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.

CARFAC encourages including resale rights in Canada’s new copywright law

Excerpts from Droit de suite – Les artistes veulent profiter de la revente de leurs oeuvres, Le Devoir (23 November 2011)
(Translation by ELAN)

The Canadian Artists’ Representation/Front des artistes canadiens (CARFAC) is taking advantage of the month of November, rich in sales at auction, to once again encourage the Harper government to integrate resale rights in its new copyright law. Resale rights would permit artists to receive 5% of the resale price on successive sales of their artworks at auction houses and commercial galleries.
(…)
CARFAC estimates that auction sales of Canadian artworks netted $18.7 M for Heffel and Sotheby’s in November 2010. Royalties of 5% would have permitted living artists to collect $106 095. By comparison, auction houses impose a commission on both sellers and buyers, running anywhere from 10-25%  and 15-20% respectively, according to CARFAC.

In 1920, France was the first jurisdiction to introduce resale rights. Today more than 59 countries have enshrined resale rights in their laws, including the members of the European Union.

Continue reading this article at
http://www.ledevoir.com/culture/actualites-culturelles/336721/droit-de-suite-les-artistes-veulent-profiter-de-la-revente-de-leurs-oeuvres

Read CARFAC’s press release on the issue at
http://www.carfac.ca/2011/11/artists-to-miss-out-on-resale-right-payments-at-three-upcoming-auctions/

My Quebec Roots Video Contest

Are you an English-speaker between the ages of 13 and 18? This is for you!
The Quebec Community Groups Network, in partnership with CBC, the English Language Arts Network, the Quebec English School Boards Association and the Quebec Anglophone Heritage Network invite you to submit a 2-3 minutes video to showcase your English-speaking Quebec roots.

Starting January 2012, students between 13-18 years of age can upload their 2-3 minute videos to www.cbc.ca/montreal. The top 10 videos will be selected by the public via CBC’s website. The finalists will be judged by a panel including a CBC journalist, a filmmaker member of the English-Language Arts Network and an historian from the Quebec Anglophone Heritage Network.

• First Prize – an IPAD 2 16 GB
• Second Prize – an IPOD 8GB
• Third Prize – a $50 gift certificate to the CBC Shop.

The winners will also be profiled online on the websites of CBC Montreal and QCGN.

The videos, which must be the original work of the contestant, will be judged for overall impact, creativity and originality, content, and technical skills.

To be valid, all entry forms and videos must be received by Monday, April 30, 2012.

Full contest rules are available at www.cbc.ca/montreal and www.qcgn.ca/myquebecroots.

CBC: Does the Canadian government invest enough in arts and culture funding?: Q interview with James Moore

• Click here to read the complete article in its original context (CBC.ca)
• Click here to listen to the interview (CBC audio stream)

James Moore, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages,

(Source: CBC.ca) Heritage Minister James Moore paid a visit to Q Tuesday morning to discuss arts funding and defend recent decisions by the Conservative government to deny grants to certain organizations.

A well-spoken Moore spoke with host Jian Ghomeshi for just over half an hour – slightly longer than scheduled – and touched on the current cultural climate in Canada.

“Culture in Canada is so widespread, so diverse, so impressive … One of the things we do best in Canada is intellectual property, that’s to say arts, culture, movies, television,” he raved.

The interview later turned to indie theatre festival SummerWorks, who lost federal funding, in part some speculate because of its decision to put on a play about a Toronto 18 member.

Moore said the decision was not in response to the controversy generated by that particular play but rather that money had gone to other worthy organizations.

He invited SummerWorks to apply next year.

Moore went on to address the CBC’s funding, saying that while there will be no privatization of the public broadcaster anytime soon, he expects all corporations to trim costs.

Massey Commission 2.0: Is it time to hit refresh on Canada’s ‘Magna Carta of arts and culture’?

This Magazine‘s Hilary Beaumont posted an excellent editorial today, rewinding 67 years to the Massey Commission report, the very origin of Canada’s cultural policies.

A great read for culture-lovers and skeptics alike, Beaumont reminds why Canada originally chose to fund culture and asks whether it is time for a Massey Commission for the 21st century — one which can lay the groundwork for the next 67 years of cultural policy.

In light of recent debates in English and French media (see here, here, here, and here), it is important to re-examine our understanding of why funding culture is good policy.

