/Blog

Opposition to Copyright reform

from: Timothy Comeau
to: Peggy Nash
cc: Jim Prentice, Prime Minister of Canada, Stephene Dion, Jack Layton
date: Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 2:10 PM
subject: Opposition to Copyright reform

While I respect the Government’s desire to update copyright
legislation to be fair to all parties within the 21st Century’s
digital environment, I do not feel that the legislation introduced
today is close to achieving that goal. Rather, it attempts to
legislate into law the 20th Century status quo, wherein the consumer
is subject to terms and conditions imposed by producers without
negotiation.

I very much object to the idea - introduced in the bill - that posting
copyrighted material online (specifically pictures) could make one a
criminal. This would have a serious effect on blogging, where it has
become normal to re-post images copied from the source. In fact, it is
often used as a mean to link to the original source. And blogging is
one of the examples of the transformative effect the net has had on
our culture … a vibrant arena for debate, discussion, and the
dissemination of new knowledge. To make any part of its culture
illegal would be equivalent to introducing limits to the freedom of
expression, or - in 20th Century language - to interfere with the
freedom of the press.

This law fails to recognize net-culture as it has developed over the
past decade. There needs to be a fair-use provision which is clear,
and which allows the posting of material within legitimate contexts,
such as those that are promotional and educational.

The Toronto Star has this breakdown

“you could copy a book, newspaper or photograph that you “legally
acquired.” But you couldn’t give away the copies. And you can’t make
copies of materials you have borrowed.”

-with regards to the photographs, this would make a site such as this
(Keil Bryant’s Flickr page, which I enjoy browsing because we share an
interest in such s-f imagery) illegal, if Bryant were Canadian. It
would also become illegal (as I understand it) for me to save a copy
of any of these images for my collection.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kielbryant/

- “- it would be illegal to post a copyright work — picture, song,
film — on the Internet without the permission of the copyright owner.”

As written above re: blogging

As a final word, the Government of Canada would be well advised to
consult with ’share-holders’ who are representative of the base of
potential inf ringers: those under 35, who’ve grown up with VCRs and
computers. It has so far failed to do so. For those us (such as
myself) representative of this generation, a series of social norms
have developed with regard to material on the net. Trying to
criminalize downloading would be like trying to criminalize the great
Canadian tradition of saying ’sorry’ when someone bumps into us.

Whatever legislation is introduced, technological circumvention along
with a young person’s ingenuity would counter it within 6 months (like
the jail-broken iPhone cracked by a kid in New York State two months
after its release). Under the new law, it would be illegal for future
young men ‘who hate AT&T’ do to so. We would thus be deprived of the
right to use a device with a contract we thought was fair.

We do not want to be beholden to the one-sided contracts which limit
our freedom to access digitized cultural material. In the 21st
Century, the more liberal (no pun intended) the copyright law, the
more creative the society is allowed to be. I disagree with Richard
Florida that the path to 21st Century wealth is the enforcement of
intellectual property laws, but I do agree with him that a
society/city’s wealth is a measure of its creativity … it’s a
question of how one’s define wealth. I do not define it in terms of
money, but rather in terms of inheritable, sharable, cultural
products. We thus currently enjoy a net of cultural wealth, and this
bill would seek to impoverish us all in favor of the more narrow
definition of wealth as a measure of how much a company can squeeze
from a consumer.

Timothy Comeau
timothycomeau.com
————————–
[also posted on Goodreads]

What follows is my 2001 correspondence with W. Warren Wagar, who died in November 2004, and whose book, A Short History of the Future provided me with much food for thought during the period I was reading it. (And anyone who knows me might remember how I went on about it during 2000-2001).

———–
1.From: Timothy Comeau
To: W. Warren Wagar
Date: Apr 10 2001 - 9:40pm
Subject: A Short History of the Future questions

Dear Mister Wagar,I’m aware that you follow and contribute to the WSN forum, but since this mostly involves questions about your book, I wanted to write to you directly.

I am an artist in Toronto who first read your book, A Short History of the Future last summer and have found it both endlessly facinating and very entertaining. I am outside of the academies now, and have conducted a sort of independent study of the text in my spare time. Understandably, you can imagine that I find the passages dealing with art in the future to be of particular interest. I’m wondering if you could answer some questions I have.

