By Hayley Conole
Contrary to what many believe, private investment in the arts isn’t always a good thing, a recent meeting on arts funding was told.
Janice Price, president of the Kimmel Centre for the Performing Arts in Philadelphia, told a round-table meeting at the National Arts Centre that private investors have too much influence, resulting in a lack of originality in the performing arts.
“The arts are facing a death of creativity and a death of risk taking when they are influenced by financial needs,” she says.
The meeting saw artists, philanthropists, and politicians discuss how to give the Canadian arts scene a much-needed financial shot in the arm. Public and private partnerships were a major theme of the meeting. But private investment wasn’t universally applauded.
Richard Bradshaw, general director of the Canadian Opera Company, agreed with Price’s assessment.
He says there is a great fear of taking risks in the arts and that private grants make risk-taking even more difficult.
“We have to risk and we have to believe that our audiences want to be challenged,” he says, “not just give them La Bohème every season because it guarantees attendance.”
Some of the round-table’s keynote speakers suggested that investors want to see their money grow, so they tend to invest in big productions because they can be assured of a return on their money.
But not all private investors shy away from avant-garde productions.
Robert Waite, senior vice president of communication and public affairs at CIBC says he is disappointed that there is so much emphasis on tried and true productions such as The Nutcracker and The Barber of Seville, even though these draw big audiences.
“We need the new, we need innovation to keep the arts alive,” he says. CIBC gives $2 million to more than 200 arts organizations in Canada each year.
According to round-table speakers, the problem with the arts does not lie just with a lack of innovation. Hilary Pearson, president of the Philanthropic Foundation of Canada, says there are problems with the government funding strategy as well.
She says the government’s “matching gifts” system, where money is contributed only once a private investor steps forward, is particularly flawed.
“It’s a trap,” says Pearson. “People resent strongly the notion that they must ante-up because others (have done so)…I think it’s a wrong-minded strategy.” Pearson says this puts pressure on private investors to take the first step and the government should lead the way when it comes to arts contribution.
Large theatre companies aren’t the only ones affected.
The Third Wall Theatre Company received $15,000 this year from its first corporate sponsor, the Trillium Foundation, but has not yet received any federal government funding.
The semi-professional theatre group produces mainly classic theatre such as Julius Caesar, but with a modern twist.
Ryan Anderson, communications director for the company, acknowledges that it is necessary for the federal government to focus on larger productions.
However, he says the government also needs to nurture the smaller companies so they can grow into bigger ones.
While Third Wall received a grant from the City of Ottawa in the past, Anderson says the main problem is that the provincial government often overlooks Ottawa’s theatres.
“The companies that are preferred the most are Toronto-based companies,” he says. “The ratio of grants received by Toronto from the Ontario government to those given to other centres in Ontario…isn’t equal.”
Ottawa’s smaller theatre groups rely on memberships, ticket sales and small donations rather than government funding or corporate sponsorship to stay afloat.
The Ottawa Little Theatre (OLT) has never received government funding since its opening in 1913.
Elizabeth Holden from the OLT says that while the company is happy to remain self-sufficient, she would still like to see the arts receive a better deal.
“Generally we would all be better off if there was more funding for the arts.”