"Culture" Minister demands arts make money before subsidisation

[Richard Barrett]

I don't like arts funding being cut but what on earth do we expect at the moment?

Well obviously we can expect some people like yourself to touch their forelock and say "it's a fair cop, guv, I know we all have to tighten our belts these days." Anyway, going back to Mr Big Brother and his sycophantic press release, I suppose now you can finally see why he was appointed to that job: in order to carry out the government's philistine and short-sighted policies without even a hint of dissent, let alone "Socialist guff".

[An_Inspector_Calls]

Well obviously we can expect some people like yourself to touch their forelock and say "it's a fair cop, guv, I know we all have to tighten our belts these days." Anyway, going back to Mr Big Brother and his sycophantic press release, I suppose now you can finally see why he was appointed to that job: in order to carry out the government's philistine and short-sighted policies without even a hint of dissent, let alone "Socialist guff".

Look, don't let me intrude on your hatred for Bazalgette. I've got better things to do.

[Richard Barrett]

I've got better things to do.

I'm pleased to hear it, but I don't hate Bazalgette, despite his being a textbook example of everything that's craven and stultifying in British culture. I do hate the fact that he's been appointed to preside over the transformation of Arts Council England from an enabler of creativity to a kind of pimping agency. But I don't tie myself in undignified knots seeing the decimation of culture and somehow convincing myself it's all for the best.

[Barbirollians]

Not for nothing is she known as Nicola Murray to her civil servants .

[ahinton]

I'm pleased to hear it, but I don't hate Bazalgette, despite his being a textbook example of everything that's craven and stultifying in British culture. I do hate the fact that he's been appointed to preside over the transformation of Arts Council England from an enabler of creativity to a kind of pimping agency. But I don't tie myself in undignified knots seeing the decimation of culture and somehow convincing myself it's all for the best.

It ought not to have been necessary for you to write this, but sadly it was, so thank you for doing so and for providing a balanced and sensible / concerned view of this situation.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

yeah yeah mrs miller ask ms may for a few bob

[burning dog]

Bazalgette

Ironic that his great great-grandfather was famous for pumping crap OUT of peoples homes.:sadface:

[Serial_Apologist]

Bazalgette

Ironic that his great great-grandfather was famous for pumping crap OUT of peoples homes.:sadface:

:biggrin: :ok:

I'd wondered about possible connections...

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

.. his great great grandpa's achievement is still to be marvelled at ....

[burning dog]

.. his great great grandpa's achievement is still to be marvelled at ....

Indeed...

Bazalgette's foresight may be seen in the diameter of the sewers. When planning the network he took the densest population, gave every person the most generous allowance of sewage production and came up with a diameter of pipe needed. He then said 'Well, we're only going to do this once and there's always the unforeseen' and doubled the diameter to be used. His foresight allowed for the unforeseen increase in population density with the introduction of the tower block; with the original, smaller pipe diameter the sewer would have overflowed in the 1960s, rather than coping until the present day as it has.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Bazalgette

[eighthobstruction]

Bazalgette

Ironic that his great great-grandfather was famous for pumping crap OUT of peoples homes.:sadface:

Indeed!!

[burning dog]

Bazalgette's work can be seen as a manifestation of the commode-ification that was taking place in Britain in the mid 19th Century.

[scottycelt]

:laugh:

"Tonight's performance is brought to you by British Aerospace ... bringing grief and misery to the world since 19.."

A slight contradiction there, amsey ... :biggrin:

I agree that Ms Miller is talking 'piffle' but as member vinteuil suggests there is some real point in her piffle. She is playing to a particular gallery. Politicians do that and, in all fairness, maybe have to do so, like some of the rest of us might do at annual wage reviews.

Surely it doesn't matter a scrap whether arts/science funding is state or corporate or in many cases a mixture of the two? The important thing is that mainstream arts/sciences are adequately funded. Large profitable companies often boast about their 'social responsibility' and here is an area whey they can clearly demonstrate it and proudly advertise the fact at the same time. That is what should be encouraged.

After all, it was originally the public's money whether it is later dolled out by the Government or Ladbrokes ...

[An_Inspector_Calls]

I agree that Ms Miller is talking 'piffle'

Careful, you risk being hintoned.

[Richard Barrett]

Surely it doesn't matter a scrap whether arts/science funding is state or corporate or in many cases a mixture of the two? The important thing is that mainstream arts/sciences are adequately funded.

The first point is that the arts are not adequately funded, and one of the reasons for this is that reducing state funding has not led to a corresponding increase in corporate funding; indeed, as I pointed out earlier in the thread, the body set up by the government to promote this shift in responsibility has itself had its funding severely cut.
The second and more crucial point is that business funding of culture is going to reflect business priorities, which of course revolve around profit. The kind of cultural activity they're going to fund will be that which gives them something in return, in terms of prestige and publicity (and therefore ultimately once more profit). Cultural activity that isn't guaranteed to provide them with this is not going to be touched with a bargepole. So much is uncontroversial. The role of state funding ought therefore to be to support those things which business is not interested in supporting, and indeed this used to be the case. Now however the government's role in arts funding has shifted towards supporting those things which business is interested in supporting, that is to say a fairly narrow subset (which is perhaps what you mean by "mainstream") of the breadth and variety of the products of artists' imaginations and skills, with everything else left out in the cold. In other words the government's priorities for cultural support now coincide exactly with corporate priorities, as we see is the case in other areas like the NHS.