3 Facts About Earmarks that the City Council Should Know

This isn’t a policy paper below. These are my thoughts after working out at the gym. I do think I’m right, I’m just hedging for the reasons you’d imagine. Here it goes:

3 Facts About Earmarks

1. They infantalize the arts community.

The earmark process turns professionals into professional suck-ups. Filing grant applications is reasonable. Making us need to establish succubent relationships with you to get what we need is dis-respectful to all involved. Everyone likes people who give them money. We’ll bring you flowers if you let us. But it exposes that somewhere in there, politicians think of artists/the arts community as pets. The city would benefit from being a real world class arts center. If you make the arts community a petting zoo, thats all its gonna be. You have to take yourself out of the equation. The work we’re doing isn’t meaningless. You need to respect it beyond politics. It’s like religion. It’s art. Please participate, and get out of the way.

2. They undermine the ability of the State arts agency/ DC Commission on the Arts to effectively design integrated community support/granting programs.

Using earmarks – two or three a year – is one thing. But using em constantly to grow organizations and fund special projects It would be absurd if I was walking into the DPW and after listening to a friend of someone who lives on a street spend one quarter of the DPW budget on something more or less out of the blue. Its nonsensical. Thats what you are doing when you write earmarks. Haphazard support is wasteful support. Support must constantly evolve and it requires attention. The decisions you allow yourselves to make in a few hours undermine all that attention. Put your faith in the experts youve hired to get it right and make certain they do. If you are committed to getting the maximum return on the citys investment,  you need to give the commission more money (including a discretionary fund that could be used – with oversight from the commissioners – to handle emergency-type need), and make us stop grabbing for scraps at your table.

3.They skew the success curve toward fundraisers, away from artists.

Artists – and the arts organizations that serve them – are notoriously NOT politicians. Right now the organizations that are getting the extra pieces of the pie are the ones who are the best at development work. Are you trying to fund an arts program or are you handing out pie to people who court you well? Do you know enough to really know what our community wants/needs? What it already has, and is already developing? Have some patience, and faith in the process you oversee. I know you’re only trying to help, and they’re all around, and very nice, and very convincing. I know that. And you do help with earmarks – a few a year. But for the reasons outlined above, its not really good for the city.

To sum up I’d like to add two things. One: I really want an earmark, and would make excellent use of the one-time investment. Two: the problem with earmarks isn’t transparency, or funding unworthy things. Infantilizing, skewing programming, funding fundraisers not artists… that’s the problem.

Art and Stereotypes: What is a Gay Character?

I contributed the following piece to Bilerico on July 12th. It’s based on an older piece, which you can see here. I like this version. It’s tighter, I think. Would love some comments if anyone reading has any on it.

bilericologo

A female friend turned to me a few years ago and said, “You’re a dancer! That’s so great that you’re in touch with your feminine side.” It reminded me that my profession is embedded with expectations of gender and sexuality. Dance is not masculine, feminine, straight or gay, but it seems like most people think it is. Why do we see dance as feminine, or gay?

We all live within communities. And so while you could say – for instance – that “Hispanic men like soccer,” to do so would be invoking a stereotype, not projecting a reality. In the practice of theater, stereotypes are used. When you go to create a character on stage, you need to project aspects of character from which an audience will ‘read’ the vision you are trying to create. At the same time, from what I’ve seen, many artists project the same character stereotypes that their work is seeking to dissolve.

Betttman mime-attachment-thumb-250x375-6665Artists are the visionaries who create the new world (at least that’s what it says in our press packets). So while we exist within communities, we are also leaders, responsible for helping others to find a new way, a new truth, and the way away from The Guiding Light. When we pay homage too deeply to existing stereotypes, we lose our ability to express a more complex, holistic humanity.

Art – dance inclusive – has always been a home for the alternative. Artists are ‘different.’ Today as all members of society jockey for full participation, artists are unfortunately making our own acceptance more difficult by producing work that fetishizes notions of masculine, feminine, straight, and gay. The projection of character and community are complex. To the degree that we as artists prepare the audience to see the world in stereotypes, we perpetuate a society that judges us in the same way.

Are there essential character traits to being a man? Are there central character traits to being a gay man? It is fine to answer glibly that, yes, being a man means liking beer, sports, and Jessica Simpson, and that being a gay man means liking fashion, wine-coolers and Jake Gylenhall. But in reality, the fetishization of ‘gay’ characteristics, like the fetishization of ‘female’ characteristics, pigeon holes not just artists – but also audiences – into oppressive roles.

Being a dancer does not imbue one with a definable character. It doesn’t mean that you are sensitive, feminine, gay, or straight. Being gay does not give you a character either. Being a woman does not give one a certain character. Being hispanic doesn’t give you a certain character. We still live in a world where smart people (for example Lawrence Summers, recent past president of Harvard University) actually debate whether men and women have the same intellectual possibility. As long as we cling to theatrical stereotypes of masculine/feminine/gay/straight, we give validity to the limits placed on any of those groups.

As audiences, and artists, we owe it to ourselves to allow individual character to overcome community stereotyping.

Toronto City Council still can’t field a winning professional sports team

As reported on April 3rd in the Toronto Star, the Toronto City Council is increasing arts spending, noting that the arts are “essential to Toronto’s vitality.” As reported by Bruce Demara,

Councillor Karen Stintz, considered a member of city council’s small “c” conservative faction, summed up why, in her view, proposals for the culture portion of the budget were approved.

“When we talk about the National Ballet and TIFF (Toronto International Film Festival), I actually see them as investments in the local economy because they have economic spinoffs that are beneficial for the community at large,” she said.

“So I see them as completely legitimate expenses for the city and good investments.”

Mayor David Miller is pleased to see relative unanimity on the issue from an often fractious council.

“Arts funding is always money well spent. It’s a huge sector of our economy but … in a diverse city, it also helps us learn who each other is. Those are investments that become even more important where the economy’s weak.

“The arts story in the City of Toronto is an example of incredible success in using public funds wisely to help create investment (in a sector) which employs people and helps us become a vibrant, interesting city.”

You can read the entire article here. The article broke down the spending, reporting it as:

Theatres

(taxpayer cost: $3,716,500)

Sony Centre for the Performing Arts: $1,161,100

St. Lawrence Centre for the Arts: $1,495,800

Toronto Centre for the Arts: $1,059,600

chris-bosh1Culture Services

(taxpayer cost: $15,402,000)

Community Partnership and Investment Program

($45,332,000 out of total budget)

Art Gallery of Ontario: $520,000

Canadian Opera Company: $1,266,000

National Ballet of Canada: $1,104,000

National Ballet School: $132,000

Toronto Symphony Orchestra: $1,090,000

Gardiner Museum of Ceramics: $130,700

Festival Management Committee (Caribana): $475,000

Pride Toronto: $119,000

Toronto International Film Festival: $675,000

Toronto Arts Council: $11,287,780.

Local art services organizations: $522,950.

Toronto Artscape: $258,840

Royal Winter Fair: $920,700

Several small non-city-owned museums: $79,050

Possibly in related news, the Toronto Raptors went 33-49 last year, and the Toronto Blue Jays went 86-76.