AnnO'Neemus
Is so vanilla
Can confirm ex-council flats on an inner city estate in Manchester are now on the market for more than a £quarter million. Madness.
Bonfire of the government arts funding
- Thread starter Cloo
- Start date
wemakeyousoundb
hopefully not gimboid
designers/architects: let's make this really cool looking buildingShit acoustics. Supposedly been addressed. But whether it's been properly fixed or just bodged and made slightly less shit, who knows? Whether they can have redesigned/re-engineered the acoustics as if they had been designed and installed well in the first place, who knows?
"Manchester's new flagship arts centre was designed with poor acoustics and an orchestra pit that was too small - and it'll cost us £1.6m to fix it
Designers have gone back to the drawing board after spotting a number of major flaws with the building"
Plans for £110m arts centre flawed - and it'll cost £1.6m to fix
Designers have gone back to the drawing board after spotting a number of major flaws with the buildingwww.manchestereveningnews.co.uk
techs who have to work there: what about the practicality of using it?
designers/architects: we'll worry about that later
muscovyduck
Good IT skills and food hygiene competent
See also: graphic design and marketing campaigns. Lots of designers are incentivised by their career first and foremost so they do useless shit like this for the sake of having it in their portfolio. Typically this happens if their full time education had a lot of 'live briefs' because it blurs the line between studentship and professionalism, and despite what you'd expect sets people up badly for the work environment because they get an incorrect set of expectations from it
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
I think the 'moving stuff out of London' argument tends to come around mostly out of an absence of any other ideas to be honest. The sort of places that people mention them going tend to be places that have been heavily hit by the decline of industry and the resulting loss of good, well paid jobs that are accessible to local people. Will plonking some sort of arts institution in those places bring those sorts of jobs back? Pretty obviously not - you'll get a few jobs relocated from London and a struggling theatre or whatever with a half full auditorium. There's a big hole in terms of better ideas though isn't there so in the absence of anything else that's what comes up.
Last edited:
I don't think it's a red herring at all - the main reason London's art funding is so much higher than the rest of the country isn't because of London luvvies jealously guarding their arts council grants - it's mostly because huge numbers of national cultural institutions are based there, because it's the capital city. There's also an existing cultural (and physical) infrastructure to support all these organisations which doesn't exist to the same extent elsewhere in the country, even in larger cities like Manchester, Birmingham etc - and certainly not in Rhyl, Stockton or Preston.
A 10% cut in arts funding to London inevitably means that as well as Legs Akimbo Theatre and whatever losing their grant, nationally important cultural institutions will also be faced with reducing staff, reducing services, moving out of the city or closing altogether. FWIW I don't think it's a totally awful idea moving some of them elsewhere in the country (though you'd hope for something a bit more creative than 'lets move it to Manchester again'), but perhaps we could talk about the various ramifications of these kinds of moves without resorting to cheap jibes about that London, or sneering at the reaction of a city's arts scene to an actual decimation of their funding.
Winot
I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint
It’s the ‘Bilbao Effect’ isn’t it - much lauded and copied in Newcastle (Baltic), Dundee (V&A), Margate (Turner) - any others?
Whether or the extent to which it works is much debated - interesting article here:
The Bilbao Effect: is 'starchitecture' all it’s cracked up to be? A history of cities in 50 buildings, day 27
Every struggling post-industrial city has the same idea: hire a star architect (like Frank Gehry) to design a branch of a famous museum (like the Guggenheim), and watch your city blossom with culture. After all, it worked for Bilbao ... didn’t it?
lazythursday
Well-Known Member
But on the other side of this decision, my local arts centre, which went bust a few years ago and thankfully reopened but didn't feel all that secure, has now made it into the Arts Council national funding list thanks to this rebalancing of funding and that will have significant benefits locally. Clearly London is always going to have more arts funding per head than other parts of the country but reducing the disparity is just simple fairness. And arts organisations in London, especially the nationally significant ones, also have considerably more access to corporate funding, high net worth individuals, etc than arts institutions in the regions.
I don't accept that the way to reduce the disparity is by cutting London arts grants, sorry - it's a miserable and mean argument that accepts Tory belt-tightening narratives - fuck that. And if high net worth individuals and corporations in London want to support the arts, they should do so by paying more tax.
hash tag
Reaching out
Well this is something English National Opera gets 'one year's reprieve' after funding cut
steeplejack
I'm Away Right Now
The "Bilbao effect" is highly dubious IMO...it does mean the parachuting in of an already well connected nucleus of middle class professionals from elsewhere and seems heavily reliant on "trickle down" bullshit...if you build an arts centre they will come and magically somehow jobs will appear and rents will rise.
