Planning for the Future
Thu, 1 Mar 2001, 10:54 amGrant Malcolm1 post in thread
Planning for the Future
Thu, 1 Mar 2001, 10:54 amThe Australia Council's discussion paper:
Planning for the Future
makes fascinating reading.
"Of primary concern, across all arts sectors, was the need for a greater level of engagement with the community. A recurrent theme ... was the lack of community ownership, the failure to connect with local communities."
Levels of engagement. Community ownership. How many people feel the same level of engagement or ownership for a company whose performances they attend two or three times per year compared with one they are an active participant with?
It's really not fair to single out an example, but i think it's interesting to examine the apparent difference in community response to Perth Theatre Company's website:
which admittedly i can only judge by the lack of community participation on the discussion board at that site, and the kind of participation that occurs here.
How much of this difference is due to a lessened sense of community ownership of this company? How does this apply to professional arts companies in general? Is this further evidence of the need for a greater level of engagement by professional arts companies with the community?
What strategies could a professional company use to build a greater sense of community ownership and belonging?
"Many of the existing barriers [between art forms, between 'high' and 'low' art] are under challenge."
What are the implications for the mythical divide? Look to the fringes, people, those grey in-betweens. This is where the future is happening, now.
The Sydney Morning Herald has a brief summary
Which reads, in part (my emphasis):
----
Specifically, the council would have to become less reactive ("just taking applications") and more active in putting together partnerships and co-ordinating infrastructure, Seares said. Despite resistance from some arts organisations about such collaborations, "we've got to accelerate that", she said, suggesting sharing not only of staff and buildings, but also of networks and technology.
----
Sharing networks and technology? Sounds like a three year old idea to me. That must be the Australia Council trying to play catch up again.
Cheers
Grant
Planning for the Future
makes fascinating reading.
"Of primary concern, across all arts sectors, was the need for a greater level of engagement with the community. A recurrent theme ... was the lack of community ownership, the failure to connect with local communities."
Levels of engagement. Community ownership. How many people feel the same level of engagement or ownership for a company whose performances they attend two or three times per year compared with one they are an active participant with?
It's really not fair to single out an example, but i think it's interesting to examine the apparent difference in community response to Perth Theatre Company's website:
which admittedly i can only judge by the lack of community participation on the discussion board at that site, and the kind of participation that occurs here.
How much of this difference is due to a lessened sense of community ownership of this company? How does this apply to professional arts companies in general? Is this further evidence of the need for a greater level of engagement by professional arts companies with the community?
What strategies could a professional company use to build a greater sense of community ownership and belonging?
"Many of the existing barriers [between art forms, between 'high' and 'low' art] are under challenge."
What are the implications for the mythical divide? Look to the fringes, people, those grey in-betweens. This is where the future is happening, now.
The Sydney Morning Herald has a brief summary
Which reads, in part (my emphasis):
----
Specifically, the council would have to become less reactive ("just taking applications") and more active in putting together partnerships and co-ordinating infrastructure, Seares said. Despite resistance from some arts organisations about such collaborations, "we've got to accelerate that", she said, suggesting sharing not only of staff and buildings, but also of networks and technology.
----
Sharing networks and technology? Sounds like a three year old idea to me. That must be the Australia Council trying to play catch up again.
Cheers
Grant
Grant MalcolmThu, 1 Mar 2001, 10:54 am
The Australia Council's discussion paper:
Planning for the Future
makes fascinating reading.
"Of primary concern, across all arts sectors, was the need for a greater level of engagement with the community. A recurrent theme ... was the lack of community ownership, the failure to connect with local communities."
Levels of engagement. Community ownership. How many people feel the same level of engagement or ownership for a company whose performances they attend two or three times per year compared with one they are an active participant with?
It's really not fair to single out an example, but i think it's interesting to examine the apparent difference in community response to Perth Theatre Company's website:
which admittedly i can only judge by the lack of community participation on the discussion board at that site, and the kind of participation that occurs here.
How much of this difference is due to a lessened sense of community ownership of this company? How does this apply to professional arts companies in general? Is this further evidence of the need for a greater level of engagement by professional arts companies with the community?
What strategies could a professional company use to build a greater sense of community ownership and belonging?
"Many of the existing barriers [between art forms, between 'high' and 'low' art] are under challenge."
What are the implications for the mythical divide? Look to the fringes, people, those grey in-betweens. This is where the future is happening, now.
The Sydney Morning Herald has a brief summary
Which reads, in part (my emphasis):
----
Specifically, the council would have to become less reactive ("just taking applications") and more active in putting together partnerships and co-ordinating infrastructure, Seares said. Despite resistance from some arts organisations about such collaborations, "we've got to accelerate that", she said, suggesting sharing not only of staff and buildings, but also of networks and technology.
----
Sharing networks and technology? Sounds like a three year old idea to me. That must be the Australia Council trying to play catch up again.
Cheers
Grant
Planning for the Future
makes fascinating reading.
"Of primary concern, across all arts sectors, was the need for a greater level of engagement with the community. A recurrent theme ... was the lack of community ownership, the failure to connect with local communities."
Levels of engagement. Community ownership. How many people feel the same level of engagement or ownership for a company whose performances they attend two or three times per year compared with one they are an active participant with?
It's really not fair to single out an example, but i think it's interesting to examine the apparent difference in community response to Perth Theatre Company's website:
which admittedly i can only judge by the lack of community participation on the discussion board at that site, and the kind of participation that occurs here.
How much of this difference is due to a lessened sense of community ownership of this company? How does this apply to professional arts companies in general? Is this further evidence of the need for a greater level of engagement by professional arts companies with the community?
What strategies could a professional company use to build a greater sense of community ownership and belonging?
"Many of the existing barriers [between art forms, between 'high' and 'low' art] are under challenge."
What are the implications for the mythical divide? Look to the fringes, people, those grey in-betweens. This is where the future is happening, now.
The Sydney Morning Herald has a brief summary
Which reads, in part (my emphasis):
----
Specifically, the council would have to become less reactive ("just taking applications") and more active in putting together partnerships and co-ordinating infrastructure, Seares said. Despite resistance from some arts organisations about such collaborations, "we've got to accelerate that", she said, suggesting sharing not only of staff and buildings, but also of networks and technology.
----
Sharing networks and technology? Sounds like a three year old idea to me. That must be the Australia Council trying to play catch up again.
Cheers
Grant