When I read that a long-published literary magazine was losing its Canada Council funding, I was curious enough to head to the reference library. What was On Spec? What had it done to deserve funding for over 25 years? What did it do to get cut off?
I got 3 non-circulating issues to read through. It’s a little, digest-size magazine, well enough made, that reminded me of a good high school yearbook. Heavy on sci-fi stories. Speculative fiction is seldom my cup of tea.
Canada Council cited layout as a failing. It’s actually not bad. A bit timid and conventional, a little unpolished. I guess the Council’s “unprofessional” criticism does apply. I’m not convinced that “professional” layout should be expected, though. I would like to see more daring, even if it failed.
As to writing, and this is a showcase for new writers, the Council wanted “better”. Me, too, from what I read. But new writers who are better may not need the Canada Council. I find it useful to sample less-than-excellent prose, if only to appreciate the accomplishments of unsubsidized writers.
I have no answers to my questions about why On Spec was funded, and none about why it was cut off, but the publishers are reaching out for Kickstarter funding from supporters. This strikes me as a good outcome.
Questions about On Spec have morphed in questions about Canada Council funding in general. What arts should be subsidized by federal monies?
1 comment
Comments are closed.
Maybe the Canada Council works better when it is a facilitator of the arts rather than a funder of finished products. I can see giving some money directly to cash-strapped artists, to help pay the bills while they work on something. I can see funding conferences and travel to inspire and educate.
If the Canada Council becomes a patron of the arts, paying to realize end products, I am less comfortable. I like the idea of nurturing artists and creating supportive environments, not stepping into the production stage.