Perhaps a better model for understanding is the Glasgow effect...Glasgow led the way in the late 1980s in terms of culture led regeneration and through a mixture of the art school nurturing young talents who later went on to become collected, discussed & known globally for their work, had become a significant global city of vsual cultural production by the millennium.
There's a strong sense of atrophy about the place today in terms of the visual arts; endless newly graduated fodder from Europe and America's art schools desperately trying to be the latest underground stop on the endless circle of new blood, hot young property, played out artist, where did he end up again? of the art world. It's a process that Variant magazine began documenting nearly twenty years ago.
Needless to say, despite the gentrisfication of previously industrial working class areas (Dennistoun) and their increasing occupation by middle class professionals, the polarisation between haves and have nots in the city has become much starker and is in part driven rather than ameliorated by thirty years of this neoliberal "creative class" type model.
There are interesting things happening in England beyond London in the visual arts, in towns like Morecambe, Blackpool, Middlesbrough, Corby...but there does seem to be a depressing failure to learn lessons from the screamingly obviously failures of culture-led regeneration. Perhaps because understanding of these startegies is shallow and even where it is not, the political will to imagine something other than culture-led regeneration is starkly absent.
Perhaps a better model for understanding is the Glasgow effect...Glasgow led the way in the late 1980s in terms of culture led regeneration and through a mixture of the art school nurturing young talents who later went on to become collected, discussed & known globally for their work, had become a significant global city of vsual cultural production by the millennium.
There's a strong sense of atrophy about the place today in terms of the visual arts; endless newly graduated fodder from Europe and America's art schools desperately trying to be the latest underground stop on the endless circle of new blood, hot young property, played out artist, where did he end up again? of the art world. It's a process that Variant magazine began documenting nearly twenty years ago.
Needless to say, despite the gentrisfication of previously industrial working class areas (Dennistoun) and their increasing occupation by middle class professionals, the polarisation between haves and have nots in the city has become much starker and is in part driven rather than ameliorated by thirty years of this neoliberal "creative class" type model.
There are interesting things happening in England beyond London in the visual arts, in towns like Morecambe, Blackpool, Middlesbrough, Corby...but there does seem to be a depressing failure to learn lessons from the screamingly obviously failures of culture-led regeneration. Perhaps because understanding of these startegies is shallow and even where it is not, the political will to imagine something other than culture-led regeneration is starkly absent.
lazythursday
Well-Known Member
I don't think this is about the Bilbao effect, or cultural-led regeneration - or at least that's a minor aspect. It's about people all round the country having access to culture rather than the funding being concentrated in London. Because there's an intrinsic benefit to the arts that goes beyond economic impact.
Nadine Dorries in Totally Fucking It Up Shocker.
bmd
Island in the stream.
How is Glyndebourne's demise affecting the east of England? All of it, like Scarborough as well etc or that part around the faaaaar fucking south where Glyndebourne actually is?
steeplejack
I'm Away Right Now
LOL- the only reason the arts receive any funding at all these days is for the "economic impact". The days of acknowledging "intrinsic benefit" became increasingly few from the late 1980s onwards. There's no putting off the instrumentalisation fo the arts for economic & regeneration benefit.
The current direction of travel in England- not "the country", is towards an American style charitable funding model with public money only available to keep the lights on in the "crown jewels" of the English cultural estate. Without radical changes in policy we'll be there in about 20 years. It's not so different in Scotland, although the pace is slower, and lessons were learned after Creative Scotland's botched attempt to replace grants with commercial loans fifteen years or so ago. a 15 -25% cut in cultural funding is coming this year in Scotland as a result of the chronic systemic crisis we are all living through.
This government hates the arts, as it votes for opposition parties by a massive majority, and is determined to reduce its significance in national life by any means. It's the only reason why they would systematically attempt to undermine and stymie the cultural industries which are I think the third biggest net contributor to UK GDP. We've moved on from Boris Johnson's trolling of the arts via Nadine Dorries, but now the accountants really are in charge. Rishi Sunak wanted to defund many more humanities / creative degrees as chancellor as under his leadership the treasury was consumingly obsessed by the failure of such graduates to ever earn enough to repay tuition fees.
Beyond that, anyone taking "levelling up" at face value needs to have a word with themselves- and that's before we get onto the debate around the Bilbao effect. Sorry that you think it irrelevant but for me all these things are closely intertwined.
lazythursday
Well-Known Member
Fair enough. I don't disagree with most of that.
But this all comes down to a simple question. The Arts Council is giving out £446 or thereabouts in its main investment programme. How should that be allocated? There has to be some level of fairness, geographically in how that is done - even if there are good reasons for giving London a larger share. This rebalancing, however badly done, wasn't really all that radical, it still leaves London with a much much higher amount per head of population.
