Grey "art strike" protest against B.C. arts cuts planned for next week

So why do artists assume that they are entitled to public funding? If you people are as "independent" as you claim to be, how about paying for your own art?

JC- to begin, government funding actually only makes up a very small portion of most arts organizations operating budgets. The majority of income comes from other revenues such as box office, sponsorships, individual donations, and in-kind exchanges. All arts organizations, at least all those threatened by these funding cuts, are not-for-profit- meaning they are ultimately aiming to only break-even every year (or raise enough income to re-invest in future seasons, projects or productions.)

The cost of staging productions and installations is incredibly expensive, but the benefits bestowed by a strong cultural industry exceed these costs on paper and is less tangible ways. There are a plethora of studies and real-world examples demonstrating how a vibrant arts and culture industry is of great benefit to a region's economy (by their own numbers, BC sees $1.38 returned for every $1 invested in arts), tourism industry, and general quality of life. It has also proven to be important in attracting and keeping a creative, intelligent and skilled workforce to/in urban centres. These benefits are all ultimately experienced across our entire province, so it therefore makes good fiscal sense for the government to make these more accessible to general public. Andrew Taylor at Arts Journal summarizes it very well when he explains "The fundamental function of nonprofits is to deliver goods and services at below their cost of production. They exist to provide something of value to a community or a society at a quality, quantity, or diversity that traditional markets won't bear, and the public sector can't or won't produce."

The issue is not one of independence- in a sense, government patronage creates greater independence for our artists in that they do not need to re-adjust their work to maximize its commercial potential or soften the edges to make corporate supporters more comfortable (incidentally, corporate giving levels tend to correlate with government- keep this in mind if any of that "private sector will have to step up" rhetoric pops up in the coming days.)

Vancouver arts will continue in the absence of funding- but we will see a distinct drop in quality (of production anyways), audience members bearing the full brunt of these production costs, and the province at large being worse off for the loss.

On a tangential note, I would encourage any members of arts organizations reading this to encourage your restaurant partners to become active in the conversation/protest as well. BC's food service industry stands to be hit doubly hard by recent fiscal revelations- first with the HST increasing their cost-to-provide, and now with the prospect of fewer arts events occurring, meaning fewer individuals dining out before a show (a crucial source of revenue for those restaurants in proximity to performance spaces.)

BP has summarised the importance of the cultural economy very well. Successful places (city regions) require a strong cultural economy to attract and retain the very best of people (talent) and companies (inward investment). Vancouver is still a very young city and lacks an established cultural economy found in older cities such as New York and San Francisco. Investment is needed, not only for artists and other creative individuals / organisations, but also for programs to encourage people to partake and be immersed in the cultural economy. The Eastside cultural crawl is a fantastic initiative and the proposed new Vancouver Art Gallery will go a long way to enhancing the local scene. There also needs to be an understanding of the importance of related cultural spaces (i.e not museums, galleries etc), local licencing laws need to be encouraged to allow independent live music venues and bars/pubs to establish themselves instead of the corporate venues found along Granville streets. If these venues are allowed to operate successfully coupled with a strong arts scene (galleries, events, etc) we will enter a virtuous cycle which will ultimately benefit the wider local and regional economy.

Public funding (that is tax dollars) that are spent on the arts actually match the amount of money that artists and cultural sector workers put into federal and provincial taxes (never mind sales tax and property tax). This statement is a result of research done by the Arts and Cultural Industries Association of Manitoba. As a cultural sector worker, I am fine with my tax dollars going to support culture, as I am sure all artists and cultural sector workers are in BC. I am sure there are many people who are not Arts sector workers that are okay with it too!

Let us not forget that miniscule cuts to public spending involving the arts create massive public outcry, such that the government looks like it's doing a great job in balancing the books, but it's really a shell game with the press, with the arts and culture sector as the pawns...it happens every time.

If the government said it was going to close all the libraries, for example (which are funded with public dollars and are the home of cultural works) I think the population would have a different opinion about whether we should fund culture...

But supporting arts and culture is NOT about economic impact, or whether I think that it's fine to spend my taxes on culture, it is about the human impact and our personality in the global marketplace. It is about our children growing up creatively and therefore ensuring their, our and our country's success. It is about recognizing that arts and culture is around us every minute of every day. Questioning whether we should or should not fund the arts over other things is (in the words of John Ralston Saul), a Jesuit argument...culture is the motor of every society, he says, and helps us define ourselves.