Below, we’ve pulled some salient excerpts. Still, do take a moment to read the complete article on www.this.org/…/massey-commission. Or if you’re feeling particularly motivated, dive directly into the original 1951 Massey Commission report.

How to save arts and culture in Canada: a Massey Commission 2.0
by Hilary Beaumont for This Magazine

(…)

Jeff Melanson, currently co-CEO the National Ballet School, and soon to be president of The Banff Centre, made a provocative suggestion at a talk in late May hosted by the Literary Review of Canada: a new Massey Commission.

Canada’s “Magna Carta of arts and culture,” as the commission’s report was nicknamed, was released in 1951. The detailed document gave advice on the state of Canada’s arts, sciences, humanities, and media based on three premises:

1. Canadians should know as much as possible about their country’s culture, history and traditions
2. We have a national interest to encourage institutions that add to the richness of Canadian life
3. Federal agencies that promote these ends should be supported

(…)

Rewind 67 years. Canada was nearing the end of the Second World War, a key part of which was fought using propaganda. Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia needed to keep their populations confused and complacent; the U.S. and Canada wanted their citizens to buy liberty bonds and join the army. Information and creative expression were deployed against the masses.

Before the war, Canada’s government had no real investment in the arts. The turning point came when arts groups began calling on their government to support culture as a way of protecting democracy.

As a negative argument, stifling creativity is censorship’s equal. As a positive argument, the arts play a role in driving democracy through freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression. (Thank you section 2(b) of the Charter.) Citizens who think critically and express their ideas creatively are a basic part of any healthy democracy — they hold government accountable.

(…)

Today many of the report’s recommendations are dated. (…) But technology is far from the report’s only concern. As Tom Perlmutter, chair of the National Film Board of Canada, told the Toronto Star:

“What we need now is not one particular policy patchwork fix but the new Massey-Levesque for the 21st century. We need to rethink the fundamental conceptual framework that can give rise to the cultural policies that will serve us for the next 60 years.”

Whether it is updated or started again from scratch, this not-yet-conceived report should be the brainchild of Canadian artists. They should review those ever-important premises about promoting the historical and cultural richness of our country. They should reassess how creative minds are using technology. They should research how Canada’s cultural policies compare to those abroad. And, most importantly, they must underline the fundamental reason that Canadians support the arts financially: the health and vibrancy of our democracy.

On SunTV and Margie Gillis, BackoftheBook.ca

Context: A video of Sun Media’s Krista Erickson browbeating dance legend Margie Gillis went viral last week. For posts about the ensuing debate, click here and here. For posts on a similar debate in the French media last month, see here, here and here.

 —–

On SunTV and Margie Gillis (excerpts), by Louis Laberge-Côté

Canadian dancer Louis Laberge-Côté, currently a teacher at Nationaltheatre Manheim in Germany, offered this assessment.

[...] And by the way, culture sector workers (including artists) are taxpayers just like any other worker in Canada, something Miss Erickson seems to easily forget.

[...] Each time an artist like Margie Gillis receives a grant, Canadians are hired: dancers, actors, musicians, composers, rehearsal directors, lighting/costume/set designers, photographers, administrative and marketing staff, to name a few. Rehearsal and performing space are rented. Eventually, posters, flyers, ads and programs are designed, printed and distributed. Many audience members go to a restaurant before or after the performance traveling by car, taxi, or public transportation. Previews and reviews are written in newspapers and magazines. Tourists come to a city or decide to stay longer to see a specific show or exhibition. Touring artists fly and travel all around the world on commercial airlines. The list goes on and on.

[...] Looking at it proportionally, it is easy to see that cultural funding doesn’t represent that much money in the big picture. In fact, wanting to cut these amounts to help the economy is somewhat similar to wanting to cut the toenails of an obese man, just so he could lose some weight. Somewhat ridiculous, don’t you think? Especially since by comparing these numbers with the ones from the Conference Board, we can also see that this “small” collective investment is actually quite a profitable one; the Conference Board estimates that in 2007, the expenses related to culture on all levels of government together (federal, provincial and local) reached $7.9 billion. This $7.9 billion generated $84.6 globally, something we all benefit from, and not only the “cultural elites” as Miss Erickson likes to believe.