SUBSTANIALISM
Lately, I have been most intrigued with the substantialist art of the Commonwealth. On the weekend it occured to me that what you describe as substantialism is a form of renewed humanism, (you do mention “integral humanism” but this seems to be more of a political thing than spiritual) a belief of man’s purpose arising from the scientific discoveries of cosmology and genetics. I am beginning to see what you describe as neorealist art celebrating the common person in terms of what occurred in the late Middle Ages, when medivael art achieved a new realism and incorporated a sense of the divine with that of the human - and which we call the Renaissance. (The Renaissance being a rebirth of ancient learning, but isn’t our own time in the midsts of a new re-birth, with our archaeological discoveries re-infusing our culture with knowledge of Lascaux and Chauvet?)

In attempting to describe what a “social realist” substantialist painting might look like to a friend, I pointed out the work of the BC artist Chris Woods (-albeit his paintings explore consumerism). Are you familiar with his work? (They can be viewed here: http://www.dianefarrisgallery.com/artist/woods/ )

ART IN 2200
In the autonomous society, where critics lament fossil art and that artists reject most of post modernism and modernism in favor of “simpler” forms: I have interpreted this to be conducive to the democratic infusion that the Commonwealth gave humanity, in line with the Preamble. Are medieval and folk art practiced because it is of the people? I have interpreted the rejection of pomo and mod based upon their consumerist and capitialist aspects, which I guess would vanish in the Catastrophe right?

As an artist, I am too often surrounded by the proverbial Philistines that I find anyone outside of the art discipline who talks about it as intelligently as you do to be a fellow conspirator - and I’m curious as to what your tastes are with regard to contemporary art, and what your background is with regard to its study. My own experience with professors in university was that they didn’t like to answer such questions, but as an historian of world politics, I am curious about how you see art intersecting the world system.

So, I’m wondering if you could elaborate a bit more on these ideas.

Finally, I just wanted to express how much I like the book. I especially like the format of incorporating letters and diary entries to flesh out the historical narrative. Eduardo Mistral Ortiz’s Diary entry is one of my favorites.

Thanks for your time,

Timothy Comeau

———–
2.From: W. Warren Wagar
To: Timothy Comeau
Date: Apr 11 2001 - 6:47pm
Re: A Short History of the Future questions

Dear Timothy Comeau,

Many thanks for your e-mail of yesterday. I’m glad that you found my book
of interest, but almost embarrassed that its few slender passages on the
arts could mean something to a working artist. By trade I am an
intellectual and cultural historian, so I know a little about a lot, but my
speculations about the arts of the future are based more on brave ignorance
than any sort of knowledge in depth. In my own personal life, the only art
form I know well is classical music, mostly of the period since 1880. My
comments follow.

At 09:40 PM 4/10/01 -0400, you wrote:
> Dear Mister Wagar, I’m aware that you follow and contribute to the
>WSN forum, but since this mostly involves questions about your book, I
>wanted to write to you directly. I am an artist in Toronto who first read
> your book, A Short History of the Future last summer and have found it
>both endlessly fascinating and very entertaining. I am outside of the
>academies now, and have conducted a sort of independent study of the text
>in my spare time. Understandably, you can imagine that I find the passages
>dealing with art in the future to be of particular interest. I’m wondering
>if you could answer some questions I have. SUBSTANIALISM a belief of
>man’s purpose arising from the scientific discoveries of cosmology and
>genetics. I am beginning to see what you describe as neorealist art
>celebrating the common person in terms of what occurred in the late Middle
>Ages, when medieval art achieved a new realism and incorporated a sense of
>the divine with that of the human - and which we call the Renaissance.
>(The Renaissance being a rebirth of ancient learning, but isn’t our own
>time in the midsts of a new re-birth, with our archaeological discoveries
>re-infusing our culture with knowledge of Lascaux and Chauvet?) In
>attempting to describe what a “social realist” substantialist painting
>might look like to a friend, I pointed out the work of the BC artist Chris
>Woods (-albeit his paintings explore consumerism). Are you familiar with
>his work? (They can be viewed here:
>http://www.dianefarrisgallery.com/artist/woods/) ART IN 2200
>practiced because it is of the people? I have interpreted the rejection of
>pomo and mod based upon their consumerist and capitialist aspects, which I
>guess would vanish in the Catastrophe right?

