Money sought

The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info

Last updated on May 20th, 2017 at 07:28 am

Louise Adler – publisher of Tanya Ha and Antony Loewenstein – outlines her Ruddorama aims:

I am going to Canberra to argue for more money for artists, for more support for the making of more Australian stories, a tax break for Australian book publishers, for the adoption of the French method of cultural protectionism, with a small levy on all movie tickets.

Adopting the “French method of cultural protectionism” doesn’t sound very Australian. Adler is seeking to force foreign values upon us.

Posted by Tim B. on 04/06/2008 at 12:17 PM
    1. It doesn’t take long for the socialists to go begging to Ruddles.

      Wouldn’t people buying her books be a better form of support. And why are movie-goers expected to pay her salary; why not, oh, I don’t know, her clients or readers?

      As to “French method of cultural protectionism”, is she demanding everything in Australia be printed in French? Or that weekly Saturday night Car-B-Cues be held?

      Posted by Wimpy Canadian on 2008 04 06 at 12:27 PM • permalink


    1. Oh, great; I wanted to see real Aussies when I come to visit.  Now Tim and Andrew and all will be wearing berets and smoking tiny cigarets and be lolling about yammering about existentialism, and I’ll hear, “Ce Sauternes a des tendances socialistes,” instead of “Oi, mate, put another shrimp on the barbie!”

      Posted by ushie on 2008 04 06 at 01:06 PM • permalink


    1. Louise Adler being invited to 2020. Why am I not surprised?

      If the Arts are so worthwhile, so wonderful, so in need of funding, why are they so reluctant (or unable?) to adapt to the kind of market they’re experiencing? If artists want more money, let them create artworks which actually engage and entice the public, not rely on government handouts.

      Posted by Ash_ on 2008 04 06 at 01:06 PM • permalink


    1. kae, Ash, would you start talking about the necessary bondage of haute couture?

      Posted by ushie on 2008 04 06 at 01:08 PM • permalink


    1. It’s rent-seeking bingo – everyone can play and no-one loses (except those pesky taxpayers, the ones who couldn’t be bothered reading second-rate books…).

      Posted by skepticlawyer on 2008 04 06 at 01:23 PM • permalink


    1. “French method of cultural protectionism”

      In other words, grant money for talentless poseurs.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2008 04 06 at 02:04 PM • permalink


    1. Can you say “rent-seeker”?

      Knew ya could.

      Posted by mojo on 2008 04 06 at 02:45 PM • permalink


    1. The “French method of cultural protectionism” has worked really well for us here in Kanada. We’ve got human rights commissions holding Star Chambers to take away ever greater layers of Freedom of Speech; we’ve got runaway taxes destroying businesses and the entrepreneurial spirit; more and more government and regulation; several bouts of Quebec separatism; and ….. Celine Dion.

      Posted by bobzorunkle on 2008 04 06 at 03:14 PM • permalink


    1. “French method of cultural protectionism” might involve the expanded use of the “French Letter”.


      Posted by J.M. Heinrichs on 2008 04 06 at 04:04 PM • permalink


    1. “French method of cultural protectionism”

      Is that why, when you walk past her house on the vinegar strokes, you can hear her screaming out in passion “Tax me, tax me, tax me!!!”

      Posted by burrah on 2008 04 06 at 04:24 PM • permalink


    1. What’s the French word for trough?

      Posted by RogerBournival on 2008 04 06 at 04:24 PM • permalink


    1. So all magazines, newspapers, novels, movies, street signs etc. would have to written in Strine instead of Standard English? That’s a bit much! Stone the crows, that ain’t half!

      Posted by andycanuck on 2008 04 06 at 04:27 PM • permalink


    1. to [be] written

      Posted by andycanuck on 2008 04 06 at 04:28 PM • permalink


    1. You have to feel for Louise, constantly under pressure to publish something that “someone wants to read”.

      Posted by Margos Maid on 2008 04 06 at 04:35 PM • permalink


    1. US influence = bad
      French influence = goodIncreased tax for the masses = good
      tax for publishers = bad

      discussion of all-around wonderfulness of artists = good
      discussion of people who cut heads off artists = bad

      Life is indeed simple on the left.