[...] But let’s use a more contemporary example; Cirque du Soleil started from nothing and is now worth around $2 billion. In the early ‘80s, the founders were a few unknown artists living in Baie-Saint-Paul with no rehearsal space. I am pretty sure Miss Erickson would have gladly described them as “walk like an Egyptian” “artsy fartsy” “cultural elites”, to use more of the colourful language she enjoys so much. But luckily, Guy Laliberté didn’t meet with Miss Erickson when he needed public support. He met with Québec Premier René Lévesque who took the time to listen. Thanks to a politician who had faith in culture, this little circus with no audience at the time became a highly successful international enterprise. But this didn’t happen in one day. It took many years of research, development, and trial and error which were at first not profitable.

[...] In fact, many artistic movements and creators were at first not appreciated by their contemporaries. For the longest time, jazz music had a very limited audience. Artists such as Van Gogh and Stravinsky, whose work is greatly appreciated nowadays, had very difficult beginnings. Many of the things we can enjoy today as “normal entertainment” would have been completely misunderstood just a hundred years ago. And that’s normal, as this is how humanity evolves. Should we stop artistic evolution just because it requires effort and personal exploration to fully appreciate it, especially knowing that this pattern (avant-garde works not being mainstream) has existed for centuries? Obviously no.

And of course, this pattern also exists in other fields. Take science for example. There is practical science which has clear direct function. And there is leading-edge research, which doesn’t necessarily have immediate results. But leading-edge research is the reason why diabetes treatments, X-rays and supersonic planes exist today. I don’t understand why artists are being publicly described as spoiled elitists when the government also supports the pharmaceutical industry, high-caliber sports or higher education. Everything is financed by the state. And everybody benefits from it. When an athlete competes on an international level, we’re all winners. When an artist like Margie Gillis presents her work internationally, the effect is the same. [...]

La Presse and Rue Frontenac respond to aggressive Margie Gillis interview on Sun TV News

Canada Live with Krista Erikson, June 1 2011

A video of Sun Media’s Krista Erickson browbeating dance legend Margie Gillis went viral last week. For context and a link to the video, click here. We have yet to notice discussion in Canada’s English papers, but journalists for La Presse and RueFrontenac.com have filed responses this week.

Translated excerpts and links to the complete original articles are available below.
(Translations by ELAN).

*****

Marc Cassivi, La Presse

La compassion de Sun TV News / The Compassion of Sun TV News
Marc Cassivi, La Presse (June  7)

“Why do you need grants for this?” asks the journalist, falsely earnest, mockingly miming Margie Gillis’ hand gestures [from the video clip]. “Because art in our country is not profitable,” the dancer responds, calm despite multiple provocations. “Why would taxpayers pay for something that isn’t profitable?” exclaims the journalist, as if revealing a self-evident fact.

She says this with clear disdain. With the short-term fiscal logic of those who can see no reason for art: Why would you get $1.2M in taxpayers’ money to make silly gestures with your arms?

Why, you ask? Because without public financing not only would there be no contemporary dance, but no theatre, literature, music or television as we know them in Canada. Even private television, which benefits from tax credits and other public supports, would be unrecognizable.

[...] At that moment I found myself wondering if Krista Erickson, in her frenzy of sophistry, would lead the same style of interview with Don Cherry, who never misses a chance to recall his support for the war. Don Cherry who, for his frequently contemptuous commentary between two periods of hockey on public television, takes home a salary estimated at more than $700,000  (and refuses to reveal the actual total of his contract).

[..] These details don’t interest Sun TV News. But an average $100,000 per year to support the activities of one of the most respected dancers in the country and the members of her troupe, well, that is fodder for a scandal.

[Click here to read the complete original article on www.cyberpresse.ca]

*****

Patrick Gauthier, Rue Frontenac

La maison de verre / The Glass House
Patrick Gauthier, RueFrontenac.com

In short, the two Quebecor commentators [Krista Erickson and Nathalie Elgrably-Levy] feel taxpayers’ money should stay in the taxpayers’ pockets and the free market will take care of the rest.

Here, we face a superb example of “Do as I say, not as I do.” As reported in Rue Frontenac two years ago, Quebecor pockets its fair share of grants every year.

