I Value the Arts – Do you?

33 comments

1. For me, certain campaigns are more important than just bringing a community feel to the call, it’s about showing the government in a non-political way (if that makes sense) that we *do* care and we *do* want it to be taken seriously.

   Agreed that at times there are too many projects at once, but doesn’t that just spotlight the urgency of the need for an injection of monies into the cultural sector?

2. I’d say, as a creative, we work better with stricter confinements. Fair enough, the government are a complete shambles, but we’ll contiunously go from a Labour government which encourages luxury and art, to a conservative government who reign things back in again to save a couple of quid here and there. That’s the way it will always work right?

   Don’t get me wrong, it makes me angry, but I didn’t see anyone piping up about any of this when it came to voting.

   I work for a sports charity and we’ve had 40% cuts in our funding across the board which is disgraceful. There’s talk of police cuts, NHS cuts, privatisations and various other things which we should have expected under this new government. It makes me sick, but one things for sure, no matter how much money there is in this world, people in general will be naturally creative and artistic.

   Am I looking at things in too much of a positive light?

3. Hello, I am writing on behalf of the UK Professional Cartoonists’ Organisation.

   Briefly, the launch of Save our Arts campaign rather stuck in the throat because the lack of support for the activities, events and institutions of our trade from ACE.

   We wrote about it at http://thebloghorn.org which is one of our collective promotional tools. Direct link is http://ht.ly/2Dhjb

   I hope this passes muster as a polite and useful piece of comment spam. It’s good to see the Culture Vulture daring to stick its head above the parapet on this.

   Best regards,

   Bloghorn
   Written by Matthew Buck, Royston Robertson and Alex Hughes on behalf of the UK Professional Cartoonists’ Organisation

4. I think you’ve touched on some interesting points, and it’s good to see an article questioning the potential ramifications of ‘change’ rather than just immediately assuming that it will be The End of Everything.

   The arts are definitely valuable to our communities, and it would be a sore loss to see things like the I Love West Leeds Festival, or Light Night dissapear but I also think that there are a lot of Arts events which seem to be aimed at existing Arts-Events-goers which our wider communities will simply not feel the loss of.

   I think it’s important to bear in mind that the only thing dissapearing is funding; not motivation, or entrepreneurship, or enthusiasm, or even the whole idea of ART itself. The Government can’t make cuts on those things.

   During periods of economic downturn, many businesses, individuals and endeavours actually thrive because they are able to think creatively and adapt to the situation.

   For quite some time, people involved in the Arts have had a relatively comfortable business model and the luxury of funding and, while the loss of that will certainly be felt, I think it will actually result in a lot of individuals really rising up to the challenge and finding ways to do things without funding; to get a little more commercially and business minded, and most certainly a lot more creative. Artists getting creative! Who’d have thought it?

   I’ve always disliked the government, and nowadays just live by the assumption that they will make poor decisions; I say f*ck ’em and let’s find ways of doing things on own terms.

5. Bad timing I agree.

   But also bad tactics I think. One of the down sides of web 2.0 is that it trivialises ‘care’. It is too easy to show a green twibbon for Iraq or ‘I Value for the Arts’. Such cheap clicks mean next to nothing.

   If you really value the arts then spend money on them, attend them, produce them – don’t just wear a twibbon. It is when we open our wallets that we send the most powerful political messages – not when we click for a twibbon.

   But also in a world of competing priorities where do ‘the arts’ fit?

   I am more concerned about cuts in mental health services, the devastating impact of floods in Pakistan and many other things than I am about the funding of arts organisations. There are many twibbons ahead of I love the Arts in my personal hierarchy of causes. But thank goodness for freedom of speech and opinion eh!

   The arts have survived and thrived in society for millennia. Most of the time done as means of self expression rather than making money. But now you need me to wear a twibbon?

6. I think it’s a fair question to ask Emma and there is a genuine debate to be had about what arts subsidy means and how public monies should be spent.

   The issue for me is that some rather tendentious things are being said (or assumptions are being made) about the public will, in general, and the provision for arts and culture in particular that will make really significant changes to the way we live our lives. More importantly, because we have a coalition government which nobody voted for (nobody!) we have not had a chance to vote on decisions and directions that are being steamrollered through, or seemingly so.

