Hello, everyone.
My name is Edouard Lock, and I am the Artistic Director and founder of La La La Human Steps. I would like to thank the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage for inviting me to appear today. I intend to primarily address the impact on the performing arts community of the cancellation of the PromArt program.
My company, La La La Human Steps, began in June, 1980 in a small theatre, Leskabel, in Saint-Henri in Montreal. The theatre had 75 seats and the run lasted three weeks. After that, we presented the same show in New York, for an additional week, in a similar sized theatre, but one which, at the time, was a hub for contemporary American dance. In all, we had three weeks of local performances and one week of international touring. Twenty-nine years later, touring has increased from one week to two years. We now perform in theatres such as le Palais Garnier and le Théâtre de la Ville in Paris, and Sadler's Wells Theatre in London. The theatres where we now perform have between 1,500 and 3,000 seats, and one dancer now earns ten times more than the company's entire budget back in 1980. But those are just some statistics intended to illustrate the impact that international touring has had on our development.
What I came here to talk about is the process that led to this, what I have observed along the way, and the effects of the cancellation of the PromArt program on myself and my colleagues. An international career is built through a coming together of many subtle influences: the international community's response to an artist's work; the reaction of artists and the media in the cities where the performances occur; box office success; the feedback provided to presenters and promoters by spectators and subscribers; the personal tastes of presenters and their own observations with respect to how well the show is received in their community.
Then, over time, a dialogue develops and leads to better recognition of the artist's work and his history. That, in return, makes it possible to develop long-lasting relationships that mean a steady touring schedule. This process takes time and, in our case, as for many others, it has taken decades to achieve. On this tour, we reached an audience of close to 140,000. When one thinks back to the first international tour by our company, where The Kitchen, in New York, was the only presenter, you can see just how far we have come. The investment in both time and resources is staggering. Yet, if Canadian artists are unable to continue to move these relationships forward, everything that has been achieved will be lost, and the world will forget us. That loss will in turn lead to stagnation among some of the most successful arts organizations this country has produced: its dance companies and dance artists.
In order to avoid that, integrating the work of our artists into the broader context of the global cultural community is vital. The mark of any civilized country is its ability to have a dialogue with other cultures. Our artists are windows into who we are, and what we believe in. Distinctive and unique Canadian perspectives are precisely what international presenters are looking for. Believe me, invitations from leading international presenters are not just paternalism. Their invitations are not designed to support us; they invite us because nothing equivalent is available at home. Inviting an artist from another country to perform is an expensive proposition that can only be justified by the quality and uniqueness of what the guest artist has to offer.
We know that money is tight, and that more grant money for many companies and young artists will be difficult to come by—hence the importance of maintaining access to international markets and foreign investments. As touring has increased for us and other companies, investments from abroad have become de facto forms of subsidy. Amounts generated through co-productions and performance fees amount, in our case, to more than the total amount of operating grants we receive from the three levels of government—federal, provincial and municipal. Therefore, to lose access to these revenues would be disastrous.
Another point I want to raise relates to the fact that most dance companies do not have long local seasons and therefore depend on international touring to maintain their revenue streams. Although national tours are pivotal, there are not enough performance opportunities to compete with extensive international tours which, once again, confirms the need to preserve them. It is clear that money alone cannot guarantee the success of an artistic endeavour and money alone cannot create an artist. But when success does occur, it must be recognized quickly and encouraged. And that is precisely the beauty of the PromArt program. That program does not create success; it supports and rewards success. It does not create opportunities; it lets the artist and presenters do that. It does not have to wonder about an artist's potential; it lets the international experts determine that and then responds based on their judgment.
It is a fundamentally smart program, in that it doesn't burden itself with subjectivity; rather, it lets the world's cultural institutions do the work and then facilitates the artists' access to the opportunities they themselves have generated through their talent and hard work.
Thank you.