Blogging as a phenomena is old enough to have developed its own rules of behaviour.

Well, it is nice that some standards have developed, but I am not happy about all the expectations.

Let me digress.

About 10 years ago, I offered to help out a committee of a professional association I belonged to at the time. I said, I volunteer to do anything at all that you need done but do not ask me to attend meetings. Of course, I was asked to attend meetings. First it was about working out what needed to be done. But thereafter meeting attendance was an expectation of volunteering.

Everybody hates meetings. I researched this and prepared a workshop on how to have effective meetings. So I find it difficult to sit through a meeting that is dawdling, dragging, or imploding. Don't ask me to be there.

Back to blogging. I want to support other bloggers that I enjoy reading. But do not ask me to do the memes, the lists of 5 things that blah-blah, and so on. Do not ask me to take up your theme for the month.

Appreciate the fact that I am a subscriber and that I read you everyday--whether you know that or not.

So, for the record, I don't like the fact that you are not considered a member of the blogging community if you do not play along and meet the expectations of other bloggers. I am just trying to meet the needs of my own readers.

A feminist critique of the Canada Council and the funding system that can make or break an artist in Canada. Too often, one is afraid to address injustice for fear of destroying one's career. So what have I got to lose?

The following is a response to reportage in the Georgia Straight on arts in B.C. In the Nov. 2 issue there were two seemingly unrelated articles in the arts section, that both had references to survival as an artist.

From a historical perspective, prior to Canada Council funding, Vancouver was a community of artists, working together, organizing shows, festivals and readings, perhaps 'artists colony' has some meaning to people. At this time there was equality for women artists, who were not inhibited in producing their art, for example, Jone Payne did pyrotechnics at the Vancouver Art Gallery, Jeanie Kamins made community art, Maxine Gadd and Judith Copithorn, readings at the Sound Gallery.

By introducing a structure for distribution of funding, sold to us under the guise of more freedom to make art, the C.C. destroyed the community and replaced it with a hierarchy, dominated by men of course, this being the sexist sixties. At that point, alternative art became institutionalized, artists economically controlled by their "peers", through the funding. My theory, that the best government control mechanism for any free thinking or radical group is to find the morally weak and set them up as the representatives. Once created, this machine will self replicate.

At the Visual Poetry Festival at UBC in 1967, all the media attention was diverted to Michael Morris and Gary Lee Nova, the "stars" of Intermedia. Other male artists of Intermedia went on to teaching in major educational facilities, young women training as art workers were subjected to this same attitude. Most of the contemporary women artists, were ignored, forgotten or marginalized by the nature of their work which was often organic. Helen Goodwin, exhausted by the years of unsuccessful funding for her dance group, eventually walked into the ocean. The traditions of that aesthetic and subsequent power structure continue to this day. Conveniently, one history is written and another is entirely forgotten with the aid of Canada Council funded art history books. ?

Many of the women I knew from that earlier period, could be classified as "behind the scenes" women. The vibrant artists scene could not have existed without these women, who made up the audience, cooked and provided food and support, contributed ideas, worked on the projects without getting credit but were really discouraged by the prevailing chauvinist climate to be artists in their own right. Some women became wives or partners and due to their connection in this way, seemed to garner more credibility. The other way for women media artists to become accepted was to become part of the groups who were offshoots of Intermedia, such as the Western Front or the Video Inn and later, during the seventies, Pumps. It is interesting to note that while the "men" belong to "schools" of art during this period, artists like Gathie Faulk and Martha Sturdy stand out as individuals.

Women artists working in the fields of social justice or textiles were not considered important. Their work was not seen as a contribution to art or culture, but instead was taken for granted. One example of these women was Melissa Gibbs who was part of the New Era Social Club collective along with Roy Kiyooka and Glen Lewis and who worked at the Georgia Straight during the early seventies. She assisted Dan McLeod during a very difficult period when he was close to losing a newspaper that is now highly successful and cannot be ignored as part of the west coast identity. Her presence within the art scene is difficult to define, but the whole culture of the late sixties and seventies in Vancouver is impossible to keep within the bounds of art history, but is more suitable to an anthro-social scrutiny. For example, why does the Museum of Anthropology contain works of art?

