More Reasons to Toss Stephen Harper into the Trash Bin of History - Disdain for the Arts

In case you are new around here I am not a fan of Stephen Harper (nor his pal above either). As a resident of Ontario I have lived through a neo-con 'Common Sense Revolution' that was sadly lacking in an ounce of common sense. No sooner did we finally wake up to the disaster and toss these rotters out when some of these same pinheads were elected to Federal Parliament where they were given positions of power.

Slowly we have seen the disdain they have for the bright and shiny ideals we hold dear to our hearts as Canadians surface. Their recent assault on the arts is a prime example. Prior to the election the government went through the artists and groups that received funding and cancelled the funding for those individuals and groups they deemed offensive. Then a cut of $ 45 million was announced. The Canadian arts community was decimated.

Then on the campaign trail Harper said this:

I think when ordinary working people come home, turn on the TV and see a gala of a bunch of people at, you know, a rich gala all subsidized by taxpayers claiming their subsidies aren't high enough, when they know those subsidies have actually gone up – I'm not sure that's something that resonates with ordinary people.

This is what drives me nuts about Harper, the way he doesn't defend a position so much as try tp divide the electorate and pit them against the very group he holds in such disdain.

People far more eloquent than I rose to the challenge and skewered Harper. Below is the column written by famed Canadian author Margaret Atwood. Clearly Ms Atwood gets it. I have to say that after reading this article, which appeared in the Globe and Mail, I would dearly love to see Atwood and Harper locked in a room together. I know who'd be standing when the door was opened again after 5 minutes.

MARGARET ATWOOD
September 24, 2008 at 11:00 PM EDT

What sort of country do we want to live in? What sort of country do we already live in? What do we like? Who are we?

At present, we are a very creative country. For decades, we’ve been punching above our weight on the world stage - in writing, in popular music and in many other fields. Canada was once a cultural void on the world map, now it’s a force. In addition, the arts are a large segment of our economy: The Conference Board estimates Canada’s cultural sector generated $46-billion, or 3.8 per cent of Canada’s GDP, in 2007. And, according to the Canada Council, in 2003-2004, the sector accounted for an “estimated 600,000 jobs (roughly the same as agriculture, forestry, fishing, mining, oil & gas and utilities combined).”

But we’ve just been sent a signal by Prime Minister Stephen Harper that he gives not a toss for these facts. Tuesday, he told us that some group called “ordinary people” didn’t care about something called “the arts.” His idea of “the arts” is a bunch of rich people gathering at galas whining about their grants. Well, I can count the number of moderately rich writers who live in Canada on the fingers of one hand: I’m one of them, and I’m no Warren Buffett.

I don’t whine about my grants because I don’t get any grants. I whine about other grants - grants for young people, that may help them to turn into me, and thus pay to the federal and provincial governments the kinds of taxes I pay, and cover off the salaries of such as Mr. Harper. In fact, less than 10 per cent of writers actually make a living by their writing, however modest that living may be. They have other jobs. But people write, and want to write, and pack into creative writing classes, because they love this activity – not because they think they’ll be millionaires.

Every single one of those people is an “ordinary person.” Mr. Harper’s idea of an ordinary person is that of an envious hater without a scrap of artistic talent or creativity or curiosity, and no appreciation for anything that’s attractive or beautiful. My idea of an ordinary person is quite different. Human beings are creative by nature. For millenniums we have been putting our creativity into our cultures - cultures with unique languages, architecture, religious ceremonies, dances, music, furnishings, textiles, clothing and special cuisines. “Ordinary people” pack into the cheap seats at concerts and fill theatres where operas are brought to them live. The total attendance for “the arts” in Canada in fact exceeds that for sports events. “The arts” are not a “niche interest.” They are part of being human.

Moreover, “ordinary people” are participants. They form book clubs and join classes of all kinds - painting, dancing, drawing, pottery, photography - for the sheer joy of it. They sing in choirs, church and other, and play in marching bands. Kids start garage bands and make their own videos and web art, and put their music on the Net, and draw their own graphic novels. “Ordinary people” have other outlets for their creativity, as well: Knitting and quilting have made comebacks; gardening is taken very seriously; the home woodworking shop is active. Add origami, costume design, egg decorating, flower arranging, and on and on … Canadians, it seems, like making things, and they like appreciating things that are made.