“Substantialism” is my version of the dialectical materialism of Marx &
Engels as revised by the French Marxist Jean Jaures. It argues that the
evolution of human consciousness has brought with it a new dimension of
being–”trans-being”–capable of repealing the laws of pre-human nature and
constructing a higher order of substance, a conscious, willing substance
that can make and re-make itself. The problem with modernism and pomo
alike is that they not only succumb to capitalist consumerism but also
erect an artificial barrier between the artist and his/her society. Art
becomes something produced only for other artists, a cop-out whereby
humankind at large is deliberately left in the dust. The reproduction of
this art takes full advantage of the mechanisms of the market-place,
simultaneously mocking and exploiting the hapless consumer, who is
simultaneously angered and humiliated by its seeming unintelligibility.

By contrast, art under the Commonwealth would become democratized and
would celebrate what all of us have in common. This happened, before, in
the art movements of the second half of the 19th Century, with the realism
of Courbet and the impressionism of Manet and all their followers; even
the post-impressionists (Van Gogh, Gauguin) eventually found a broad public
able to connect with their sensibility. All of this work is an art of
common humanity. The form that it would take a century from now is of
course unguessable.

world politics, I am
>curious about how you see art intersecting the world system. So, I’m
>wondering if you could elaborate a bit more on these ideas.

Several lines of your letter seem to be missing here. I would just add
that in the “House of Earth,” I anticipate the arts taking on a greater
variety of forms and media of expression, in keeping with the greater
variety, freedom, and complexity of life in such a heterodox culture. But
again, the arts would grow out of communal life, not a standardized
metropolinized “one size fits all” life.

Somewhere I think you also asked me about my own preferences. I feel the
strongest connection to the art of the second half of the 19th Century and
the first half of the 20th, through Picasso and Magritte. My musical
tastes are even narrower, essentially the music of the post-Wagnerian
generation, circa 1880-1920. My favorite composers are Gustav Mahler and
the little-known English composer Frederick Delius. Does any of this “make
sense”? You tell me!

Cheers,

Warren Wagar

———–
3.From: Timothy Comeau
To: W. Warren Wagar
Subject: Thank you for answering
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 22:48:11 -0400

Thank you for responding. You have given me a lot more to think about!

My own take on art history is whereas academic history is a narrative of recorded events, art history offers a record the psychology of the times. I sometimes define an artist as a “psychological historian”. That’s why I appreciate your inclusion of “a short art history of the future”. It’s one thing to be taught that World War I was the first industrial, mechanized war, it’s other to be taught that due to the medical advances of the time, people were surviving injuries that would have previously killed them, which was greatly shocking to the people of the day, to see the maimed “living monsters” as they thought of them, and this in turn is represented in German expressionism of the 20s(Grosz, Beckman).(I realize that’s somewhat simplistic, but I think it illustrates quite well what I am talking about - and it’s how I understand the nihilism of Leroy du Rien).

As it is, I have so far only had a vague working knowledge of Courbet and the 19th Century, but now I’m much more interested. From “the catching up,” I’ve done over the past few days, I can see what you wrote about with greater clarity. It does make a lot of sense.

I admit that my preferences lie more toward what is being done now, the contemporary art of today’s galleries and prizes. But I fully agree with your statements in your letter, art being something produced for other artists (and hence my interest in it - your point exactly) a cop-out
leaving humankind behind. My own take on this is a result of what you call “credicide” in the book.

But it’s also true that art is in a double bind. It seeks to criticize the contemporary, while being entrenched with the consumerist system. It is constantly bitting the hand that feeds it. Art exists in opposition to popular culture -as it has now for almost 150 years. As as admirer of
classical music, you see exactly what I’m talking about when trying to find the few radio stations that play it in the midst of all the other Top 40 stuff. But most people don’t appreciate classical music because for a variety of reasons they don’t invest the time to appreciate it, preffering the quick pop medleys to provide a soundtrack to their lives. Classical musicians make no apologies for not “dumbing down,” and neither do contemporary artists.

I have often thought however, that some of today’s contemporary art is comparable to that of the post impressionists: that they too will “eventually [find] a broad public”. But your book gave me a new way of looking at it all, with contemporary art’s connection to consumerism and capitalism that is by no means a guaranteed economic system. So I thank you for that.