      Posted by AusDoug on 2008 04 06 at 04:40 PM • permalink


    1. Listen, you people are going to get Art whether you want it or not!

      It’s always amusing to see “artists” squealing for bigger buckets of slop. If their “work” is a “vocation” unencumbered by a vulgar obsession with “commercial viability” and “bourgeois popularity”, then a low standard of living is a price they should be willing to pay for the great spiritual privilege of being culturally superior to the lowing herd. They should take comfort in the knowledge that, although they shiver in their drafty lofts, eating cat food and bathing in zinc buckets, and whereas I have settled back in my comfortable wing chair in the library – to enjoy a Montecristo cigar and snifter of brandy, after yet another meal of rib eye steak marinaded in teriyaki sauce, served up with home-made fried potatoes and hot buttered yeast rolls – I am the merest unlettered philistine, surrounded by the reactionary and hopelessly out-of-date scribblings of Shakespeare and Dickens and Faulkner and Waugh, a tragic cultural loss of a man, who is, and always will be, unacquainted with their own immortal creations, cast in the brittle terra cotta of post-modern narcissism and political schizophrenia. And if I ever do encounter a specimen of the oeuvre conjured up by one of these geniuses, and an awareness of my soul-deadened state dawns on me, then no doubt I shall cry all the way to the bank.

      Posted by paco on 2008 04 06 at 04:52 PM • permalink


    1. Look at the value we get from our publicly funded ABC: PM’s Mark Colvin interviewing Dr Gurcharan Das.
      MC: “But what’s wrong with Indian governance. Is it that you’ve got that legacy of British colonial rule with lots of form filling, lots of bureaucracy”DrG: “The pain is caused by the fact that the vast army of civil servants, great part of them do not work. We have one million school teachers in our primary schools, and out of those, one-fourth, quarter of a million just don’t show up. And because of the power of the unions, because it’s the job for life, because they’re invigilators at elections and politicians are scared of them, you can’t do anything.”

      And later:“here we had the best institutions, we inherited them from Britain in the 60s and the 70s, we were very proud of our bureaucracy, our judiciary, our police.

      Posted by PeterTB on 2008 04 06 at 05:12 PM • permalink


    1. Grrrr…. it’s the airheaded posers like the loathsome Ms. Adler that piss me off. I’m a representational artist and author, who has spent untold hours polishing my craft, and yet some twit can splatter paint on canvas or dunk a Crucifix in urine and get paid buckets of money for it…..

      Makes me want to scream.

      Posted by akornzombie on 2008 04 06 at 05:24 PM • permalink


    1. #8 Bob, you forgot the CBC 🙂

      Posted by Wimpy Canadian on 2008 04 06 at 05:32 PM • permalink


    1. Sounds like she’s taking lessons from Robert Redford, who just did the same thing to the US Congress –

      Maybe this Louise chick ought to move to Hollywood…?

      Posted by Sharon Ferguson on 2008 04 06 at 05:38 PM • permalink


    1. #16 willing to pay for the great spiritual privilege of being culturally superior to the lowing herd.

      Paco, were you thinking of this line from Gray’s Elegy?:

      “The lowing herd winds slowly o’er the lee,
      And shuns my world of artists’ subsidy”

      Posted by Barrie on 2008 04 06 at 05:44 PM • permalink


    1. #21 Oh, very clever. Clap. Clap. Give the man a grant 🙂

      Posted by Wimpy Canadian on 2008 04 06 at 05:59 PM • permalink


    1. Would the “French Method” require you to withdraw funds just prior to them being spent?  Or am I thinking of something else?

      Posted by anthony_r on 2008 04 06 at 06:02 PM • permalink


    1. The “French Model” refers to isolationism. Ms. Adler would prefer that Australia be totally hostile to art produced by non-Australians. Like all isolationism, it impoverishes everyone except the (Bingo, guys!) rent-seekers.

      Or, to be clearer: she wants to wall off a small enough puddle that she can be the biggest frog in it. Looks to me it’s gonna be a mighty small billabong.


      Posted by Ric Locke on 2008 04 06 at 06:05 PM • permalink


    1. #21: Good one, Barrie!

      Posted by paco on 2008 04 06 at 06:06 PM • permalink


    1. #8, bobzorunkle:

      …here in Kanada… We have…Celine Dion.

      Not to mention Robert Goulet.

      But – and a big but – MORE than balanced by the brilliant Robbie Robertson, Rick Danko, Garth Hudson and Richard Manuel of The Band, k.d.lang, Kate and Anna McGarrigle, Paul Anka, Bruce Cockburn, Glenn Gould, Joni Mitchell, Neil Young etc. etc.

      Remarkable musicians, all.

