If they were any good the market would pay for their work

Aussie arts bludgers are having a whinge. 

The government has slashed their subsidised lifestyle.

Last week, the Australian arts community reacted in horror as news was released of the defunding of around 65 arts companies and organisations. In what is already known as “Black Friday”, the Australia Council released its latest figures for multi-year funding, revealing the bleak result of years of cuts and bungled policy.

So far discussion has focused on the crisis facing small-to-medium companies and organisations. But this has obscured where the real damage is happening. The number of Australia Council grants to individual artists and projects has decreased by a staggering 70% since the 2013/14 financial year.  

According to the Australia Council’s 2013/14 annual report, that year it funded 1,340 individual artists and 2,489 total projects. In contrast, the total for the twofunding rounds for 2015/16 was 405 individual artists and 694 projects. This represents a fall of 70% for individual artists, and 72% for overall projects.

The number of small-to-medium organisations receiving multi-year funding over the same period fell from 178 to 128, around 28%.

The 70% reduction particularly hits artists such as writers and visual artists, who mostly work alone. This intensifies the impact that literature has taken in the cuts. As Writers Victoria said: “It’s impossible to know what Australia’s literary landscape may look like in six or 12 months’ time.”

Horror? Really? As for the luvvies expressing concern for the “literary landscape”…oh puuulease.

If they were any good then the market would support their apparent self-described brilliance. It doesn’t, hence we can assume they are crap and no better than ordinary bludgers. In fact they are just bludgers who can write, spell and paint.


-The Guardian


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • shykiwibloke

    “Bludgers who can write, spell and paint” – quite true in that order, as there would be no money for the ‘art’ if the poor wee dear could not fill out the grant application – the true talent of these Luvies who can sniff out free money at fifty paces.

    • kereru

      Slight correction if I may – bludgers who think they can write, spell and paint.

  • jcpry

    In the course of history all the arts have relied on patronage in order for their talent to be realised. Rightly or wrongly this patronage has now been passed to a government agency to administer.
    We would be remiss to foster young talent as our society will be much the poorer for this however it is equally remiss to continue to throw money at those who have plenty of opportunity and funding but have failed to prosper.

    • shykiwibloke

      When it is via a government we are forced to pay. When via private sponsorship then we get to choose what to support. I think that is an important difference.

      • jcpry

        We don’t choose who we invest in for any other occupation – doctor, lawyer accountant who are funded into their occupation by highly a subsidised education why is this any different?

        • InnerCityDweller

          one could argue that doctors in particular return some tangible returns

    • Sagacious Blonde

      Athletes are another group who seem to enjoy a free ride. Some seem able to cling to the trough long past their glory day.

  • Ruahine

    I do not believe ABBA received any Govt handouts.

    • jcpry

      A very poor comparison to make. Check the background to ABBA and you will see that they had long apprenticeships in the industry before ABBA. They were not teenagers when they hit the big time.