The Big Canvas Confab - Group Five

The Big Canvas Confab - Group Five

There were 12 people in this group, including one elected official, four people that worked or represented arts and cultural institutions, three practicing artists, three people who enjoyed the arts as citizens, four people had attended previous Big Canvas events, and four people who lived in Philadelphia.  Several people fell into multiple categories. Moderators were Carol Lydon and Franne McNeal. State Sen. Andy Dinniman also joined the group.

What elected officials thought most important:
• Regionalism will work if two things are balanced: self-interest and “enlightened” self-interest.  People need to know that their interests are being taken care of and then they can focus on the bigger/broader issues of others.

• Need to solve problems though knowledge and creative economy. Need to get people talking. Coordinate efforts to incorporate arts and culture (often seen as low priority) with other issues seen as high priority, e.g. poetry inserted into guide regarding open-space issues in Chester County.

What the arts and culture leaders/workers thought most important:

• The diversity of their members (51 zip codes, 6100 members, and 3 years) makes them more than an  “insiders club.” Although they have a "small footprint", they make a big impact.

• They agreed with Senator Dinniman in that 1) a Civic campaign is important. 2) There is a strong need for cultural attractions and 3) It’s “Hard for exurbs to see the benefits of urbs”, i.e. urban and suburbs.

• Saw "confusion" in the environment about what is arts and culture. For example, William Penn Foundation did not recognize "film" as a funding category in "arts and culture."

• Approaches 2+3+4 work well (rising tide lifts all boats). Nurturing the arts experience will improve and build creative economy, and education will improve quality of life. Many students do not have school assemblies, and yet adults (in this room) can remember a school assembly that made a difference. 

• Most expressed disbelief that people said they didn’t know what was going on with regards to arts and culture events in the region. The arts leaders felt that the problem is that there is “too much information” which must be confusing for people.

Discussion:

• They didn’t like catchy phrases like "let's be know as the creative region," "let’s create a create corridor from Allentown to Easton."  Phrases are "feel good", but not realistic or accurate. 

• Problem with the "discussion" (artists and creators were missing).  There is little input from the people who create "at the street level." It could be that a lot of them feel that the "work" of organization such as discussion and advocating, is not their work.

• WHYY gets the funding, but doesn't spread the word, yet they are key to exposure.  WHYY should be featuring local arts and making the connection to the region, so that the public can be involved in supporting artists within the region.  (Specifically, reference was made to the old People’s Light & Theatre Company building, which was in a re-used factory.  Why did WHYY not feature that theater the location, the history, the art itself.) 

• There was concern with how % of $ for arts (that comes from new building development) is distributed.  The city needs to renegotiate how 1% or 2% is allocated and it needs to fund grassroots (practicing artists, art education, kids in public schools).  They favored:  Giving money directly to artists and nurturing arts education.

• Look at new ways to generate $.  Fund arts from general revenue (taxes) versus dedicated funding that may go up and down due to economy.

Need a way for organizations to collaborate on infrastructure of publicity (advertising, getting word out).

• Leverage arts as a sense of community.

• Offer encouragement and support where arts is combined (Christmas Trolley, oral history, multiple neighborhoods, etc.).

Common ground:

• Nurture arts education (involve school students, match students with artists).  The long-term benefits (jobs, inter-generational experiences/patrons) of these efforts are great. Though there was concern as to who has the “responsibility” for arts education for children.  If organizations come into the school – schools often count on the organization and use it as a justification for not having a budget for arts in the schools. Arts organizations should "augment' not replace education in schools.

• More working artists need to be involved in the discussions, including decision-making, recipient of direct funding, support and exposure.

• Collaboration is key – amongst artists, groups, and advocates.  Sharing of best practices, marketing, etc.

Tensions:

• Whether "centralized" communication was a benefit or not.
     → Point A: Some felt communication of options is important. Lots of choices (paper, Internet, etc). Want centralized source (web/calendar), to promote arts in the region.
     → Point B: There’s too much stuff now and it’s too overwhelming to sort through. Why make it electronic and make more of a mess? Whose responsibility is it? If you can't find the stuff now, how will you find it later?  Web 2.0 is overrated.

• Need more definition of "creative" in creative economy.  There was disagreement in term, the use of the term, and level of explicitness. Is it an "ingredient, and economic value, talent development?  Arts can be integrated in to the economy (school, attendees, students, etc).  But how is interdependence measured and valued?