Timothy Comeau

———–
4.From: W. Warren Wagar
To: Timothy Comeau
Subject: Re: Thank you for answering

And thanks for your further comments. I know what you mean about
how contemporary art and music takes time to reach a broader public. In a
sense that’s the whole story of the last two centuries, ever since the
invention of the “avant-garde.” Certainly some of the work done in the
last 50 years or so will eventually find an audience outside the ranks of
its initiates, but it would be a mistake to rely too heavily on the
patterns of the past. Abstract expressionism, for example, still comes
across as more curious than expressive. Dada is still a vast joke,
although widely emulated by the contemporary avant-garde. And the serial
music of the 1940s to 1960s, so universally acclaimed by the music
professors of the period, still falls on deaf ears. Yet without a vibrant
living art, culture can petrify and survive only as museum pieces fit only
for reverence. Wags like to refer to the Met in Lincoln Center as the
Metropolitan Museum of Opera, a showcase for Handel, Mozart, Rossini,
Wagner, and Verdi, staged over and over again. The same goes for all past
great work. No wonder so much of postmodernism consists of quotation. As
someone says in A SHORT HISTORY OF THE FUTURE, “all late culture is
quotation.” What a terrifying thought! (And now, lord help me, I’m
quoting myself.)But much of the blame falls on the academy, I am convinced. Just
as science and technology have become more and more minutely specialized
and professionalized, so the arts have been captured, catalogued,
classified, critiqued, and endlessly subdivided by the academicians. I
was on a doctoral committee recently for a novelist. He got his Ph.D.
with a science-fiction novel. And his partner was getting a Ph.D. for
critiquing gay poetry. Professors tell you whether you’re any good. Even
the writing of history (my field) has lost most of its grace and force
thanks to submission to the canons of professionalism. I have been a
professional academic for 43 years now, and sometimes I feel like a Greek
slave teaching Aristotle to a Roman patrician or a mandarin in the
neo-Confucian court of a Chinese emperor. Of course my “credentials” also
gave me the freedom to write A SHORT HISTORY OF THE FUTURE, so perhaps I
shouldn’t complain.

Enough rambling. Best wishes!

———–
Shortly after this correspondence I went out and bought Phaidon’s book on Courbet and read it within a month, furthering my understanding not only of Realism, but leading to the work of Baudelaire as well. Two years before I had borrowed this book from the NSCAD library, but it didn’t hold my interest at the time.

From: steven.laurie
To: timothy c.
Date: May 30, 2006 7:18 PM
Subject: Re: Article

Timothy

I read the article about my work or press release. I found it interesting. I
can see what you are getting at but I have no interest in mocking the subject
matter i am dealing with. Also I agree that masculinity or “manliness” is not
entirely a performance.

Thanks for your comments though. I appreciate the time you took. I would like
to hear more of what you think on this issue.

Thanks

Steven Laurie Artist “Riggin the Exhaust”

(Steven Laurie is the artist whose press-realease I criticized in my previous post Manliness in today’s paper and elsewhere.)

Subject:London Terror
From: Timothy Comeau
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:24:29 -0400
To: today@cbc.ca

Admittedly, as soon as I heard about this on this morning’s radio I turned on the television to, for lack of a better phrase, ‘witness the spectacle’. Given how two weeks ago you (CBC) suddenly dropped the Karla Homolka story in favor of a full day’s coverage to the events, and how you seem about to be doing the same thing today, it occurs to me that you are complicit in the terrorism by giving these jerks all the attention they want. Would they be so quick to set off bombs and kill and maim if they knew the media would ignore it in favour of Tom Cruise’s love-struck antics? I saw on the ticker that 15 people died in Iraq today, but you’re quite comfortable in burying that story. Breaking News story spectacles are part of the problem, and are never informative. Why not wait until you can actually inform me of something, and give me news I can use, not water cooler gossip?

Timothy Comeau

Somebody I know wrote me, and said this amongst other private things:

I’ve been reading your words about Canada Council on Goodreads. Every generation of emerging artists, since the mid 80’s and rise of Jesse Helms-like sentiments towards the arts, have seen a decline in opportunities and support and a rise in competition. As well we see a system stretching to help more senior artists enjoy a level of support to match their accomplishments and stages in their careers. I know that I’ve gone to conferences and see a lot of late 40 somethings and 20 somethings, but there is a definite void in the 30-40 range. I think that a lot of people from the generation of initial public cutbacks were actually forced to stop producing and participating and went on to something else outside the art world. Its a sad lesson. And I agree that the only real solution is to lobby for more money for the Canada Council.

January 2005

Dear Colleagues,

As you know, the Visual Arts Section of the Canada Council for the Arts is working on its new program of assistance to visual artists. We would like to thank you for having taken the time to provide your feedback and ideas during the latest round of public consultations. The volume of the correspondence we received and the quality of many of the interventions once again highlight the keen interest of Canadian artists in the Council���s programs.