   It is at times like these, relatively uncharted waters, that we need to stand up and actually talk about what we value and why. I Value the Arts and the petition for a Commons Debate are ways of doing so. We are also, incidentally, responding to what the coalition says they want to happen.

   Cuts are an inevitability, the speed, nature and positioning of them are, here I am living in hope rather than expectation, not.

   I have very particular views on arts subsidy but that is, almost, not what this is about for me.

7. I guess I have little hope about the cuts etc, like you say why should a government that was not the people’s choice, start to listen now? They are convinced of their vision, will it take someone like Jamie Oliver to get them to change tack? They’ve started so they’ll finish. I would be very happy to be proved wrong, I’ll eat the biggest portion of humble pie naked if that’s the case!

   That’s why I think we should forget government, local or national and just get on with proving value, forging new ways of doing the stuff that we want to see happen.

   1. I’d tried to get onto the What If Leeds website and failed, and remembered Culture Vulture was mentioned at the Future Arts meeting last night. I am attempting to get my artwork known through LCA and other organisations, and worry about the funding cuts here and elsewhere a lot.

      1. I totally appreciate the worry everyone faces, no matter at what level they receive funding. Everything is in such a state of flux right now. Wish I had been at the Future Arts event, they’re doing some really exciting stuff right now.

         To my mind we have to think differently now, that’s how we are going to keep being creative and pay the bills. How do we harness our networks to achieve what we want to see happen. How can we speak to businesses better? How can we step outside of ourselves and understand how we can add real value to people so that they really would miss us if we weren’t there?

8. I don’t have much hope that they will change course or vision either but when did that last matter in standing up and being counted?

   Also, briefly coming back to Mike’s point about mental health and other world issue funding. As both a mental health service user and a world citizen I care deeply about those too but also know perfectly well that were we to totally abolish all arts funding tomorrow it would not make the slightest difference to those and it is fallacious to suggest otherwise. I do, believe, and believe passionately that arts and culture make a significant difference to how we live and what we think.

   If those are your concerns, Mike, shouldn’t the question be rather aimed at why we maintain ourselves as a superpower whilst being unable to socially and medically support our citizens and those around us?

   That does not appear to be on the agenda as far as I am aware?

   1. I too agree with standing up and being counted, just not quite worked out what the best way of spending my energy is! Yes a petition takes me ten seconds to complete, makes me feel momentarily better, and let’s me get back to whatever else I was doing.

      Likewise seeing my twitter stream full of pink twibbons helps me see what I already suspected, that like follows like! I don’t follow too many rascists, fascists etc, or Tories (joke @simonmagus) but I do follow companies, business people, (not many celebs)individuals etc who don’t seem to be employing the pink twibbon, or commenting on this post.

      I’d like to make a difference in a non worthy way, just want to make sure that I don’t end up smacking my head against an immoveable brick wall.

   2. Agreed.

      We will find £80m to fund an arena because it helps to make us an ‘internationally competitive city’ (I have yet to see this framed as an £80m investment in the arts! This is not a Sage in so many ways)yet we can not find the money required to invest in basic services.

      I think everyone values the arts – in some way, shape or form. It is part of what it is to be human. Indeed ‘the arts’ may be essential to a thriving community. But the arts are not something we choose to contribute to either as consumers or producers because of subsidies. I am not sure that I value many of the art quangos.

      But art and culture came before free markets, capitalism, taxation and public funding. I suspect it will take more than a few viscous cuts to spell their demise

      1. NB that should be vicious as in spiteful. Not viscous as in thick and sticky. Although if the cap fits….

9. I know (and know of) a lot of people who make their living out of art because they’re good at filling out funding forms and making projects fit criteria rather than making good art. I’d not be sad to lose those people from the sector.

