 |
 |
||||
 |
|||||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
||
|
|
|
|
Chapter 20 | William D. Coleman (continued) 3. implications for cultural creativity In his presentation, Professor Meisel quotes Northrop Frye on Canadian identity: “the question of Canadian identity, so far as it affects the creative imagination is not a “Canadian” question at all, but a regional question.” In light of the changes to identity just described, I wondered how Frye might have reformulated that quotation if he were writing today. Perhaps it would be the following: “the question of Canadian identity, so far as it affects the creative imagination, is not a “Canadian” question at all, but a series of ever-changing questions tracing plural, floating, border-crossing interactions.” The question that follows then is whether these kinds of changes in identity formation and in the sources of identity hinder cultural creativity in smaller societies. Certainly, there are important obstacles to creative cultural expression in the current globalizing context. With the commodification of culture and its transformation into a contributor to a mass consumerist society, smaller societies face particular obstacles. The market for their products is too small sometimes to be profitable, particularly when faced with the economies of scale and productive power of transnational cultural corporations like Disney or Polygram. To compete, artists in smaller societies have to face the question: “will it sell here and abroad?” In addressing this question, they may have to place constraints on their own creativity, compromise quality and detach the artistic creation from the locality or place where it was developed. Perhaps these economic constraints may be less important if the support for artists permits them to take advantage of the plural, floating, border-crossing identities that have become increasingly common. For example, some at the colloquium spoke of the possibility of renewing and reinforcing the Québécois identity through the multiplication of new intercultural dialogues with countries situated outside the usual economic circuits of cultural production. In speaking of the conditions for important dialogue and debate, Michael Cross suggested that the horizontal structure of the media in Italy rather than the vertical, monopolistic character found in Canada might be a crucial factor. In this vein, the Internet, particularly as broadband capacity, becomes more widely available and may make more possible these kinds of horizontal, intercultural changes that would seem favourable to creative expression given the changing character of identity. The question was also raised whether the way in which programmes supporting artistic creation are set up tends to reinforce creative expression along more traditional identity lines, at the expense of marginal communities, whether aboriginal or recent immigrant ones. The idea was raised that systems of peer review, longer-standing commitments to particular institutions, and unions of artists might create barriers to new artists seeking funding. To the extent to which this kind of bias might exist, it is rather disturbing given the analysis of identity that I have just reviewed. Important sources of creativity may be left unrecognized or undernourished at a time when those sources are highly needed if we are to understand well the changes in our identities. Moreover, we may be losing economic opportunities for cultural creativity in the globalizing world in which we live. It is also important, however, not to overemphasize the dominance of consumption in the cultural field as a result of the commodification and globalization of cultural production. There are many aspects of peoples’ cultural relationships and practices that resist some of the commodifying logic, whether these be personal relationships, religious affiliations, a sense of ethnic identity, or attachments to “local” practices and contexts. As Geertz (1973) has stressed, these lived cultures enacted and re-enacted in particular local contexts with their own traditions and histories produce a “thickening of cultures” that are, in turn, potentially resistant to commodification. This assessment is important because it appears consistent with another theme that emerged at the colloquium: local and regional contexts are an increasingly important site of cultural creativity. In Québec, a new emphasis on cultural development has emerged at the local level, while the provincial level has receded in importance. Some municipalities are taking greater responsibility for cultural development. This phenomenon also lends itself to horizontal linkages between cities that cross provincial and national borders, without the direct intermediation of provincial and federal governments. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
