There is little doubt in my mind: the film Strange Brew captures the unique essence of the Canadian Cultural Identity.
But even though this film was a minor commercial success, there are many people in the culture industry who claim they absolutely NEED subsidies from the rest of us taxpayers to help preserve the national cultural fabric, whatever the heck that is.
What is so unique about Canada that needs preserving? Hockey? Curling? Beer? Skiing? Songs by Anne Murray? Poutine? Tim Horton's? But all these things pass the market test very successfully and will continue to do so without subsidies from the taxpayers so long as they provide satisfaction to consumers who vote with their dollars.
What is definitely not unique to Canada, though, is allegedly high-culture stuff for the elitist bigots of the country. Shakespearean productions are not a part of the unique Canadian culture; neither are local orchestral productions of supposed "music" by Mahler or Schonberg, showings of ancient art at local art musea, etc.
These things are nice, maybe, for people who like them, but there is no reason for the rest of the taxpayers of Canada to support such extravaganzas. Just because they are performed or managed or produced by people living in Canada, that doesn't make them part of our unique cultural fabric.
Some people think we should help preserve our cultural identity by supporting the artists who write music and paint and write stories. I disagree. Most of the stuff produced by these self-proclaimed artistes is unwanted by the majority of Canadians; it comes from snobs to be consumed by snobs with average folk being asked to pay for it. This situation is highly unfair. Furthermore, if average Canadians don't want the junk enough to support it, I place little credence in the claims that it represents Canadian culture.
Let's face it. Most real people would probably rather visit a wax museum than sleep through a ballet. And a wax museum probably sounds better to most people than all the "cultural" activities in all of the prairies put together (by prairies, I mean from Kenora to the Rockies). Ask yourself this: which has more visitors per year -- the Niagara Falls wax musea or Winnipeg. I'll bet Winnipeg loses by a ratio of about 235 to 1.
And now ask yourself: which gets more tax dollar support for culture -- the Niagara Falls wax musea or Winnipeg? I'll bet Winnipeg wins by an infinite ratio.
The important conclusion to be drawn here is that Winnipeg needs, yes, NEEDS federal subsidies for its very own wax museum. Or else to subsidize the move of their entire city to Niagara Falls.
Meanwhile, let those who make their living by appealing for government grants to the arts do something useful with their time, such as set up a wax museum in London, Ont., or produce more good movies like Strange Brew that real Canadians can identify with.
***
People who know me understand that I'm an above average supporter of the arts in London, Ontario; I strongly favour private support for the arts. My objection is to taxing everyone to support the tastes, wishes, activities, of the pretentious (and, of course, non-pretentious) few.