plowing the road: enhancing opportunities for pluralism in performing arts in ontario charles c....

7/28/2019 Plowing the Road: Enhancing Opportunities for Pluralism in Performing Arts in Ontario Charles C. Smith Consulting

1/42

1. Introduction:

The Community Cultural Impresarios (CCI) has been on an intense and adventurousjourney since its inception in 1999. Starting with sparse resources and members, CCIhas become a significant force for development and change within the performing artscommunity across Ontario and nationally. Beginning with an annual budget of $8,093.00in 2001, CCI has grown steadily to a current budget of $743,948.00 and with numerousprojects and initiatives. At the same time, CCI maintains a small administrative core andhas developed an organizational structure that benefits from its volunteer component,principally its board of directors, and several contracted project leads. While some ofthese project leads are engaged in core CCI projects (i.e., Block Booking, OntarioContact and Fresh Start), other project leads are engaged in time-limited initiatives, e.g.,Values and Benefits Study, Cultural Pluralism in the Performing Arts Movement Ontario,Healthy Arts Leadership and Municipal Cultural Planning. Other CCI initiatives areannual engagements that happen at various times during the year, e.g, the annualretreat and the arts leadership institute.

Given the balance needed to support core programming as well as to address timelyissues, CCI (like many small organizations) appears to be in a perpetual state of creativetension. In this regard, CCIs administrative model may be seen as entrepreneurial, astructural form that allows it to respond to emerging opportunities and threats in the fieldof cultural performance and outcomes of cultural policy changes. Also, while many non-profit cultural organizations face similar circumstances, CCI is unique because of itsorigins, its role and its membership. The reasons for this will be discussed further on inthis report.

For now, however, it is important to note CCIs vision is to ensure access to A liveperformance for everyone in Ontario. Its mission is To lead and develop leadership inthe performing arts and its values which value the participation of our artists, artistrepresentatives, professional and volunteer presenters and business consultants by:

encouraging, supporting and developing those responsible for the presentation ofprofessional performing arts in the communities of Ontario;

fostering networking, professional development, advocacy and access toresources;

supporting our members curatorial visions;

fostering and encouraging collegiality, trust, and openness within themembership;

encouraging the presentation of new art forms and the appreciation of quality andengaging performing arts performances; and

developing strong and healthy leadership1.

CCIs vision, mission and values guide and set it apart as a unique entity in the

1See CCI Website www.ccio.on.ca

Charles C. Smith Consulting July,2009 1


2/42

performing arts community as it assumes the role of an arts services organization thatengages in strategic partnerships with other arts and social networks and with a singularpurpose to ensure full access to live performing arts. This vision is perfectly amenableto notions of pluralism, equity and diversity2 in the arts as it provides CCI withopportunities to consider the relationship of performances to audiences and the publicand the rapidly changing communities of Ontario. It also provides CCI with the

opportunity to explore and assess cultural standards in the historical context of aparticular selective tradition that has established normative values in culturalproductions, norms that are being challenged and changed in the performing arts andacross other fields, e.g., literature and visual arts.

This report examines CCIs efforts to address the challenges and changes to normativevalues in performing arts across Ontario. In this context, the report reviews CCIsstructure, projects, resources and capacities. It also examines CCIs work to promotepluralism, equity and diversity, in particular what CCI has done in the past, is engaged innow and plans to undertake in the future.

The report is organized to provide:

1) A summary of CCIs history and development;

2) A summary of CCIs work in the areas of pluralism;

3) A review and assessment of the demographic changes in Ontario and theirimplications for performers, presenters, communities and audiences;

4) A discussion on the challenges and opportunities CCI faces in addressingpluralism;

5) A discussion on the important role CCI can play in promoting pluralism in

performing arts across Ontario and nationally; and

6) Identification of the practical steps CCI seeks to take to promote pluralism inperforming arts across Ontario and nationally.

The methodology for this report has been to:

A. review documentation about CCI as well as other relevant literature3;

B. meet with and interview all project leads and the CCI Executive Director;

C. work with CCI Executive Director and project leads to refine strategies for

integrating pluralism, equity and diversity into CCI projects; and

D. receive comments from the project leads and Executive Director on a draft of thisreport.

2See Roopchand B. Seebaran et al Culturally Diverse Arts Programs: A Guide to Planning &Presentation, 2005, and Charles C. SmithPlanning Inclusion for Now and Tomorrow: A Report andAction Plans on Equity and Diversity for Arts Etobicoke and Lakeshore Arts 20033A full list of references is included at the end of this report.



3/42

2. Background:

As noted above, CCI has grown considerably. This section of the report chroniclesCCIs growth However, before discussing CCIs development, it is important to brieflyreview the history of presenters in Ontario. This will give some context to the growth,impact and importance of CCI to the performing arts community in Ontario today.Following this, CCIs emergence will be highlighted in terms of the issues it hasaddressed over the years, the projects it has developed and either implemented or is inthe process of doing so.

2.1 Presenters in Ontario A Brief History:

From the mid-to-late 1940s to early 1970s, most community presenting in Ontario waslinked with Columbia Artists of New York through a program called Community Concert

Associations. In 1973 the Ontario Arts Council (OAC) set-up a touring office todisseminate Toronto-based touring productions of opera, theatre, ballet and symphonic

repertoire. The purpose of this was to encourage local community concert associationsto book Ontario-based artists.

The OAC closed its touring office in 1996. At the time, this office had three central staffin Toronto and five regional staff across the province. This office provided support tolocal presenters and funded performance initiatives through a budget of $1.4 million with$1 million in community presenter grants. When the office was disbanded, atremendous support vacuum was created in the provincial touring and presenting sector.To begin to address this, in 1997 the OAC created a system of funding through itsTouring and Collaborations office with a staff of two people. The bulk of the funding fortouring was diverted to performing ensembles and artists whose mandates were explicitto tour Ontario communities. This program was just recently replaced with the OACs

National & International Touring; Northern Ontario; Ontario Arts Presenters; and OntarioTouring programs.

In June 2001, The federal Department of Canadian Heritage launched the ArtsPresentation Canada program as part of its 5-year, $500-million Tomorrow StartsTodaycultural initiative. This was the first time the department provided federal fundsfor presenters.While these developments of the OAC are instrumental in maintaining some support tolocal presenters, there has still been a significant gap in the support required to nurturethe continuous growth of this vital sector of the cultural community that contributes toOntarios cultural vitality. This vacuum has led to the growth of CCI.

2.2 The Emergence of CCI:

CCI as an entity came into being in 1988. It started with 7 members who werecommunity and university-based performing arts venues. It was legally incorporated asOntario Campus and Community Impresarios. CCI operated for a decade with thevoluntary support and activity of its members. In 1999, the organization commissioned abusiness planning study to investigate CCIs future possibilities. Through that process,the membership (up to 23 venues) determined that it was willing to expand its



4/42

membership to include volunteer community presenters and extend its resources to thesame. At that time, CCI operated with no administrative structure/secretariat and had anannual operating budget of $8,093 (Ministry of Culture 2000/01 grant application).

In short succession, CCI implemented an earned revenue program of commissions onblock booking and engaged Judy Harquail on a part-time basis to coordinate this project.

At the same time, CCI applied for and received a 3-year $100K project grant from theOntario Trilllium Foundation to conduct a needs assessment of the performing artssector and establish a secretariat. CCI also applied to the Ministry of Cultures ArtsService Organization program and, in 2000/01, hired its first Executive Director, WarrenGarrett. The secretariat operated from the executive directors home office.

In February 2003 and again in September 2005 Jane Marsland was engaged to facilitatetwo planning retreats with the CCI board to help it further develop the organization andits membership. From these retreats an organizational vision, mission and set of valueswere established.

According to its 2007/08 audited financial statements, CCI operates with a budget of

$743,948 and employs three full-time persons in a small administrative unit locatedwithin the Centre for Social Innovation in Toronto. It is led by its Executive Director andsupported by two other program staff, an administrator and program assistant. Thesestaff manage the day-to-day administrative work of CCI and support, where appropriate,CCIs Board, its projects and project leads. CCI also engages several project leads.These leads are well-known, knowledgeable and experienced individuals who bring awealth of expertise to CCI and its members. At the same time, these project leads havesignificant credibility within the performing arts community and amongst funders. Thishas increased CCIs profile and provided the organization and its members withinvaluable knowledge, commitment to and passion for the arts. These project leads arecomplemented with two U.S. based firms, Wolf/Brown Inc. and Meaning Matters LLC(Jerry Yoshitomi) who are involved in some of the CCI projects discussed below.

