 |
 |
|||||
 |
||||||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
||
|
|
|
|
Chapter 2 | John Meisel (continued) But it is not only the quality of artistic creation, that is at stake. The very question emerges of whether it will be attempted at all. For as Canadian musicians, film makers, magazine publishers and many others know, US works, benefiting from the colossal size of the American economy, are made available at prices which the smaller Canadian market cannot match. Thus, a level playing field — a term much loved by American commercial and artistic imperialists — cannot be attained without state intervention. And it, as Canadian periodical publishers know better than anyone else, is becoming increasingly problematic, largely because of the ever greater interference in our domestic affairs by the World Trade Organization. This trend is abetted by the dominance of marketeering values which find any state involvement repugnant. One of the consequences of the prevalence of anti-statist sentiments, of limitations on the capabilities of the state arising from lack of funds, and of the interference of transnational bodies, is the resort to partnerships. This increasingly common pattern involves the collaboration of both public and private sectors in supporting cultural and other activities. Partnerships of government agencies, private firms or institutions and of cultural organizations (or any two of these) inject funds and facilitate artistic creation. At the same time they can pose risks: long term financial planning is fraught with uncertainty; an inadequate amount of funds may be forthcoming; and the private sector may be willing to assist only projects which will be inoffensive. Thus the scale of an enterprise may be reduced, and the area of freedom it enjoys may be circumscribed. These potential liabilities are well known. But it is worth noting that benefits also accrue from these mixed arrangements. One of them is that the diversification of financial support protects cultural organizations from having all their eggs in one basket. Sometimes there is safety in numbers. Furthermore, the new formulas invite a closer involvement of the cultural sector in its enveloping community. This is salutary for both parties because it encourages the arts to become more enterprising in reaching a larger public and to express themselves in accessible terms. At the same time, important economic and other organizations which were heretofore oblivious of the arts become more aware of, and involved in them. More important in the present context is that not only national and multinational firms are drawn into the cultural sector but also local enterprises and individuals. To finance themselves and mobilize needed volunteers, a great many arts organizations establish links to nearby firms who are consequently drawn into the cultural community. National organizations rely heavily for sponsorships on large corporations. In smaller, non-metropolitan areas these are not ignored, but greater reliance is of necessity placed on indigenous firms. Partnerships mobilize heretofore apathetic actors and assist a process through which cultural organizations sink roots more widely and deeply in neighbourhoods and nearby communities. This strengthens the community context of cultural life and to some extent mitigates against the universalizing forces of globalization. Further, partnerships offer an opportunity of great relevance to the role performed by a small country in a globalizing world. As attested to by coproductions in film and television, they encourage players from different jurisdictions to collaborate in common artistic enterprises and to cast their work into moulds acceptable to their compatriots as well as to those congenial to other nationalities. ... Like many western countries, Canada is being transformed dramatically by the globalization of world populations. Globalization in this sense refers to the striking increase in the degree to which the ethnic composition of many lands is becoming so much more heterogeneous. In Europe and America, at least, the faces one encounters almost everywhere represent a microcosm of many races and continents. Migration patterns have increased the ethnic diversity of most regions but particularly those of the largest cities and the metropolitan areas — the very places which provide the most fertile soil for cultural creation. As a consequence Canadian artistic life, which was once predominantly an extension of British and French traditions, has increasingly reflected the emancipation of the country from its colonial past and, more recently, the ethnic heterogeneity of its ever more cosmopolitan population. A comparison over time of the origin of winners of Canada Council Awards documents the growing participation and advent to prominence of creators of widely diverse ethnic and geographic origins. Among the numerous growing pains associated with this process, none is more perplexing than the accommodation between the historically sanctioned traditional values of long established populations and the beliefs and styles of newcomers. When the latter come from distant lands, bearing diverse religious, social and cultural preferences, dissonance and even conflict are unavoidable. The central question usually concerns the status of the old “established” regime in the face of the sometimes quite widely diverging norms and behaviours of the immigrant societies. To what extent should the traditional patterns be discarded to make room for newer, more widely acceptable ones? Very practical problems emerge, such as the retention of Christian prayer in schools and public institutions, celebrations of traditional holidays — Holy days — by public and commercial bodies or, on the other hand, whether Sikhs are allowed to wear turbans while serving in the RCMP, or their ceremonial, religiously significant daggers when in court. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
