When Artists Carry the Torch

I BEGAN THIS RESPONSE ON THE DAY (19 November 2008) we learned that the Conservatives never did intend to replace the arts funding programs they cut last summer. At that time, Canadian Heritage Minister Josee Verner had hinted that more "efficient" arts programs would be put in place to replace the cancelled $45 million originally destined for traveling arts companies. Several months and an election later, the Conservative government finally made their decision clear. They let it be known that the money taken away from so-called inefficient programs would go to the promotion of sports, including the 2010 Vancouver Olympics, and specifically to the torch relay. Instead of a "handful of artists travelling around the world, this will have the eyes of over three billion people around the planet looking at Canada" (Chase). The switch is a useful illustration of the Conservative approach to culture. The Olympic torch relay is to become a spectacular form of national theatre to be witnessed by billions across the planet. Why promote the travel of professional theatre companies abroad when you can have the whole world watching Canadians on their own national stage? Indeed, the logic of the transfer in funding is justified according to the Conservatives by the fact that money for arts programs has not been taken out of the Heritage Ministry but recycled within it. It's all culture; what's the problem? And so Harper can play the populist card (badmouthing the "people, you know, at a rich gala all subsidized by taxpayers claiming their subsidies aren't high enough when they know those subsidies have actually gone up" [Benzie]) and still claim that he is supporting culture. The funding cuts are old news now, especially after the pre-Christmas political crisis in Ottawa. But the issue was crucial in the elections, showing that "culture" is a blunt instrument that conservative politicians use for gain. Culture is invoked by conservatives (both in Canada and in U.S., for example, Sarah Palin and Joe Sixpack) to divide the country, to win populist favour, and to try to connect with "ordinary" people, even though in every other way they ignore the concerns of those same constituencies. That Harper should set himself up as a populist is ludicrous and hypocritical. (Speaking of galas, his wife chaired a National Arts Centre gala just last year.) Still, Conservatives haven't given up entirely on the prestige of high culture. To prove that the new Heritage Minister James Moore is not an entirely uncultivated person, a Globe and Mail article had made a point of emphasizing his arts connections. These come in the form of the pieces of Baroque music that he includes among the thousands of songs on his iPod. "'I can't sit down and read for more than half an hour unless I am listening to baroque music," says Moore when pressed for examples of what sorts of culture Canada's latest arts minister likes to consume. 'Baroque's best for listening to when you study because it's layered music; it's intense; it's all about rhythms. You'll have a percussion section going and you'll have a string section ... and so what it does is it actually gets your brain going and thinking in ways that promote rhythm; he says. 'When you have rhythm--that's what you're looking for when you're studying"' (Chase). This is rather an unusual understanding of Baroque music, generally perceived by the general public as formulaic and stilted. What is Moore referring to? Monteverdi's Orfeo? Vivaldi's Four Seasons? Efficient background music. But what really gains Moore's favour is the recently released Canadian war film Passchendaele. "These are the kinds of things we ought to be doing and the kind of things we ought to support; he said of the ambitious production, which has received mixed reviews across North America (Chase). The Conservatives thought political gain was to be had by making disparaging remarks about the arts and the (supposedly) privileged artist class. …