What does it take to make us angry? By MAGGIE BIZZELL Manager, Progress Books ‘Publishing is in the doldrums,” says William French in a Globe and Mail article (July 22) on Fall, 1980 publishing plans. : “It’s a tragic situation for young writers,’’ says Timothy Findley ina CBC interview on the death of Tamarack magazine. For more than ten years we have seen an acceleration of publishing problems in Canada, leading to a situation today which, in my opin- ion, is more than ‘‘doldrums.”’ I think we are in a situation which un- less checked promises serious con- sequences. It is possible that faced with crises all around us and perhaps becoming hardened to sporadic outcries of pub- lishers and writers, Canadians do not pay sufficient attention to the grow- ing number of symptoms which to- gether spell danger for the written arts in Canada. ; If we inspect the list of Fall books as French noted, there is something wrong. Between now and Christmas there are plans for fewer than 20 works of fiction. Novels by new au- thors are rare, publishers are play- ing it safe by publishing only best- selling celebrity authors. Even in non-fiction, unless an au- thor has made his name elsewhere, his chances of being published are slim. Of the Fall non-fiction titles, nine are by well-known journalists. Poetry, of course, being a poor sell- ing item, suffers drastically. Of the handful to be published a high per- centage are reprints. Why is there such a dismal choice of new writing this year? First, the ability of the Canadian publishers to stand up to U.S. competition has been increasingly undermined. Inthe last few months we have seen yet another Canadian house taken over — one with a long and respected his- tory, Macmillan Co. of Canada Ltd. We have seen McGill-Queen’s Uni- versity press, the second most impor- tant academic publisher (after U of T Press), threatened with.a shut-down. Tamarack, one of the most prestigi- ous small literary magazines, which has launched an extraordinary number oftoday’s successful writers, has folded. What’s wrong with Canadian pub- - lishers? Are they just poorer businessman than their U.S. counterparts? From the recently re- leased Statistics Canada Report on Publishing, that would appear to be true. The Report concludes, ** The typical publisher in Canada is in a very poor profit position . .. The typ- ical foreign-owned publisher is the one who fared best.”’ The old concept of business is based on the so-called fair competi- : tion for the market. Canadians are competing with U.S. conglomerates whose sole interest is the bottom line, by whose philosophy literary quality applies to books as much as aesthetic value and usefulness applies to soap or automobiles. Canadians are competing with dis- tribution networks, bookstore chains which are increasingly be- coming integrated into U.S.-based monopoly systems. They are com- peting with vast advertising budgets and with companies whose im- mediate markets extend around the English-speaking world. | Further, in the face of this gigantic competition, Canadian publishers are given no protection in their ef- forts to operate in'as much as possi- ble of the relatively small home mar- ket. We have a government commit- ted to free trade, no tariffs on U.S. imports, which means the U.S. com- panies are free to treat Canada as open season and Canadian com- panies are free to compete. Some competition, some freedom! ~ The groups affected by this state of affairs have not been quiet. Over the last decade there has been con- sistent hard work by publishers, writers, booksellers, etc. to pressure Ottawa. This has undoubtedly had an effect, at the very least has slowed down the process. However, it has obviously not been enough. Any reading of the trade publications makes it clear that there is general unease in every section of the indus- It seems to me that there are sev- eral reasons for the lack of success of Canada on Stage forming spaces.” Centaur’s Balcon- ville by Fennario is the only English-. language show he mentions, though: at least two other companies mounted plays in English. Thea Borlase found that ‘‘box- office considerations in New Bruns- wick dictated adherence to tried and true favorites ... New enterprises and original material had a rough re- ception ...’’ Theatre New Bruns- wick’s Young Company toured elementary and high schools and ran into trouble with a play about ‘teen- age pregnancy. L’Escaouette toured French schools with locally-written scripts and the Acadian Theatre Populaire d’ Acadie had its own suc- cessful tour. Patrick B. O’Neill reports that the Halifax Neptune, under John Nevil- le, wiped out a ‘‘staggering $200,000 deficit,’ that Theatre 1707 did over 30 shows in nine months, that the Mulgrave Road Co-op toured successfully, the Kipawa Showboat of Wolfville played a series of musi- cals and light comedies, and chil- dren’s theatre continued to grow. Generally it was a good year. But across the water at the Charlotte- town, P.E.I. Festival, with seven productions, attendance declined. The Newfoundland playwright, Michael Cook, questions the heavy hand of burlesque in such popular groups as Codco. Do they present a true