They show their appreciation by contributing. Canadians of all ages volunteer in vast numbers for local and city museums, for their art galleries and for countless cultural festivals - I think immediately of the Chinese New Year and the Caribana festival in Toronto, but there are so many others. Literary festivals have sprung up all over the country - volunteers set them up and provide the food, and “ordinary people” will drag their lawn chairs into a field - as in Nova Scotia’s Read by the Sea - in order to listen to writers both local and national read and discuss their work. Mr. Harper has signalled that as far as he is concerned, those millions of hours of volunteer activity are a waste of time. He holds them in contempt.

I suggest that considering the huge amount of energy we spend on creative activity, to be creative is “ordinary.” It is an age-long and normal human characteristic: All children are born creative. It’s the lack of any appreciation of these activities that is not ordinary. Mr. Harper has demonstrated that he has no knowledge of, or respect for, the capacities and interests of “ordinary people.” He’s the “niche interest.” Not us.

It’s been suggested that Mr. Harper’s disdain for the arts is not merely a result of ignorance or a tin ear - that it is “ideologically motivated.” Now, I wonder what could be meant by that? Mr. Harper has said quite rightly that people understand we ought to keep within a budget. But his own contribution to that budget has been to heave the Liberal-generated surplus overboard so we have nothing left for a rainy day, and now, in addition, he wants to jeopardize those 600,000 arts jobs and those billions of dollars they generate for Canadians.

What’s the idea here?

That arts jobs should not exist because artists are naughty and might not vote for Mr. Harper? That Canadians ought not to make money from the wicked arts, but only from virtuous oil? That artists don’t all live in one constituency, so who cares? Or is it that the majority of those arts jobs are located in Ontario and Quebec, and Mr. Harper is peeved at those provinces, and wants to increase his ongoing gutting of Ontario - $20-billion a year of Ontario taxpayers’ money going out, a dribble grudgingly allowed back in - and spank Quebec for being so disobedient as not to appreciate his magnificence? He likes punishing, so maybe the arts-squashing is part of that: Whack the Heartland.

Or is it even worse? Every budding dictatorship begins by muzzling the artists, because they’re a mouthy lot and they don’t line up and salute very easily. Of course, you can always get some tame artists to design the uniforms and flags and the documentary about you, and so forth - the only kind of art you might need - but individual voices must be silenced, because there shall be only One Voice: Our Master’s Voice. Maybe that’s why Mr. Harper began by shutting down funding for our artists abroad. He didn’t like the competition for media space.

The Conservative caucus has already learned that lesson. Rumour has it that Mr. Harper’s idea of what sort of art you should hang on your wall was signalled by his removal of all pictures of previous Conservative prime ministers from their lobby room - including John A, and Dief the Chief - and their replacement by pictures of none other than Mr. Harper himself. History, it seems, is to begin with him.

In communist countries, this used to be called the Cult of Personality.

Mr. Harper is a guy who - rumour has it, again - tried to disband the student union in high school and then tried the same thing in college. Destiny is calling him, the way it called Qin Shi Huang, the Chinese emperor who burnt all records of the rulers before himself. It’s an impulse that’s been repeated many times since, the list is very long. Tear it down and level it flat, is the common motto. Then build a big statue of yourself. Now that would be Art!

It is interesting the way protests grow in our modern age. There is now a facebook group entitled Ordinary Canadians DO SUPPORT the Arts, Mr. Harper. You are dead wrong. of which there are currently 43, 441 members and I am one of them!

Comments

[Annie]

Great post and rant. It's one of my pet peeves too, and funding for the arts in US public schools has been slashed to the bone under this boneheaded administration that is (thank god) almost over.

And "trashbin of history" - I love that! May I join you in throwing Bush/Chaney on the pile?!

[kendall]

Well said Ms Atwood! Don't Bubba & Harper look like two peas in a pod. It makes me think of global conspiracies of the one world government sort. Please excuse my violent tendencies, but hang the samanabatches!

[Brad'll Do It]

Aren't the "arts" the media in which creativity is most freely expressed? Isn't creativity the cornerstone for progress? Isn't progress the goal of a country's leader(s)?

Then how the hell can a country's leader(s) cut/limit/eliminate support for the "arts"? It seems self-defeating. Hopefully, for Harper, it will be.

[Sheena]

The continually outrageous behavior of this man (Harper, not Jerry) leaves me speechless. I suppose it is pointless to hope that he may have actually read Margaret Atwood’s excellent article?

[Jerry]

Annie - there is room in that trashbin for a few more!

Kendall - leaders like this to bring out the worst in folks.

Brad - Harper is the type that only supports things that fit his values - which are likely further right than George W above. Art and creative stuff? Oh oh!

Sheena - isn't Atwood wonderful. She nailed this one! I just can't understand how anyone could ever consider voting for this dolt!