Skip to content

The Performing Arts Fund has a huge problem

I wrote a while ago already about it. About all those people who are now barely sustaining themselves on a minimal grant amount from the Performing Arts Fund, and that they have all done a fan-tas-tic job. This is what director Henriëtte Post told me in a conversation sometime this winter. 'Based on their performance, none of the current institutions can be removed from the system: they have fulfilled the requirements perfectly.'

So institutions that want to enter now, in the new round for 2017 and beyond, as newcomers, must present a better-than-perfect programme if they want to be considered. Not to mention all those creators who were also perfect last time, but for which just then - unfortunately - there was no more money. Take your pick from that. That is a luxury problem that no assessment committee wants to be saddled with.

The Fund, in the tradition of enthusiasm with which it also tried to survive the last period, is now trying to cheerfully present the hard facts: '54 of the 217 applications are for multi-annual festival subsidies. For the multi-annual production subsidy, we received 68 applications within the discipline of theatre, 45 applications concern music, 28 applications come from dance companies and 22 for music theatre. All sub-budgets are oversubscribed, the sub-budget for festivals even more than four times.'

That's a raffle for the newcomers, and a hell of a wait for the veterans. Post: 'It is notable that among the 'new applicants' there are many ensembles, companies and festivals that received a positive opinion four years ago, but for which insufficient funds were available at the time to honour their application. 35 of these institutions are reapplying. Fortunately, the number of organisations applying for a multi-annual grant for the first time is also substantial, because without new blood, cultural life will eventually wither away. But we cannot give any guarantees about the outcome, the quality of the plans always prevails.'

So new blood must also be added. Which can be supplied by the slaughter of the existing 'lucky' ones. Game of Thrones is nothing like it.

See entire post.

Wijbrand Schaap

Cultural journalist since 1996. Worked as theatre critic, columnist and reporter for Algemeen Dagblad, Utrechts Nieuwsblad, Rotterdams Dagblad, Parool and regional newspapers through Associated Press Services. Interviews for TheaterMaker, Theatererkrant Magazine, Ons Erfdeel, Boekman. Podcast maker, likes to experiment with new media. Culture Press is called the brainchild I gave birth to in 2009. Life partner of Suzanne Brink roommate of Edje, Fonzie and Rufus. Search and find me on Mastodon.View Author posts

Small Membership
175€ / 12 Months
Especially for organisations with a turnover or grant of less than 250,000 per year.
No annoying banners
A premium newsletter
5 trial newsletter subscriptions
All our podcasts
Have your say on our policies
Insight into finances
Exclusive archives
Posting press releases yourself
Own mastodon account on our instance
Cultural Membership
360€ / Year
For cultural organisations
No annoying banners
A premium newsletter
10 trial newsletter subscriptions
All our podcasts
Participate
Insight into finances
Exclusive archives
Posting press releases yourself
Own mastodon account on our instance
Collaboration
Private Membership
50€ / Year
For natural persons and self-employed persons.
No annoying banners
A premium newsletter
All our podcasts
Have your say on our policies
Insight into finances
Exclusive archives
Own mastodon account on our instance
en_GBEnglish (UK)