Two project leads manage three ongoing CCI programs: Ontario Contact, Fresh Startand Block Booking. The other project leads are engaged in time-limited initiatives or inannual educational events for CCI members. While the work varies by project lead, CCIhas engaged and developed strong relationships with these professionals over a periodof time.

2.3 CCI Membership:

In 1999, CCI had a membership of 23 organizations that included university andcommunity-based performing arts venue managers across Ontario. As a result ofdiscussions at their annual retreat in Hockley Valley that year, members determined that

CCI had an opportunity to create an Ontario-based network of arts presenters similar tothose in other provinces and in the U.S. The organizations board of directors shortlythereafter expanded categories of membership to include voluntary communitypresenters in addition to the two existing categories of performing arts venue managers(under 500 seats and over 500 seats). CCI now has a membership of 153 that includesthe categories of: presenter; agent/artist manager; business service consultant; artist;and student



5/42

At the end of its first decade, CCI was a tightly-knit and highly collaborative network.This level of collaboration was attributed to members working and communicatingfrequently with one another, enabling a trust to form among the members that, in turn,compelled them to collaborate on other projects such as research, advocacy andprofessional development.

Capitalizing on this collaboration, CCI has chosen facilitated processes to engage andassist in the development of its members.

2.4 CCI Projects and Initiatives:

CCI developed its current programs and services in an process that can best bedescribed as evolutionary,. Part of this development is attributable to CCIsresponsiveness to the needs of its members; another part is based on CCIs leadershipas an arts services organization. CCI is well positioned to receive information from itsmembers that identity their issues, challenges and needs. At the same time, CCI workswith highly regarded consultants in the arts field and maintains ongoing dialogue withfunders and representatives of other networks. These sources of information provideCCI with contemporary research and valuable connections in a variety of disciplines thatcan and do inform developments within the arts, e.g., the network mapping initiativewhich is discussed briefly later on in this report.

CCI began to develop the resources for its services in the following way:

In 2000, CCI received a three-year grant from the Ontario TrilliumFoundation. The purpose of this grant was to conduct a needs assessment,develop a website and support its secretariat functions;

The Block Booking Program was set up in 2000 as a collaborative projectwith earned revenue derived from commissions charged for the professionaladministration of this service. This program is administered by Judy Harquail;

Funding was received for the first time in 2000/01 from the Ontario Ministry ofCulture through its Arts Services Organization program;

The federal Department of Canadian Heritage launched the Arts PresentationCanada program and CCI received its first APC funding in 2001/02;

CCI presented John Killacky as its keynote speaker at its 2002 AnnualRetreat. Killacky had been actively involved in the American advocacymovement to defend and support the National Endowment for the Arts which

had become embattled in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Killackys topic atthe 2002 retreat was 11 Lessons Learned From the Life of An ArtsActivistand his conversation with CCI members signaled a turning point forOntario presenters who recognized the important role and responsibility thatpresenters played and held in building stronger, healthier communitiesthrough a vibrant and contemporary engagement in the arts;

From 1999 to 2000 the OAC continued to host and produce OntarioContact, an annual booking/showcasing conference for the performing arts.



6/42

In 2001 and 2002 OAC partnered with CCI in producing this event and in2003 the OAC turned it completely over to CCI manage;

From 2000/01 to 2003/04 CCIs budget grew from $94,879 to $515,733;

In 2003 the Fresh Start Program was created by the Federal Departmentof Canadian Heritage as an agreement with CCI to provide funds to emergingpresenters. This program is managed by Judy Harquail;

In 2003 CCI diversified its membership to include agents and artists;

In 2004, the CCI annual retreat focused on pluralism and involved theCollective of Black Artists (COBA) and the Menaka Thakker Dance Company;

In 2004, CCI collaborated with the Centre for Cultural Management at theUniversity of Waterloo to develop the Municipal Cultural Planningproject.This project is facilitated by William Poole of the Centre for CulturalManagement;

In 2005, CCI initiated a pilot test of its new Healthy Arts Leadership Programfacilitated by Jane Marsland and Judy Harquail;

In 2005-06 Jane Marsland facilitated a second strategic review of OntarioContact and CCI;

In 2006, CCI supported the development of the Ontario Classical MusicNetwork now co-led by Val MacElravy, Stan Passfield and Bob Johnston;

In 2006, CCI launched the Arts Education Forums project in partnership

with Prologue to the Performing Arts and eyeGO To the Arts;

In 2006 Marion Paquet facilitated a 2-day think-tank on re-energizing OntarioContact;

In 2007, CCI initiated its Values and Benefits Study led by Ken Coulter ofthe Oakville Centre for Performing Arts and project managed by Cheryl Ewingwith support by WolfBrown and Associates and the Major UniversityPresenters Consortium(US);

In 2008 CCI began working with Charles C. Smith to develop CPPAMO.Smith made a presentation to CCIs annual retreat in Chatham and Heidi

McKenzie later joined CPPAMO as a resource to assist its development;

In 2008, CCI initiated Ontario Dances, developing competencies in dancecuration, with assistance by the Ontario Arts Councils dance office. The 3-year project ismanaged by Judy Harquail;

In 2009, CCI initiated its Network Mapping initiative as a participant in aMetaMapping Community of Practice led by Liz Rykart of MetaStrategies;



7/42

In 2009, CCI will engage in a third strategic review to be held in the early fall.

In addition to the above, CCI holds an annual retreat and offers Arts LeadershipInstitutes. It also works with other National and Regional Presenting Network (NRPN)Executive Directors in developing national and regional strategies for arts presentation.

Brief descriptions of these CCI projects and initiatives are provided below.

2.4.1 Fresh Start:

This is a third party granting program administered by CCI on behalf of the Departmentof Canadian Heritage. The program disperses approximately $170K in grants each yearto emergent culturally diverse and non-incorporated performing arts presenters andfestivals that are otherwise not eligible to apply to Arts Presentation Canadas mainfunding program. While the funds were originally targeted to Aboriginal and diverseethnoracial communities, the purpose of program is to enable emerging presenters tohave the capacities to approach the Department of Canadian Heritage for funding as amature presenting organization and has expanded to go beyond funding these primarycommunities.

The program has three-to-four intakes each year and funding is awarded on averagebetween $1,500 and $5,000 for activities that range from a single event to a weekend ofactivities. Interested organizations are informed through the Department of CanadianHeritage, through CCIs e-newsletter, through Community Arts Ontario, and throughregional and local offices of provincial ministries involved in arts and/or heritage. All ofthese sources refer potential applicants for consideration.

There are approximately 40 applicants per year and the application process issupported by a jury with members from diverse communities and those recommendedby the Department of Canadian Heritage.

Over the years, this program has funded 187 organizations for a total of $732,660.00.Of these, 83 recipients have been Aboriginal and ethnoracial organizations with 31

Aboriginal and 52 ethnoracial. While these organizations comprise just less than 50%of the total grant recipients, it is notable to see the decrease in funding of Aboriginal andethnoracial organizations following the programs first two years. For example, in 2003-04 and in 2004-05, a total of 22 Aboriginal organizations (11 each year) receivedfunding while a total of 28 culturally diverse organizations (14 each year) receivedfunding. For the following years, from 2005-2009, only 9 Aboriginal and 24 ethnoracialorganizations received funding.

2.4.2 Healthy Arts Leadership:

This initiative is a facilitated leadership strengthening program based on the U.S. body ofwork developed by Arts Action Research (AAR). AAR works to connect anorganizations core principles with healthy organizational functioning, professionalleadership and a healthy professional leadership-board relationship. AARworks witharts organizations to enable them to increase their ability to articulate artistic values andto function within an arts-based process, e.g., using creative processes inherent in the



8/42

artistic process4.