   I agree that this campaign is too little, too late. If you (generic, not Emma) wanted people to care about the arts, you should have got them to vote accordingly. It is indeed cyclical (Labour boom for the arts in funding terms, Tories slashing and burning) and could also be argued that when there isn’t lots of funding money and there is plenty going on in the world to kick against, better art is created. Emin is now whinging about cuts, despite publicly voting Tory and being richer than most of us can ever dream about. That does NOT help. Damien Hirst, known mainly for being a rich bastard and most people hating his art. Not helping. Also the negative arguments in Shrigley’s video and some of what I’ve seen on Twitter – back the arts because football, the Olympics, Big Brother and X Factor are shit and a waste of time and money – appal me. Give money to us rather than them or you’re a moron only appeals to, well, morons. Plus it reminds me a bit of the awful BPI Music Matters campaign – http://www.bpi.co.uk/post/Why-Music-Matters.aspx – which most music fans find to be an embarrassment, rich artists and companies telling them to be more “ethical”.

   In a way I think making better art and making more of a fuss of the art (especially individual projects and artworks rather than the colossus of ALL ART AND CULTURE) rather than thinking about money all the time and campaigning for “the arts” as a giant colossus it’s hard for people outside “the arts” to care about would be better. The latter favours the professional arts administrators and funding experts, the former favours art and artists.

   1. This is incredibly badly written because I’m in the final stages of an epic OU assignment and my ability to think coherently is dying.

10. For the last few weeks i feel like i’ve been on a seesaw of emotion with the daily pronouncements of looming funding cuts in all sectors. I have been so unsettled by the whole ideology of the new condem government that i struggle to find some solid ground from which to take a stand.

    I have no doubt that the funding cuts will damage a lot of arts orgs, some of them irreversibly, the festival i am responsible for heading up may well not be here by the end of February which will have implications for the community, artists and of course my own personal ability to pay my rent in the coming months. I value the arts and their ability to change lives, they have a way of looking the community in the eye and saying i believe in you and you have value, real value that is not measured in pounds and pence or in the number of degrees you have.

    I worry that when we try to fight fire with fire by talking about the arts in terms of economics we are in fact pissing into the wind, though i understand why those arguments are being used. The threat of cuts has set us into panic and also has highlighted the huge inequalities in the funding system. We have already started fighting amongst ourselves, i go to meetings in the community and people are looking round the room wondering who will still be there in 6 months time.

    But do campaigns like i value the arts make a difference? I’ll be honest, i signed it but somehow it felt futile, for a while i felt foolish for signing. It felt like putting a fig leaf on the line in front of an oncoming freight train but it felt like a small thing i could do to stand in solidarity with others (i would also be happy to say that i value the nhs, the library service, the police and other services about to be butchered).

    I saw a panel discussion advertised at the ICA on the funding issue, you had to pay £12 to go to listen to blokes being self important and i thought “what a complete waste of time”, i also saw arts business on the panel and thought “well i’d cut them for a start”. See, there i go thinking bad things about another member of the arts community, im sure arts business play a valid part in the arts arena, its me behaving like a cornered animal that is the problem.

    Art wont stop after the cuts but it will change, my organisation and others may not be here next year but something else will be. In the meantime i want to see hear and support as much interesting stuff as i can (sorry musical theatre i have to draw the line somewhere), stop my goddamn whineing and join the library while im at it.

    but if we do end up on the streets can i suggest a torched art car parade or burning some artist painted sheep…

    1. can i also say that my proposal on twitter last night that allocation of funding was decided by Jim Bowen on Bullseye was genius and if anyone from the arts council or arts business would like to discuss if further im available for a very expensive consultation fee

       1. *applause*

11. I value the arts, I’ll support small productions and I’m married to a playwright! The pink hand campaign, though, just strikes me as a sticking plaster to fix a collapsing building. Arts funding can come from many sources and the twibbon just seems to be focusing on public sector arts funding without really looking at private enterprise. And that’s fine, but so many people seem to be adding the pink hand without really thinking about it.

    Back in the early days – all of 12 months ago – the twibbon was a new, cutting edge idea that got lots of people excited and brought certain things to the fore, like NHS funding and suchlike. Now it seems that every campaign and their dog has to have their avatar sticker, and it’s beginning to feel like the anti-BP stickers that you see on adverts in tube stations.

    On a different note, Penny’s last paragraph ^^ is exactly right. Perhaps concentrating energies on making better art is more constructive than harking back to a status quo that perhaps might benefit from change.

