arcadia – Three Percent /College/translation/threepercent a resource for international literature at the University of Rochester Mon, 16 Apr 2018 17:34:38 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 One Last (?) ACE Funding Update /College/translation/threepercent/2008/02/04/one-last-ace-funding-update/ /College/translation/threepercent/2008/02/04/one-last-ace-funding-update/#respond Mon, 04 Feb 2008 14:50:50 +0000 http://www.wdev.rochester.edu/College/translation/threepercent-dev/2008/02/04/one-last-ace-funding-update/ Despite the apparent good news that most of the Arts Council England funding would be restored, Dedalus and Centerprise ended up on the cutting block [all quotes via :

In the face of appeals and threats of legal action, Arts Council England has this morning confirmed it is to cut funding from the independent publisher Dedalus Books and the east London literature centre, Centerprise.

As Eric Lane said in this interview, losing this grant will severely impact Dedalus.

“I’m just amazed at their stupidity and the level of malice,” he said. “I can’t be angry, I can’t be shocked because I’ve had four years of this.”

He still “doesn’t understand” why a publisher specialising in literature in translation and new writing – two of the council’s major priorities – has had funding of £25,000 removed.

And this sounds awful as well:

The British Centre for Literary Translation has had it confirmed that funding after 2008-2009 will be subject to specific conditions, which are yet to be spelled out.

Amanda Hopkinson—director of the BCLT and a fantastic translator—expressed some relief and anxiety about the decision:

“However we await with considerable interest and some anxiety to hear the new ‘specific conditions’ which we will have to fulfil,” she said, “and of which we have not been informed.” After a difficult period she hoped that the council appreciates the need to regain trust. “At the end of the day,” she continued, “the Arts Council needs the arts sector more than the other way round.”

Thankfully Arcadia had its funding restored, as did Anvil Press, but what a process . . . Obviously, the Arts Council (or any other funder) has the right and obligation to review its grantees and restructure funding if necessary, but it seems like the process got out of hand this year and led to many organizations spending more than a month focused on fighting with the ACE and trying to get their funding secured rather than focusing on their mission.

All very unfortunate, although there is a silver lining of sorts. Arcadia, together with , Barn Owl Books, Centerprise Literature Project, Dedalus, Enitharmon, Haus, Marion Boyars, Portobello/Granta and Tindal Street have founded the Publishers Liaison Group, “an informal network which will meet from time to time to discuss common funding issues and strategy in regard to Arts Council England (ACE).”

Sounds somewhat similar to Jim Sitter’s LitNet group, which is the national advocacy group for Literature here in the States—another useful and important organization.

Any UK organizations interested in getting involved with the Publishers Liaison Group should contact Gary Pulsifer at gary at arcadiabooks dot co dot uk.

]]>
/College/translation/threepercent/2008/02/04/one-last-ace-funding-update/feed/ 0
ACE Funding and Parliament /College/translation/threepercent/2008/01/23/ace-funding-and-parliament/ /College/translation/threepercent/2008/01/23/ace-funding-and-parliament/#respond Wed, 23 Jan 2008 14:47:09 +0000 http://www.wdev.rochester.edu/College/translation/threepercent-dev/2008/01/23/ace-funding-and-parliament/ Today’s update in the ongoing saga of the ACE funding cuts comes from Arcadia and Parliament.

First off, a couple of the new people who have signed on in support of Arcadia are Dominick Dunne and Caroline Michel. Which is great in and of itself, but what I find really fun are some of the “Early Day Motions” from Parliament about the cuts.

the EDM about the general cuts:

That this House regrets the timing of the decision made by the Arts Council to notify its regularly funded organisations of the details of its investment strategy; is concerned that this occurred over the Christmas period and that the appeal process is only lasting six weeks; is surprised that investment plans were announced before the publication of the McMaster Review and before the new Chief Executive of the Arts Council takes up his position in February; and calls on the Government and the Arts Council to ensure that there is sufficient time for organisations that are having their funding withdrawn to be properly consulted.

“Concerned that this occurred over the Christmas period”?!?? I can’t imagine anything so civilized (or open to interpretation as being in favor of a particular religious holiday) occurring here in the States. I mean, I guess I have a hard time envisioning anyone in Congress saying something like this either:

That this House condemns plans by the Arts Council to cut funding to Queer Up North; recognises the excellent work that organisation has done, including tackling homophobic bullying through performances of F.I.T. at local schools; notes with concern that funding cuts will lead to the cancellation of the 2008 festival in Manchester and all future touring plans, end its unique programme of work for young people and result in the immediate closure of the organisation; and therefore calls on the Arts Council to overturn its decision.

or

That this House condemns the decision by the Arts Council to cut funding to LipService Theatre Company; notes with concern that the timing of the decision occurred over the Christmas period, leaving very limited time to appeal; recognises the unique contribution to the Arts made by LipService, described by the Independent newspaper as Britain’s favourite literary lunatics; further notes with concern that LipService was given no warning or indication in its Annual Review 2007 that it would have its funding cut; and calls upon the Arts Council to reverse its proposal and reinstate funding to LipService for the coming year.

(Britain’s “favourite literary lunatics”—nice.)

One aspect of this that I haven’t adequately covered here is the timing issue. As referenced above—and in op-ed piece by Ed Vaizey MP, Shadow Minister for Culture—Peter Hewitt, the current CEO of the Arts Council England is stepping down in February and being replaced by Alan Davey.

Furthermore, the $100,000 report on artistic excellence (the aforementioned “McMaster Report”) was in mid-January, after the funding cuts had been announced. Of course, the report seems to run counter to the actions of the ACE, and it really doesn’t make sense to commission a report to figure out how best to stimulate the arts and then, less than three weeks before it’s released, slash funding for heaps of arts organizations.

Ed Vaizey sums this up quite nicely:

To be sure, the Arts Council has played a bad hand even worse. Faced with this late settlement, it should have had the courage to put the cuts on hold. Peter Hewitt should have said what is true – “I’m leaving, and a new guy takes over in February. I’ll let him read the McMaster report, and decide what he wants to do. It will be status quo for a year”. Instead, cuts have been rushed through, with, because of the Christmas period, arts organisations having just 18 working days to get their appeals together. And more and more arts organisations are showing that the decisions made by the Arts Council are based on flawed data and false assumptions. Even worse, those arts organisations that are getting an uplift have already been told. The council has sowed division among the arts community, with one organisation knowing it will only get fed if another starves.

]]>
/College/translation/threepercent/2008/01/23/ace-funding-and-parliament/feed/ 0