|
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
"Culture in all its forms is the essence and key expression of
our identity and heritage as Canadians. As we prepare to enter a new century
where technological change will continue to have a vast impact on our socio-economic
life, dominated by increasing interdependence of people, countries, and
trade among them, it is essential for us to further define the role of
the federal government in support of our culture."1
With these words in February 1997, Clifford Lincoln, chairperson of
the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, began a review of Canadian
cultural policy. The Committee met with representatives of Canada's cultural
communities, it received briefs from individuals and organizations across
the country, and it met with experts. Members of the Committee also travelled
East, West and North to meet with Canadians to hear their thoughts and
responses to three basic questions:
- What has been the role of the federal government in cultural activities
in the past?
- What is its present role?
- Should the federal government continue to be involved in culture in
the future?
Working with the evidence
This report is based on a synthesis of the evidence that was provided
by witnesses. The report is also a digest of the information, analysis
and feelings expressed to the Committee. On practically every page the
reader will find comments that were carefully crafted in the form of a
prepared brief as well as comments offered in the free flow of conversation
and in response to questions. What can be seen from the evidence is the
passion and seriousness with which Canadians express their understanding
of culture. The Committee appreciates the forthright observations that
were given by the witnesses in their testimony, or through written submissions.2
Defining Terms
When Canadians speak of culture they are speaking about much more than
the visual, performing or literary arts. They often refer to cultural institutions
such as galleries, museums, libraries, archives, concert halls and theatres.
Some talk about the importance of Canadian content regulations in broadcasting;
while for others the links between culture and heritage are inseparable.
For them, the experiences of Canadians in the past continue to inform present
circumstances. Still others talk of the business of culture, and trading
in the international marketplace for cultural goods and services. Some
talk about the importance of nurturing new forms of artistic expression
to reflect the ever-changing nature of Canadian society. Meanwhile, others
see culture expressed in hockey, or in the preservation of the landscapes
and seascapes of our National Parks.
The more the Committee heard Canadians address "culture,"
the more important it became to find a workable definition that includes
as many different experiences as possible. In the past, government reports
have begun with the challenge of defining culture. The work of the Committee
began in a similar fashion. But the Committee members soon discovered that
one person's sense of culture is another's popular entertainment, and where
one defines it as the soul of their country, the other might see it as
the way one earns a living.
There are hundreds of definitions of culture, from the sociological,
the anthropological, to the aesthetic. The French author André Malraux
once wrote that culture is the answer we receive when we look into the
mirror and wonder what it is we are doing here on this earth.3
Some examples of Canadian attempts to define culture are:
- [C]ulture is a way of being, thinking, and feeling. It is a driving
force animating a significant group of individuals united by a common tongue
and sharing the same customs, habits, and experiences . . . Culture does
not determine the thoughts or actions of the group; instead it colours
the group's manner of thinking and acting. - Royal Commission on Bilingualism
and Biculturalism, 1970.4
- Culture is a dynamic value system of learned elements with assumptions,
conventions, beliefs and rules permitting members of a group to relate
to each other and to the world, to communicate and to develop their creative
potential. - A Working Definition of Culture, Canadian Commission of
UNESCO, 1977.5
- Culture . . . is central to everything we do and think. It is . . .
the world we have created and are still creating and the motives that urge
us to change it. It is the way we know ourselves and each other, it is
our web of personal relationships; it is the images and abstractions that
allow us to live together in communities and nations. - Bernard Ostry,
1978.6
- The bond that holds Canadians together is our distinct culture - not
just in the sense of the arts, but in the larger meaning of our pastimes,
habits, images, institutions, perspectives on the world, collective memory
and our bilingualism and multi-culturalism. Our culture is to a large extent
the expression of who we are. - Vital Links, 1987.7
- Montreal author, Neil Bissoondath, writing in 1994 defined culture
in this way:
- Culture is life. It is a living, breathing, multi-faceted entity in
constant evolution. It alters every day, is never the same thing from one
day to the next. . . Culture is a complex entity shaped in ways small and
large. . . Nothing is inconsequential. - Selling Illusions, 1994.8
During the Winnipeg round table, Zaz Bajon, General Manager, Manitoba
Theatre Centre, provided this definition of culture:
- Culture is the psychological, spiritual, mental well-being of [a] community.9
Members of the Committee offered several definitions of culture of their
own:
Culture is central to the human experience. Canadian culture is what
Canadians believe to be important. It tells us who we were in the past
and who we are in the present. Because of the way culture shapes our lives,
inevitably, it will also influence who we are likely to become in the future.