In Toronto, theAARapproachwas used in theArts For Change initiative that occurredbetween 1996-99. The aim of this initiative was to enable Toronto-based, mid-sizeperforming arts organizations to get out of debt and stabilize themselves. It also aimedto support these groups in sharing resources. Some twenty-five organizations were

involved in integrating the key values of the Arts for Change initiative, i.e., beingadaptive, relevant and ready for change. Centred within the arts community, theinitiative prepared its members to be able to respond to the OAC Endowment Program(1999-2001) that promoted sharing amongst artists. OAC funding assisted theseorganizations in understanding and respecting each other and supported them to worktogether in fundraising. This initiative later transformed itself into the Creative Trust -Working Capital for the Arts.

CCI adapted the technical assistance component of The Creative Trust for its members,launched a pilot test phase with four member sites in 2005-06 and rolled out the entireprogram in 2006/07. CCI member organizations involved in this initiative are: Oakville,Sarnia, Markham, Chatham, North Bay, Brampton, Owen Sound, Peterborough, Orillia,

Parry Sound and Meadowvale (Mississauga). Some of these members are municipally-based performance venues. These differ significantly from other members because oftheir hierarchical decision-making reporting structures and processes. Some CCImembers involved in this initiative are stand-alone non-profit organizations.

Based on complexity theory5, the Healthy Arts Leadership (HAL) approach suggests thefollowing processes are most effective to enabling arts organizations:

a) using discovery and co-learning which embeds organizationaldevelopment in the acknowledgement that each organization has aunique vision, perspective and way of working;

b) designing without engineering which requires working with an artsorganization on the basis of its strengths;

c) identifylng continuity and the strength an organization can derive from it;

d) valuing variety and diversity of experiences as both learning and teachingopportunities6

In working with the aforementioned organizations, the Healthy Arts Leadership (HAL)

4An Elegant Process: The Artistic Process/The Planning Process (2007); Growing Audiences: CreatingValue, Meaning and Energy (2005);Leading Arts Boards: An Arts Professionals Guide (2005), Nello

McDaniel and George Thom, ARTS Action Issues New York5Complexity theory has been defined as a mode of thought which suggests that that criticallyinteracting components self-organize to form potentially evolving structures exhibiting a hierarchy of

emergent system properties.

This theory takes the view that systems are best regarded as wholes, and studied as such, rejecting the

traditional emphasis on simplification and reduction as inadequate techniques on which to base this sort of

scientific work. Quantifying Complexity Theory, Chris Lucas at 2. See also Complexity Theory andManagement Practice, Jonathan Rosenhead6The Arts Action Research Process of Work, no date, Nello McDaniel and George Thom



9/42

project, as it was named, set five goals. Some of these included:

1) helping the organizations leadership articulate the needs,goals, opportunities, problems, etc., they want to address;

2) designing a planning approach that is organic and appropriate;

3) keeping the working process focused, realistic and inaccordance with timelines.7

As a result of this process, the members involved are learning how to:

i. embed planning processes to take care of the organization and not just theshow;

ii. learning to work as leaders, not simply as managers; and

iii. deal with risk averse environments, e.g., municipal entities, changing funding

levels and fluctuations in audience numbers.

The process takes time and the organizations have been actively engaged in this for thepast four years. During this time, some of the organizations involved are developingviable models that recognize that their venues are not exclusive clubs for privilegedmembers but are entities that belong to the community. In this regard, some of theseorganizations have begun to refocus their activities that seem to be unreflective of theircommunities, tend to be white and older and have challenges with inclusion of diversecommunities and artistic forms of expression. Some organizations operate in an oldschool fashion with a traditional hierarchical structure more suited for non-artsorganizations, e.g., reports to the board from an executive director using antiquatedmodels of recommendations and approvals as opposed to considering the healthy arts

approach that values the competencies of artists and the artistic vision of theorganizations management staff.

2.4.3 Values and Benefits Study:

This study is a three-year investigation aimed at identifying and revealing the intrinsicimpact of live performing arts experiences on audiences. As an associate in the largerUS MUPS study, CCIs study provides local presenters with protocols and survey toolsto gather evidence from their audiences and discern a variety of intrinsic impacts at play.The next phase of the study will produce a segmentation analysis to produce identifiable

values-motivated audience clusters to shape programming, messaging and audienceservice engagement practices.

This study grew out of a professional development opportunity offered by CCI featuringJerry Yoshitmi who suggested discussing this matter with WolfBrown Consultants whowere doing similar research in the U.S.A. CCI was interested in a made in Canadastudy and began to work with six communities: Oakville, Peterborough, Parry Sound, St.Catherines, Markham and Waterloo Region.

7CCI Healthy Arts Leader (HAL) Final Report, no date



10/42

In exploring how people value culture at an intrinsic level, this study is a departure fromthe notions of economic benefits of the performing arts that have become so prevalent.The concept of this study is to understand the audience and their interests as aspringboard to assist presenters in developing more inclusive language in theirrelationship with audiences.

The response to the survey has been excellent and has used a two-pronged approach:

i. A form is filled out in the theatre by audience members after aperformance; and

ii. Follow-up interviews are held within 24 hours with those who filledout the survey. These in-depth interviews take about 1 hour and are done bytrained volunteers.

The study was implemented in the Spring 2008 and surveyed 4-6 performances in eachvenue or approximately 200 per venue. The in-depth interviews were conducted with

representatives of existing audiences as a means to develop an understanding of them.A total of 189 interviews were conducted with 127 of these specific to presenteraudiences.

While those surveyed were able to identify their country of origin as a survey response,there have been some challenges regarding the diversity of audiences surveyed andinterviewed. Aside from the aforementioned category, it is not possible to determine the

Aboriginal or ethnoracial composition of the audiences surveyed and interviewed andthere is a strong perception that audiences were fairly homogenous.

2.4.4 Ontario Contact:

This is an annual booking and showcase conference serving touring artists as well aspresenters from across Ontario and outside the province and agents/managers.Essentially a showcase/networking opportunity for presenters and artists, OntarioContact offers showcase opportunities where artists perform for presenters who areconsidering what to place in their venues.

There is an application process for performers/artists and applications are accepted inthe spring for the fall event. A jury meets in May to deliberate on the applicationsreceived. Usually 150-200 applications are received and the jury may select 40 50.The selection criteria are based on artistic excellence and the impact on aperformer/artists career. The jury tends to prefer newcomers so that it can expand

performance opportunities for audiences across Ontario. Selections ensure a balancebetween music, theatre, dance and other performing arts disciplines.

There are four people on the jury and the following qualities are considered in selectingthe jury: someone from the previous year; a volunteer; some one with a classical musicbackground; knowledge of young audience; and experience in theatre/music/dance.The jury makes selections and a back-up list in the event of cancellations.



11/42

Ontario Contact lasts 3-4 days and there are usually about 40 showcases for 15-18minutes each. Theatre and dance are given 30 minutes per performance as they needmore technical support. Many presenters come to Ontario Contact on a voluntary basis,watch the artists/performers and make recommendations to their organization. Basedon the observations of the event manager/project lead, there is some diversity amongstthe performers/artists involved. For example:

Of 149 applications in 2008, 10% were from ethnoracial performers (i.e., the leadsinger or composition of the act was ethnoracial) and, of these, 16% weresuccessful in gaining a showcase spot;

In 2009, there have been 159 applications with 12% from ethnoracial performersand with 15% successful in gaining a showcase. This is despite the fact that thenumber of showcases has decreased from 49 to 40 from the previous year.

One issue now being considered is how to assist the performing artist in understandingwhat presenters are looking for. There have also been challenges related to classical

music and young audience venues that are usually run by volunteers who have accessto limited budgets and want all showcase activities on a single day as they have to taketime off work to attend. As well, cross-over opportunities are limited and in 2008 theclassical and young audience venues were programmed against each other which willnot happen in 2009

2.4.5 Ontario Dances:

This is a threeyear pilot project developed in partnership with OAC to cultivatecontemporary dance curatorial competencies and audiences at eight multi-disciplinarypresenting venues across Ontario. It includes funding assistance for presenters to attenddance performances and professional development opportunities with leading,contemporary dance artists, artistic directors and presenters who provide arts educationin their communities. Now in its second year, the program aims to increase danceperformances in venues outside of the Greater Toronto Area and to break down theperception that dance is an urban phenomenon.

