This just in from the UK, thanks to a tip from my BBC podcast of Radio Four's Today Programme this morning: John Purnell's Department for Media, Culture, and Sport has relased a White Paper intended to re-organize arts funding in Britain. Known as the Mcmaster Review, it is titled: Supporting excellence in the arts - from measurement to judgement.The author, Edinburgh Festival director Sir Brian McMaster, calls for the abandonment of quantitative "targets" for cultural grants, to be replaced by qualitative evaluations of "excellence." His proposal has already generated a fuss in England, including some protests against the initiative. More on the backlash in this article from the Daily Telegraph.
Meanwhile, I read through the report, and can see why people are upset. He's asked the right questions, but so far has not come up with the right answers. There's a lot of procedural and bureaucratic boilerplate--including an unfortunate call for more peer review (often merely "crony review")--with little discussion of competition. Especially odd from a government ministry also responsible for sport.
In the hopes of moving the discussion along, here's a memo to Sir Brian, who is has claimed that the UK is the verge of a new "Renaissance":
If you want a "Renaissance," instead of more bureaucracy and peer panels, encourage competition. Set the "Royal" institutions against the "National" ones, the West End versus the South Bank, and the Regions against London. Artists are as competitive as footballers. Use that energy to foster excellence. Let artistic organizations compete openly and fairly for funding according to fixed criteria, ranked like athletes, so that the heavyweights can't crush the bantamweights.Still, it is nice that Sir Brian is even talking about "excellence" in the arts. Sir Brian's report has started a debate that I wish we were having here in the USA, and for that he deserves thanks.
