Fund, reward, give, grant
- Posted by Karen Ball on June 18th, 2008
The language around granting is loaded.
Even the word 'grant' as defined on
dictionary.com speaks to the hierarchy and entitlement that is
implied by the word and potentially the action.
something granted, as a privilege or right, a sum of money, or a tract of land.
If Calgary Arts Development provides a sum of money to an artist in the form of a grant is it really bestowing a privilege or right on the artist? If it was than it would be the opposite of a democratic practise where the government would empower artists to contribute value to the society not grant them the right to do so.
It is easier for me to understand the contribution of an artist as something that the artist grants to a community or audience than it is to understand the investment of a City in the arts as something that is granted to artists.
As we move forward with our granting renewal we will be introducing a new slate of funding programs that we see fundamentally not as grants but as investments. If we invest wisely, the return on these investments will be the ability for our artists and arts organizations to flourish. Through a flourishing arts sector, countless Calgary audiences and appreciators, including myself, will be granted the type of City that we wish to live in.
My understanding of the word
My understanding of the word "Grant" in this sense is that the government (or whatever funder) is "granting" the right to produce the cultural artifact (artwork, performance, etc.) ON THE GOVENRMENT'S BEHALF, so the "granted" artist is a representative of the agency in a way that non-granted artists are obviously not. Of course, any artist has the "right" to make their own work on their own, but only those with a "government grant" can be said to do so on the government's behalf.
The trouble is, that we tend to think of governments as "respresentative" of a place, but does a government really "represent" a culture better than the individual citizens do? Do we vote in governments as cultural representatives, for that matter? Does Harper's government represent Canadian culture?
Seems to me it's the context of receiving the 'boon' from "official" places confers an "official" stamp of approval, but it certainly doesn't confer real quality. I will not wait to be "empowered" by anyone to make art, as nobody can give that power to me... they could, on the other hand, give me a grant...
I don't think the
I don't think the government's role is to represent culture in any way.
Their role is to represent the people living within their
jurisdiction when it comes time to create policy. provide services
and make investments. In our case at CADA, we are arms length
to the City of Calgary as the appointed agency to invest a
committment of $'s into the arts sector. The dollars we invest
represent about $3 for each person living in Calgary. The investment
would be the most democratic if every person living in Calgary
decided how to spend their $3 worth of taxes into the arts sector.
We make investments because the citizens have expressed an interest
to have art in their city and the members of City Council currently
interperet the citizen interest to be about $3 from every person.
From that perspective, it's hard to imaging that we are making an
investment 'on the government's (city council's) behalf'. I
think we are charged with ensuring there is a flourishing arts sector
for all citizens of the city... and the investments are aimed to do
this.
Of course you won't wait for any government to "empower"
you to make art. Of course, money is one way an individual can
be "empowered".
Admittedly, the assessment of "real quality" is
something that most government funders don't do a very good job at.
The best systems to support quality would assist in creating the
conditions where artists could thrive... this would mean not only
providing grants, but other types of support including affordable
space, access to materials, development of sophisticated audiences,
the ability to interact with artists around the world, etc...
I am a very big supporter of quality of work. Calgary Arts
Development is working now to ensure that there is a considered
discussions at the time of assessment around quality of work as it
relates to artistic impact. However, once things are
systematize, there is always a filter between the artist and the
funder... which brings up a new word - Patronage - and another -
Charter.