And yeah - levelling up under this government has been a con - look at the figures released yesterday that show that the southeast has benefited more than Yorkshire, for example - but it still remains the case that there is a strong argument that there should be some level of equity in allocating government money. And that would be the case just as much if we had a socialist government that loved and valued the arts.
steeplejack
I'm Away Right Now
Yes I don't think anyone disputes that. Yes it would be great to focus investment & building up strong instiutions outwith the golden triangle of the South-East. As you say the latest round of management consultant / PR bluster & grateful penurious instiutions duly tugging their forelocks to a munificent DCMS on social media, as a condition of their funding award, isn't really that.
Dystopiary
Left lyrics in the practice room
I didn't hear this - did anyone catch this on Radio 4 this morning? I know you can listen to it on iplayer.
Christopher Eccleston's talking about the closure of Oldham Coliseum. It first opened in 1885 and had its final performance last night (31/03/23).
from Wikipedia:
BBC Radio 4 Today on twitter
Christopher Eccleston's talking about the closure of Oldham Coliseum. It first opened in 1885 and had its final performance last night (31/03/23).
from Wikipedia:
BBC Radio 4 Today on twitter
Sasaferrato
We've been together now for twenty years...
Why don't people like Stormzy and Eric Clapton require public funding?
It is the case that music or performance that people actually want to see do not require public funds. No state body funded 'Evita' or 'Le Miserable', because audiences were prepared to pay the ticket price to see the performance.
I'm sorry, but opera and classical music have been sacred cows for too long, subsidised from the taxes of people who wouldn't cross the road to attend the performance.
It is the case that music or performance that people actually want to see do not require public funds. No state body funded 'Evita' or 'Le Miserable', because audiences were prepared to pay the ticket price to see the performance.
I'm sorry, but opera and classical music have been sacred cows for too long, subsidised from the taxes of people who wouldn't cross the road to attend the performance.
Alfie Boe, who played Jean Valjean in a production of Les Mis that was in the West End and shown in cinemas, studied early on his career at the Royal Opera House.
So if you had your way he wouldn’t have had the pathway to lead him to star in Les Mis and people wouldn’t have been able to pay to see him.
Price of everything and the value of nothing.
Sasaferrato
We've been together now for twenty years...
So, a single example is proof that the existing system works? A tad naive one would have thought?
Elaine Page, the original Evita, did not come through any state funded company, you argument doesn't stand up.
Are you employed in something supported by taxpayers money by any chance?
You last line is utterly absurd, but then you never could resist a personal dig, bit of a personality defect really, when one cannot discuss something without personal insults.
Last edited:
It’s bizarre that you think that pointing out the cynical nature of your point of view is a “personal dig”.
As is your assertion that I might be involved in something supported by “extorted money”.
Its typical of you that can’t see any benefits in supporting activities beyond their capacity to generate profits.
As for Elaine Paige, she was apparently encouraged by her school music teacher. Paid for by funds “extorted” from others.
What do you mean by 'extorted money' exactly?
Sasaferrato
We've been together now for twenty years...
Its ridiculous that someone who torrents as much media as Sasaferrato is making the case that art only has worth if people are prepared to pay for it.
Or is it more ridiculous that they are a monarchist but think something’s existence is only justifiable if it can support itself without taxpayer funds.
Hard to tell when they lack any self-awareness.
Or is it more ridiculous that they are a monarchist but think something’s existence is only justifiable if it can support itself without taxpayer funds.
Hard to tell when they lack any self-awareness.
That's an interesting view. How did working for HMRC fit in with this 'all tax is extortion' thing?
Sasaferrato
We've been together now for twenty years...
My view is far from cynical.
The funding of entertainment should not be a taxpayers matter.
Entertainment that is good thrives. Glastonbury (attended by a large number of people who post on these boards) requires not a penny of public funding, despite costing £40m to stage. Glastonbury Festival: Everything you want to know! - Helpful Holidays.
If orchestras and opera groups require public funding in order to exist, then their time has ended. There is no rational reason to produce 'entertainment' that people don't want to go and see being subsidised at public expense. Arts Council funding is 'luvvies' looking after the interests of other 'luvvies'. If it was a government contract being given to a relative of a member of the government, there would be howls of outrage, yet when it is one of the cultural elite doing the same thing for a similar person, silence.
We have people sleeping on the streets who could benefit from the money spent on arts funding, but obviously they are much less important than a theater being funded.
Sasaferrato
We've been together now for twenty years...
After all, who likes paying tax? Needs to be done though. 
Similar threads