12. Lorelei is right that those who work in the arts do not often or effectively shout loudly about both the short and long-term social and economic argument for the arts. Having worked for an arts funding scheme, I have both witnessed the vast array of amazingly positive statistics collected from arts organisations about participation and impact, and seen first hand the life-changing impact that participation in the arts has had for so many people. Honestly, I have been brought to tears (good ones) compiling reports about this stuff.

    But there are a couple (probably more, but I’ll stick these for now) of major problems in offering this information up as justification for maintaining arts funding. One is that it is quite difficult to prove a direct link between engagement in the arts and, for example, impact on crime figures. Let’s take the teenager from the ‘deprived area’ who had quit school and was bumming around, but then signed up to a publicly funded music production course for NEETs (those not in education, employment or training) and who then decided to make a career of it. We may know in our hearts (and from statistics about his peers) that his life path, had he not done the course, was likely to encounter drugs, knifes, unemployment, and later possible criminality, addiction and poor health. But how can we prove it?

    Having said this, putting together likelihood statistics isn’t impossible, and many organisations had begun compiling this very kind of information, using probability and extrapolation, and comparative longitudinal studies and such like. But this is getting into heavy duty maths territory. And heavy duty maths is certainly not what arts organisations are about and often not what many of them do well.

    Also, many smaller arts organisations had been so busy maximising what little resources they had on doing amazing and often life-changing things for their local communities, they just didn’t see this need for justification stats coming. All of a sudden, they needed to prove lots of things they just hadn’t collected any data on. And to prove life changes, you need a few years of data on the people you’ve helped. And not there’s not enough time to collect it now.

    That’s not true across the board, of course. Of those, often larger, arts organisations who have collected data, many have had reservations in shouting about it. On the one hand there are the purists, who believe art has an intrinsic value, and that art should be done for arts sake alone. And on the other hand, those who recognise and fear that publicising economic arguments will lead to it becoming the only thing that brings in funding, so suddenly you are spending your entire time doing maths and filling in forms instead of getting on with doing great arts stuff. Out of necessity, these reluctancies have had to diminish over recent years, but the theoretical arguments still remain.

    Thus the argument for funding the arts, and indeed art itself, is complex, and any form of reductionism should be approached with caution. There is a wealth of beauty in its complexity and I, for one, would be sad to see it reduced only to a simple ‘Cameron election poster-style’ slogan, with nothing behind it.

    But slogans and banners get attention, they provide something accessible and understandable for everyone, and through grabbing attention, they hopefully will engage people enough to read further and learn more about the complex arguments, ideals and potential underneath. And that is why I have out the ‘I value the arts’ banner on my Twitter account.

    So let’s keep talking about art and art funding, so the power of our collective voices will be read and understood by more and more people. Because then, when the axe falls (or ‘if’, if you like), we will have many more people who want to volunteer, to donate, to train, to start businesses or community organisations, and who will be inspired to be creative and get involved.

    As a final note I like this fact:
    The UK has one of the most heavily regulated and legislated advertising industries in the world. Yet it produces arguably THE most creative advertising in the world.

    Adversity and restrictions breed creative solutions. Keep being creative, people! Because funded or not, through our unique creativity, we will win through regardless. 🙂

    1. That’s a great comment Helen!

13. Ah, loads of people have commented since i started writing my heartfelt waffle/rant so apologies for any duplicated comments!

14. My problem isn’t about spending money on the arts (though let’s be clear, most of it goes on institutions that support art forms with inescapably high production costs, opera, ballet etc.)it’s with the dodgy arguments and woeful “evidence” that gets dragged in to supposedly clinch the debate. Any stick seems good enough to beat the Condems with when you’re arguing a case about which you feel passionately and virtuously, on the side of the angels – I even read someone on the arts funding Ning site call someone a “bad journalist” because they had the audacity to disagree with the tactic of using Damien Hirst as a figurehead. But just because it makes us feel all warm and fuzzy inside to show our solidarity with a twibbon (yeah, stick it to The Man!)it doesn’t necessarily convince anyone.