      Posted by ann j on 2008 04 06 at 06:07 PM • permalink


    1. It all comes down to…

      “I want a pony!”

      Like my parents used to say, when money grows on trees, you can get your pony.

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2008 04 06 at 06:17 PM • permalink


    1. I await the day when someone tells these artists forever in search of more of my money to survive, that until they produce something for which I would voluntarily pay, they are mere hobbyists.

      Posted by lotocoti on 2008 04 06 at 06:26 PM • permalink


    1. This is where Kevin 2020 comes fun. Half the delegates think they are planning for the future of Australia. The other half think they are lobbying for their pet projects ahead of the budget.

      And chairman Rudd thinks it is a photo op with lots of famous people.

      Posted by Contrail on 2008 04 06 at 06:27 PM • permalink


    1. Quote from Kristy Edmunds, the Melbourne International Arts Festival director, about the summit:

      The arts are delighted to be at the summit, and delighted at the challenge set by the Government. Melbourne International Arts Festival artistic director Kristy Edmunds said: “Essentially, all of us as leaders in the arts, design and creative professions accept greater responsibility for creating a truly imaginative nation.”

      Leaders? She doesn’t lead me. I’m doing very nicely with my book and poetry and CD collections, and my subscription to the New Yorker and Andromeda Spaceways magazine. It’s just egomania to believe that you are an arts ‘leader’, and therefore entitled to ‘shape this nation’s creative future’, or simply a bigger slice of arts funding. People make their own choices about the arts and culture all the time; they don’t have any need of a ‘leader’.

      Posted by TimT on 2008 04 06 at 06:41 PM • permalink


    1. My boss is going to 2020.
      Well, the Head of School.

      Posted by kae on 2008 04 06 at 06:43 PM • permalink


    1. “Australian stories”.
      It might be incomprehensible semi-literate tripe – but Geez, says Louise, it’s Australian[/i…

      Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2008 04 06 at 06:48 PM • permalink

    1. whoops, italic slip.

      Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2008 04 06 at 06:49 PM • permalink


    1. French rent-seeker method of cultural protectionism


      Posted by egg_ on 2008 04 06 at 06:58 PM • permalink


    1. In the paragraphs before the one Tim cites is this:

      The naysayers have used a standard script. This is an elitist event, a love-in for the luvvies on the left, “just a talk fest”, and a calculated gesture because “nothing disarms a critic like a cocktail party”. Is there something endemic to the Australian psyche that prefers the commonplace to the exceptional?

      It is a paradox, since we embrace excellence every weekend on countless ovals in towns across the nation. Why, therefore, is there so much angst about the notion of a group of people gathering together to talk about our future?

      Apart from thinking she’s exceptional (she publishes crap books, for God’s sake), Adler has the football analogy all wrong. A more accurate one would be if sports teams were comprised of only those players who’d received a subsidy and were paid by taxpayers when crowds dwindled to around a dozen.

      And on the Adler Paradox: When footballers start telling people how to live their lives, then I suspect too there will be much angst.

      In the meantime, Louise, keep on believing you’re exceptional if that’s what gets you through the day. Just don’t be surprised if nobody else believes it.

      Posted by Hanyu on 2008 04 06 at 07:03 PM • permalink


    1. ”..with a small levy on all movie tickets..”

      We already have one, its called the GST, and I’m willing to bet ms Addler was one with chooks fling out her arse when it was introduced.
      Maybe we could subsidise by increasing the GST on Australian books and films to 20%, by her standards that should see a creative boom?

      Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2008 04 06 at 07:37 PM • permalink


    1. ’course, Ms Adler would be driving a locally-produced car, non?

      Posted by egg_ on 2008 04 06 at 07:38 PM • permalink


    1. #36
      The independent cinema operators will love to hear that …2020 seems to be fast becoming a yartz-arse-hat-fest of gigantic proportions; onya Tim, for keeping tabs …

      Posted by egg_ on 2008 04 06 at 07:45 PM • permalink


    1. Track back to 1988.
      1. Louise Adler becomes the editor of “Australian Book Review”.
      2. Format changes from dull with low quality paper to snappy fonts and glossy cover.
      3. Content shifts radically to the left.
      4. Victorian Ministry for the Arts becomes a sponsor.

      Posted by Rafe on 2008 04 06 at 07:50 PM • permalink


    1. We already have one, its called the GST

      Yep Frollickingmole, and I know of at least one person who has called for the GST to be taken off theatre tickets – hoping for this idea to be raised at the 2020 summit. Kind of sympathetic to that, since the lower taxes are the better; but the trouble with this persons call obviously is that they’re calling for special treatment for the arts.

