Do arts have a role to play in the innovation economy?

Montreal has an artist culture, so it's easier for something like Cirque du Soleil. 

Arts allow people to think outside the box.  If we encourage creative thinking, then we can encourage critical thinking and that they can be innovative in their workplaces and governments.  Art gives people the spark to create change.  That can relate to business as well. 

Are we talking about arts as their own think (i.e. productions, plays, works), or arts as they are prevasive in other interfaces, i.e. GUI, the media, etc.  Koorus thinks that art is a vehcile that reflects whatever else is happening in society.  It's interesting how art is a reflection of society at the current time, so I think to understand your place is necessary to innovate.  Art gives us a foundation and lets us know what exists. 

When you think about the arts, and how traditionally people access the arts, if you're talking about an innovation economy, maybe we need to look at how we're accessing art and maybe there needs to be a new model.  People are looking at ways to take art out of the galleries, and into the classrooms.

Who would innitiate this?  Maybe it's already happening?  i.e. NFB Filmmakers in Residence program where young homeless mothers were given cameras and were involved in media making.  How can we apply these models and scale them up?  The government isn't going to do it but who will?  Corporations?  Is anyone who is here who's willing to do that? 

It's the same challenge as with government.  Everything is on the chopping block.  Corporate sponsorship is a personal desicion, maybe for some projects it wouldn't work.  In the north end of Hamilton there were all these delapitated buildings, but they got artists in there to transform the space and then now there is a huge cultural hub there now.

Governments have made it clear that they don't have money to sponsor that so maybe the only existing option is partnering with corporations.  It's up to governments to make it look attractive for corporations to fund the arts.  There is a wonderful add with dancers in blue tights with a car.  Amazing ad, and it makes art accesible.  Nothing else happens if we don't have the creative spirit.  We have to find a way to refocus our priorities right from birth on to make it absolutely clear that this type of nurturing is essential to our survival.  It's the arts that restore you, the music, the opportunity to go out and look at amazing buildings.  We've got to change our focus from the ground up. 

What about corporations effect on the message?  If corporations don't like your message you can go somewhere else.  What about artists in residence programs?

Are the arts a public works in the same way as police officers, hospitals, etc.  If so then they should be supported by the government.  Or is it a private enterprise, and if so then it should be treated as a private enterprise?  Who should be responcible for it?  Private or Public?

Part of the assumption, is private business supposed to survive on it's own?  A part from these recent events, industries have been always subsidized by tax payers for their operations.  For example, truckers depend on public assets (roads) in their operations.  The premise that if you're private that you should not expect anything for the public sector.  For tech companies there are different tax credits.  Are artists give a fighting chance.  It's hard, because most of governments support artist in the form of grants.  It's not sustainable.  Most of it is capital funding. 

How do we define art?  Does art have a function?  Is fashion or web design art? 

We have to be careful of how we distribute our cash.  What do tax payers get out of it?  Just because you're an artist, it doesn't mean that society is getting an impact from that?  It's hard with art because it's not a commercial thing and it's hard to put value on it. What metrics can we use to evaluate the impact of the art?  How many people are employeed? 

If we were talking hockey this would be a different conversation.  Businesses, government, non-profits, people are all over it.  It's upsetting.  If you move it one to the other the arts are treated as elitest?  Is that the ticket we want?  NO!  It's your living breathing, creative spirit but you can take it back to the library.  

What exactly is an artist?  You provide the nurturing environment, be it a space, be it time, things that allow a person to go and be creative.  Whether that artist starves or not, it's not entirely the responsibility of the tax payer. 

If someone pays a million to drop a statue that's worth what it's worth.  But what about marginalized artists?  The status quo just gets reinforced?  How do we support artists who don't have connections to businesses?

What about a micro-credit model?  If we collectively fundraise and lend out grants when they need it.

Canada is very unique in that we have a surplus of artists.  What if we were to market that internationally?  The artists carry our culture to the globe.  It's a peaceful culture.  John Williams believes in artists and is lobbying intensively to get the government to pay attention.  It's important to note how the web changes art and distribution models. 

In an innovation economy when you have art you're dealing with intellectual property.  If we talk about concrete objects we can put more of a dollar figure on that.  A song by an independent songwriter gets shared, it ends up not being worth anything.  So for somebody who is a song writer, they're not making a living.  Even though the internet allows us to produce things at no cost.  Is that art or is it folk art? 

We've lost access to a lot of our cultural heritage and how we have this encredible tool to create a new one.