Culture is all that touches us in our daily lives, wherever and however
we live. It is our continuing legacy that links the past with the present.
Culture is what we have learned to hold dear since it is the accumulation
of all the experiences we will ever have and all the places we will ever
go. Finally, culture is a force that drives our unique development as individuals.
The Committee could have spent much of its time debating definitions.
Instead, the Committee borrowed a straightforward definition of culture
from UNESCO. In its 1996 report Our Creative Diversity, UNESCO adopted
a four-word definition of culture: "ways of living together."
10
It is an especially useful definition in a context where traditions and
rapid technological change must find ways to co-exist. While recognizing
that volumes could be written about it, for the purposes of this report,
the Committee has defined the term "culture" to mean those creative
things we choose to do as we live together as citizens of Canada and the
world.
Lives Enriched
The Committee respects the hundreds of thousands of Canadians whose
contributions to the cultural development of this country have been, and
continue to be, immeasurable. Whether they are creative artists, volunteers,
community boosters, fundraisers, or dedicated parents driving their children
to piano lessons in the winter, all seem filled with civic pride and a
sense of contributing to future generations. Some Canadians make culture
an important part of their daily lives, and in doing so enrich the lives
of generations yet to come. This report contains the words of some of these
remarkable Canadians. Some are well known, others are not. Some are experts,
some are artists, and others have an enduring commitment to arts and culture.
The Committee has chosen to leave as much room as possible for these individuals
in this report.
Remembering the Past
The Committee has identified three key federal government initiatives,
as a point of departure for defining the Government of Canada's role in
support of our culture. The first was in 1929 when Sir John Aird tabled
a report recommending the establishment of a publicly owned broadcasting
system. The second initiative was Prime Minister R.B. Bennett's endorsement
of the creation of the Canadian Radio Broadcasting Commission in 1932,
which later became the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). The third
initiative is the Massey-Lévesque Commission of 1951 which led to
the foundation of the Canada Council for the Arts in 1957. In the intervening
years, the federal government's actions in creating an environment in which
cultural expression and identity could thrive have been relatively constant.
The Committee learned that the guidance for those actions was provided
by Canadians with strong commitments to Canadian cultural expression and
identity. Therefore, this report includes examples of distinguished Canadians
who have made lasting contributions to Canada's cultural landscape.
In virtually every field of cultural endeavour a cultural "visionary"
can be identified. In some cases there is more than one. Without them Canadian
culture would be profoundly changed. Consider whether Canada would have
a National Ballet without Celia Franca, Le Théâtre du Nouveau
Monde without Jean-Louis Roux or a Canadian Centre for Architecture without
Phyllis Lambert.
Lists are often limiting because others could have been mentioned. In
film, there are the pioneering productions of Donald Brittain or Claude
Jutra; in theatre, the innovative plays of such authors as Gratien Gélinas,
who has been called the father of contemporary Quebec theatre, or James
Reaney who brings the vision of the poet to the world of the theatre. As
performers, the late Kate Reid and the current head of the National Theatre
School, Monique Mercure have set a remarkably high standard for excellence
in performance. As theatre directors and teachers of acting, Jean Duceppe,
Jean Gascon and Jean-Louis Roux are internationally acclaimed. Indeed,
without the creative vision in the late 1950s of theatre founders Tom Hendry
and John Hirsch, it is hard to imagine what Canada's regional theatre scene
would look like today.
