Protection vs. Promotion of Canadian Cultural Industries

 

by H.A. Fraser, Editor, ABM.

 

Much ado is being made of Canadian Trade Minister Art Eggleton's recent comments concerning Canadian cultural policies. He asserts that these policies, some 30 years old, are no longer useful or appropriate. He states that Canada needs policies which focus rather on the promotion of Canadian culture.

Mr. Eggleton's comments were interpreted negatively by Robert Everett Green in the Globe & Mail (Feb.1). Mr. E-Green spies the "boomerang" theory of Canadian culture: Canadian art must be proven elsewhere before it can be accepted at home. This view is a reflection of the Canadian preoccupation with its lack of identity.

To find a positive direction in Mr. Eggleton's remarks is to believe the theory that an exclusive reliance on a home art market does not foster economic growth. For the health of Canadian cultural industries, we should establish a Canadian presence outside the borders and benefit from other markets.

For Canadian artists who have not ventured beyond the country's borders, it is difficult to know what to think. This sudden reassessment of political policy was sparked by the World Trade Organisation's rejection of Canada's bid to tariff American split-run magazines. In response to this win for the Americans, Trade representative Charlene Barshefsky said, "We have no objection to the promotion by Canada, or other countries, of national identity through cultural development. But we do object to the use of culture as an excuse to take commercial advantage of the United States, or as an excuse to evict American companies from the Canadian market."

Strong words that evoke thoughts of Manifest Destiny: a long held suspicion that the Americans want to take over Canada. As metaphor or reality, Manifest Destiny has been a cornerstone of Canadian cultural policies. The Massey Commission Report (1949) -- from which grew the Canada Council and satellite funding bodies across the country -- upheld the belief that if we did not foster Canadian culture, the nation would forfeit to the Americans.

In its report the Commission recognised that "a vast and disproportionate amount of material coming from a single alien source may stifle rather than stimulate our own creative effort; and, passively accepted without any standard of comparision, this may weaken critical faculties.... We are now spending millions to maintain a national independence which would be nothing but an empty shell without a vigorous and distinctive cultural life. We have seen that we have its elements in our traditions and in our history; we have made important progress, often aided by American generosity. We must not be blind, however, to the very present danger of permanent dependence."

Despite efforts to fund cultural endeavours and to build protection from American cultural influences, Canada continues to experience a brain drain to our southern neighbour and feel the constant and strong influence of American TV, film and radio.

Is Mr. Eggleton right? Will reaching out instead of hunkering down bring promised strength to our cultural industries? Given the technological innovations of recent years, including the Internet and the multi-channel universe which continue to break down barriers, it is difficult to believe otherwise.