The Complicity of Artists Funding in All Of This

This year, not including matching grants from other funding sources, the Canada Council gave the largest artist run groups, Western Front Society, a privately owned institution, $221,500 and Video Inn/Satellite Video Exchange over $200,000. They, along with artists and and other gallery administrator/curators connected to them, have dominated "alternative art" for over 30 years, in Vancouver, and along with their contemporaries in other parts of Canada, through the artist run gallery system.

Although some galleries try to remain independent and some people in ARGs are socially responsible, the lure of accessible money and guaranteed success is far too tempting to ignore. Why bite the hand that feeds? Now, the $50 million in "supplementary grants to help arts organizations that already receive council funding" (Heather Redfern, executive director of Vancouver’s Alliance for Arts and Culture), reward is heaped on reward.

"Redfern pointed out that the $50 million is just a short-term commitment to two years’ worth of funding. What’s needed next, she said, is to make the $50 million a permanent increase, and then beef it up with the added $100 million arts groups say is needed to sustain and grow culture in this country." (Straight-Nov2, 2006) (Organizations can start applying for the supplementary grants through www.canadacouncil.ca/ beginning Monday [November 6]; the deadline is December 15. Their proposed two-year plans will be assessed by a jury of peers.)

"The other third of the new money is being earmarked for increased support to individual artists, and for both improving public access to the arts and helping Canadian troupes tour the country and internationally. “There’s been an explosion of touring in Canada, both internationally and within the country, but funds have not increased to match that,” said a supportive Redfern. “I’ve been on a [council] touring jury and it’s heartbreaking.”> Janet Smith - Georgia Straight, Nov2, 2006

So, if the present system is fair, why are the majority of full time dedicated artists and musicians still starving, while art industry salaried or successful professionals get the biggest grants?

There is no longer any artistic free will, as (Ron) Burnett (President, ECIAD) says, "We're trying to resituate the process of creativity within an understanding of how industry works. For example, if they want to be a painter, they have to understand how the gallery system works." > Janet Smith - Georgia Straight, Nov2, 2006

What is this system? It is the funding industry run by arts organizations through the "jury of peers". Artists are no longer trained to be artists, but 'art businessmen', using connections to "sell" their work to the galleries, networking their way to the top to become "established". Coupled with matching grants from other funding bodies, these "established" artists are eligible for huge amounts of money, for BC this year, for example from the C.C. alone, Jeff Carter $45,000, Claudia Minerva Culos-Medina $59.000, Julie Andreyev $60,000, David Rimmer $60,000, Jean Routhier $60,000, Steven Sanderson $50,000, Paul Wong $60,000 and others for a total of $796,486 for individual artists in the Media Arts.

True, media art costs a lot of money, but the costs of production in digital media has significantly decreased and a lot of equipment and facilities are already paid for, supposedly for artists use. But this is always designated by a careful bureaucracy, to artists who bring in more money through their projects. Media artists and musicians should have better access to the tools of production based on need, that doesn't include the inherent politics of these groups and pre-approved art. For a while, there was some social justice funding to media for community work, but that ended when the "Arts and Media" got changed to the "Media Arts", under Tom Sherman. When the C.C. gets its funding cut, "it" will consolidate. You can bet that when Harper starts hacking, it won't be the funding to well established groups.


However, if an artist is "established", why go to the CC for money? Wouldn't an "established" artist have more luck raising funds from other industry sources?

The $17.4 million in grants to B.C. from the C.C. for 2005 - 2006 was represented by a total of 106 jurors from BC. That's $174,000 aprox. (or more?)designated by each juror and well worth having some connection to. We are specifically told, from an industry viewpoint, to network, as part of our job as an artist. Having someone from your group working at the C.C. probably also helps.

