Sunday 5 September 2010

The kindest cut


There has been much wailing and gnashing about public spending cuts recently. In all the Government's pronouncements, the most obvious savings to be made by getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan, plus the scrapping of our absurd, dangerous and otiose nuclear "deterrent", have been skilfully skipped round. Other state sacred cows remain safe from the chancellor's dogs; like the Arts Council - of which the most infamous arm is ACE, the English Arts Council. This body exists to support activities that would never survive in the real world, as they have audiences that vary from minimal to non-existent outside the clique of London critics, the tiny band of accountants and lawyers who fancy themselves as curators and the speculative collectors.

But who better than
David Lee, founder and editor of The Jackdaw, for a good long time a great thorn in the side of the State Art establishment, to sum up the current state of affairs? The September/October issue is worth grabbing for its comprehensive expose of the whole business. I should say, the whole damn business:


The procrustean approach of the Government to reducing the deficit in our annual accounts will result in many hardworking people who perform worthwhile tasks being thrown out of work: some will lose their wits to anxiety. Necessary as some of these redundancies may be, it is still a sickening spectacle to watch ministers including the Prime Minister, all born into substantial inherited wealth and privilege, removing with a stroke of their pens the livelihoods of those who have nothing to fall back on. In the visual arts most of us will only suffer second hand. The overwhelming majority of artists will be unaffected by Government cuts to art budgets because they were never beneficiaries of its largesse in the first place, so selectively and prejudicially was it distributed. They are used to surviving without complaint. It is my view that visual arts budgets might be cut savagely as the effect for most will be invisible and the sufferers will be, in the main, those who can most afford it. Painters and sculptors will suffer not because the Arts Council's budget is cut but because those who buy their work have less or nothing left to spend.

...ACE has developed neurotic obsessions with things that have nothing to do with making great art. For example, we are informed, though God only knows for what reason, that "the number of organisations whose diversity action plans or equality plans are rated as a 'strength' have increased from 53.3% to 61.6%".

...The Serpentine, which employs two directors for four exhibitions a year, is surely now ripened for privatisation. It is the convenient outpost for the half-dozen most fashionable art dealers in the West End, whose artists are predominantly shown there. It costs the taxpayer a million pounds a year to further rubber-stamp the reputations of mainly foreign artists who are already well-known.

Read about more, including a list of Danien Hirst's ripoff sources and the ever popular Artbollocks page at www.thejackdaw.co.uk

Illustration by Andrew Gray

3 comments:

  1. It is always a shame when cuts have to be made, as they nearly always impact either directly or indirectly those who have the least means to withstand them.

    BUT the Arts Council for England do seem to have some very strange ideas on what is worthy to fund. Artistic merit seems to be at the bottom of their list when deciding. Equality plans? If you submitted a plan with the words "digital diversity" in it you'd get money thrown at you, no matter what the actual content was. It is time for a change, and that can only come by breaking up the the Arts Councils.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Right on, Pete! Without the Arts Council-funded stuff bleeding into the commercial galleries, the art world could be a very different place. And so would the art schools, I hope - where drawing, painting, sculpture and printmaking; "Art", in short, are herded into ghettoes labelled Fine Art, and left unattended by lecturers without any professed competence in making stuff.

    ReplyDelete