      Posted by TimT on 2008 04 06 at 07:57 PM • permalink


    1. I’ve got a mate who is a cabinet maker. No-one is smart or tasteful enough to buy his work so I think he should get a government grant.

      Posted by Penguin on 2008 04 06 at 08:01 PM • permalink


    1. #39
      The webdiary business model?

      Posted by egg_ on 2008 04 06 at 08:14 PM • permalink


    1. #30 That would presumably be the same Kristy Edmunds who, as director of the Melbourne Arts Festival in 2006, scheduled her live-in girlfriend on the programme.

      Posted by cuckoo on 2008 04 06 at 08:51 PM • permalink


    1. Medici, Medici, where do you roam?
      A publisher of fortune is the family called Medici.
      Medici, Medici far, far from home.

      Posted by stackja1945 on 2008 04 06 at 09:09 PM • permalink


    1. totally OT —

      There’s a group that exposes scum falsely claiming to be war heroes, but my brain is flatly refusing to cough up the name.  Can any of the commentariat help me out?

      Posted by Achillea on 2008 04 06 at 09:30 PM • permalink


    1. Artists who live off of government grants are naught but whores.

      Nay, I speak unfairly of whores, who at least attempt to give something back for their payment.  Artists demand payment from us for their own satisfaction.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2008 04 06 at 09:34 PM • permalink


    1. #45
      Web links: (Lists men who claim to be current or former Navy SEALS) (Gives the names of those who claim to be former prisoners of war) (Identifies those who claim to have won the Medal of Honor)

      Posted by stackja1945 on 2008 04 06 at 09:51 PM • permalink


    1. #45
      Australian and New Zealand Military Impostors.

      Posted by kae on 2008 04 06 at 10:00 PM • permalink


    1. #38

      The 2020 yartz-hat fest, proudly brought to you by you …

      Posted by egg_ on 2008 04 06 at 10:20 PM • permalink


    1. I don’t like it when the government takes my money by force, then gives it to artists whose art I don’t like. I simply can’t see any good side to it.

      If people like art, they’ll pay to see it, right? If they don’t, they won’t, and thus the government will steal my money so the poor artists won’t starve. Why can’t those artists, whose work nobody likes (clearly, otherwise they wouldn’t need to be given my money), find a more useful job. There are so many jobs you can have where people are willing to pay you for your work. Why expect the government to prop you up instead of finding one?

      I’d love it if someone could explain the logic behind this to me – if any.

      Posted by Nicholas on 2008 04 07 at 12:20 AM • permalink


    1. ”..with a small levy on all movie tickets..”
      So, movies that nobody wants to watch will be funded by an impost on the ones that they do. Brilliant.Incidentally, Tim, what’s with that blogad for “Victoria International School of Shariah”?

      Posted by s.r.intulom on 2008 04 07 at 12:28 AM • permalink


    1. #51

      Incidentally, Tim, what’s with that blogad for “Victoria International School of Shariah”?

      Click on it and see. It’s been put up there by Australian Islamist Monitor. That should tell you something.

      Posted by kae on 2008 04 07 at 12:32 AM • permalink


    1. ann j: How could you forget Rush???

      Posted by Nicholas on 2008 04 07 at 12:33 AM • permalink


    1. Come on, The Yarts are a vitally important part of our culture. We need things like “revolutionary opera” to educate and inspire the masses.

      Also, remember, The Yarts will bring about a decrease in “Global Warming”, increase the life span of everyone, grow more crops, feed the hungry, and provide a rich tapestry of infrastructure.

      Authors like Matthew Reilly couldn’t survive without government funding.
      What’s that? Matthew Reilly sells books without government funding?

      Yeah, but people *read* his books.  We have to fund the authors who write impawtant stuff that no-one reads.

      Posted by wanglese on 2008 04 07 at 12:56 AM • permalink


    1. Adler’s achievement: Printing a crappy, error riddled book by a talentless author.

      Adler’s measure of success: Calling said crappy book a “bestseller” despite selling merely a few hundred copies (many of which were purely for Fisking purposes).

      My Adler Question: Is this woman in the real world?

