So, is Phil/Toby claiming that Jazz is not subsidised in Finland?

Franklin: Probably not.

For culture support, I would rather give more to films and cut opera entirely. For example, in 2004, Finnish films received approximately 10 millions in support (6.5 to production costs, 3.5 went to finnish film archives). Not a massive amount by any stretch. About a quarter of a budget of a mainstream Hollywood film.

I tried to find statistics on how much support Opera receives but could not find it. My quess is that it must be several times bigger amount.

Which one attracts more paying viewers? Without statistics I would say films. How do you import opera? Not very easily?

How do you import films? You burn it to DVD or print it to film and send it away, perhaps with couple of persons to market it if needed.

No, not at all, although I’d bet the amount of money the state gives to opera vs. jazz is very different. We’re talking millions vs. peanuts.

mrS: Not a massive amount by any stretch. About a quarter of a budget of a mainstream Hollywood film.

Hollywood film = Free Market economy.

Phil/Toby wrote:

“I can understand people’s deep love for Opera, but I find it just incomprehensible that they then expect other people to subsidise it whilst they they belittle other people’s interests…”

Your statement is highly insulting. I am an avid fan of Opera, but feel very bad about the fact that other people are forced to subsidise part of my entrance fee. I would gladly pay twice as much for my seat if only SKO was privately operated. Or would gladly choose a competing, privately operating, opera house if given a choice.

SKO is artistically top notch but businesswise they aren’t even trying. It’s as if they feared that being caught with any business savvy whatsoever would put their 40M from the state in jeopardy.

As far as I know you can’t even buy an SKO T-shirt! Selling merchandise, after all, would give out the message that they are in a position to make money! Which, given the circumstances, is very risky you understand.

As a rule I choose a private business over a subsdised one every time. It is only my deep love for opera that makes me an SKO customer despite having a very guilty conscience about it.

Your statement is highly insulting. I am an avid fan of Opera, but feel very bad about the fact that other people are forced to subsidise part of my entrance fee. I would gladly pay twice as much for my seat if only SKO was privately operated. Or would gladly choose a competing, privately operating, opera house if given a choice.

Al, I think I can speak for Toby when I say that we didn’t mean to be insulting at all! Obviously not every Opera fan support the state subsidies, it just seems from the previous article, the majority of them do. When Toby wrote “…that they then expect…”, I believe the “they” refers to people who support the state subsidies and not people like yourself.

‘Finnish opera summed up’ HAHAHA Is this a Joke? I really am getting sick of all this summing up yours – always illogically attacking something/someone who is hardly to blame for anything. First Tarja Halonen for her payrise, now Opera. Are Halonen and Opera really the cause of financial disaster in Finland?? I mean it is so transparent to put an image of a totally unrelated Pavarotti into your entry and then trying to be a populist by relating yourself to ‘the average person’ who says ‘screw opera’, because you mistakenly think it is a ‘high-class exclusive activity’ in Finland. Well, unfortunately Finland will continue to strive for accessibility of quality arts and science for ALL people, and American ‘libertarians’ will just have to tolerate this.

Not ALL government intervention is evil, Phil – in a small country like Finland we need a support system for sustaining cultural heritage that would not survive otherwise. It is not so simple a matter that you can say ‘well why do they need support if people love it?’ The reason it needs support is that it is very costly and it is largly non-commercial. And because financial results in performance art are very unpredictable, it is certain that bad years come once in a while. Thank God we don’t live in USA with MTV full of junk bands and TV programs with 50% advertising time.

Toby hit the nail in the head in a sense: If Finland did not have an opera house, it wouldn’t be merely seen as a ‘rural poor backwater of Europe that it used to be’, it would BE a rural poor backwater of Europe. And this is hardly a view confined to elitists.

In any case, I smell envy at people who can tolerate or enjoy a wider range of art-forms, and promote diversity. Just because Opera gets more money than some other forms of music, theatre, fashion, architecture etc (all part of opera), it doesn’t mean the Opera is to be blamed for ‘special treatment’. The opera just happens to be more expensive than some other arts. It is by no means the worst in this respect, and the investment has been worth it: Look at the status of Finnish classical music and all that it has done to promote Finnish culture abroad.

Finnish Opera is very respected part of Finnish culture to most Finns. Confusing it with Pavarotti’s private commercial concerts and Depeche Mode (!) or Jazz (what is the conflict between Jazz and Opera???) is absurd. National Opera is a leading educational and artistic institution in Finland. These attacks will perhaps provoke conversation, but it will also make people lose their faith in your intelligence.

