Arts as an Election Issue

REMEMBER C10? BACK in those old days, I started out arguing that the best argument to make was NOT the censorship one, since that played right into the base -- but to attack the very real and legitimate argument about the crushing reality that uncertain funding or financing would bring to the sector. Even I fell down on constantly hammering that argument home. That's the thing about wedge issues. They're designed to overload your reason circuits.

I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but the Conservative Party of Canada is going to win the Canadian Federal Election. Barring some game-changing, incredible clearing of the decks. And the Liberal Party platform, announced yesterday (Yesterday? Really?) probably isn't it.

So again, as I sit in my WGC Council Meeting, and talk to other people (in and among the grinding out of script pages, which is another story. My condo for an uninterrupted 23 hour writing day, and, uh, 12 cc's of adrenaline, I guess) there seems to be a concerted effort toward the practical matter of: how do you talk to these people? Because they do not understand your issues.

As a friend put it recently, "they look at all of you as bought and paid for ten times over by the Liberals anyway."

I tend to think, again, the economic arguments about industry and job creation are going to fly better with this crowd than any notion of culture as society-builder. They simply don't think that way. They don't care.

In Today's Globe & Mail (which, for all I tend to criticize the press these days, really has been all over this culture issue -- they deserve praise for that) Jean-Daniel Lafond, the husband of Canada's Governor General, is profiled by Michael Posner. And besides a bon mot about culture to make us all feel good: "Culture is oxygen," he says some of the smartest things I've seen about culture in the current campaign:

Fundamentally, he said in a recent interview, "it's a problem of education," and the fact that the Conservative government could slash funding for a variety of arts programs and organizations and do it without a large-scale reaction indicates just how much education is needed.

"We need to sensitize people to the importance of the arts. Don't forget, culture is oxygen. We have to protect it and [spending on it] is not wasting money. But it's a dead end to make a confrontation between artists and politicians. The only possible end is demagoguery."

Until the population understands the vital importance of the arts, not just its economic power but its cultural force, "it's very safe for a politician to destroy culture. We have to go further with education. Culture is not elitist. For me, it's an essential part of life. Otherwise, it's dead. But as it is, for more than half the population, culture is not a necessity. We have to go further ... The debate is not just for election campaigns. It's bigger than that. So maybe this is a good crisis. I think it's dangerous to tie the culture only to nationalism. ... Culture is coast to coast. Diversity is easy to talk about, but our country is made with that and if we want solidarity, we have to recognize real diversity, not just to save Quebec or Alberta."

Part of the problem is the very notion of "culture" as "special." Because to the swath of people who are likely to decide this election, it's not. They simply don't care. Yes, if you're an activated, pro-culture voter, you may know why that is ultimately short-sighted, self-defeating, even -- dare I say it -- un-Canadian -- but that case has not been effectively made, which is kind of why we're in this fix. And the problem is that the less culture matter the more provincial Canada becomes and the more the close-minded appeal of the Tory message will resonate. The only possible end is demagoguery.

Right now, the Conservatives' chance is based upon the fact that the left is split and the right is united. But that doesn't have to remain so forever. A few more cycles with these guys in charge and the oxygen sucked out of anything cultural (perhaps to be put to Sports -- and let's not kid ourselves, a dynamic that pits amateur sport funding versus the Arts would be like Christmas and Baal rolled into one for these guys) and that socially progressive Canada that most of us treasure will look as quaint as crackly old Newsreel footage.

There is nothing, after all, Progressive about these Conservatives.

But if they're driving, you have to talk to them.

So the attacks that are shrill and hysterical have to go. Yes, check things like the WGC's Election Page, and try to figure out if you're in a riding where your vote really could make a difference. And ask questions of your candidates and go to all candidates' meetings. But after that, spend some time thinking about the future, and how you're going to build a bridge to two audiences -- 1) Canadians. And 2) Conservatives.

Jill Golick discovered an interesting new front when a canvasser came to her door. She wrote about it on Weinman's Macleans site:

The NDP canvasser at my door the other night was a biologist and breast cancer researcher. He says the Harper government treats his industry in exactly the same way; decimating it with a thousand small cuts.

The sciences and arts aren’t the only ones being slowly strangled by Harper’s cuts. Perhaps the arts community would be more effective telling those stories than our own.

Harper is at war with the civil service, and cutting lots of industries that don't immediately resonate in his orbit. Finding those people, building bridges to those issues might offer another way.

Because trust me when I say this: they love it when we talk about how special we are and how important we are. They want more of that. It makes us deliciously easy to ignore.

The Alberta-bound Conservative mindset is a pure distillation of quid pro quo politics. "What does supporting your issue get me?"

In the end, we're going to need to figure out the answer to that question. We ignore it at our peril.