A
andreapalladio
Guest
Google tells me that Joe Warmington is a columnist for the Sun.
|
|
|
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
T
tudararms
Guest
...and Vanessa Lu is from the Star. Philistines and pinkos. I guess all is as it should be.
A
AlvinofDiaspar
Guest
Tdot:
That diversification should be occuring at the city-region level. Economic factors beyond the control of the city itself, e.g. land value dictate that some industries will not be viable within say the City of Toronto. It doesn't mean it wouldn't make sense in say Oshawa (e.g. GM) or Hamilton (Stelco). All the focus on creative industries does is leverage the natural advantages the City of Toronto has.
AoD
I agree GB only to an extent. I think we have shifted too far the other way however. The key in my mind is diversity of industry sectors. A region denuded of it's heavy industry is also weakened even if they have the top knowledge industries in the world. It is inevitable that that lack of diversification will come to haunt you down the road.
That diversification should be occuring at the city-region level. Economic factors beyond the control of the city itself, e.g. land value dictate that some industries will not be viable within say the City of Toronto. It doesn't mean it wouldn't make sense in say Oshawa (e.g. GM) or Hamilton (Stelco). All the focus on creative industries does is leverage the natural advantages the City of Toronto has.
AoD
U
urbanboyto
Guest
The arts that are relevent flourish organically, always have and always will.
The police budget is the largest single item in the city budget, overwhelming most other line items, including all social services and arts funding put together a few times over.
If you think the arts flourish only organically you really don't know much about the arts.
T
tudararms
Guest
"If you think the arts flourish only organically you really don't know much about the arts."
I said 'relevent' arts, and I stand by this point. If you don't agree that's fine, but keep your pointless pseudo-omniscient observations to yourself, please.
I said 'relevent' arts, and I stand by this point. If you don't agree that's fine, but keep your pointless pseudo-omniscient observations to yourself, please.
B
building babel
Guest
Re:Star - Nurture T.O's Creativity, Report
And what, pray, are your "relevent" arts?
And what, pray, are your "relevent" arts?
T
tudararms
Guest
Re: Re:Star - Nurture T.O's Creativity, Report
Which word requires definition for you?
Which word requires definition for you?
B
building babel
Guest
Re: Re:Star - Nurture T.O's Creativity, Report
The one you misspell.
The one you misspell.
C
Canuck 36
Guest
Re: Re:Star - Nurture T.O's Creativity, Report
Have others read "Rise of the Creative Class"? I just finished it and was wondering what others thought of it.
Have others read "Rise of the Creative Class"? I just finished it and was wondering what others thought of it.
T
tudararms
Guest
Re: Re:Star - Nurture T.O's Creativity, Report
Babel: While I look up the spelling, why don't you look up the meaning, then get back to me.
Babel: While I look up the spelling, why don't you look up the meaning, then get back to me.
A
AlvinofDiaspar
Guest
Re: Re:Star - Nurture T.O's Creativity, Report
tudararms:
Semantics aside, just what do you consider to be "relevant" arts?
AoD
tudararms:
Semantics aside, just what do you consider to be "relevant" arts?
AoD
B
building babel
Guest
Re: Re:Star - Nurture T.O's Creativity, Report
The question remains the same: what arts do you consider "relevent" because they "flourish organically"?
The question remains the same: what arts do you consider "relevent" because they "flourish organically"?
E
esplanade guy
Guest
Re: Re:Star - Nurture T.O's Creativity, Report
Why is it the city can spend so much money on the police dept and even though I disagree with it, I accept it. As soon as the city spends money on arts or social programs, right wingers get up in arms. I guess they figure that only their selfish agenda and needs should be met, while ignoring other segment of this city. Of course we need to spend money on police but I also want my tax dollars spent on my interests. (the arts, design, beautiful city, social programs, festivals) In a city of this size and stature, all these things can and should be funded with tax payers dollars, although I'd cut a few million from the police budget. I bet crime would not change much at all. More cops do not equal less murder!
Why is it the city can spend so much money on the police dept and even though I disagree with it, I accept it. As soon as the city spends money on arts or social programs, right wingers get up in arms. I guess they figure that only their selfish agenda and needs should be met, while ignoring other segment of this city. Of course we need to spend money on police but I also want my tax dollars spent on my interests. (the arts, design, beautiful city, social programs, festivals) In a city of this size and stature, all these things can and should be funded with tax payers dollars, although I'd cut a few million from the police budget. I bet crime would not change much at all. More cops do not equal less murder!