Before giving you an overview of the responses, we would like to reiterate the reasons that we decided to revise our Creation/Production grants to visual artists:

• a significant rise in the number of visual artists over the last decade (15,000 according to Statistics Canada);
• the very low level of annual income received by visual artists despite 45 years of investment on the part of the Council;
• the weakness of the market;
• the financial inability of our program to enable artists to devote most of their time to research and creation, or to provide real support to independent creation in Canada, when the Section receives 2,400 applications each year and can offer only 220 grants.

In light of these findings, we had to redefine the goals and terms of our Creation/Production grants to visual artists. We held a series of discussions in the fall of 2003 with more than 250 artists from across Canada (Phase 1 of the consultations). Following these talks, we developed a proposed program whose main values were:

• The focus must be on long-term professional development.
• Social recognition and greater dissemination of artists and their work must be encouraged.
• Artists should receive more encouragement at key moments in their careers.
• Artists usually work independently, but they also need to maintain close professional ties with organizations.
• A diversity of practices (regional, artistic and cultural) must be respected and encouraged.

We presented our draft program in public consultations held in 13 Canadian cities in the fall of 2004 (Phase 2). We listened to and read attentively the comments and submissions we received from you. The main points expressed were as follows:

• The primary concern deals with our proposal to link our creation grants to a confirmed exhibition. This proposal, which aimed to increase the public presentation of works that had received grants, was judged to be detrimental to the development of independent creation.
• The administrative measures that would impose a waiting period for artists who are not supported after a certain number of applications and which limit eligibility for some applicants were considered by many to be too restrictive.
• Artists support the idea of a ���professional venue��� but hope that the Section would be flexible enough to recognize the presentation of alternative practices that are not exhibited, presented or structured by artist-run centres or galleries.

Other points of our proposal were appreciated:

• Many artists agree that the current program must be revised and that the three categories (emerging, mid-career and established) should be abolished.
• The plan for a multi-year grant was generally supported, although certain people found that the amount offered was too high in comparison to other components of the program.
• Electronic processing of applications was supported, since artists see it as a method of transmission that will eventually be the standard for the presentation of grant applications.

Recognizing the importance of independent creation, the Visual Arts Section will take into account all of the comments it has received in drafting the final version of the program. Naturally, this draft program will respect the fundamental values of the Canada Council, such as excellence and peer assessment.

Our next steps:

• Update our web site with the reports on the consultation meetings of Phase 2 on January 27, 2005.
• A meeting of a Special Advisory Committee composed of artists from the community and officers from the Section in January 2005 to study the new draft of the program.
• Presentation of the final draft to the Board of the Canada Council in March 2005. This will take into consideration the reasons for the revision, the values expressed in Phase 1, the comments received in Phase 2 and the comments of the Advisory Committee.
• Announcement of the new program in the Spring of 2005, upon Board approval.
• The gradual phasing in of the new program starting in September 2005.
• Please note that in the interim, the current program and deadline of April 1, 2005, remain unchanged.

We are confident that we will find a solution that addresses the concerns of the artists as well as the values and constraints of the Council. Thank you once again for your input.

Yours sincerely,

Fran?�ois Lachapelle

Head of the Visual Arts Section

Canada Council for the Arts

Toronto Women’s Bookstore

CMCE / Centre for Media and Culture in Education (OISE/UT)

+ University of Toronto Cinema Studies presents

Quien es mas macho? The Abu Ghraib Photos: A Presentation by Susan Willis

Tuesday, Jan 18, 05 / 6:00 PM

Toronto Women’s Bookstore

73 Harbord Street (at Spadina)

FREE + wheelchair accessible

From: shayla.morreau@canadacouncil.ca
To: tim@goodreads.ca
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 17:38:21 -0500
Subject: RE: feedback on the proposed changes

Dear Colleague,

Thank you very much for your letter, which articulates your opinions about the proposed changes to the Grants to Professional Artists: Creation/Production program. We welcome your views, and will take them into consideration before any new program receives final approval.