The program uses a juried process where each presenter selects one dance program foreach of the projects three years. CCI receives funds to do follow-up work with thepresenters and performers. Each presenter is progressing in different stages anddeveloping curatorial competencies. It is anticipated that this approach may betransferable to curatorial competency development in other performing arts disciplinessuch as theatre and music.

In the projects first year, three presenters were involved along with two dancecompanies, KaHa-Wa Dance, led by Aboriginal dancer and choreographer Sante Smith,and Dreamwalker, led by Asian dancer and choreographer Andrea Nann.

Currently, there are seven presenting communities involved Oakville, North Bay,Orillia, Chatham, St. Catharines, Kitchener and Guelph. However, aside from theaudience education work in North Bay being led by South Asian dancer and



12/42

choreographer, Nova Bhattacharya, there are no diverse dance programs beingpresented in the projects second year.

2.4.6 Block Booking:

A curatorial learning and tour coordination service provided to presenting members, thisproject supports presenters who wish to engage in collaborative buying ofperformances as a way to reduce costs and to coordinate promotion, publicity andcontractual arrangements with performers. This program also helps to develop thecuratorial competencies of presenters as well as the collegiality of CCI members whoshare performers/performances and the contractual logistics to engage them.

In 2006-07, 35 tours were booked and 11 of these were of artists from Aboriginal andethno-racial communities. In 2007-08, of the 44 tours booked, 11 were from diversecommunities and in 2008, of the 45 tours booked, 12 were from diverse communities.

2.4.7 Ontario Classical Music Network:

This is a network-forming initiative aimed at bringing specialized presenters of classicalmusic together to strengthen their presenting and audience engagement practices. TheNetwok is now in its incubation stage and has been in a developmental process as aresult of the interests of classical music presenters across Ontario. As a result of thetransitions described earlier in terms of the demise of both the Columbia ArtistsCommunity Concert Association and the OAC Touring Office, these presenters began toexperience a significant reduction of presenting opportunities and volunteers in theircommunities as there was no longer a focal point to coordinate their activities and, also,valuable resources were no longer available to assist them.

In the past, the OAC Touring Offices five regional touring consultants assisted volunteercommunity presenters with information, resources and connections with the OACsTouring Office. When the OAC Touring Office closed, this service to regional presenterswas discontinued. Subsequently, the volunteer resources needed to run community-based presenting organizations under the existing volunteer-run models developed inthe late 1970s suffered.

Following the closure of the OAC Touring Office, presenters were without criticalresource support and, as a result, retreated into survival mode and learnedhelplessness as there was no advocate for their group and their activities. It was alsoevident that fewer and fewer classical presenters were attending Ontario Contact. Indiscussions with CCI, classical presenters articulated their desire to return OntarioContact to a functional format that served their specific needs, i.e., showcases,advocacy, training and education as well as a focal point for connections andnetworking.

In 2004, the OAC and CCI initiated discussions on this issue and in 2006, JaneMarsland facilitated an early meeting that resulted in CCI assuming a lead role inbringing classical music back to Ontario Contact in 2006. Following this, the Networkdeveloped the following vision and mission statements:



13/42

VISION: The Ontario Classical Music Network envisions all people having theopportunity to experience the transformative power of live classical musicMISSION: The mission of the Ontario Classical Music Network is to foster and promoteclassical music by strengthening and supporting leadership in classical music

presenting.

2.4.8 Municipal Cultural Planning Partnership:

The Municipal Cultural Planning Partnership (MCPP) was established in 2006 followinga series of successful forums on Municipal Cultural Planning (MCP) in Ontario. Theseforums were held in Orillia, Peterborough, Sudbury, Mississauga, Cambridge, Strathroy-Caradoc, Kenora and Perth. The audience for these forums included: mayors and otherelected officials, senior municipal staff, as well as community, cultural and businessleaders. To continue the development of MCP, the Centre for Cultural Management atthe University of Waterloo and CCI entered into a collaborative agreement in order to

secure project funding from the Ontario Trillium Foundation. CCIs interest in MCPPstems from the fact that many of its members are running municipally-owned facilitiesand the practice of MCP calls for their involvement and leadership.

CCM has obtained a number of grants from the Ministry of Cultures Cultural StrategicInvestment Fund. CCI obtained funding from the Ontario Trillium Foundation in 2005and in 2007. These funds supported the establishment and maintenance of project officeat the University of Waterloo and numerous projects that raise awareness of andcapacity for MCP. MCPP raises awareness of MCP by hosting workshops and forumsand delivering presentations at conferences and meetings. MCPP provides technicalassistance to municipalities interested in pursuing MCP by connecting experiencedpractitioners with those new to the practice. MCPP provides an opportunity for MCP

practitioners to learn from each other and contribute to the development of this emergingpractice through meetings and networking.

MCPP s mission is: To support municipalities in integrating culture into all facets ofcommunity planning and decision-making as a means of building healthy, prosperousand sustainable communities. MCPP will do this by harnessing the expertise andresources of its member partners.Its values are to:

1. Respect Local Leadership local leaders best understand their communitiesand have the capacity to affect change

2. Acknowledge Different Contexts municipal perspectives and needs vary due tosize, location and economic or other circumstances; respect these differences;and

3. Emphasize Results support continuous monitoring and evaluation of results8

Interest in and commitment to MCP across Ontario has steadily increased since the

8www.ontarioMCPP.ca

http://www.ontariomcp.ca/http://www.ontariomcp.ca/http://www.ontariomcp.ca/


14/42

series of forums in 2005 and 2006. At that time, very few Ontario municipalities wereseriously considering the role of culture in their communities, including its role ineconomic development. Since this series of forums, 55 municipalities have undertakenMCP initiatives. In the last year (2008/2009) approximately 20 municipalities haverecognized the importance of culture by pursuing MCP.

2.4.9 CPPAMO:

A new three-year facilitated approach to open opportunities for Aboriginal and ethno-racial performers to engage with audiences across Ontario, CPPAMO is a collaborativemovement aimed at mobilizing and empowering the performing arts communities ofOntario in their pursuit of sustainable change in the areas of pluralism.

The project mandate is to:

1) identify the challenges in promoting cultural pluralism in performing artsorganizations;

2) identify and promote evidence-based practice models of cultural pluralism inperforming arts organizations on such matters as:

a. developing audiences inclusive of diverse communities;

b. promoting/marketing performances to diverse communities;

c. developing collaborative touring projects with performing arts organizationsfrom diverse communities;

d. recruiting board, staff, volunteers and artists from diverse communities;

3) providing education and training to performing arts organizations to build theirknowledge, skills and capacities in the area of cultural pluralism;

4) develop and provide resource support to performing arts organizations engaged inintegrating cultural pluralism into their organizations, e.g., programming, marketing,board/staff/volunteer engagement.

It will also provide opportunities for CCI itself to develop its resources and capacities tosupport pluralism in the arts through its resources and member services.

2.4.10 Arts Education Forums Partnership:

From 2006-2009, this educational initiative involved convening artists, presenters andeducators in an effort to build arts education programs at the local community level.

The initiative was implemented in partnership between CCI and eyeGO to the Arts andPrologue to the Performing Arts with funding provided by the Ontario TrilliumFoundation and the Department of Canadian Heritage.

The project involved convening a series of forums to discuss presenting arts for childrenand these forums were held in Sarnia, Kitchener, Ottawa and Peterborough andaddressed such issues as outreach to educators, artists and presenters and how toengage each in promoting performances through local schools. As a result of theseforums, a lessons-learned session is scheduled for Ontario Contact in 2009.



15/42

2.4.11 NRPN Learning Intensive:

Held in Banff, an initial three-day program aimed at strengthening the networkleadership skills of the Canada National and Regional Presenting Network (NRPN)Executive Directors, this Intensive was co-developed by CCI, BCTC, CAPACOA and

Atlantic Presenters Association for 12 Executive Directors from Anglo and Francophonenetworks. The Intensive was partially self-funded by participants with additional fundingsupport provided by the Department of Canadian Heritage and by CAPACOA.