T
tudararms
Guest
Re: Re:Star - Nurture T.O's Creativity, Report
To be clear,
1. I'm using the term "The Arts" as a catch-all phrase to simplify talking inclusively about all art forms, artists and works of art.
2. When talking about 'relevance' I'm talking specifically about "social relevance", meaning society and the people that make up society.
3. I understand that the Arts are not always socially relevant. For instance, my own creative pursuits are for my own personal enrichment and nourishment. No audience required. However, when a particular work of art or art form reaches an audience beyond that of the artist that creates it then clearly it has gained some relevance. To me, it would stand to reason that the wider the reach obtained the more relevant the art in question.
My feeling is that the Arts that achieve the most relevancy tend to emerge organically, as a product of the times and of the people living them. This is a human tendancy and has been seen throughout history: The cave painters at Lascaux did not need a panel of bureaucrats to encourage them to paint. The Arts have flourished within the most impoverished, oppressive and even dangerous of times. Yet even in good times, how often is it the wealthy and privileged, or even the trained and patronized for that matter, who are creating the works of art that truly speak to their generation and beyond? On the contrary, often what is the most relevant is that which is in opposition to that which is sanctioned and institutionalized. When you remove the 'struggle' from the Arts you remove a little of the spirit, the edge and the need, and none of this can be supplanted by what is clearly a politicized and bureaucratic state-sanctioned program of policies. The Arts incubation approach takes this process out of the 'street', so to speak, and into what can only ever be an artificial, rarefied and cloistered environment, out of touch with and sheltered from the very society it seeks to be relevant to.
I don't think anybody is advocating that the government shouldn't support the Arts, but throwing money at dubious panels with nebulous policies like that of 'encouraging creativity' just sounds like the silly posturing of a government that in fact has very little intention of supporting the Arts in a meaningful way. If money is really intended to help foster the Arts, how about more tangible policies like directing money for the funding of supplies to community centres or the funding of performance/atelier space, or investments in and imrovements to venues, or organizing of events for the exposure of artists, and so on? Let the people, or the market, take care of the rest. Those who are relevant will find their audience, or their audience will find them. The others can toil away in blissful anonymity, like me, happy in the knowledge that I am enriching myself if not others.
To be clear,
1. I'm using the term "The Arts" as a catch-all phrase to simplify talking inclusively about all art forms, artists and works of art.
2. When talking about 'relevance' I'm talking specifically about "social relevance", meaning society and the people that make up society.
3. I understand that the Arts are not always socially relevant. For instance, my own creative pursuits are for my own personal enrichment and nourishment. No audience required. However, when a particular work of art or art form reaches an audience beyond that of the artist that creates it then clearly it has gained some relevance. To me, it would stand to reason that the wider the reach obtained the more relevant the art in question.
My feeling is that the Arts that achieve the most relevancy tend to emerge organically, as a product of the times and of the people living them. This is a human tendancy and has been seen throughout history: The cave painters at Lascaux did not need a panel of bureaucrats to encourage them to paint. The Arts have flourished within the most impoverished, oppressive and even dangerous of times. Yet even in good times, how often is it the wealthy and privileged, or even the trained and patronized for that matter, who are creating the works of art that truly speak to their generation and beyond? On the contrary, often what is the most relevant is that which is in opposition to that which is sanctioned and institutionalized. When you remove the 'struggle' from the Arts you remove a little of the spirit, the edge and the need, and none of this can be supplanted by what is clearly a politicized and bureaucratic state-sanctioned program of policies. The Arts incubation approach takes this process out of the 'street', so to speak, and into what can only ever be an artificial, rarefied and cloistered environment, out of touch with and sheltered from the very society it seeks to be relevant to.
I don't think anybody is advocating that the government shouldn't support the Arts, but throwing money at dubious panels with nebulous policies like that of 'encouraging creativity' just sounds like the silly posturing of a government that in fact has very little intention of supporting the Arts in a meaningful way. If money is really intended to help foster the Arts, how about more tangible policies like directing money for the funding of supplies to community centres or the funding of performance/atelier space, or investments in and imrovements to venues, or organizing of events for the exposure of artists, and so on? Let the people, or the market, take care of the rest. Those who are relevant will find their audience, or their audience will find them. The others can toil away in blissful anonymity, like me, happy in the knowledge that I am enriching myself if not others.
B
building babel
Guest
Re: Re:Star - Nurture T.O's Creativity, Report
The romantic nineteenth century notion of the artist as a struggling ghettoized outsider will not die as long as tudararms walks the earth.
The romantic nineteenth century notion of the artist as a struggling ghettoized outsider will not die as long as tudararms walks the earth.