"The figures are quite clear," said FranÃcois Lachapelle, head of the section, on the line to the Straight from Ottawa. "Only 15 or 10 years ago, we were able to fund roughly one artist out of three applicants on the senior level. Now we cannot assist more than one artist out of 10 applicants." The council's proposed solution is to cut the pie up in a radically new way. The most striking of the suggested changes is at the top of the system. The richest funds handed out under the current arrangement--$34,000 grants, each intended to fund a year of work by an established visual artist--would be replaced by a group of $50,000 allotments, each renewable over three years for a total of $150,000 apiece, a drool-inducing prospect for most working artists. - Brian Lynch, Straight, Nov. 2004

Peggy Campbell, a filmmaker who is trying to be helpful, gives workshops on how to make your application "stand out from the rest". It's competition, using all the rules of cutthroat business, not for the sake of art, but rather the art form of bureaucracy, clothing the machinations of control.

Curators/artists are churned out by the dozen every year, locked into this system. Society has spent a lot of money on the children they love, to become artists, there has to be some sort of industry to take them. Unfortunately, the industrial commodity is our most sacred creative quality. Why has art become sublimated to this atrocity?

"But at the same time, the economies necessary to support it remain fragile, and questions about representation and identity – “Whose art is it, anyway?” – are constant reminders of the vagaries of art’s integral “value.”" - Melanie O'Brian. While the eagerly awaited, "Vancouver Art and Economies", co-published with Artspeak, ("one of Canada’s most influential artist-run centres, assesses the “state of the arts” in Vancouver" - Arsenal Pulp), is not yet available through the public library's reference section, I doubt it will address the inequities I have touched on above but will focus on Vancouver's lusty photo conceptual industry.

Under the C.C.'s soviet style socialism, you have to focus on their industrial structure as a means of survival as an artist. It requires time and inclination to become a robot in their system, which is ironic as the WF has 6 artists in residence rendering that very thing. Another linguistic irony is the use of the word "swarm" and "INfest" for the annual get together of government funded artist run galleries. "InFest is about infesting the world with these new models of galleries," (Keith) Wallace says, as the meeting breaks up and Western Front members clatter around in the kitchen at the back of their building. The sun has set. It's time for dinner. - "Artists at the Helm", Robin Laurence, Straight, Feb. 2004

Some artists will get a lifetime of support because they are closely networked into this structure. They know how to get the grants. Look at the records. The protective urban mythology surrounding the grant system is "a crap shoot", "roll of the dice", "luck of the draw", "I just do it to keep in practise". Why fill out an application form, which takes significant work, why not just get a ticket? A lottery system would actually work if it was fair, putting previous winners out of the draw.

Finally, there is no transparency in the way the money is distributed, C.C. reports are always two years behind, you never find out who are on these juries, unless you applied for a grant and make a request in writing after you get the results. What are they ashamed of? You'd think they would be proud of these awards, publish the profiles and projects of the artists and organizations on the web along with the juries that selected them. Artists who have been unsuccessful should also have the right to have their project published to see what we have missed in our cultural landscape.

Is it too much to ask that all funding bodies publish this information, why must there be such a veil of secrecy if we are truly amongst our "peers"?

A single post by Megan Casey offers several examples of adapting the delivery of a single message for readers with different needs or information processing styles.

Reading a newspaper article about how the popularity of the provincial Liberal government has seemingly not been affected by all the questions about its integrity served to remind me that I wanted to comment on the lack of integrity of our provincial government.  

Admittedly all our current political parties and most, if not all, politicians are “integrity challenged”, it is just that the Liberals are the party running our province giving them a public ability to display this lack of integrity.   

Integrity: adherence to moral and ethical principles; honesty; freedom from corrupting influence or motive; uprightness; rectitude. 

Integrity is not about being able to say “I/we have done nothing wrong”, it is about behaving in a consistent manner; one can behave one way here and another way there. Nor does one get to avoid or ignore reality just because it does not fit into your world view or political philosophy. 

Behaving with integrity is the foundation on which government behaviour should be built. Sadly this is not the way current governments at any level behave. 

This question of integrity comes to mind every time I hear the government advertisement about the rent subsidy program for families making $35,000 or less per year. $35,000 per year and you need a rent subsidy. $7300 per year and you do not need a rent subsidy – if you are on Income Assistance.  

I concede that to a certain extent this is comparing apples and oranges but … for a government that acknowledges that the cost of renting is so high in the lower mainland that at an income of $35,000 a subsidy is needed, to claim that $375 a month is adequate for a person on Income Assistance to find shelter is duplicitous. 

This behaviour lacks Integrity. 