Following a needs assessment conducted through a survey questionnaire, the Intensiveaddressed the health of the leadership and, through this focus, provided opportunity forparticipants to gain perspective on work-life balance as well a professional andorganizational growth and their commitment to it. Through a facilitated process, eachparticipant was able to work through key personal and organizational challenges as wellas consider network thinking and the potential of working in a community of practice.

All of the participants found the session very valuable and participated in ateleconference follow-up to continue this conversation. As well, many participants arehopeful that this Intensive will be an annual event.

2.4.12 Arts Leadership Institute:

An annual event, the Arts Leadership Institute by invitation brings together 10-12cultural leaders in the arts presentation field. The purpose of this is to provide thesepresenters with opportunities to re-balance their personal, professional andorganizational life plans and to give them the space to re-energize in order to re-engagecreatively in their efforts. CCI members have participated in three of these sessionssince 2006 and another one is now being planned for the fall 2009.

2.4.13 Pan-Canadian Task Force on Touring & Presenting:

Begun in 2008, this is a national initiative co-led by CAPACOA and other NRPNs. Itspurpose is to gather and reveal evidence of Canadas touring and presenting sectorsimpact on the lives of all Canadians. This project emerged out of a meeting in Ottawain June 2007. Terms of reference have been developed for this project and an advisorycommittee struck to guide its work. It is anticipated that this project will take 5 years tocomplete as it will engage all sectors involved in performing arts, including unions,presenters, performers, researchers, academics, etc.

2.4.14 Network Mapping:

A new initiative begun in early January 2009, Network Mapping aims to provideopportunities for CCI to learn about effective ways to map and encourage networkdevelopment among the provinces performing arts presenters. The Project is led byMeta Strategies president Liz Rykert and lead facilitator June Holley. The results of the



16/42

mapping will be used to develop and strengthen touring and presenting networks in theprovince, including opening links and performing opportunities for ethno-racial and

Aboriginal touring artists and audiences.

3. CCI Initiatives Promoting Pluralism:

As described above, there are a few CCI projects that have promoted pluralism. Theseinclude:

The CCI 2004 and 2008 Annual Retreats. For both of these events, CCIfocused discussion with its members on notions of pluralism, equity and diversity.The 2004 retreat featured a panel presentation involving renowned South Asiandancer Menaka Thakker along with BaKari Eddison Lindsay of the Collective ofBlack Artists. In 2008, CCI featured a presentation by Charles C. Smith, LecturerCultural Pluralism in the Arts University of Toronto Scarborough andFounder/Lead Facilitator of CPPAMO.

The Fresh Start Grants Program was initially targeted to support Aboriginaland ethnoracial presenters and, while the program focus has widened to includeemerging presenters, it still receives and funds applications from presenterswithin ethnoracial communities.

The Ontario Contact showcase provides opportunities for Aboriginal andethnoracial performers to perform before presenters who may engage them fortouring opportunities across Ontario.

It must also be noted that both the Values and Benefits and Network Mappinginitiatives have the potential respectively to increase understanding of ethnoracial

and Aboriginal audiences as well as support networking amongst presenters andAboriginal and ethnoracial performers, artists and presenters. Effort is nowunderway to support this.

Even though CCI has established itself amongst its members and within the broaderperforming arts community, it has not focused its efforts on pluralism in performing arts.Despite this, CCI has a keen interest to undertake work in this area based on itsunderstanding of members interest and interactions with performing arts organizationsacross Ontario and Canada.

To enable this, CCI began a relationship with CPPAMO in early 2008 and has placedthe work of CPPAMO within the current movement for change within performing arts

organizations. CCI has undertaken work with its members that will enable this projectto take place with little difficulty. CCIs work on the Healthy Arts project as well as itsefforts to build the curatorial capacities of its members in the discipline of dance areexcellent points of intersection with the goals and strategic planning of CPPAMO.

In essence, CCI members are engaged in processes of change and CPPAMO canassist this since CCI members are looking to showcase performances of culturalexpressions from diverse Aboriginal and ethnoracial communities. To enable this totake place, however, requires building the will, capacities, cultural competencies and



17/42

understanding of CCI members so that they engage performances from thesecommunities and, thereby, enable audiences across Ontario to access artisticexpressions from diverse communities on a regular basis.

CPPAMO is essentially an organizational change activity aimed at integrating thevalues of pluralism into the core activities of performing arts organizations. The

process started with a launch of its goals and objectives at the CCI Annual Retreat inMay 2008. Following this, CPPAMO has initiated a series of facilitated interventionswith ten (10) CCI members. At the same time, CCI has also reviewed its ownorganizational structure, decision-making processes, policies, programs and resourcesto identify its capacities to support the CPPAMO initiative.

This phase in the organizational change process requires an assessment of CCI and itsmembers to provide them with an overview of the project and to receive their input as towhat they believe is needed to make this project a success. This phase also requires areview of CCI as the main partner in this process. This review has been done toensure CCI is prepared to facilitate this project in the short-term and then sustain it intothe future.

CPPAMO aims to set in motion processes to address diverse representation reflective ofOntarios society in the boards and authorizing bodies (i.e. municipal governments),staff, artistic programming and audience reach of CCIs members. It has also initiatedan ongoing forum for conversation/support to develop a cultural transformation withinand outside of the arts communities. This will be implemented through several vehiclesfor change, including: facilitated consultations; bi-annual Town Halls on Pluralism inPerforming Arts; workshops and professional development opportunities; developmentof resource guides, toolkits and model action plans; and research into evidence-basedpractices on pluralism in performing arts.

As a result of these processes, it is anticipated that the following momentum will bedeveloped:

The education and training program will be set up in such as way as to provideperforming arts organizations with practical guidance to enable them tosuccessfully integrate culturally diverse values and principles in their operations,planning, programming and decision-making processes;

Each participating organization will generate usable and tangible content that willinform the development and implementation of cultural pluralism into their day-to-day operations;

The performing arts community in Ontario will have useful and appropriate toolsand guides related to cultural pluralism;

Diversity practice and implementation will be guided and facilitated by aprofessional equity/diversity arts consultant with hands-on and ongoing fieldexperience;

The commitment of participating organizations to the CPPAMO project willcatalyze increased interest and proactive engagement throughout the sector aswell as other arts disciplines; and

Through integrating pluralism into its core member services, CCI will redefinenotions of healthy arts and arts action research within the performing arts



18/42

community. This will ensure that these concepts, and related services, are seenas integral to and supportive of each other.

The following CCI communities are being approached to participate in this process:Markham, Richmond Hill, Brampton, Oakville, Mississauga, Kitchener-Waterloo, Guelph,Ottawa, Kingston and Peterborough

To support this process, a Roundtable on Pluralism in the Arts has been formedcomprised of individuals and cultural workers engaged in a community of practice withdemonstrated passion for pluralism in the arts. The Roundtable will be a co-learningresource towards identifying, discussing, guiding and steering the process by which theinitiatives of CPPAMO will be undertaken. The members of the Roundtable include:

Ms Anna Azrahimi, Canadian Childrens Peace Theatre Ms Farwah Gheewala, Education Coordinator, Soulpepper Theatre Mr. Perry Voulgaris, Director Digital Media Program CBC Ms Lata Pada, Sampradaya Dance Creations Ms Andrea Baker, fu-Gen Asian Theatre Company

Ms Helen Yung, Canadian Arts Coalition and Culture Days Dr. Wayne Dowler, Cultural Pluralism in the Arts/University of Toronto Scarborough Mr. Dan Brambilla, Chief Executive Officer Sony Centre for the Performing Arts Ms Madeha Khalid, Community Relations Manager, Canadian Stage Mr. Phillip Akin, Obsidian Theatre Ms Mae Maracle, Centre for Indigenous Theatre Mr. Brainard Bryden-Taylor, Nathaniel Dett Chorale Ms Emily Chung, Little Pear Garden Theatre Collective Spy Denome-Welch, Aboriginal Playwright Ms Denise Fujiwara, CanAsian Dance Ms Charmaine Headley, Collective of Black Artists

As part of the overall process, effort is needed to bring together this Roundtable with CCIand its members in order to build relationships that will lead to increased opportunitiesfor Aboriginal and ethnoracial performers to be presented in venues across Ontario.

