I think the situation in the UK is going down the same lines as Aus, it's
taking longer 'cos of the historical core of Brit culture, plus it being a
more populous, if physically smaller place, but monopolisation is becoming
the name of the game over here too.
I was recently trying to get some contacts on non-mainstream plays being
performed, not by me I hasten to add, and after talking to people in admin
at various theatres I found the advice was 'well, for anything like that
you'll have to try the MAC'
The MAC is the Midlands Arts Centre in Cannon Hill Park in Birmingham.
Basically I was being told that anything unconventional had only one
possible performance venue in the whole of the English Midlands.
In the meantime tRAce continues to prosper, small firms go to the wall, and
our Chancellor propounds the US as the economic model for British society.
Our Labour Chancellor.
Best
Davo
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alison Croggon" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2001 10:55 PM
Subject: Re: Trevor's book
> Mark wrote:
>
> >> But things are probably worse in Australia.
> >>
> The reason things are worse here in that aspect is that we have such heavy
> monopolisation of the mainstream media - only three major media companies,
> and only two (New Ltd and Fairfax) in newspapers. None of the newspapers
> take anything like a serious attitude to arts reporting/reviewing, and
> whatever one thinks of those who do it, they are battling against the tide
> to get any but the most basic coverage in the pages at all. There is very
> little status/money to be had from the arts, except in their more
corporate
> forms.
>
> The coverage is events/celebrity led, and nowt to be done about it. A few
> brave and reckless individuals might make a difference, but the
proprietors
> are on the whole careful not to employ such people - consequently, one
gets
> to read reviews, say, of the latest Rimbaud biography by someone who had
> clearly never heard of Rimbaud before reading the book. (It was a low
> point). The effect, which is not I think entirely deliberate but more by
> default, is a kind of cultural totalitarianism, the creation of an
> "official culture" (by culture I'm meaning the mediation between artist
and
> public). It is not on the whole ill-meaning, but it is generally worse
> than useless - it insulates "the arts" in a kind of vacuum which has
little
> to do with the general culture of ideas in say, science or politics, mere
> consumables. When people complain about elitism in the arts, what they
> mean is generally its Saatchi and Saatchi presentation (which is where a
> large part of Australia Council budget is going). Given that, people can
> be forgiven for thinking that the arts for the rich and leisured, and how
> many have the time or inclination to find out otherwise?
>
> On the other hand... there is a kind of freedom in this situation. Free
of
> expectations of any kind, artists can do what they like. And that can be
> interesting. But I can't say I feel especially sanguine about the
cultural
> atmosphere in this country at the moment - and not just in the "arts
> industry" -
>
> Best
>
> A
>
|