    I’ve heard a lot about the economic case for the arts. For every pound spent the return is two or three quid . . . well, maybe that’s been the case, but is it guaranteed? I think we all agree that the economy is looking pretty peaky right now and that may mean people choose to spend their money differently for the foreseeable future; so what if that means the arts become less than profitable, a drain on the national purse? I’m not saying they will, but it could happen. Then why would a government concerned about the bottom line continue funding? There has to be a better argument than shoddy economics.

    But I doubt the better argument will be the one Helen relies on, the dubious claim that the arts can uplift the unwashed and rescue them from a future of smack, reality tv and dog fighting. It just takes one kid on work placement at the local theatre to go off his trolley and embark on an axe murder spree down the conservative club and all those carefully collected statistics are just so much waste paper. It’s not like the arts ever protected us against our darker natures. Just look at which European nation before the 2nd World War went to the most theatre, saw the most ballet, heard the most opera . . . I think you know where I’m going with that (there’s a famous essay by George Steiner, it’s not an original thought.) Point is, arts don’t necessarily make us better people or more valuable cogs in the social machine.

    I’d much prefer it if artists put forward an artistic response to the cuts, do something creative and play from their strengths, which evidently isn’t economics or quantitative research. Much like that David Shrigley video that’s doing the rounds, you know the one with the tractor driving, calf fiddling, cartoon oiks in overalls talking in comedy Northern accents about defending The Arts, “you know,art galleries, theatre, opera, that kind of thing . . . ” Erm, ok maybe not.

15. I don’t disagree with a lot of what you’ve said, Phil. Certainly, neither pure economics nor ‘warm and fuzzy’ idealistic symbols, nor evangelical claims of the healing power of the arts has stand-alone credibility. But let’s get them all out there so we can discuss and debate them, and see how together they can fit together to form pieces of the jigsaw.

    The example I quoted is based on a real-life person (a number of them, in fact) that I had the pleasure of speaking to and following up after an actual music mentoring scheme. It sounds like a stereotype, because it is. Because stereotypes are based upon commonly seen factors.

    Although I don’t remember dog fighting ever coming up in the data analysis….

    1. dog fighting? It could be just a Beeston thing . . . Still not convinced that art is about worthy self-improvement. Most of my artistic heroes were saturnine, drug abusing, narcissisic, self-destructive, sexually predatory, misanthropic, mean, moody, suicidal bastards . . . I don’t remember the arts Council having a view on that. And that’s the problem with a lot of subsidised art, the dreary positivity, the syrupy happy-clappiness, the soul sapping stodginess of it all . . . it drives me to drink and dangerous assignations with vampish vixens. Because, let’s face it, that’s what art’s about, isn’t it? It’s not a slightly random form of community service, it’s where you fight your demons . . . and mostly the demons don’t give up till they’ve disembowelled you and stuck your head on a pole . . . hmm, maybe I could get a grant for that.

16. PS – Fully agree about a creative response

17. Can I start by declaring my interests – I’m involved in the delivery of the I Value The Arts campaign, although what follows is my own opinion!

    With that out of the way, then… What we are categorically not trying to do with I Value The Arts, is to weigh in to the arts funding debate. We’re not in the business of deigning the arts as an untouchable part of a society which is facing great change as a whole. Cuts, whether large or small, are inevitable – and besides, that debate is being voiced very eloquently elsewhere!

    What are we trying to do then? We’re trying to capture and empower that public voice which, as Emma quite rightly points out, has been somewhat missing from the debate thus far. “The arts”, for those outside the sector, can be a misleading term, seen as referring to the more “difficult” end of the spectrum (opera, contemporary dance, the ever-trotted out examples of Emin and Hirst). What is so often overlooked in the rhetoric about this subject is the small-scale community and education stuff that can, and does, have so much impact on the everyday lives of everyday folks.

    I recently went to an event hosted by Rural Arts in Thirsk in North Yorkshire, and was utterly inspired by a talk given by Tony and Linda from Wass (a village of approx 100 population) in the East Riding. They had, through blood, sweat, tears and a few bits of funding from here and there, entirely revamped their local village hall, creating a unique and thriving arts hub for the village. The real beauty of this project was the sense of community created and, crucially, sustained. The whole village pitched in, rebuilding the venue from the ground up, programming activities for their new space and fundraising on top of their grants by organising raffles and catering at the events.