4. Demographic Changes:

Supported by StatsCan Census data, Ontario is recognized for its diverse communitiesincluding Aboriginal peoples and peoples with diverse first languages, religious beliefs, culturalvalues, racial backgrounds, nationalities and distinct histories. Resulting from the growth of

Aboriginal populations as well as vibrant immigration patterns, the composition of Ontario has

changed dramatically over the past two decades and will continue this way into the foreseeablefuture.

For example, in 2006, 19.1% of the Ontario population was comprised of individuals fromracialized (i.e., visible minority) communities and this is by far the most significant populationcentre for these communities comprising over 2.2 million peoples and representing 54% of allracialized peoples in Canada. The most significant communities within this demographic are



19/42


20/42

Save for the present time, the 1990s were Ontarios highest intake of immigrantshistorically;

At the current time, projections for future immigration indicates that the levels for newarrivals may result in even higher settlement numbers between 2001 and 201016.

4.1 Demographic Changes and CCI Member Communities:

These provincial wide changes are mirrored and lived in local communities, each of which hasits own particulars to work with. This is something the CCI communities seem to recognize.Whether Markham, Richmond Hill, Brampton, Oakville, Mississauga, Kitchener-Waterloo,Guelph, Ottawa, Kingston or Peterborough, each of these communities has and is experiencingsignificant shifts in their local populations. Increased numbers of South Asians, Asians,

Aboriginal peoples and those of African descent, are evident across Ontario. These changeshave mostly taken place in the past twenty years largely as a result of the upward ceiling placedon immigration to such levels as 250,000 per year, most of whom settle in Ontario.

Based on recent census data, It is clear that the communities noted above are experiencingsome version of this right now. Each has felt the varying changes to their local neighbourhoods,giving each a different texture but a common challenge. Some of these changes within theaforementioned communities include17:

Markham: This community has grown by 25.4% from 2001 to 2006, from 208,615 to 261,573,and with:

152,440 reporting a first language other than English or French;

immigrants comprising 147,400 or over 50% of the total population whereas this group

was at 68,845 before 1991 and grew by 58,680 between 1991 and 2000 and then againby 18,875 between 2001 and 2006 for a total of over 77,000 peoples over a 15 yearperiod;

the Aboriginal community comprising 405 of the total population in 2006 while racializedgroups comprised 170,535 or over 50% of the total population with the most significantnumbers in the Chinese (89,300) and South Asian (44,9,95) communities.

Oakville: This community has grown by 6.6% from 2001 to 2006, from 144,738 to 165,613 andwith:


immigrants comprising 50,250 of the total population whereas this group was at 31,710before 1991 and grew by 11,270 between 1991 and 2000 and then again by 6,820between 2001 and 2006 for a total of over 18,540 peoples over a 15 year period;

16Ibid 2417The statistics used in this section of the report are all derived from Statistics Canada, 2006 CommunityProfiles. See also Ontario Ministry of Finance Census 2001 Highlights: FactSheet 6: Visible Minorities

and Ethnicity in Ontario



21/42

the Aboriginal community comprising 665 of the total population in 2006 while racializedgroups comprised 30,315 of the total population with the most significant numbers in theSouth Asian (9,945), Chinese (5,260) and Black (3,535) communities

Kingston: This community has grown by 2.6% from 2001 to 2006, from 114,195 to 117,207,

and with:



the Aboriginal community comprising 2,360 of the total population in 2006 whileracialized groups comprised 8,150 of the total population.

Guelph: This community has grown by 8.3% from 2001 to 2006, from 106,170 to 114,943, andwith:



the Aboriginal community comprising 1,290 of the total population in 2006 whileracialized groups comprised 15,800 of the total population.

Brampton: This community has experienced population changes at many levels with a 33.3%population increase from 2001 to 2006, from 325,428 to 433,896 persons and with:



the Aboriginal community comprising 2,665 of the total population in 2006 whileracialized groups comprised 246,150 or over 50% of the total population with particularlystrong numbers in the South Asian (136,750) and Black (53,340) communities

Richmond Hill: This community has increased by 23,2% between 2001 and 2006, from132,030 to 162,704 and with:


immigrants comprising 83,335 or over 50% of the total population whereas this groupwas at 37,095 before 1991 and growing by 33,875 between 1991 and 2000 and thenagain by 12,360 between 2001 and 2006 for a total of over 46,000 peoples over a 15



22/42

year period;

the Aboriginal community comprising 315 of the total population in 2006 while racializedgroups comprised 73,885 or just less than 50% of the total population with particularlyhigh numbers in the Chinese (34,615), South Asian (11,320) and West Asian/Arab(13,050) communities

Ottawa: This community has increased by 4.9% between 2001 and 2006, from 774,072 to812,129 persons and with:


immigrants comprising 178,545 of the total population whereas this group was at 96,200before 1991 and growing by 52,690 between 1991 and 2000 and then again by 29,650between 2001 and 2006 for a total of over 126,000 peoples over a 15 year period;

the Aboriginal community comprises 12,250 of the total population in 2006 whileracialized groups comprised 161,720 of the total population with particularly highnumbers in the Black (30,070), Chinese (30,760), South Asian (26,510) and Arab(24,105) communities.

Mississauga: This community has experienced an increase of 9.1% between 2001 and 2006,from 612,925 to 668,549 peoples. Of this population:

333,495 reported a first language other than English or French;

immigrants comprised 343,250 of the total population whereas this group was at157,560 before 1991 and grew by 110,875 between 1991 and 2000 and then again by74,805 between 2001 and 2006;

the Aboriginal community comprises 2,475 of the total population in 2006 whileracialized groups comprised 326,425 or just less than 50% of the total population withparticularly strong numbers in the South Asian (134,750), Chinese (46,120) and Black(41,365) communities

Kitchener and Waterloo: This community has experienced an increase of 9% between 2001and 2006, from 438,515 to 478,121 and with:


immigrants comprising 105,375 of the total population whereas this group was at 63,395

before 1991 and growing by 24,955 between 1991 and 2000 and then again by 17,020between 2001 and 2006;

the Aboriginal community comprising 4,810 of the total population in 2006 whileracialized groups comprised 61,980 of the total population with particularly high numbersin the South Asian (16,415), Black (9,510) and Chinese (9,200) communities

Peterborough: This community has grown by 4.8% between 2001 and 2006, from 71,446 to74,898. Of this population:



23/42

4,735 reported a first language other than English or French;

immigrants comprised 7,340 85 of the total population whereas this group was at 5,705before 1991;

the Aboriginal community comprises 1,690 of the total population in 2006 whileracialized groups comprised 2,625.

Most scenarios suggest that the changes in these, and other Ontario, communities will onlyaccelerate over time and the proportion of Aboriginal, immigrant and racialized communities willcontinue to increase at rates faster than their European counterparts. Some cities have alreadywitnessed changes in the numerical majority of their communities and most of this has comeabout during the last twenty years, a short period of time18. Coming to accept and work with thisis inevitable.

4.2 New and Different Audiences:

These demographic shifts are having, and will continue to have, recognizable imprints on thefaces of Ontarios cities and towns. In terms of their interest in performing arts, it isquestionable as to how presenters will change what they do to engage these growingcommunities even though such a change initiative is a fairly important topic amongst theseorganizations. It is, after all, a movement into something that is not known and that somehowchallenges all involved to engage in a critical self- and organizational assessment and, basedon that, a realignment of their personal and organizational behaviours and values..

These are the challenges the CCI members engaged in this process will experience and,through a set of facilitated sessions, will be supported to continuously build their own

understanding, will, capacities, anti-racist and cultural competencies so that they work well withand engage performers and audiences from diverse communities while, at the same time,enabling audiences across Ontario to access artistic expressions from its diverse communitieson a regular basis.