I am horrified in the sharp decline in the journalistic quality of this site recently. We don’t need a sensationalist blog which makes a big deal out of ridiculous topics!

Opera is a charitable and NON-COMMERCIAL organisation (gets support from Veikkaus etc) and is NOT to be blamed for social or economical problems in this country! Get real!

Of course opera and Tarja Halonen’s pay raise aren’t the only things leading to Finland’s social and economical problems. That’s retarded. But these little things (is 40 million really little?) add up.

And don’t think I’m just picking on opera here because I’m not a fan of it. If you’ve read my blog, you’ll notice that there’s a LOT of government subsidies that I’m against.

I’ve obviously touched a nerve with you because you enjoy the opera so much, I wonder if you would be this vocal if I criticized state spending on other “cultural” programmes…like paying for F1 racing on television for instance?

These attacks will perhaps provoke conversation, but it will also make people lose their faith in your intelligence.

Maybe so, but 47% of readers (according to my poll results so far) believe that opera should fund itself. And the Ministry of Education aren’t happy with their wasteful spending either. So I doubt it’s just us “American libertarians” who feel this way.

Phil, I hear you loud and clear. But the thing is I am not at all convinced that even the majority of SKO customers expect/support the subsidisation. I personally don’t know anyone.

SKO themselves will give you a different story, of course. As any business owner knows, being this heavily subsidised changes your mode of operation entirely. And once there, a business automatically weakens to the point were it no longer can support itself without the subsidies.

SKO, the organisation, are the ones who directly benefit from the subsidies. It allows a certain laxness to their being — no need to address every inefficiency, no need to truly excercise your creativity.

On the other hand, I’m fairly sure that most of the opera goers could afford the higher ticket fees and wouldn’t mind patronising their favorite art form. Especially when knowing that it was entirely depended on their support.

My point: you are barking at the wrong tree. The cycle of sosialism begins at the point of confiscation, not at the point where people can’t help but accept the benefit of the subsidy because they have no other choice.

All government intervention is evil. That is pretty much what the posting is all about.

Life does not change just because you do not like the outcome. Phil correctly pointed out the facts of what happens with free government money, and how it can destroy an industry like the opera.

So get off your soapboxes and open some eyes.

Yep, without state support we would not have the flourishing Finnish cultural scene, but would be dominated by commercial Hollywood and domestic trash. Yes, taxes would be very, very slightly lower – and of course a country without a national identity would be even more amenable to dismantle its civil society, getting more return to investments by American pension funds. I kind of see the logic here.

mjr

You missed phils point. The Gov Support for the opera is whats making it fail.

Its failing to innovate, as a commercial enity would, thus its loosing customers.

How long before it has 1 person left to clap? would that one person be you?

Phil,

You may have said this before but I’m new to this blog.

Are you a Finnish citizen? Or are you a dual American/Finnish citizen? Do you pay Finnish taxes? Just curious. If not, then what right do you have influencing Finnish public policy? If so, then I would recommend that you express your views to your representative in Eduskunta, if you haven’t already.

Also, I am wondering if you are really happy in Finland. It doesn’t seem like it. What are the things that you like about Finnish culture? Your posts have not demonstrated this. Are you expecting Finland to be more like America?

Finns enjoy a great culture that they’ve worked hard and fought to preserve. When I’m in Finland, I try to defer judgment on cultural matters to the Finns. That wins me more allies. Wouldn’t you expect a Finn to do the same in the USA? Wouldn’t it annoy you if a Finn lived with you in Baltimore and he complained constantly about your country’s politics?

You missed phils point. The Gov Support for the opera is whats making it fail.

Absolutely. When they just take taxpayer’s money every year, there’s no need to market their product, increase sales, become more effecient, make any changes…

winter: I think have a good example in Hollywood: quality does not compete very effectively: an overwhelming majority of the stuff is not innovative or courageous, the opposite if fact – markets enforce timidity and trust in tired formulas. We have lots of mindless entertainment in Finland regulated by supply and demand, it will not be threatened by this support of high arts, nor would our taxes be significantly lower if it was abolished. I would say that this support should basically be multiplied, it is a great, great investment and the sums involved quite minor.

Are you a Finnish citizen? Or are you a dual American/Finnish citizen? Do you pay Finnish taxes?

I’m an American citizen who lives in Finland and pays Finnish taxes.

