Culture is what people willingly pay for themselves, not expect gov’t to pay
To the editor:
What is culture:
• The symphony or a rock concert?
• The art gallery or a Canucks hockey game?
• The ballet, or Dancing with the Stars?
Sorry to say it is the rock concert, the hockey game and Dancing with the Stars.
Why? People want to see these things and will pay big money to see them.
Every symphony in North America, with the exception of a few, and ballet, and art gallery must get public funding to exist. Why? People do not think it is worthwhile to spend their hard earned dollars to pay for admission at a level needed to carry the programs.
But supporters of the ballet, symphony, arts and many other people have the fuzzy idea that culture is a good thing but should be paid by the government, (municipal, provincial or federal) because culture enriches our lives. Kids can go to show and tell at the art gallery for free on a field trip, and I don’t have to pay my kid’s admission because all the taxpayers can pay, because it would be a shame to lose “culture.”
What I am saying is culture is something that is relevant to the majority of the people, it can stand alone and will be supported by the people.
That which is not supported by the users is not relevant and shouldn’t be subsidized for a few.