Another glaring example is that if you are on or eligible for Income Assistance and you deal with the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance you will receive $610 a month of which $375 is for shelter. If you have to spend $600 a month on rent (if you can find something habitable for that) and only have $10 to live on – it is your problem. 

However should you go to a shelter and use the BC Housing outreach program to find housing you can get an additional rent subsidy up to $120 per month. At these levels of income the $120 has a huge impact on your quality of life, especially the quality of housing. 

It gives an unfair competitive advantage in the competition to find housing to those who receive the extra $120, further marginalizing those on “just Income Assistance.” It also makes the outreach/shelter programs appear more successful than they really are – at the expense of the most vulnerable people. 

This behaviour lacks Integrity. 

I am considering writing a brochure on the existence of this subsidy and the steps required to obtain/qualify for this subsidy in order to level the playing field, promoting fairness and integrity. 

Could I get this subsidy? It is a moot point because, as badly needed as the extra $120 maybe, the actions required in getting this subsidy would lack integrity.  

The government is behaving without integrity, with a total lack of fairness and are “cheating” in making their housing program “successful.  

I cannot take advantage of their lack of integrity and get an extra $120 – because I have integrity. 

Talk about Irony.

overheard a guy living outside asking another one: do all those people who drive right through here (he was talking about powell street) even Notice us?

I thought that was an excellent question.

What kind of mixing makes audio gold?

While B.C. is the first jurisdicition in North America to implement a significant tax on carbon (Quebec did so last year, but it's negligable), we're decades behind Europe. Findland and Sweden have had systems in place since the early 1990s and a number of other countries, including Denmark, Netherlands, Poland, Switzerland, Great Britain and New Zealand, also already tax carbon in one form or another.

How does B.C.'s new carbon tax stack up against these other countries? According to the Sightline Institute, B.C.'s tax is nowhere near the highest, but it is by far the most consistent and comprehensive. For example, while the carbon tax rates in Findland and Sweden are roughly $27 and 69$ per tonne respectively (ours will start at $10), they exempt a number of industries. Our tax, by comparison, is far more wide reaching and has no misleading fineprint. It's so well crafted, in fact, that Sightline calls the new policy "a huge political breakthrough." Their praise continues:

"It’s ready to be copied elsewhere in Cascadia and beyond. And I mean that literally: copied and pasted into the law books. It’s that good."

If you'd like to read about the positives and negative aspects of our carbon tax, the Sightline Institute has a good overview on their blog. For a brief description of other carbon taxes around the world, check out the Carbon Tax Center.

The By-elections are upon us and this is an especially important time for us UBCers... or shall I say Vancouver Quadra residents. While I still vote in my home riding of Windsor, Ontario, I'm sure there are many readers and UBC students who will be casting a ballot Monday. Remember to vote as the papers are making this out to be closer than originally thought! Here are links the candidates their homepages:

Joyce Murray - Liberal

Deborah Meredith - Conservative

Rebecca Coad - NDP

Dan Grice - Green

And for more info about all the candidates... check out recent articles about them...

The Georgia Straight

Vancouver Sun

The Province

Okay, I know. It is the ultimate environmentalist clichè...save the spotted owl...we've heard it all before, over and over. To some of you it may be a clichè, but to me it is so much more. It's not just over the spotted owl that this battle is being fought. The spotted owl depends on old growth forest to survive, as do many other species. The B.C. Government has issued a news release announcing

Recently, I received notice that my credit card was going to be discontinued. Sigh. So began the search for a replacement. I stumbled upon Citizens Bank and found their Oxfam Canada credit card which will donate $0.10 for each transaction I make. Winner! I would rather my typical spending help others than me fussing with another points-based reward card.

Every little bit helps!

https://www.citizensbank.ca/Personal/Products/VISACards/OxfamVISA/

Some of you might have seen advertisements for (or even attended) a Grant Institute training program in Metro Vancouver in the past… If they come back again you might want to do some homework before signing up. The NonProfit Times has a story on the numerous complaints against them with Better Business Bureaus in the US. I’ve heard of similar problems with their programs in Canada. Buyer beware.

The Word of the Day at Dictionary.Com is "listless":
Having no desire or inclination; indifferent; heedless; spiritless.

