (includes translated excerpts with links to Google Translate versions too).

Fagstein blog analyses Epic Meal Time on Tout le monde en parle

Just tripped across an excellent Fagstein blog post from last month breaking down the heightened response to Epic Meal Time’s appearance on Tout le monde en parle (scroll to bottom for video of the show). The West Islanders conducted the interview in English and response was swift. Even though this is an old story, we thought the Fagstein analysis was worth sharing. Click the title for the complete article, which includes highlights of the flood of Twitter response, video responses from Youtube, and discussion of education policies, anglo guilt, entre autres… Definitely worth a read.

Un souper presque Epic (excerpt)
April 14, 2011

(…)

I put in a request with Epic Meal Time’s agent (yes, they have one), but have heard nothing yet. For the sake of argument, let’s assume they’re like me and many others from the West Island and that they went to English public school. Let’s also assume they know some French but not enough to have an in-depth conversation.

It makes me wonder if I would have been judged so harshly if I had been on the Plateau of this show, and with a mix of nervousness and a desire to be clear I had asked that the interview be done in English. My conversational French is okay, but my grammar is awful. There’s a reason I don’t blog in French often. I have too much respect for the language to expose people to my destruction of it.

That in mind, it seems perfectly understandable that two guys from the West Island who make Internet videos aren’t the best French speakers and prefer to express themselves in the language they’re most comfortable in.

And yet, it bothered me.

It wasn’t so much that they were talking in English. But they had earpieces during the interview, which means they needed the questions to be translated. That’s kind of a depressing statement about the state of French-language education in English schools in Quebec (again, assuming that’s how they were educated).

But even that didn’t bug me as much as this: They didn’t even try.

One thing I’ve learned about Quebec’s French language protectors (at least the reasonable moderate ones) is that they appreciate effort. It’s the thought that counts.

When Brian Gionta introduced the Canadiens at the beginning of the season in quite possibly the most atrocious French anyone has ever heard this side of an Alberta public school, the fans appreciated it. It didn’t matter that he couldn’t pronounce the numbers right or that he called Maxim Lapierre “Maxim Laperrière”. He acknowledged that French is the language spoken here and he wanted to make an effort, if only a tiny one, to speak to them in that language.

But Morenstein and Toth couldn’t manage even a “bonsoir” or a “merci”, perhaps because they were playing their tough-guy characters, or perhaps because they just didn’t care and had no respect for the show, the host or the audience they were addressing.

Epic Meal Time's Harley Morenstein and Sterling Toth on Tout le monde en parle (photo: Karine Dufour for Radio-Canada)

The language of poutine

It’s funny because Epic Meal Time has probably been one of the best ambassadors for Quebec cuisine of the past decade. Just two days before taping TLMEP, they released this video of them heading into the woods and preparing a meal that included tourtière and tire sur la neige (words that Morenstein utters in slightly accented but perfectly understandable French).

One of their earliest videos was of the Angry French Canadian, a “meal” that included poutine, steamés and maple syrup on a baguette.

They’re not exactly promoting Quebec as the healthiest place in the world to eat, but they’re not hiding where they come from either. If it wasn’t for the language thing, you’d think they were the most proud Quebecers you’d ever seen.

Except that in Quebec, everything is a language thing. (…)

Continue reading the original article here: http://blog.fagstein.com/…/epic-meal-time-on-tlmep

Watch the original Tout le monde en parle interview here:

L’art de tromper/The Art of Deception: Journal de MTL columnists continues debate on on validity of public investment in the arts

Picking up on last week’s denouncement of public patronage for the arts, today Nathalie Elgrably-Levy’s questions the validity of citing economic impact numbers to justify public investment in the arts:

NATHALIE ELGRABLY-LEVY

Mon dernier texte dénonçant le mécénat public a visiblement déplu à plusieurs artistes. L’indispensable débat sur les dépenses publiques est alimenté. Mission accomplie !

Pour défendre les largesses de l’État à leur égard, les artistes ont été nombreux à invoquer l’étude du Conference Board affirmant que le milieu culturel génère des retombées économiques de 85 G$ annuellement. Selon eux, ce chiffre serait suffisant pour clore la polémique. Erreur !

La méthode de calcul à la base des études de retombées économiques est loin de constituer une preuve «scientifique» irréfutable. En vérité, cette méthode est la risée des économistes. Non seulement n’est-elle pas enseignée dans les cours d’économie, mais elle est dénoncée comme étant une fraude intellectuelle.

La raison est simple (…)

Continuez votre lecture

—

My last text denouncing public arts patronage has clearly perturbed many artists. This has provoked an indispensable debate on public spending. Mission accomplished!