A simple click on the Canadian Heritage site reveals that for the year 2009-10 alone, eight magazines by TVA Publications (a Quebecor property) pocketed $2,108,657 in grants under the Publications Assistance Program.

The same empire that denounces $1.2M given to one of the greatest dancers in history and her company over [13 years] pockets, with out laughing, more than $2M a year for MAGAZINES that sell ads and often do little more than publicize the empire’s own products.

For example, TV Hebdo alone received more than three-quarters of a millions dollars last year. Whereas 7 Jours (which just won the prize for best selling edition at newsstands, for the one with Celine’s twins on the cover) collected $48,380.

[Click here to read the complete original article on RueFrontenac.com]

Can you explain why we give public money to artists?

A video of Sun Media’s Krista Erickson browbeating dance legend Margie Gillis is making the rounds on Facebook today.

To watch a national cultural icon treated with such open disrespect is angering. However the question ‘Why are Canadian taxpayers obliged to contribute to the arts?’ is perfectly legtimate and deserves a clear response.

We in the arts community take it for granted that the value of public arts funding is self-evident. But it has been 50 years since the value of cultural investment was agreed upon after public debate. Do taxpayers remember why arts funding mattered then? Do the arguments still hold?

Coming so tightly on the heels of a similar debate in the French media (see here, here and here), we should invest some time and effort into examining our assumptions and ensuring that they still resonate with the Canadian public.

Canada Live with Krista Erickson, 1 June 2011

(Click above to watch the interview)

Other links to recent anti-arts funding clips from Sun Media:

• Ezra “Le Artiste” Levant (The Source, 25 May 2011)
• Getting More Out of Moore (Canada Live with Krista Erickson, 21 May 2011)
• The Waste Report: Arts Funding (Canada Live with Krista Erickson, 17 May 2011)
• Eviscerating the Artsy-Fartsy (Canada Live with Krista Erickson, 16 May 2011)

Did you know about…? Programs for emerging artists

1. Young Canada Works

For many of ELAN’s student members their studies have come to a momentary stop: final assignments and papers have been submitted, final art critiques and performances have passed. Student members can now enjoy a well-deserved break but the search for summer employment has become the next priority. Did you know that the Government of Canada has set up the Young Canada Works program for students returning to school (high school, college or university) and for recent college and university graduates.

It gives participants valuable skills within their field of study and the opportunity to be a part of a valuable community. Employments areas include: Aboriginal urban youth employment, Heritage organizations (museums and gallery settings), Both Official Languages, Languages at work, Building careers in heritage, Building careers in English and French. Curious?
Application is free.

Open your account by visiting here www.youngcanadaworks.ca/…/.

2. International Youth Offices of Québec (LOJIQ – Les Offices jeunesse internationaux du Québec)

LOJIQ, a powerful education and employment resource for today’s world. LOJIQ draws on the vitality and success of its member youth agencies and their outreach and involvement in regional, national, and international partnership networks to assist and support Québec youth (18-35 years old) who seek personal and professional development through rewarding and educational international mobility experiences.

LOJIQ offers a unique approach that includes international mobility project development, work sessions abroad, meetings with partners, knowledge acquisition, coaching, and follow up upon return. Through their experience with LOJIQ, young adults gain intercultural awareness and new qualifications while developing a better understanding of international socioeconomic relations.

Each year more than 4,700 young Québec adults travel abroad to complete projects and network with youth in other countries. Areas that participants travel to include: France, Wallonia-Brussels, the Americas, Europe, Asia and Oceania

LOJIQ has on-going travel calls for submissions with funding both for projects it develops and for self-initiated projects proposed by prospective participants. Participants come from diverse backgrounds from the sciences to arts and cultural. The next deadline for proposals is September 30, 2011 for projects in mid-December 2011 to March 2012. For more information, contact 1 800 465-4255 and they will gladly assist you in the language of your comfort (English or French).

3. The Elizabeth Greenshields Foundation

The Elizabeth Greenshields Foundation offers the largest private individual artist grant for visual artists in Quebec. It is a $10,000 grant to young artists who are practicing in traditional art forms in painting, drawing, sculpture and printmaking. Usually, these grants are used for travel abroad or for artistic development through study. Candidates may have already started or completed training in an established school of art; and/or demonstrate, through past work and future plans, a commitment to making art a lifetime career. Application is on-going.

 

“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).