4.3 Aboriginal and Ethnoracial Performers:

As might be expected, similar to the increased percentage of the population comprised ofAboriginal peoples and ethnoracial groups, there has been a significant increase in the artists,particularly performing artists, within these communities. This is especially evident forethnoracial artists, including racialized19 and immigrant groups. Based on analysis of the 2001census, Hill Strategies Diversity in Canadas Arts Labour Force20suggests many revealingpieces of information, including:

18See Alain Belanger and Eric Caron MalenfantEthnocultural Diversity in Canada: Prospects for 2017,and, Krishna PendakurVisible Minorities in Canadas Workplaces: A Perspective on the 2017 Projection19The term racialzed refers to people of colour, e.g., South Asians, Asians, persons of African descent,Latinos20Statistical Insights on the arts, Vol. 3 No.3, February 2005



24/42

racialized artists combined for 8.9% of all Canadian artists, Aboriginal peoplescombined for 2.5% of all Canadian artists and immigrants combined for 20% of allCanadian artists;

Ontario accounts for 50% of the racialized and immigrant artists in Canada with theoverwhelming number of these artists living in metropolitan areas while Aboriginalartists tend to live outside metropolitan areas21;

corresponding with increases in immigrant settlement, racialized and immigrant artistsgrew strongly between 1991 and 2001 by 74% and 31% respectively22;

the most common disciplines for racialized artists include musicians and singers,producers, directors, choreographers, writers and actors23;

between 1991 and 2001, the number of racialized artists more than doubled in suchareas as actors, dancers, producers, directors, choreographers and relatedoccupations, exceeding the increase by artists in all other groups24;

Ontario is home to 50% of all racialized artists and these artists comprise 11% of theprovinces artists25;

between 1991 and 2001, there was a slight widening in earnings between racializedand other artists (9.8% to 11.3%), however, this small disparity is notably increased insuch professions as acting (-21%), dancing (-14%), as well as amongst musicians andsingers (-18%), and producers/directors/choreographers (-20%)26;

racialized artists in Ontario have the highest average earnings when compared to theircounterparts in other provinces but still lag 15% behind all other artists in the province27;

across Canada, while most Aboriginal artists are involved in crafts, there are numerousartists involved in performing arts as musicians and singers, writers, producers,directors and choreographers28;

Ontario is home to 20% of all Aboriginal artists comprising 1.2% of all Ontario artists29;

Aboriginal artists earned on average 28% less than all other artists in Canada withactors, dancers and other performers making 13% less, and, producers, directors,choreographers making 30% less30;

21Executive Summary 1-322Ibid 423Full report 324Ibid 3-425Ibid 426Ibid 727Ibid 828Ibid 1029Ibid 1130Ibid 2-13



25/42

while Aboriginal artists have their highest earnings in Ontario, these artists make 21%less than the average earnings of all other Ontario artists31;

the largest number of immigrant artists arrived in Canada between 1991 and 2001 withthe most common areas of creative expression in musicians and singers (20%), writers(20%), and producers, directors and choreographers (19%) with actors amongst thisgroup more than doubling32;

Ontario is home to 49% of all immigrant artists33;

Immigrant artists earnings are 1.4% less than the average for all other artists.However, between 1991 and 2001, their earnings increased 13% which is 50% lessthan the average increase for all other Canadian artists.34

Unfortunately, the Hill Strategies report does not correlate racialized and immigrant artists.However, judging from the immigrant settlement patterns noted earlier, it is quite likely that

many immigrant artists are also racialized. What is also very notable is the dramatic increase inthe number of Aboriginal, racialized and immigrant artists since 1991. While this hascontributed to the diversity of Canadian artists, particularly those in Ontario, and has likelyprovided a broader span of cultural forms, histories and artistic standards and values toaudiences, it is also likely that the significant disparities in earnings for Aboriginal, racialized andimmigrant artists are attributable to them being less employed than other artists.

This is particularly notable in the areas of performing arts and may be attributable to a numberof factors, including the relative newness of these artists as well as the diverse cultural formsand values they bring to the arts that are different than the Eurocentric values and practices ofother Canadian artists. In fact, the latter may be directly related to the lesser rate of earnings of

Aboriginal, racialized and immigrant artists since their forms of expressions and stories

(including myths, iconography, references, techniques, etc.) may draw on the rich histories andtraditions of their own cultures and not be based on Eurocentric norms. Many in the arts field,including presenters, may see this as being not appropriate for their audiences.

The obvious challenge here is for the arts community generally, and presenters particularly, tobegin to understand that it is not possible to use traditional Western modes to assess the meritsof diverse artistic forms and expressions from Aboriginal and ethnoracial communities 35. Long-standing standards of excellence only need to be re-assessed against the measure of a criticalcapacity, one that considers the standpoint of presenters, i.e., their relationship to the

31Ibid 1432Ibid 1633

Ibid 18

34Ibid 1935For a more in-depth discussion on this issue, see Cornell West The New Cultural Politics of Difference,Homhi Bhabha The Location of Culture, Frances Henry and Carol TatorChallenging Racism in the Arts,

Althea Prince The Writers Conference, Michael M. Ames Cannibals and Glass Boxes,Natasha Bakht,

Mere Song and Dance, Michael GreyeyesNotions of Indian-ness, Kevin A. OrmsbyBetween

Generations: Towards Understanding the Difference in Realities and Aspirations of the First and

Second Generation of Culturally Diverse Artists, Little Pear Garden Theatre CollectiveDemystifying

Chinese Aesthetics, Mennaka Thakker Dance Company and Kalannidhi Fine Arts of Canada

Contemporary Choreography in Indian Dance



26/42

production of knowledge and their adherence to a selective tradition that honours the notionthat universal values in the arts derive from the European systems against which others arethen measured. Such an approach cuts short any dialogue about the values and selectivetraditions of Aboriginal and ethnoracial groups and their importance in influencing the creativeexpressions of artists from these communities.

5. CCI Challenges and Opportunities:

As is evident from the summary of CCIs projects as well as the issues identified in theenvironmental context, there is much to be done in the field of performing arts to meet theinterests of Ontarios diverse communities, particularly its Aboriginal and ethnoracial population.CCIs Executive Director and project leads have already noted many of these challenges which,in some part, have been an underlying issue to CPPAMOs emergence and CCIs interest inengaging in a partnership with CPPAMO as one of its projects.

In the context of pluralism, the challenges to performing arts are evident from threeperspectives:

1) the ever-increasing demographic changes across Ontario, particularly in its urbancentres;

2) the challenge to normative values based on Eurocentric traditions in the performing artsand how this relates to engaging diverse performances, audiences and communities;and

3) the increasing resilience of performing artists from Aboriginal and ethnoracialcommunities.

While these can be clearly seen as challenges to performing arts in Ontario, they also represent

unique opportunities for cultural change and transformation which has the potential torestructure normative values in performing arts and, by doing so, providing a broad range ofcultural performances and values to communities across Ontario.

To discuss these, it is first important to note the issues identified by CCIs Executive Directorand project leads. It will then be useful to discuss the challenge to normative values inperforming arts and the potential pluralism holds for the future of performing arts across Ontario,particularly in the context of CCIs vision to ensure performing arts opportunities are availableacross all of Ontarios communities.

5.1 Meeting Ontarios Interest in Performing Arts:

As a result of the two presentations on pluralism at CCIs annual retreats in 2004 and 2008,there are now CCI members interested in working to integrate the values and practices ofpluralism into their day-to-day operations and working with CPPAMO. However, CCI membershave been facing a very difficult year due to the current economic downturn and, as a result, arebeing challenged to maintain their current audiences.



27/42

As well, another key issue to consider is how to continue members growth and developmentwhile balancing the interest in pluralism with other supports provided by CCI, e.g., Healthy ArtsLeadership, the Values and Benefits Study, Network Mapping and the Annual Arts Leadershipeducation.

While CCI is keenly interested in supporting its members to address the challenges andopportunities resulting from the increasing diversity of local communities across Ontario, localpresenters need to begin to explore these challenges and undertake to engage theircommunities as performers, audiences, volunteers as well as board and staff members. In thisregard, CCI and its members need to work on artist and audience engagement together with

Aboriginal and racially diverse artists and communities to transform communities through art.

Specific challenges to CCI projects and initiatives are summarized below.

Fresh Start:

While originally targeted to support the development of Aboriginal and ethnoracial performingarts, this program has had very few Aboriginal organizations applying for funding and has in itsmost recent years released significantly less funding to Aboriginal and ethno-racial groups. Atthe same time, the focus of this program has shifted from Aboriginal and ethno-racial presentersto emerging presenters which may mean that the communities originally interested in benefitingfrom this program appear not to have fared as well as anticipated. Further, the program doesnot fund festivals or Pow Wows which are now funded by the Department of Canadian Heritage.

