A chara - I am grateful to Damian Smyth for informing us (October 7th) that it is not the task of the Northern Ireland Arts Council to write poetry in Irish. There is a weird attraction in the notion of a collective of arts council apparatchiks writing a poem in Irish, particularly when they cannot collectively read a poem in that language. However, although Damian appears to think I either said or implied something of the sort, this bizarre suggestion did not come from me.
On the other hand, I did suggest that the council should take a proactive approach to Irish language arts. This suggestion has been eloquently rejected by Mr Smyth, who claims that "arts funding is responsive", as if it can only be responsive. The council can be pro-active when it wants; for example, it pro-actively established and continues to fund a fine art gallery in Belfast (£230,000 in 1997-98). The council could have a pro-active Irish language arts policy if it wished, but its chairman and public affairs officer assure us that, as a matter of policy, it only responds to applications. However, in one of the references to the Irish language arts in its 1995 strategy document To The Millennium, the council tells us, in bold type: "We now affirm that a less reactive and more proactive approach is being developed". Doitered or what, as we say here.
Even if we accept that the council is only a responsive funder, its policy is flawed. Mr Smyth claims that the council funds "quality creative activity in Irish in Northern Ireland". Given the facts that no-one in the council has enough Irish to put out the cat, that there is minimal consultation on funding decisions, and that the council does not have any coherent or informed evaluation mechanism, how does he know? The answer is that he does not know. As far as the Irish language arts are concerned, the council cannot tell quality from a bull's foot.
Irish language arts in Northern Ireland face a number of problems. They are as yet weak, underdeveloped and underfunded, and they lack adequate development structures. These difficulties are compounded by two additional problems. One of these is that Irish language "arts" activity can have a value for the language movement which need not be related to artistic quality. The other is that the council lacks the competence or will for any kind of meaningful engagement.
The last thing Irish language arts need is the present piecemeal, uncritical, unfocused, reactive approach. They need sensitive and pro-active support balanced by rigorous evaluation to ensure that whatever funding is available is used to maximum effect.
There is a new political imperative on the horizon. The Council will, rightly, come under new pressure to increase funding for Irish language arts. The political situation will also put it under pressure to increase funding for Ulster Scots. Regrettably, pressure may come from people more interested in either Irish or Ulster Scots as a cultural emblem reflecting their political ethos than as a cultural or creative resource. The only possible defence against the excesses of any language lobby will be creative quality backed by a courageous and informed decision-making and evaluative structure.
When Irish-speakers who are also concerned about the arts make a case for a more coherent and informed approach, they deserve to be received with courtesy rather than bluster. - Is mise, Aodan Mac Poilin,
Director,
ULTACH Trust,
Belfast.