Reading the definition this Sunday morning, I saw this interpretation: without a list.

I had been traveling and working so much in the past 2 months that I could not keep up with my posting here and, as time went by, I felt even more listless about posting.

Then I got it into my head that I needed to make a list of possible topics before I could even make one post. But I made my list yesterday, and still... listless.

So what hit me this morning was the thought that our busy lives are managed by lists. But what happens when you have no more lists?

Who wants a retirement that is listless.

I'm not lazy, I have chronic fatigue and a school of life education, which makes me tired, of all the rhetoric, which sometimes allows bad art to be good and vice versa, so I compensate, by trying to focus on the most critical things affecting our planet, ie: the human psyche and its ensuing compulsive greed. In this I find a great source of inspiration, in both ignoring it and exploring it.

Canada's Minister of Fisheries and Oceans today announced that our country will not vote in favour of the United Nations General Assembly resolution calling for a moratorium on high seas bottom trawling. Given the global decline in fish stocks and the highly destructive effects of bottom trawling, this announcement is very disturbing. I take exception to many of the comments in Minister Loyola

Environmentalists are frequently discredited as being alarmist. For those of you that are not yet alarmed, check out the facts. Land Over 80% of the world's ancient forests are gone. The land is where we store our garbage, including used toxic chemicals and nuclear waste, and the garbage is piling up. Desertification is happening all over the world due to land degredation. You should be alarmed

Oldtown News
Vancouver, BC

PEEWEE IS MISSING

Hi All,

Please help find the beautiful Peewee. He belongs to Colleen Nystedt and went missing from his home on Kits Point. He doesn't have his collar on as he was returning from his summer vacation home on Keats.

Peewww is very friendly and will become ornery if he misses on any of his regular Friday board meetings at Rossini's where he has many friends.

Please do whatever you can to bring Peewee home to his Mistress, Colleen.

Colleen feels that Peewee scooted over to Kits beach as she was unloading the jeep from their trip.

It says it takes a village to raise a child, well I say it takes a City to bring a Peewee home.

Please everyone be on the lookout for Peewee. If you suspect anyone of peewee-napping or have seen the notorious 2 year old Peewee please contact Colleen asap at 778 999-7677 or feel free to post sightings here.

Thanks

Jamuie Lee

If there's anything that the Salmon Aquaculture Industry and their opponents have in common, it's fear. And anger. I saw plenty of both at the Special Committee on Sustainable Aquaculture's public hearing in Campbell River on Wednesday. I saw it in the faces of the bosses and workers, in the eyes of the Chiefs, and I heard it in the voices of the concerned citizens. I felt my own blood boil as

The Security boss at Carnegie Center who wears a tag around his neck with the name "Skip" on it won't give anybody his last name, or tell anybody if Skip is his real first name. That's not suprising since his conduct as head of Security is too often illegal. We have learned his last name, "Everall" from a commenter on this blog and confirmed from other internet posts that a "Skip Everall" does

Oldtown News
Vancouver, BC


THE VISION NOMINATION


Tomorrow is the big day for the Visionistas as they board buses, party on the drive and juice their way over to the Croatian Cultural Centre where three Men are vying to become the Mayoral candidate to take on Councillor Peter Ladner.

The lead up to the Vision nomination has been short on politics and big on membership sign-ups.

According to Vision they have close to 13,000 members but how many of these members will actually show up to vote on Sunday, June 15 is anyone's guess. Probably not a huge number if the day starts out sunny and warm.

It's only a feeling but I expect 4,000-5,000 Vision members will actually vote and if my projection is accurate, Vision may choose to only provide percentage numbers of the top two candidates instead of an actual vote tally. This saves Vision any embarrassment since they have gleefully gloated over how many members they have and by extension, how popular a party they are. As my readers may know, 15 year old and non-voting citizens are able to join Vision and vote in the nomination process although they cannot vote in the municipal election.

So what happens tomorrow you may ask. Well like everyone else I'm uncertain who may win but I have a hunch who might. I could be wrong or I could be right. Of course, I like to remind folks, Oldtown News, picked Councillor Ladner when most mainstream press outlets continually projected that Mayor Sam Sullivan would easily beat Mr. Ladner and Councillor Ladner prevailed.