While this programs objectives are structured to support Aboriginal and ethnoracial performingarts organizations, there is insufficient data at this time to indicate the success rate of theseorganizations both in terms of applying for and receiving funding from other sources as well asbeing able to access funding from the Department of Canadian Heritage for ongoingdevelopment. For example, while the number of these organizations that have received funding

was noted earlier, there is no data on the number that have applied. Further, the category usedto group ethnoracial organizations does not provide the specificity needed to identify distinctcommunities (e.g., South Asian, Asian, African, etc) that have received funding support.

Ontario Dances:

For this program, the presenters make the choices of whom they would like to showcase. CCIassists presenters with the curatorial decision-making processes as well as setting a frameworkto enable selection. In doing this, similar to HAL, CCI uses a non-judgmental facilitation role tosupport presenters. As this is a new program, it is difficult to assess how performers from

Aboriginal and ethnoracial communities will be engaged in this project over a significant periodof time to identify trends and to then address them.

Block Booking:

This program is not intended to focus on pluralism and, as a result, the outcomes can be mixedin terms of the diversity of performers. Coordination with other presenters may impact onconsidering needs and interests of local communities and this may weigh against engaging

Aboriginal and ethnoracial performing artists. Further, there is no data to identify specificchallenges, issues and gaps that presenters may wish to address to support diversity in



28/42


29/42

considered some issues related to addressing pluralism in the context of its mandate, i.e., topresent classical music and gather a range of diverse performers and audiences within this.

The Lindsay community may be a model on how to do this. For example, the local presenterhas worked with African drumming and Asian instrumentalists in order to broaden notions of theterm classical. Lindsay has also actively provided exposure to other cultural forms a well as

education and training on these forms and twinning with cities in different countries, e.g., Japan.While this model may not be so readily transferable, nearly all classical presenters areconcerned about focusing on children and enabling them to develop an interest in classicalmusic at a young age.

OCMN acknowledges the demographic changes sweeping across Ontario and that it isimportant to begin planning for an acceleration of these demographic changes in small Ontariocommunities, e.g., increased immigration levels with families beginning to settle in small citiesand towns as well as the potential impact of improved public transit systems enhancing travelacross Ontario in the way the proposed train station in Peterborough seeks to do.

While these changes can be intimidating, this is a good time for OCMN to address them as it

engages in its own resurgence. During this time, OCMN has an invaluable opportunity to buildpluralism into its work now so that it is a core value and grows with OCMN. This, however,cannot be done without considering the difficulty OCMN has to deal with in terms of budgetrestrictions and efforts to strengthen the Networks volunteer commitment, particularly to sustainand attract new individuals and to work with those who only want to be involved with a time-limited specific project.

Another challenge to OCMN members is that funding for programming is largely reliant on ticketsales. This makes audience development and engagement important, especially since thereare minimal capacities in OCMN right now. Also, the Network needs to plan for its developmentand will likely need to engage in a 2-3 year planning process to support and bring about changeto reflect pluralism in its programming and other operations. One issue that will require attention

is the need to look at outreach and communications with diverse Aboriginal and ethnoracialcommunities.

Further, individual networks need to look at how they connect to young musicians from diversebackgrounds. There is also a need to ensure local communities can bring young Canadianmusic scholars home. This may address some issues of pluralism while, at the same time,contribute to the development of Ontarios classical music resources and capacities.

Healthy Arts Leadership:

As noted earlier, this project employs a facilitated process and non-judgmental role to supportpresenters professional and organizational development In this context, the project has had toaddress traditional organizational models/hierarchies that seem contrary to the artistic process.This is particularly evident in the municipally-operated venues that present even moreentrenched models of organizational hierarchy which, in turn, limits the ability of its managers touse their creativity and judgment.



30/42

At the same time, HAL is being implemented within organizations whose communities arefacing significant demographic changes. As such, the organizations involved in HAL are unsureabout outreach and programming, i.e., who to outreach to and how to program for diversecommunities. This challenge is one other factor to consider amongst not-for-profit artsorganizations that face several challenges related to a lack of strength amongst professional

leadership, being under-resourced and simply managing performing spaces

While HAL has had some progress, it has been difficult working with some members if theirmanagers predominantly focus on maintaining performance venues as opposed to asserting theleadership needed to bring about changes to these performance venues, their staffing, boardand performances. In addition, many CCI members:

are over-extended and face significant challenges in attempting to do demographicanalysis and outreach to their respective public;

dont receive many opportunities to engage in reflective moments to assess their work;

need to understand that developing consistent and inclusive programming is beyondmarketing and public relations and involves the development of relationships betweenpresenters and performers;

need to examine who needs to be at the table and ensure it is inclusive of diversity,e.g., the Kitchener Culture Plan II process has an inclusive framework in which itpurposefully went to diverse communities to find what was hidden;

need to build pluralism, equity and diversity from the organizations strengths as well asto understand and build relationships with diverse audiences/different demographics thatrequire program challenges and changes.

While developing and maintaining community connections is key to change, CCI members inHAL will have to address the pressures of being under-resourced and how this will impact whatthey are doing and avoiding the notion that some will say this is extra work for which they arenot resourced. As part of this, CCI members involved in HAL will need to focus on structuralissues, e.g., leadership, resources, the board as a cultural army, promoting dialogue andlearning within the organization, and moving from a prescriptive mode of operation to one ofengagement and creative collaboration of individuals across the organization. To support this,HAL indicators could be used as a platform to help arts organizations address these issues.

Also, the healthy arts leadership approach can be used as a model to enable CCI members todevelop and articulate their values and beliefs regarding pluralism in performing arts and in theirorganizations as a whole.

Municipal Cultural Planning Partnership:

The success of this initiative is dependent on keeping municipalities at the centre of the processand having them consider culture in all aspects of what it does, its services, functions,businesses and communities. To assist this process, in 2006-08, the Department of CanadianHeritage initiated a grants program to support municipalities to engage in municipal culturalmapping. These funds were conditional on having a heritage aspect to the process.



31/42

Given that MCPPmay have raised expectations of those municipalities and communities it hasengaged, there needs to be consideration on how to follow-up on the initial successes. In thisregard, MCPPis working on a three-year strategic plan with specific workplans. Amongst otherthings, these plans will address how to meet unmet demands, e.g., interest of other cities likeKenora, and the need to be attentive to areas with Aboriginal populations nearby.

MCPPhas also developed a website that will need to be updated and maintained. At the sametime, MCPPis not a racially diverse group and its forums have not been diverse either. This isa key priority for future work given the changes in demographics across Ontario. For example,one incident prompted concerns about racial insensitivity at an MCPPfunction. This promptedmembers to realize that diverse perspectives have not been at the table in any of the forumsand that MCPPneeds to consider proactively how to engage with pluralism and diversity so thatit has a strategy for inclusion through a collective approach.

5.2 Integrating Pluralism Into CCIs Projects:

While CCI is attempting to integrate pluralism into all aspects of its work, it faces severalorganizational, i.e., systemic, barriers in doing so. Some of these barriers are related to CCIsadministrative structure and its capacities to sustain the numerous projects the organizationoffers. Some barriers are related to the limited engagement of the project leads CCI relies onto carry out its mandate. Other barriers relate to CCIs relationship to its funding sources,particularly its reliance on project funding for several of its initiatives.

These barriers have numerous impacts on, and present distinct disadvantages for, CCI as itundertakes to improve the capacities of professionals in the performing arts field and increaseaccess to and interest in diverse forms of performances in communities across Ontario. In thiscontext, it is evident that:

1) Since most CCI project leads are engaged for time-limited projects, it is difficult to maintain

momentum for a project that requires more time to achieve its results than is allowed by theconditions of funding. For example, HAL is an important project to developing thecapacities of CCI members, yet this project is reliant on project funds to provide services tomeet this need. Also,Arts Education is a critical partnership between CCI, Prologue andeyeGO to the Arts as communities more educated in performing arts can likely be offereda wid

plowing the road: enhancing opportunities for pluralism in performing arts in ontario charles c....

Documents