Similarly, in the world of ballet, Betty Oliphant, Celia Franca, Betty
Farrally, Gweneth Lloyd and the late Ludmilla Chiriaeff served as guiding
lights for Canada's foremost ballet companies: Les Grands Ballets Canadiens,
the National Ballet of Canada and the Royal Winnipeg Ballet. In literature,
Mordecai Richler, Mavis Gallant and Anne Hébert, among many others,
brought international attention to Canadian letters at a time when Canadian
authors were largely unknown outside the country. In the world of opera,
Edward Johnson, Léopold Simoneau, John Vickers, Raoul Jobin and
Maureen Forrester performed in the foremost opera houses around the world
when European artists dominated the art form. Wilfrid Pelletier and Ernest
MacMillan cleared the path for a new generation of Canadian conductors
and composers. In the world of visual art, Jean-Paul Lemieux, Jean-Paul
Riopelle, Emily Carr and Michael Snow have impressed critics and gallery
visitors alike. This is not an exhaustive list, nor is this report intended
as a reference work on Canadian cultural history. It serves to illustrate
the depth of talent of some pioneering Canadian cultural visionaries who
have inspired audiences and fellow artists.
These particular cultural visionaries, and the important parts they
played in Canada's cultural development, are fairly well known. But the
fact that Kaye Lamb made a deal with Prime Minister King to create a National
Library is not well known. Similarly, the fact that the Stratford Festival
was the response of a single Canadian to the loss of a major local industry
to a small town is not well known. The Committee has concluded that the
visions of many individual Canadians have had profound effects on what
Canadian culture has become. They and their colleagues in every region
of Canada have been guiding lights for the federal government in orienting
its contribution to the development of cultural expression and identity
in Canada.
Growing Complexity
The Committee recognizes that critics may consider its working definition
of culture to be somewhat simplistic, considering the complexity of the
task at hand. This is evidenced by the sheer number of government reviews
of culture and cultural policies that have been undertaken in the past
half-century. Over time, the issues have become more complex. Trade issues
in relation to cultural policy measures are only one example of this trend.
Witnesses apprised the Committee of the myriad factors at play in the cultural
sector, both in Canada and in our relations with other countries. The information
they provided enabled the Committee to identify and focus on a number of
strategic issues.
Organization of the Report
The Committee faced the daunting task of organizing a great deal of
information and many issues in a way that permits thoughtful analysis and
discussion. In meeting this challenge, the Committee chose to organize
its report in an innovative manner that breaks from the organization of
past studies. Typically, the approach has been to structure the subject
vertically into disciplines and categories: visual and performing arts,
cultural industries, cultural development, broadcasting, etc., each with
its own chapter and recommendations. This is the "stove pipe"
approach. Considering the array of interconnections among the various elements
that make up cultural activities, the Committee decided to look at culture,
and specifically the federal government's role in it, from the perspective
of key elements of cultural activity. These elements can be described as
a six part continuum.
- Creation - Creators are central to the artistic process.
- Training - This involves helping creators prepare for a career in the
arts and ensuring that on-going training is available as their careers
evolve.
- Production - This is the industry side of culture: publishing and making
recordings, films and television programs.
- Distribution - This is the way in which cultural materials are marketed
and made available, making sure that what is produced makes it to audiences
at home and abroad.
- Preservation - This is how a society maintains a record of its cultural
achievement, how a culture of the past and the present is made accessible
to audiences now and in the future.
- Consumption - This is about audiences and the many wayS individuals
participate in their culture.
Organization by activity
These six categories were identified as the Committee's work progressed.
They were defined by the testimony of the witnesses and by the submissions
made. With one exception, each activity is the subject of a chapter in
this report. The Committee was made aware of the inseparable nature of
production and distribution by witnesses. These topics have been combined
into a single chapter.
The Committee's work involved a detailed review of existing federal
support measures for culture. Appendix 1 contains a detailed examination
and listing of these measures, while Appendix 2 shows the crown corporations
that comprise the Canadian Heritage Portfolio within the Department of
Canadian Heritage.
Acting in Partnership
The federal government has played an important role in the development
of cultural expression and identity in Canada throughout this century.
Its role has been vital in both official language communities and, according
to the testimony presented to the Committee, must remain so in the future.
