Bureaucratic double talk is an art form. It’s a language of circles. Simply put: How to answer a question without really answering the question. You really have to admire a bureaucrat’s command of the English language (or at least admire their handlers and speech writers). I never realized that people were coached on this art of communication until I was working with an AIDS organization. Many of us were about to be in the public eye – giving speeches and dealing with the press and to prepare us the organization hired a media consultant. Here’s what we were told. Be clear on your message and when confronted with a question that you don’t like, say something like – “That is an interesting question, however I think the main issue is…” and then go back to whatever topic you are suppose to be talking about. Often I have wondered what would happen if everyone just said what they really meant – straight up with no embellishments. Then again – saying what you really mean doesn’t make for smooth sailing.
My record with the arts councils is not stellar. In fact – it is downright dismal. My first foray into the world of arts councils was with the Canada Arts Council. In those days, you would submit an application and then meet with the standing committee to show them your work and plead your case. The first question that I was asked by the arts council committee was “Why did you wait so long to become a choreographer?” I was thirty-nine at the time. My answer? “Because I actually could dance so I had a career and didn’t have to create works to get myself on stage.” OK – in retrospect, not the best answer given that many of the committee members fell into that second category. Needless to say – I didn’t get the grant.
The next year when I was up in front of the committee again, I had made a bit of a miscalculation. I had asked for support to create several new pieces, one of which I had just publicly presented (to rave reviews) two weeks before I met with the committee. The reason? Sometimes when the muse hits you – you kind of have to go with it. The committee questioned me about this and what did I say? “You know, I have more than one idea.” Again – in retrospect, probably not the right answer. I was turned down again and I can’t fault their decision. I’m the one who screwed up. The third time, I watched my tongue and played by the rules. I was still refused support. After that – the granting process was changed and the committee didn’t have to deal with applicants face to face. It became a closed door process. I’m sure the change lowered the committee’s stress level. It’s so much easier to slam someone else’s work in private. My record with the Canada Arts Council has been consistent. I have been turned down every single time that I have applied. Most people probably would have given up but I go with the belief that you really can’t complain about a system unless you are part of the game.
The Canada Council called me one season to congratulate me on the success of my second collaborative creation, Aphrodite Unveiled. They also inquired about my next project, Planetarium. Planetarium was to be my first international co-production with the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. We (my two Macedonian collaborators and I) were creating a work with fifteen Canadian and Macedonian dancers that we were going to show in both countries. The Canada Council told me that Planetarium was exactly the sort of project that they were looking for in their new international co-production program. They also asked me to apply to the program. Sounded promising didn’t it? Now before I get to the point where they turn me down, let me explain what goes into creating an international co-production. You have to get commitments from all the performers, composers and artists in both countries. You have to have your budget in place and make sure that all your financial commitments are solid – in both countries. Money in place, artists and venues confirmed – everything to ensure that the project was a go. OK – so I had twenty-one confirmed artists, venues in both countries confirmed, and the financial backing of producer in Macedonia. True – the financial backing put up by the Macedonians was about a quarter of the entire budget – but let’s face it – they could do things in Macedonia for a quarter of the cost in Canada. My agreement with the Macedonians was that they would cover the costs in Macedonia and I would cover the costs in Canada – it seemed like a fair deal to me. My main hurtle was securing the financing in Canada. It is practically impossible to pull off a project this large without government backing. Now I would like to remind you – the Canada Council asked me to apply. OK – so here’s the punch line: They turn me down. I got stuck with a production that was going to happen because I had put in place and confirmed all the necessary elements and now – I wasn’t going to have enough money to pull it off. I called the Canada Council and what did they say? Macedonia was not a priority country. I shot back an angry letter pointing out their role in my current disaster and demanded that they state in their future application forms that they were not interested in funding any projects with developing countries. Not that my letter did me any good with the problem at hand, however there were significant changes in the next international co-production application forms. A lot of “cover our asses” clauses. Well – whatever works for them. Post script to this story – I raised the needed money privately although I truly feel the work fell short artistically. I spent all my energies raising money versus tapping into my artistic psyche. Oh well.