Writing in the Guardian, Hannah Jane Parkinson bemoans a modest reduction of the Arts Council’s budget:
This philistine government is betraying the arts.
It goes without saying that the 6% budget trim, £39m of a total £622m budget, is presented in the most ominous possible terms, using a four-year figure, presumably to induce gasps of outrage. We also get the line, wheeled out repeatedly by the Guardian, that,
The creative industries contribute £90bn net to the UK economy.
A framing that not only jars with demands for further public subsidy, but which slyly conflates actual, self-supporting businesses, including TV production companies, designers and games developers, with the kind of fare more likely to be subsidised by the Arts Council.
So far, so Guardian. And then there’s this:
There seems to be no recognition of how powerful the arts can be in educating audiences, reflecting current events, exploring different views and opening up dialogue. In the past year alone, I have enjoyed Nicholas Hytner’s version of Julius Caesar at The Bridge, influenced by Trump’s America; The Jungle’s tale of life in the Calais refugee camp; Alan Bennett’s Allelujah!, a celebration of the NHS.
Readers will note that the artistic projects deemed exemplary are somewhat uniform in their default politics, which seem unlikely to differ much, if at all, from those of the typical Guardian columnist, or the typical Arts Council employee, or indeed the typical beneficiary of Arts Council largesse. Perhaps, then, we can hazard a guess as to Ms Parkinson’s definitions of “opening up dialogue” and “exploring different views.”
[ Added via the comments: ]
The leftist lockstep of the arts and theatre establishment, and of recipients of Arts Council subsidy in general, does, however, produce moments of grim and inadvertent comedy. As, for instance, when the Observer’s Jay Rayner noted the “baffled silences” and the “almost total failure of imagination when it comes to working out what a play from the right might actually look like.” When pressed on this point, the suggestions by leftist directors were hypothetical productions that celebrate racism, sexism and rape. Because, clearly, that’s all that a non-leftwing play could possibly be about.
Publicly subsidised art and theatre will of course tend to favour a political outlook in which the subsidy it expects is most vigorously endorsed, resulting in uniformity and self-flattering parochialism. And so, we find leftist writers and leftist directors, all accustomed to decades of coerced public subsidy via overtly leftist institutions in a left-dominated part of the culture, claiming to be “dissenters” who are being “suppressed” when the level of subsidy fails to meet their expectations. And likewise, we arrive at the conceit that the rest of us will be educated by people who frame those who disagree with them in terms of absurd hyperbole – Trump as Caesar – or depravity – those imagined affirmations of rape.
(Gotta admit, I was rather proud of “cargo-culture”.)
It was, I think, bang on.
Arguably Captain America: The Winter Soldier makes the small government case more. Yes, it’s perfectly possible to give govt peers that could do all sorts of arguably Good Things, but remember that is perfectly possible for govt to be taken over by Bad Men who would then be able to use those powers to do Bad Things and probably make one of them a Bad King…
Looking back at the comments on the hustle post made me curious as to whether Dame Liz had gone on to some other “worthy” appointment. A glance at her Eli page suggests not and also has this absolute gem:
Surreal Inversion
Now THAT’S a band name. Works as a pretty good description of life in 21st century western civilization as well. Which is what makes it a good band name. Inspired even.
I have read that in the Netherlands there are warehouses full of bad art: Nobody wants it but it cannot be destroyed because it was funded by the government.
Wasn’t that the short-lived experiment when the Dutch government announced it would buy all art and bypass the grant-giving process altogether?
Grifters practically cleared out art-supply houses in a mad rush to slap paint on a canvas and make a quick buck. They were racing to the art-buying agency before the paint even dried.
Nowadays the grifters have to “earn” a government grant before they can make a quick buck on the taxpayer’s back. So we’re back to normal.
Jay Rayner noted the “baffled silences” and the “almost total failure of imagination when it comes to working out what a play from the right might actually look like.”
Well, there’s Every Good Boy Deserves Favour, Night and Day, on television Professional Foul…
Well, there’s Every Good Boy Deserves Favour, Night and Day, on television Professional Foul…
Anything written in the last 40 years?
Serious question, in light of the Thought Police, are any snarky (but certainly not “hateful” as “poking fun at” does not equal “hate” to any normal person) comments from this side of the big ditch liable to get someone on the other side in deep kimchee ? IOW, have they invented “hate” by association yet ?
The scariest part is “perceived by the victim” (“victim”, oy gevalt) which is utterly unable to be disproven.