Since the 1950s, the involvement of the federal government has gradually
evolved to include a variety of roles in response to the expansion of cultural
activity and its growing social and economic impact. It is important to
note that the federal government has not done this alone. As this report
will show, cultural development in Canada is a partnership among the private
sector, individuals, corporations and all orders of government. The federal,
provincial, territorial and municipal governments make an annual investment
of almost $6 billion.11
Figure 1 - Federal/Provincial-Territorial/Municipal Spending
on Culture (1996-1997)
On a per capita basis in 1996-1997 (the most recent figures available
from Statistics Canada), the federal government spent $93 per citizen,
the provinces and territories spent $58, and the municipalities spent $48.12
Figure 2 - Per Capita Spending in Dollars by Federal/Provincial-Territorial/Municipal
Governments (1996-1997)
This level of expenditure represents a strong commitment to Canadian
culture - one that involves all orders of government.
The Approach to Making Recommendations
The Committee is aware that the federal government is but one of several
orders of government engaged in supporting culture. Some of its recommendations
are also made with the knowledge that culture involves departments other
than the Department of Canadian Heritage.
The Committee has designed its recommendations to be measurable and
strategic. In many instances the Committee has asked the Department of
Canadian Heritage to report within a specific period of time. This addresses
the issue of timeliness, which was raised repeatedly by witnesses. The
Committee also worked to avoid a micro-management approach to the issues
presented. The recommendations relate to broad themes and measurable initiatives.
Finally, while the Committee has attempted to establish reasonable timelines
in its recommendations, those that are more pressing have been highlighted.
Among the hundreds of submissions forwarded to the Committee was a policy
document created by the Canadian Conference of the Arts (CCA), an umbrella
organization for individual artists and arts organizations across the country.
Throughout the course of its deliberations, the Committee returned several
times to the CCA's document: Working Group on Cultural Policy for the
21st Century.13
What the Committee found especially useful was the way this document looked
at key elements of the federal government's involvement in culture. The
Committee appreciates the document's multifaceted approach which focuses
on actions and common themes. The CCA pointed to the importance of encouraging
a strong French language and culture, both in Quebec and other centres
of francophone life. In addition, the submission recognized Canada's cultural
diversity and stressed the cultural contribution of Canada's Aboriginal
peoples and the need to foster a greater appreciation of our collective
experience and aspirations. The CCA submission also stressed the importance
of an approach to cultural policy that uses the tools available to a government,
including regulation, legislation, financial support and taxation. It called
for a new approach to policy, which is responsive to changing conditions,
opportunities and technologies.
When it started its work the Committee believed that globalization,
new technologies and changing demographics will have a bearing on the future
role of the federal government in support of cultural expression. Witnesses
were, therefore, asked to address these issues in their comments and submissions.
While the continuum of creation, training, production, distribution, preservation
and consumption provides the structural spine of the report, each segment
of the continuum is shaped by a number of horizontal or cross-sectoral
factors. As a result, the issues of new technologies, globalization and
Canada's changing demographics occupied a great deal of the Committee's
time.
Given the fundamental questions that inspired this process, some topics
receive less attention than others. There are two reasons for this. First,
a number of other reviews were being carried out during the course of the
Committee's work. These include, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications
Commission's hearings about the future of new media in Canada, cross-Canada
consultations on the future role of the CBC, a review undertaken by the
Department of Canadian Heritage on feature film production and legislation
dealing with the conservation of some of Canada's marine areas. While not
avoiding these topics in this report, the Committee chose not to duplicate
existing reviews. A second reason has to do with the nature of the task
given to the Committee, which was to further "define the role of the
federal government in support of our culture."14
By looking back to the 1950s, one can see the emergence of a distinctive,
Canadian approach to supporting culture. In recent years this has been
identified as the Canadian model of cultural affirmation. It focuses on
the development of a healthy cultural marketplace, freedom of choice for
consumers and the principle of access to Canadian cultural materials. It
emphasizes partnerships with other governments, organizations, and the
private sector. And most importantly, it is an approach to government that
uses a mix of the most effective measures available to it, recognizing
that circumstances and situations are constantly shifting.