picture, or is it mere clowning to amuse an upward-moving middle class? He finds ‘ta marked trend to- wards cabaret ... There is some- thing in the flavor of the times, and the: type of entertainment that smacks of Germany in the 30s.” - Among new growth are the ambiti- ous Theatre Newfoundland and Labrador which aims to fill regional needs. He proposes cooperation among existing groups and decries competition from imported U.K. shows. : Joyce Doolittle complains that the Year of the Child inspired few genuine contributions. Yet a suc- cessful tour covered 52 communities and Canadian companies went to the USSR, France and England and at- tended a festival in Wales. Scripts were published and, all in all, there was progress. Editor Don Rubin of York’s Theatre Faculty sounds a note of cautious optimism. He welcomes an improved international outlook anda greater interest in our theatre history - and literature. ‘‘Despite the financial problems,”’ he writes, ‘‘despite a lack of clearly-stated government priorities in the arts, despite the fact that companies of all sizes continued to have a rough time of it and despite the fact that money for new ventures all but disappeared, 1979 was not all that bad a year and, if one were op- timistic, could be seen as an augury of many good things for the new de- cade.’ — Martin Stone PACIFIC TRIBUNE—OCT. 31, 1980—Page 8 pressure from Canadian ‘‘book people.”’ First, the tendency is to look for solutions from Ottawa mandarins who are committed to policies which have done little to protect or build Canadian resources or manufactur- ing. Instead of concentrating hopes on getting help from the men and policies responsible for the sell-out of our oil, gas and water, responsible for an Auto Pact which inflicts on a city the size of Windsor unemploy- ment levels worse than during the Depression, maybe publishers and writers should see Ottawa for what it really is. . It is an institution which has con- sistently sold out the people of Canada to the highest bidder — the multinationals. To expect that polite lobbying will produce any real help from federal or provincial levels of government of the kind now in power is to be rather naive about their past record. Much more effective politi- cal clout is required. Even James Lorimer, generally regarded as the most radical and vocal individual in the book busi- ness, does not extricate himself from this band-aid approach. In an open letter to the provincial ministers of education he outlines the source of the well-known problems of Cana- dian school and university text- books; he lists the changes that need to be made. His conclusion is that because the field is dominated by a dozen giant publishers in competition with each other, provincial governments are unable to make any real choice based on the criteria which they, the teachers and the parents want. They have to accept the texts the pub- lishers want to sell which in the main Means texts not written and pub- lished in this country. Lorimer sees this as a frustrating impasse to which neither he nor any- one else has a solution. So his only recommendation is yet another government task force. He feels that ‘*The only people who can satisfac- - torily undertake this job of develop- ing a new strategy for Canadian learning materials are you (the minis- ters of education) and -your col- leagues.’’ Betty Stephenson? _ Why is it not possible to look into a joint federal-provincial, publicly- owned democratically-controlled, learning-materials industry? The inevitable question is: where would the money come from? If Canada can find money for military expansion, for out-of-date planes and other war machinery, why can’t we find money for education? Why is a scheme which could benefit first education, correct regional disparity in the publishing industry, and in the process help writers and publishers across the country, not worth con- sidering? If as Lorimer states, he sees no other solution, maybe such an alter- native must be considered. A second reason for the relative lack of success achieved by the im- mediately affected pressure groups can be traced directly to the lack of involvement of other organizations and sections of the Canadian popula- tion. Except for the shortlived 1812 Committee, there has been no effec- tive participation by the general pub- lic in this struggle. The tendency, it would seem, is to regard the problem as one shich af- fects afew small businessmen, and at the same time to accept, as a fact of life, that Canadian writers have a raw deal. But at some stage it must become apparent to all Canadians that this is a situation which requires their ac- tive participation. It sounds drastic to say that our literary heritage is dying, but if publishing in 1980 is any indication, we have to conclude that this is a distinct possibility. We also an alternative voice have to wonder: are we so used to our relationship with the U.S. that the significance of our own literary heritage is not grasped? We must ask: fifty years from now, what novels will explain, ina way no history book can, the deliemmas, agonies and triumphs Canadians face today? ‘What poems: will provide the fine- grained