Additional Articles for March 2004 Issue
Getting real about a creative economy
Along with scads of other people,
we showed up at the Maine Center for Contemporary Art in Rockport a couple
of weeks ago to attend a discussion of the potential which
the Creative Economy might hold for our impoverished state—an impoverishment
brought about in large part by failures of imagination and a refusal to pay attention
to economic law. The Rockport meeting was a sort of recruiting effort to lure
people to a larger and more practical discussion at a Blaine House Conference
at Bates Mill in Lewiston on May 6 and 7.
For those readers who have somehow managed to remain ignorant of the Creative
Economy (CE) concept, we offer a somewhat jaundiced definition which avoids the
self-congratulatory “Gosh, we’re special” attitude. The industrious
folk who labor in fields as disparate as software design and boat building as
well as the more traditionally artsy-craftsy types make up the work force of
the CE. Some definitions of the CE also include imaginative financial wizards
in the creative population. We would submit that the CE intends to exploit the
cultural clout enjoyed by these arcane and vaguely mysterious callings in order
to attract more of the same people to a given location as well as audiences for
them and their endeavors. Obviously and most germanely, the given location our
readers will be interested in is right here on the midcoast.
"So will it need a frame?"
In short, then, the CE looks to borrow the “cluster” model
which has been so successful for technological enterprises in order to
create similar
liaisons and facilities within the creative sector. If we are jaundiced or somewhat
skeptical about the success of an organized CE in Maine, our misgivings have
less to do with the local scene than they do with the machinations of the bureaucratic
and legislative hordes in Augusta. At the meeting, Bob Hastings, executive director
of the Rockland-Thomaston Area Chamber of Commerce, pointed out that the economic
policies which currently render the state unattractive to traditional business
will have the same negative effect on any initiative to attract creative businesses.
The Midcoast Review has held since its inception that the artistic community
is an entrepreneurial one and is in need of the same sort of regulatory and policy
relief as other more apparently traditional business enterprises. The arts have
just as much of a bottom line as a snowplow manufacturer. Even the non-profit
Farnsworth Museum had to close for a while this winter in deference to red ink.
These economic caveats should be fairly self-evident. If the arts are going to
be treated like any other engine to drive economic development, then clearly
they will require the same kinds of policy support which other state businesses
are seeking. Representative Steve Bowen of Rockport did advise that efforts on
behalf of the CE should “stay away from the paradigms of the old economy,” but
we inferred that he meant those aspects which would judge the CE by the same
standards as the manufacturing sector. That thinking sees a company which creates
200 jobs as more important than 20 companies creating 10 jobs each.
Abbe Levin, one of the leaders of the discussion and a staff member of the Maine
Arts Commission, offered an intriguing insight. “The same effort that was
devoted 25 years ago to preserving natural resources now needs to be applied
to cultural resources,” she declared. She also pointed out that “The
Creative Economy is not new in Maine. We need to organize what we have here.”
All of those observations deserve consideration, but one relevant comment didn’t
get reported. Dana Rae Warren of Moody Mountain Films in Searsmont observed that
the “success of the Creative Economy will depend on getting the idea across
to the kinds of people not at the meeting.” In other words, she is concerned
that the general population may not be intrigued by the concept and therefore
will not feel a need to back it.
Given a couple of other comments which were made, we think Warren’s concern
is valid. One questioner wondered what the Creative Economy might do to discourage
the proliferation of “big box” stores like Home Depot. Another person
was concerned that “diversity” didn’t get mentioned.
We’re not entirely certain that those concerns are the ones which will
attract the sympathetic interest of hard-pressed families looking for jobs. More
useful is the fact that even exotic creative companies will eventually need workers
with traditional skills in office management and the like. We’d suggest
that’s a better and more realistic point with which to sell the public
than excerpts from an idealistic agenda.
The Creative Economy offers a good deal of promise for the region and the state,
but it must be explored from a rational and hardheaded point of view concerned
with economic realities if it is to have any chance at all of succeeding.