To defend the government’s largesse to their benefit, numerous artists have cited a Conference Board study that affirms the cultural milieu generates an economic impact of $85 billion annually. They believe this number is enough to close the argument. Error!

Economic impact studies are based on a calculation method that offers far less that an irrefutable ‘scientific’ proof. In truth, for economists this method is a laughing stock. Not only is it not taught in economics courses, it is denounced as an intellectual fraud.

The reason is simple (…)

Continue reading this week’s column here: L’art de tromper (i.e. The Art of Deception, Google Translate version here)
Read the original editorial here: Non au mécénat public (i.e. No to Public Arts Patronage, Google Translate version here)

Read our sampling of print and online responses here.
(Includes translated excerpts and links to admittedly atrocious Google Translate versions).

(Update I & II) Non au mécénat public: Journal de Montréal columnist sparks debate about public funding of culture

In the wake of last week’s election, a Journal de Montréal columnist penned an editorial  titled Non au mécénat public (No to public arts patronage) questioning the public interest of funding for the arts.

A number of interesting responses have cropped up online and in other papers since.

If you haven’t been following this debate, we’ve collected a few highlight links for you. Below you will find excerpts from the original editorial, plus a sampling of responses from Nathalie Petrowski (La Presse), Simon Jodoin (Voir, Bang Bang Blogue), and one of many to appear on Facebook.

We’ve including links to the original articles and to Google Translations to help those for whom written French is a challenge, but with this caveat: Automated translations are abominable and are often a challenge to understand in themselves.

——————————————–

Nathalie Elgrably-Lévy

Original Editorial
Non au mécénat public, Nathalie Elgrably-Levy (Journal de Montréal, 5 mai)

“Je serai franche, au risque d’être politiquement incorrecte. Il n’existe que deux raisons pour lesquelles un artiste vit dans la misère. La première est que son talent n’est peut-être pas en demande. La deuxième est qu’il est peut-être tout simplement dépourvu de talent. Dans un cas comme dans l’autre, le public n’est pas disposé à consacrer son argent à l’achat du produit culturel.” (Original article)

—

No to public arts patronage: “I’ll be honest, at the risk of not being politically correct. There can only be two reasons why an artist lives in poverty. Either their talent is not in demand, or they are simply devoid of talent. In both cases, the public is not in a position to devote our money to purchasing their cultural product.” (Google Translate version)

Festival Edgy Women: Annie et ses femmes

Annie Sprinkle: C’était dans le cadre d’une pièce appelée Post Porn Modernist, où je faisais une «annonce de cervix public» ! J’insérais un spéculum et invitais le public à venir regarder mon cervix (le col de l’utérus) avec une lampe de poche. C’était drôle et intéressant, je suis fière d’avoir conçu une telle performance historique, présentée dans 17 pays, pendant cinq ans, notamment à Montréal, en 1992, où je suis passée plusieurs fois grâce à Claude Chamberlan. Dans les 15 dernières années, je l’ai reprise seulement trois fois, mais c’était toujours aussi intéressant. Oui, je savais que c’était un acte controversé et marquant. Mais ce que j’ai fait après me semble encore plus intéressant: cela s’appelait Legend of The Ancient Sacred Prostitute (présenté à Montréal en 1993) et c’était un rituel magique de masturbation. Je crois que c’était encore plus provocant et puissant.

Q: Au festival Edgy Women, vous allez présenter cette fois Love Art Lab, qu’est-ce que c’est exactement?

Full interview at: Cyberpresse.ca

Moderniser: Hamlet

Marc Béland dirige ses acteurs de manière formidable. Il impose un niveau de jeu où l’expression, l’émotion et le langage corporel s’appuient sur une grammaire actuelle, en gardant le minimum de décorum qui sied à une famille royale. Il n’y a rien d’affecté dans ce Hamlet-là où tout est mis en oeuvre pour débusquer l’hypocrisie de la cour du roi Claudius (Alain Zouvi), souverain fratricide, inceste et calculateur, qui a tout du politicien téflon. On se moque ainsi beaucoup des détours langagiers de Polonius (Jean Marchand, toujours délicieux) et Hamlet ne manque jamais une occasion de décocher une flèche ironique.

Read More at: Cyberpresse.ca

Funkytown: franchit le cap du million

L’action se déroule en 1976. Le Québec se croyait alors à la veille de devenir un pays, Montréal voulait devenir la métropole la plus courue en Amérique du Nord, et une mode appelée «Disco» influençait toute une génération.

Read more at: JournalMetro.com