picture of how we are all af- fected by the desire for a unified Canada-in a two-nation state which guarantees the rights of both nations, and our anger at the injustices suf- fered by-the Native peoples of Cana- da? What plays will convey the social upheaval felt by families in Windsor? If the present trend continues, the new young writers who can perform these tasks will be working as cab drivers, not writing. Throughout history, whenever 4 people’s culture has been cut off oF dominated, the results have beet longlasting damage to the pride and dignity of those people. Unless wé react and fight to reclaim and b our own culture, we are in danger 0 losing that pride and dignity. Is it not time that the trade unions, ! churches, the city councils and all of us as individuals became angry enough to demand new cultural policies that will serve the people of Canada today as well as future gen- erations? ——— Pub culture By STEVE GIDORA The author is a member of a group (one of several that entertains with songs and skits in neighborhood pubs on the lower B.C. mainland. . In 1975 the government of British Columbia opened the booze business to small enterprising businessmen and small bars began to appear with- in residential areas. The first clientele lived in the vic- inity of these establishments. Folk music that included English, Irish, Scottish, American and Canadian ballads and sing-alongs was used to create the neighborhood pub atmos- phere. Pop and country tunes that are singable by audiences were in- cluded. Comedy, and people coming forward from the audience to per- form were also on the agenda. A sense of neighborhood and commu- nity was enhanced by the pub own- ers and managers who promoted group events such as bus trips to sport events, yacht cruises and golf tournaments. The age group was 19 to 60. However, in most cases the neighborhood pubs were (and the exceptions are) becoming mere hotel-type lounges where people go out for a quiet drink during the week (if the music is not too loud) and where young people meet on the weekend before going to the discos and cabarets. Most of the young people (19-30) frequent neighbor- hood pubs because of the cheaper prices and the possibility of meeting a date. The latter phenomenon, coupled with the fact that many pubs are located near apartment dwellings where many young workers live, gradually created a clientele that 15 more interested in top-40 and roc music. The music became heaviel and louder and the older people left. Consequently the concept of 4 neighborhood pub was, with very few exceptions, destroyed. The deeper reasons for the demis¢ of this concept are entrenched in the economic facts of Canada. Out media and culture are dominated by American and British commerc music interests and most young Canadians know no other form © cultural activity. Alternative cultural expression ‘and involvement do not exist in the neighborhood pubs because of thé absence of the older generation (35- 60). A larger proportion of the older age groups has direct contact with their various ethnic backgrounds and have participated in and created theif own music. When younger people observed this alternative to com- mercial music they appreciated it and became involved. On their ow? they are not as enthusiastic about cultural alternatives because they d0 not have the experience. The neighborhood pubs in B.C- had a great potential to develop a pub culture beneficial to our society, or at least a step above the mass strip tease, beer parlor, cabaret and discO culture. Perhaps the neighborhood pub-owners’ association, with some lobbying by culturally aware people, might realize an alternative and stop the sliding cop-out. Better yet, it would be desirable to have a government that promotes, fosters and develops Canadian cul- ture in all aspects of our lives. — Soon to Soon to Be Born, the just- published novel by Oscar Ryan, has been warmly commended by one of Canada’s leading writers of the last half-century. Dorothy Livesay, twice winner of the Governor-General’s Award for Poetry, author of a score of books of poems, short stories, plays, auto- biography and memoirs, and noted teacher, editor and critic, wrote of Ryan’s book, published recently by New Star Books: “*T found the reading of this novel very absorbing. ~ “It is a real challenge to all the - stereoyped criticism we have heard about the Thirties. This offers a complete panorama of what the common people went through in Canada during 1929-1939, but unlike * Ten Lost Years it is not a history. “It is skillfully arranged as fiction, introducing us to a vibrant group of people, young and old, men and wo- men, illustrating their reaction to the times and to each other. “Rather than setting the story down chronologically Oscar Ryan has used two key years with alternat- ing scenes from each year, from the Be Born point of view of alternating charac- ters. This device creates. tension. One reads on, with absorbing in- terest right to the end. “*The style moreover is a joy. De- ceptively simple, it is exact and evocative. There is nothing flashy of attention-getting about either the love scenes or the scenes of un- employed struggle.”