"Culture" Minister demands arts make money before subsidisation

[french frank]

R3 announces:

Music Matters tomorrow

"Arts and the Economy
Maria Miller

At the British Museum last week Maria Miller gave her first keynote speech since becoming Culture Secretary last September. In it she said the arts world must make the case for public funding by focusing on its economic, not artistic, value – ‘culture does not simply have a role to play in bringing about a return to growth. Rather, it should be central to these efforts.’

Tom is joined by Susanna Eastburn the Chief Executive of Sound and Music, Randall Shannon the Executive Director of the Buxton Festival, and Professor A C Grayling to discuss the complexities of measuring the value of the arts in terms of economic value.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01s5m24

All will be made clear ...

[MrGongGong]

Thanks for that FF

:biggrin:

[amateur51]

So, given the reasonable assumption that you don't believe that all requested arts funding should automatically always be granted to any and everyone that applies for it for any project and that there is a limitless anmount of money available, what criteria woudl YOU use, AH, to decide what gets funded and what doesn't?

Same question to Mr GG and RB.

Would I be right in assuming that this is a mistake and that you mean [B]'isn't'[/B?

[ahinton]

A pedant writes: shouldn't the word "subsidisation" in the thread title be changed to "subsidence"?

I'll get me coat...

[ahinton]

So, given the reasonable assumption that you don't believe that all requested arts funding should automatically always be granted to any and everyone that applies for it for any project and that there is a limitless anmount of money available, what criteria woudl YOU use, AH, to decide what gets funded and what doesn't?

Same question to Mr GG and RB.

What I would NOT do is assume that if I think certain artistic endeavour and its outcome is "rubbish", most other sensible people would agree with me and therefore funding for it should be scrapped; furthermore, I would not expect to make all such decisions based upon a principle that, irrespective of artistic merit, if it doesn't or can't generate a profit,it should receive no assistance or support.

[Simon]

Would I be right in assuming that this is a mistake and that you mean [B]'isn't'[/B?

Thanks for your input, but no, it isn't an error.

However, "woudl" should read "would".

[Ian]

...to discuss the complexities of measuring the value of the arts in terms of economic value.

Can't be as difficult as measuring the value of the arts in terms of artistic value.

[teamsaint]

with the quantity of heavy duty posting on here, on a work day, one might think that some folk are benefiting from subsidies already:whistle:

anyway, 3 day week end , so lots more to come , no doubt !!

[amateur51]

Thanks for your input, but no, it isn't an error.

However, "woudl" should read "would".

I see, so this is an entirely speculative exercise because at the outset fund are never limitless in reality.

[MrGongGong]

So, given the reasonable assumption that you don't believe that all requested arts funding should automatically always be granted to any and everyone that applies for it for any project and that there is a limitless anmount of money available, what criteria woudl YOU use, AH, to decide what gets funded and what doesn't?

That is a very big question
but i guess I would try and find an anarcho-punk-aggrotech-lesbian noise ensemble performing a mixture of Bartok and Stockhausen and give all the money to them to make evil noise in the dark during a BDSM performance festival in Surrey :cool:

(I guess that is the answer you seek ? hope it's made you happy :gift:)

[Richard Barrett]

That is a very big question

It is. But the main problem here isn't the judging procedure but the fact that it's constrained by budget cuts rather than any kind of artistic priorities: the bottom line is that the budget will now fall to x, and spurious criteria are invented in order to keep to this value, rather than first thinking as MrGG says what do we want to have and then devising a budget accordingly, and cut say the nuclear weapons budget instead.

[MrGongGong]

Indeed Richard
What seems sad to me is the lack of imagination that seems to be spreading in the UK
when STEIM in Amsterdam were criticised for being "too niche" they organised a festival of Niche Musics :biggrin:
That's the kind of thinking we need IMV

[Flosshilde]

Bartók's music is indeed not just fundamentally based on "tunes" but on the folk traditions of his homeland and surrounding regions. To regard it as "tuneless" is not very far from saying Central European folk music is itself tuneless, though I guess a xenophobe would have no problem holding such an opinion.

Am I right in thinking that Simon has expressed a belief that Bartok's music is 'tuneless'?

[french frank]

Am I right in thinking that Simon has expressed a belief that Bartok's music is 'tuneless'?

More precisely, he was speaking of one particular piece.

[ahinton]

It is. But the main problem here isn't the judging procedure but the fact that it's constrained by budget cuts rather than any kind of artistic priorities: the bottom line is that the budget will now fall to x, and spurious criteria are invented in order to keep to this value, rather than first thinking as MrGG says what do we want to have and then devising a budget accordingly, and cut say the nuclear weapons budget instead.

Absolutely correct! - and also perhaps cutting some other parts of the "defence" budget along with the nuclear weapons one, too. You've put your finger on the nub of the problem, for which many thanks.