I will proactively denounce myself, just in case.
Anything written in the last 40 years?
Rock ‘n’ Roll’?
Squaring the Circle was only 34 years ago.
But let us be kind and pretend The Hard Problem never happened.
Meanwhile in Nashville, the Tennessee Arts Commission brings us some Official Government Brand™ Shakespeare.
Official Government Brand™ Shakespeare.
I’m not seeing the issue. (I’m assuming Caesar’s melanin levels aren’t relevant to this telling of the story.) Though the second item here, by Douglas Murray, seems apposite.
Though the second item here, by Douglas Murray, seems apposite.
The latter, in this case, without doubt; we all know they would scream murder if, in reverse, they cast Owen Wilson as Othello.
So basically “Hamilton” on the Tiber, and you have a Stuchbery version of Rome wherein evil wypipo conspire to kill a powerful black man. Yeah, no politics there.
Official Government Brand™ Shakespeare.
I’m not seeing the issue. (I’m assuming Caesar’s melanin levels aren’t relevant to this telling of the story.)
It’s not in this case. It’s who is playing the role of Julius Caesar in this Nashville, TN staging that’s supposed to be the draw (Eddie George having been a former running back — and a darned good, and popular, one — for the NFL’s Tennessee Titans).
evil wypipo conspire to kill a powerful black man
If your production of Julius Caesar has either the conspirators as goodies and Caesar as a tyrant they defeat, or the conspators as simple baddies and Marc Anthony a hero taking his rightful vengeance, then you’ve done so much violence to the play already that any casting issues are simply irrelevant.
“Jay Rayner noted the ‘baffled silences’ and the ‘almost total failure of imagination when it comes to working out what a play from the right might actually look like.’”
Of course, as I’ve said before, part of the problem is that they can’t readily define what “the right” is.
If your production of Julius Caesar has either the conspirators as goodies and Caesar as a tyrant they defeat
Part of the problem is that in the grand historical sweep of things, this is exactly what happened. However one wants to interpret the character of the conspirators, Gaius Iulius did still cross the Rubicon at the head of an army.
I will proactively denounce myself, just in case.
My experience has been that self-denouncers are motivated by hostility and prejudice against protected groups. I demand you denounce yourself for that, too.
[Heh heh, the trap is laid…]
[Heh heh, the trap is laid…]
Oh shit, was that my out-loud voice?
[Heh heh, the trap is laid…]
Oh, the trap is “laid”, you couldn’t have said “set”, noooo, you had to use heterosexist patriarchal rape language. I demand you denounce yourself.
“Set” would imply it acquiescence, as in “I’m all set for you, darling.” Get your mind out of the gutter.
Or move over if there’s room.
…move over if there’s room.
Get your mind out of the gutter.
Might big talk from someone who has violently culturally appropriated the name of a poor migrant Chinese cook (who was a nuclear brain engineer in his home country) colonized and oppressed by the Cartwrights. Besides, my mind is not in the gutter, it hasn’t gotten to such a lofty level yet.
“Part of the problem is that they [the left] can’t readily define what “the right” is.”
‘The right’ is anything and everything ‘the left’ is not, and since what the left believes changes from moment to moment then this causes the right to change as well. The left is really of the mentality, “You are with us or you are against us (and thus an enemy).”
Might big talk, Farnie boy?
Well, it’s a might big gutter, now ain’t it?
Shove a bum, chum.
Part of the problem is that in the grand historical sweep of things, this is exactly what happened. However one wants to interpret the character of the conspirators, Gaius Iulius did still cross the Rubicon at the head of an army.
This is about the play, though, not the history; and in the play there are no uncomplicated heroes nor villains.
(Which is what makes it totally unsuitable as a choice of play if you want to push one particular political point of view, and if you try to use it that way, then you’re an idiot)
pst314 @ November 26, 2018 at 18:21: I have read that in the Netherlands there are warehouses full of bad art: Nobody wants it but it cannot be destroyed because it was funded by the government.
Communist-bloc regimes produced endless volumes of the “writing” of regime leaders, expounding Marxist-Leninist doctrine at great length. Thousands of copies were printed up by state publishers.
The Collected Essays of Wladislaw Gomulka and Famous Speeches of Comrade Ulbricht accumulated in warehouses. An American speaking with the custodian of one such warehouse asked why the unwanted books were not merely pulped. “Who would dare give the order to destroy such books?” the custodian answered.
“Then what do you do?”
“Every now and then we have a little fire.”