Based on 4,000 - 5,000 members voting at the Vision nomination meeting and because Vision claimed an original membership of 2,000 and if 11,000 new members signed up-- I suspect that a good chunk of those original two thousand members may be in the camps of Councillor Raymond Louie and Park Commissioner, Allan De Genova. In fact, I would give Councillor Louie, 1000 of those members with Mr. De Genova taking 600 while Mr. Robertson can lay claim to 400.

If you factor in another 10,000 members and with MLA Gregor Robertson claiming 5,000 of those new sign-ups which leaves about 5,000 for Mr. Louie and Mr. De Genova.

If Mr. Louie and Mr De Genova evenly split those 5,000 new members, Mr Louie will likely have 3500 potential votes and Mr. De Genova will carry a potential of 3,100 memberships into the nomination.

If 50 percent of Mr. Robertson's supporters turn-out, this would give him a base of 2,500 votes and if you throw in around 400 more of the original 2000 members which is entirely possible and 50 percent of them vote, Mr. Robertson would have 2700 potential votes he can tap into.

Councillor Louie most likely enjoys the support of 1000 of the old Vision members and if you add in 2500 new voter sign-ups this gives him a projected total of 3500 votes. Mr. Louie most likely would bring in at a minimum 50 percent of those votes which gives him 1750 votes, however, he is an ethnic candidate so turn-out for him could be much stronger considering he could wind up being this first Chinese candidate to run for Mayor of Vancouver.

Mr De Genova most likely will bring in 50 percent of his supporters so he would have a potential 1550 votes.

Mr. Louie even if he only brings out 50 percent of his pool of votes, he winds up with 1750 votes which would put him in second place and that is exactly where he wants to be.

And if by chance, Mr De Genova comes in 3rd place, his 2nd place preference votes would most likely go to Mr. Louie although a number of them may go to Mr. Robertson. For Mr. Robertson to prevail over Mr. Louie he would need to obtain at least 200 of Mr. De Genova's votes and the likelihood of that happening isn't strong.

Mr Louie most likely will receive 3150 votes and the nomination.

Even though there are many variables involved in nominations, however, just for fun, I'm going out on a limb and projecting Councillor Raymond Louie to be the winner tomorrow.

Imagine that!

Jamie Lee Hamilton
tricia_foxx@yahoo.com

I have mixed feelings about one of my random internet finds: 'Sexual Assault Bingo'. Each square represents a different example of blaming the victim or justifying rape. Hypothetically, next time rape is mentioned and Mr. or Miss. Patriarchy throws out "It was two in the morning. What were you doing out?" or "This is going to destroy his [the perp's] family, you understand" pull out your bingo card and go to town.

I could never see anyone who has had to go through the excruciating process of dealing with their sexual assault or that of a loved one pulling out a game (though it would definitely make a wonderful visual cue to the unenlightened that what they're saying is trite and predictable). It seems like a subject that is too serious to mock with a game associated with Church halls and blue-tinted hair. However, as someone who has played 'Hipster Bingo' when at local concerts I know first hand how something so silly can call one's attention to the predictability of stereotypes in the media and subcultures. Isn't it sad when common threads emerge in worn-out conversations?

For instance, Andrea Rubenstein over at Official Shrub.com has a fun 'Geek Girl Stereotype Bingo'. She explains her game like this:

Basically the rules are that when you see a media article, blog post, or anything else talking about women in relation to a geeky hobby (gaming, technology, science, etc) you pull out this scorecard and mark down which points the article touches on.

The squares cover everything from "The colour choice(s) being attractive to women" and "Talks about weight loss". It definitely focuses your attention to the way women are portrayed and/or marketed to in the technological industry. Although I rarely read blogs or magazines about gaming or technology I do read such literary gems like People.com and US Weekly. And I'm sure some of you out there have your own niche subgenres that has some repetitive anti-feminist touches. So, Antigone Feminists, do you have any Bingos that you would like to share? Perhaps 'Weight Loss Surgery Article Bingo' or 'Young Starlette Interview Bingo' (which would definitely have the squares "she's so down to Earth!" and "fame hasn't changed her").