Let me explain why the Canada Council must review its program of assistance to visual artists. Considering the current situation, in which the success rate is one in ten, the peer assessment committees have repeatedly noted that they cannot recommend grants to all of the artists deemed excellent in a given competition. Of 2,400 requests, the Council was able last year to offer only 220 grants. The Council has lost its capacity to be generous and is therefore less able to support the “development of the practice”, the purpose of the current program as stated 40 years ago. Even the largest grants barely cover production costs. It has become clear that the Visual Arts Section’s resources are not adequate to support all excellent individual artists on a regular basis at anything approaching adequate grant levels. We decided some time ago that it was essential to determine how Council’s current funding can be made most useful to artists at key moments in their practice and career, and we are reviewing our program accordingly. Of course the Council is also seeking all opportunities to increase its parliamentary appropriation and thus its overall support to artists.

Recently, incorrect information has been circulating, and I would like to correct three major points. First, this revision does not impact the program budget; it will remain the same. Furthermore, if the overall Section budget is increased, this new program will be given a high priority to receive additional funds. Second, the revised Grants to Professional Artists program is not being implemented in January 2005. The final version of the new program, once it is approved by the Board of Council, will be implemented gradually, likely beginning in September 2005. Last, in the revised program, you will notice that assistance to creation is maintained. The purpose of the new program is to determine those key moments in a visual artist’s practice and career at which Council funding may be the most opportune. We believe that this is the case when there is an upcoming exhibition. This has created concerns in the community, and we will take great care to ensure that different points of view on this issue are considered before finalizing the new program.

We also feel that it is important to provide you with some background as to the process of this revision. As you may be aware, the Visual Arts Section began a formal review of the Creation/Production program in 2003. Last winter, we organized discussion groups with over 250 visual artists in 12 cities across Canada and also received feedback through our web consultation. This was Phase I of the process. After these group discussions, we drafted a proposed new program for the Grants to Professional Visual Artists program. This fall, we presented the revised program to groups in 13 cities across the country, as Phase II of the consultation. The purpose of the consultation was to present the draft, as a starting point for community feedback. For details concerning Phases I and II and an overview of the proposed program, please refer to our website: www.canadacouncil.ca/visualarts/ under the link entitled, “National Consultations with the Visual Arts Community”.

Our next step is to bring together all responses from the meetings as well as the comments submitted through e-mail, letters or the web. After reviewing the reactions from the community, we will be engaged in a process of in-depth, Council-wide discussion and reflection over the next few months. In addition, we will be holding a special advisory committee composed of visual arts professionals which will have a mandate to make recommendations to the Visual Arts Section.

In Phase II of the consultation, it became obvious that we needed more time to discuss this program revision. Therefore, the April 2005 deadline for the current Grants to Professional Artists: Creation/Production program will be maintained.

Again, I would like to thank you for taking the time to write; it is important and appreciated. We want to proceed with the proposed changes carefully, considering all the views of the community we serve.

Sincerely,

Fran?ج�?ois Lachapelle

Head, Visual Arts Section

3. Timothy’s Letters | Timothy Comeau

A. Letter to Google News
From: news-feedback@google.com
To: Timothy Comeau
Subject: Re: Google Arts News [#930186]
Date: Thursday 26 September 2002 2:46 PM

Dear Timothy,
Thanks for your helpful email about Google News. We’re considering a number of improvements based on feedback from our users, and we will certainly pass your comments on to our engineers. Given that we’re still fine-tuning this service, it’s too early for us to know which of the many great ideas we’ve received will be implemented. Thanks again for taking the time to write us and please visit Google News in the coming weeks to see our additions and improvements.

For the latest on Google News and other Google innovations, you may want to sign up for our Google Friends newsletter at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/google-friends/

Regards, The Google Team

—–Original Message—–
From: Timothy Comeau
Subject: Google Arts News
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 02:41:43 -0400
I really like the Google news so far, but think you definitely need an arts page. I don’t give a shit about sports so your algorithms are wasting processing power on that one when it comes to people like me - and you know there are a lot of us out there! The lack of arts coverage in the media in general is depressing. With Google News which is new and hot, why shouldn’t you add to your hipness by making sure arts gets covered just as thoroughly as sports?

Thanks,

Timothy Comeau
Toronto

B. Letter to CBC Newsworld Program CounterSpin
From: “counterSpin”
To: “Timothy Comeau”
Subject: Re: not that pleased
Date: Friday 18 October 2002 10:25 AM
Timothy:

Thanks for your comments. CounterSpin is an independent co-production and all decisions regarding scheduling, broadcast frequency and commercials are made by the CBC management. I encourage you to forward your comments directly to the CBC through cbcinput@toronto.cbc.ca, or by contacting CBC President Robert Rabinovitch.

