Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Lifestyle

Canberra's most awarded family
owned real estate agency

2007 festivals announced

By johnboy 27 September 2006 30

Jon Stanhope has announced the winners of grant funding for festivals in 2007 and I have to admit there’s some interesting stuff in there. Of interest to me is:

â–  Canberra Festival of One Act Plays
â–  2007 Canberra International Film Festival
â–  Pacific Islands Showcase
â–  Conflux – a science fiction conference in 2007

There are 13 funded festivals in 2007 which if memory serves is a welcome reduction.


What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
30 Responses to
2007 festivals announced
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
snahon 1:44 pm 03 Oct 06

goes rather well with “If I wanted your opinion, I’d give you one”

VYBerlinaV8 1:22 pm 03 Oct 06

People will like what I tell them to like…

Mr_Shab 8:55 am 29 Sep 06

You don’t have to like what other people like, VY. It’s all part of the joy of living in a society 😉

simto 8:54 am 29 Sep 06

Look, for various reasons, the government funds ways and means of people getting together. They also chuck bucketloads of cash into sport, so it evens out and everybody gets to experience the kind of things they want to without having to pay the full cost directly.

VYBerlinaV8 7:46 am 29 Sep 06

Well, let’s all sit a circle with flowers in our hair singing Kumbayah then.

Oh all right, sometimes festivals are ok, but most of them don’t float my boat.

terubo 11:28 am 28 Sep 06

Philistine!

simto 11:25 am 28 Sep 06

If all you’re going to do with your life is run hospitals and teach people, then you’ll have a pretty empty life.

Getting out, and in touch with other people is a good thing – and workable festivals, that get people out and about and living as part of their community rather than hiding in their little boxes, are an important part of that equation.

Having said that, I have no idea whether these festivals actually do achieve any of this, ’cause I’ve gone to remarkably few of ’em.

terubo 11:15 am 28 Sep 06

Agreed, AD. It’s bad enough enduring widespread drought, without bringing cultural drought into the equation.

Absent Diane 11:10 am 28 Sep 06

they are waste of money for plain brained people. To those who get a kick out of life doing these kind of things, they aren’t a waste.

VYBerlinaV8 10:58 am 28 Sep 06

That’s right, but this 200k, and another 200k from another waste of time, and another 200k from over there….

See the pattern?

simto 10:52 am 28 Sep 06

Total funding for this lot is around $200,000 – and that’s between thirteen of ’em. Which isn’t really a whole bucketload of cash.

If you really think that much can keep a school open or a hospital in gear, you’re crazy.

VYBerlinaV8 10:40 am 28 Sep 06

Some of these things are up there with the inaugural Festival of the Spanking Monkeys I’m planning for next year. It will centred around my golden statue of hot lesbians being married that should be erected on Northbourne Ave in the next few months.

What a complete waste of tax dollars. Especially at a time when schools are closing and the health system needs support.

Thumper 7:41 am 28 Sep 06

I have no problem with funding of the arts as long as it isn’t overly political in its outlook, and that it serves a genuine need and purpose in the community.

And that the spending is not too grandiose.

And AD is correct about the Medici family, even if he did ‘fuck up’ his post.

hehe

nyssa76 7:15 pm 27 Sep 06

I don’t mind it at all. As long as we don’t pay for artists to paint with their own shit and sell it.

Believe me, this did happen in France. Don’t ask me to tell you how he got the “colours”.

Absent Diane 5:50 pm 27 Sep 06

well i fcked that up totally

Absent Diane 5:49 pm 27 Sep 06

um yes they did kind of.. they were called commissions.. the medici family who ruled florence during the Renaissance (and a couple were popes as well) paid for a lot of great art.

But generally artists and money don’t go well together.

But generally art and

Ralph 5:23 pm 27 Sep 06

Some people are prepared to pay to get their jollies watching interpretive dance. Let them pay and don’t waste my tax dollars on that and other postmodernist crap.

Funny how the Renaissance movement was relatively self sustaining. They didn’t have arts grants back in those days………

Mr_Shab 5:22 pm 27 Sep 06

Isn’t it kinda the nature of art to get an awful lot of guff for every really good work. I don’t think you’d see a flowering of great art by pulling the rug out any more than by pumping more government money in.

Aaaaaanyways – there’s already a government subsidy for art. It’s called the dole.

johnboy 5:11 pm 27 Sep 06

yeah the world would be a better place without arty rubbish like the opera house and the mona lisa

Well architecture falls more under capital works and the mona lisa was private patronage so they’d both be safe.

government arts funding is notoriously bad at delivering good art.

it does however make artists very happy.

Mr_Shab 5:02 pm 27 Sep 06

I think we should throw everything open to market forces.

Actually – sod government. Corporations do it better.

Okay – maybe that’s taking it too far. How about we run government for profit. Then everything would be perfect, cause the unfettered free market always makes things better for everyone.

In the words of Bill Hicks “You’d be a fool and a communist to suggest otherwise”.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2019 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site