Reflecting on the cultural achievements of the last fifty years has
helped the Committee to realize the extent to which the federal government
has made a substantial and important contribution to the creation of an
environment in which cultural expression and identity can thrive. The Committee
is confident that the insight and understanding of Canadian citizens that
guided the federal government's initiatives in the past will continue to
serve it well in the future.
Canadians have always been interested in, and responsive to, cultural
materials and services that originate beyond our borders. One major development
over the past fifty years has been the increasing number of Canadian authors
and playwrights from our two official language communities who are read
and performed abroad. Canadian writers are receiving increasing acclaim,
our television programs and sound recordings are being exported in growing
numbers, and the work of our architects is being commissioned internationally.
The shifting balance between domestic and foreign influences and interests
is not new, nor is it specific to the cultural sector. However, the equilibrium
Canadians have traditionally sought in terms of their cultural identity
may be more difficult to achieve and maintain in the future than it has
been in the past. The Committee believes that it is possible to make an
objective assessment of Canada's past successes in providing Canadian spaces
for Canadian voices.
A Sense of Place - A Sense of Being
The Committee has explored existing policies that support culture in
Canada. Its starting point was the conviction that a knowledge of these
policies, combined with an understanding of the experience and wisdom of
the witnesses, would provide invaluable guidance. Having listened closely
to Canadians, the Committee is confident that with the recommendations
presented in this report, Canada's long-established orientation to the
support of culture will enable all Canadians to continue to develop an
even stronger sense of place.
During a round table discussion in Montreal, Mr. Dinu Bumbaru of the
Heritage Montreal Foundation, made a comment that inspired the title for
this report: A Sense of Place - A Sense of Being. Mr. Bumbaru
observed that a citizen's sense of place is central to an understanding
and experience of culture. "We do not live in ant hills," he
said, "but in places that mean something."15
We derive a sense of place from the landscape, the buildings and the artifacts
that surround us. We also impart meanings, and in so doing each of us plays
an active role in enriching the culture of the places where we live.
The Committee has titled this report A Sense of Place - A
Sense of Being, in the hope that it will contribute to the further
development of cultural policies in Canada. Each generation passes something
of its experience on to those who follow. A culture lives and is enlivened
by those who experience it as well as by those whose lives help shape it.
A Sense of Place - A Sense of Being recommends to the federal government
that it reaffirm its commitment to the creation and support of culture
for Canadians.
1
News Release, Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, Ottawa, February
10, 1997.
2
See Appendices 4 and 5 for a list of witnesses and briefs.
3
Quoted by Gerard Pelletier in a speech to Board of Trade of Montreal, October
28, 1968, p. 4.
4
Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, Report, General
Introduction, Book 1: The Official Languages, Queen's Printer, 1967,
paragraphs 38, 39 and 40, pp. XXXI-XXXII.
5
Canadian Commission for UNESCO, A Working Definition of Culture for
the Canadian Commission for UNESCO, 1977, p. 6.
6
Bernard Ostry, The Cultural Connection, McClelland and Stewart,
Toronto, 1978, p. 1.
7
Department of Communications, Canadian Cultural Industries - Vital Links,
Ottawa, 1987, p. 77.
8
Neil Bissoondath, Selling Illusions - The Cult of Multiculturalism in
Canada, Penguin, Toronto, 1994, p. 81.
9
Zaz Bajon, General Manager, Manitoba Theatre Centre, Round Table, Winnipeg,
February 23, 1999.
10
UNESCO, Our Creative Diversity: Report of the World Commission on Culture
and Development, Paris, 1996, p. 14.
11
Statistics Canada, The Daily, September 24, 1998.
12
Statistics Canada, The Daily, September 24, 1998.
13
Canadian Conference of the Arts, Working Group on Cultural Policy for
the 21st Century, January 1998, p. 34.
14
News release, Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, Ottawa, February
10, 1997.
15
Dinu Bumbaru, Heritage Montreal Foundation, Montreal Round Table, February
25, 1999.