Brent Preston
Senior Producer
At 01:11 AM 10/18/02 -0400, you wrote:
>Eeeewwww….
>
>….it seems that whenever the higherups take a great show and make it
>once a week, than it’s on its way to being cancelled….
>
>Counterspin is such a great and important show (though you too often have
>the same right-wing windbags on -Jonathan Kay from the National Post and
>Jason Kenny from the Alliance Party / please find more intelligent people
>to articulate the views of the right -who with them as their spokespersons-
>often seem like the Wrong Wing, which can’t be true given that they’re so
>popular out west….) that I would hate to see it made irrelevant by being
>on only once a week. Please say that it’ll be on for at least an hour and
>half, or failing that, commercial free. Last season you were lucky to have
>any conversations at all, since you kept going to commercials (which is
>actually quite insulting to the demographic who is watching the show,
>young people like myself who are concerned about contemporary
>politics/state of the world, and not McCain’s french fries).
>
>Regardless, I’m looking forward to the new season.
>
>yrs,
>
>Timothy Comeau
>
>ps. I’d nominate Mark Kingwell from U of T to be the new host (if his
>schedule permits of course. I also realized it’s far fetched, but hey,
>wouldn’t that he great?) or Daniel Richler (god Big Life was a great show)

C. Letter to his MP
From: Timothy Comeau
To: McTeague.D@parl.gc.ca
Cc: email@danmcteague.net
Subject: Please support the Kyoto Accord
Date: Monday 21 October 2002 8:11 PM
—————————————————————————–
To: Right Honorable Dan McTeague
Member of Parliment for Pickering, Ajax & Uxbridge
Room 302 Justice Building
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada
K1A 0A6
Mon. 21 October 2002

I simply want to express my support for the Kyoto Accord, and hope that you will be voting in favour of it when it comes up later this year.

I am a young person (27) who is very concerned about the world I am in the process of inheriting. While I understand that Kyoto will have economic consequences, I believe that scaremongering on this basis is both irresponsible and representative of a narrow minded parochial view. It would seem to me that those so heavily invested in a fossil-fuel based economy are refusing to see the economic benefits (and I would think, great opportunities) of a Green based one. The jobs that will be lost are - like an “executioner”- jobs that probably shouldn’t exist in the first place, since they are detrimental to the long-term survival of the biosphere.

You are from a generation older than mine. You have experienced and enjoyed an ecosystem that will probably not exist for my children or grandchildren. This is something new for us as human beings and as citizens of Canada; the rural generations of a century ago did not imagine their descendants not enjoying clean rivers and clean air. Why should we make the future pay for our selfishness? Kyoto may be considered a small and almost insignificant step, but we have to start somewhere.

Please vote in favor of Kyoto. You can count on my vote in the next election if you do.

Sincerely,
Timothy Comeau
tim@instantcoffee.org

4. Letter to Timothy
Ed Deary Sometimes when I read Instant Coffee I think about how much of a “affliction” living in a small town in the middle of nowhere is. So here is a short list of events:

This weekend:
Star Belly Jam, a music festival featuring “hippie” bands.
Free camping, the all-day ticket price is 20$ a day.
(note- I don’t think the bands are the reason to attend this: the lackey crowd, laced up should provide anybody with a reason to go. This is the equivalent to a trade show on drugs. I won’t go, but I look forward to the inevitable stories that will flow out. Really, some of the things that I have heard have been quiet re-tellable).

So much should have been written down. My memory is not what it should be, and I am so afraid my weakness will keep me away from what I want.

What are you doing now? Are you working out of the house and with your “instant coffee”? Do you still fight with your sister?

I have to leave this place, move in with my mother in North Vancouver, and put my stuff in storage. You did this, how was it?

Sometimes I think that I should get more student loan money and go to UBC’s English department. Other times I think that I should keep going with what I’m doing, (the relentless studio practice).

At the Khyber, your stairway show blurred the separation between studio practice and the contemplative act. Sometimes I think of that show, the way you were able to weave idea and thing together. Sara’s art of cooking pulled me so far from school. Now I’m sewing trousers. Happy to run away from the institutions, learn to cook, and name it badly with the feminist quip; the private is political. God, some days I actually believed that I was doing art- staying home making myself dinner. Black on Black paintings have the same effect as picking one’s nose. So what the f–k, I want to leave the house now - engage with this public society. I live alone and plan to move home. Maybe that’s o.k?