      Posted by Dan Lewis on 2008 04 07 at 01:12 AM • permalink


    1. sorry about the long quote, but it’s crikey so not link-friendly. the sharp-eyed will recognise a few of the usual suspects…

      Rudd’s 2020 Summit:

      Tony Kevin writes: Re. “Rudd’s 2020 Summit: Who will fart in church?” (Friday, item 6). Here is a case study. In the group on “Australia’s future security and prosperity in a rapidly changing region and world”, chaired by Michael Wesley, in a field I thought I was reasonably familiar with (foreign policy and national security); I think I recognized only about 28 from the 90 names, and I know personally about half of those. I feel a bit uncomfortable not recognizing the names of over 60 people – I must be really out of touch. (I thought perhaps I had failed to recognize international trade specialists – not my field – but then I saw that is part of an economics-oriented committee). Here are some of the names not on the list for the ‘foreign affairs and security’ committee -commentators and writers Bruce Haigh, Peter Mares, Dick Woolcott, Allan Behm, Nic Stuart, activists Helen Caldicott, Sue Wareham, Margo Kingston, controversial persons Andrew Wilkie, Lance Collins, Richard Butler and yours truly, academics Owen Harries, Coral Bell, Alison Broinowski, Stuart Harris, Tony Milner, Desmond Ball. Of course some of these – myself included – may not have applied. And most of my names here are over 55s. I wish the summit well.

      Geoff Russell, Animal Liberation SA, writes: Margaret Simons has missed one interest group which appears to be totally missing from the 2020 summit attendees list. There seems to be nobody sticking up for animals. This is despite us living in a country with 5 times as many sheep as people, despite Australia’s animal based diet creating more climate warming than all our coal fired power stations, despite 400 million chickens being slaughtered annually with possibly 100 million being in significant pain for the last week or two of their miserable 6 week life and despite Australia’s heavy use of dairy products being the single biggest source of water use from the ailing Murray Darling Basin. The methane from the animals used to feed the delegates will surpass anything that could be produced by an army of sparrows.

      would that be jeff & jill, perchance?

      Posted by KK on 2008 04 07 at 01:14 AM • permalink


    1. There seems to be nobody sticking up for animals. This is despite us living in a country with 5 times as many sheep as people

      Sometimes it’s hard to differentiate between them.

      Posted by kae on 2008 04 07 at 01:56 AM • permalink


    1. What does the Blarians think? I am after grant money too.

      I read today that solar towers can produce 500MW of power, if done right… so I figured to scale it down some, as the average solar powered car, runs on 1.2MW

      I am thinking, that in addition to the solar tower technology, that perhaps putting a wind turbine on the tower, could also go towards producing free car power.

      Posted by Admonkeystrator on 2008 04 07 at 02:26 AM • permalink


    1. They’re certainly out of luck with Louise if they were looking for NEW ideas…..

      Posted by Waste on 2008 04 07 at 05:58 AM • permalink


    1. Arts funding is rubbish. It’s based on these ideas:
      * without help from government and the elites we’d be ignorant swine;
      * popular culture doesn’t count;
      * commercially viable culture doesn’t count;
      * bureaucrats can be trusted to know what’s good for you.The biggest “arts” movement in Australia was contemporary music (ACDC, Easybeats, INXS, the Models, and so on ) and it all happened with zero funding, while the “artists” were getting money for bloated orchestras, classical music, and ‘street poetry.’

      aggh! don’t talk to me about The Arts.

      Posted by daddy dave on 2008 04 07 at 06:55 AM • permalink


    1. She is in favour of more security and prosperity for ze scarlett women’s alliance, non?

      Posted by blogstrop on 2008 04 07 at 07:38 AM • permalink


    1. As an Artist, may I simply say, NO GOVERNMENT FUNDING FOR THE ARTS, EVAR!

      Government funding just enables hacks to foist garbage on the public using taxpayer dollars.  If an artist can’t find a private patron or make it in the marketplace, there’s always only one reason for it: THEY SUCK!

      Posted by Hucbald on 2008 04 07 at 09:57 AM • permalink


    1. I thought “the French method” meant, well… You know.

      Posted by mojo on 2008 04 07 at 10:22 AM • permalink


    1. #47 –

      Thank ye kindly.

      Posted by Achillea on 2008 04 07 at 12:53 PM • permalink


  1. #62 Hucbald, I agree with that.
    Commercially viable art is alive and well and it’s all around us: TV, film, radio, photography, music, books, comics, computer games, painting, etc.
    Oh, and now a dance competition that is taking the country by storm, yet strangely was not a recipient of an Arts grant. Not even a small grant.

    Posted by daddy dave on 2008 04 08 at 06:15 AM • permalink