    This is just one of thousands of examples that could be cited of the community spirit that can be engendered by the arts – which, in this case, comprises such activities as village ceilidhs, touring musicians and theatre companies, storytelling circles and exhibitions of local artists.

    We’re not denying or trying to rally against the changing funding landscape, which is an inevitable state of affairs. What we will be doing with I Value The Arts is keeping people informed about how this changing set of circumstances is likely to impact upon the arts in their local area – and, crucially, providing practical suggestions and advice as to how they can support their local artists and arts organisations, whether that’s through donating to fundraising initiatives, volunteering, contacting local politicians, etc.

    As our circumstances continue to change, so will the ways in which we, as citizens of the ‘Big Society’, can make our voices heard and spur our local communities into action. With I Value The Arts, we hope to raise awareness of what cuts to arts funding will actually mean amongst the people who will be affected, and to provide a hub of advice and support.

    1. What an inspiring story about Thirsk!

       It’s fantastic that you’re raising awareness of what cuts to arts funding will mean amongst those affected. I suspect many will be surprised to see a lot of things they take for granted disappear and be surprised to learn that these things had previously been supported by ‘arts’ funding.

18. It is a really interesting conversation, and one which I imagine might never have happened had the country not been threatened (and to be honest is very likely to receive) the cuts proposed by the ConDems.

    In response to earlier comments I quite distinctively did use my vote to oppose such cuts, but my vote was not part of the final alliance. Such is democracy.

    I see fighting against cuts as a raising of my voice. I disagree with the way our government is addressing the current problems and believe that there are more balanced ways to deal with things.

    So I do not want to stay quiet. I believe in the arts and it pays my rent and it makes me happy. I have not commented on here earlier as I was at work (in the arts) and out (at art openings).

    I have chosen to put a twibbon that obscures my face on my Twitter avatar, because it is a small step to announcing what I believe. But I will also sign petitions and I will march, shout, and wave placards if I get the chance. It may do absolutely nothing to change things but I will know that I have made a stand.

    Creative political statements are a great thing, but they are not every artist’s forte. They can end up looking trite and forced (see all the criticisms of David Shrigley’s animation). So why not allow artists and those that believe in the arts to express their passion in the same way as the trade unions? We have so little say, so few people to fight our corner in Westminster.

    I have always believed in creativity and togetherness in adversity and this is no exception, I think great things can be done with the rallying call to work together, to get public support and generally take the artistic light from under the collective bushel (why are British people so bloomin’ reticent to shout about what we are good at?) but get back to me when I am eating cold baked beans in a cardboard box and see how my creativity is coming along.

19. I work in the arts as a dance teacher and performer of classical and contemporary Egyptian dance. This started as a hobby, grew into a passion, and ended up as a career path. I have never had any funding, or even known much about how to obtain such funding. I charge a fee to teach and a fee to perform and have fortunately found there is a market for these things.

    Now I do spend more time than I’d like bopping to three minute pieces of upbeat Egyptian pop than expressively performing 9 minute pieces of complex and nuanced classical Arabic music! But I have been able to carve out one or two platforms for the “real thing”. And the more commercial work I do, while sometimes less artistically fulfilling, at least allows me to continue to my dance training and to self-fund the odd “art for art’s sake” type event.

    So while I agree with public support for the arts, the quantity of public funding available has had little impact on me as an artist, and the lack of public funding definitely doesn’t need to mean no more arts scene.

    If public funds are drying up then let’s seek out new ways to fund our art. Let’s try more efficient ways of working, new ways of reaching out to the public, new approaches. It might be that we will have to put our more esoteric projects on hold for a few years – or maybe not, who knows? But as artists we should thrive on, and be inspired by, these changing and challenging times.

    In the meantime, I totally agree with a previous poster that we should put our money where our collective mouthes are and make sure we are supporting good local artist and art initiatives, however they are funded.

20. Just read a great blog by @artsmonkey1, worth a look http://artsmonkey.wordpress.com/2010/09/16/what-price-value/

21. bettingbonuses.biz betting bonuses

22. Pretty nice post. I just stumbled upon your weblog and wanted to mention that I have really enjoyed surfing around your weblog posts.

Comments are closed.