Also, I am wondering if you are really happy in Finland.

How about those thousands of blogs who criticize the U.S. Do they hate the United States? Are they unhappy? Are they un-American? Just because one is critical of their government doesn’t mean they hate their country or are unhappy living there.

Wouldn’t it annoy you if a Finn lived with you in Baltimore and he complained constantly about your country’s politics?

Of course not!!

mjr
If you expect every movie out of Hollywood to be of high quality, then that’s not their business model. Plenty of B movies make money and cover their production costs.

Then there is the occasional B movies (My favorite is the Clint Eastwood western’s -spaghetti movies) that make the big money at a low production price.

All Phil is pointing out is the Bad Bad model of using Gov Money in an enterprise. It just sucks, and causes the enterprise to go under real slow.

Phil,

Fair enough. I was just curious. If you pay taxes in Finland, then you should have some say, I guess.

This doesn’t change the fact that opera is an important staple in Finnish society. Like it or not, it is extremely important for many Finns, and it costs money. As I said, there’s a difference between paying a small group of 5-10 people vs. an opera company of several thousands of employees.

Some industries need to be subsidized, like airlines. Without the support, safety standards are compromised. That’s a proven fact. Music is not a mere commodity. It is a part of the Finnish character (i.e. the three S’s “Sisu, Sauna, Sibelius), and it will probably be firecely protected for many years to come.

I just don’t see the point here: Finland is a small country, our national languages are small languages. Our cultural scene would me much poorer without these quite small subsidies that come without basically any strings at all. We are not lacking b-class, well, f-class entertainment, but this lively cultural scene is invaluable. I don’t see any meaningful argument here. Sure, there are issues with our public expenditure but this is not one them. Actually, I would really advocate multiplying these investments. Let’s take the extra money out of corporate welfare for example.

Phil: I wonder if you would be this vocal if I criticized state spending on other “cultural” programmes…like paying for F1 racing on television for instance?

Again, as much as I enjoy F1 racing, you can’t find many forms of entertainment more commercial than that. They shuffle millions around on their own and need no support.

My main point rests that non-commerciality and cultural heritage are the main reasons to subsidise some forms of culture. Opera is expensive, and losing it would be a major blow to Finland, and not only to our national pride, but also in producing and training thousands of great musicians, dancers, opera singers, technicians, choir members, clothes designers, incredible hairdressers, make up artists, technicians and artistic directors. Many of whom are among the most famous Finns abroad. Our opera house is pretty much a Finnish monopoly intended to sustain fine standard, and Big Scale.

I think that without the subsidies the level of excellence would not be what we’ve expected to take pride in – having a crap opera house is almost worse than not having one. Having worked there, I know that things really click there and people try their utmost best to reach perfection. Those people deserve a little help financially. And that’s not saying that other venues don’t aswell.

I don’t think the only important indication of the value of opera is just the number of audience… Obviously it was a risk to try out many new operas in Finland and it hurt a bit financially, but keeping a diverse repertoire is also a value in itself. Some guy in the other thread said that opera is some elitist relic from the past that no longer needs to be kept alive – well what can you say to such ignorance? I guess we need to preserve sports and Gallen-Kallela paintings and Sibelius manuscripts etc. etc. even if they aren’t IN at the time – same goes with opera.

Opera isn’t just a field of music. It is an entire culture of its own, with history, culture, pride and immense joy. At least 3 different tv documents were made to celebrate the birthday of a Finnish opera singer last year. That’s how much we associate it with Finnish life. Mocking or undermining it is like going to USA and pissing on the Statue of Liberty.

This doesn’t change the fact that opera is an important staple in Finnish society.

If it was an important staple in Finnish society, we’d have more than one opera house (someone did say we have only one, right?)

Sauna…now there’s a staple in Finnish society!

Some industries need to be subsidized, like airlines. Without the support, safety standards are compromised. That’s a proven fact.

You must be a Republican back in the states, Democrats hate corporate welfare.

Again, as much as I enjoy F1 racing, you can’t find many forms of entertainment more commercial than that. They shuffle millions around on their own and need no support.

But they do! (it’s been a while so correct me if I’m wrong) F1 may move from public TV to cable TV in Finland because the public stations can’t afford it, so Karpela proposed the state subsidizes F1.

Mocking or undermining it is like going to USA and pissing on the Statue of Liberty.

Yeah but didn’t the French pay for the Statue of Liberty?

mjr

throw more money at it? When all they can do is pull in 1/2 of their seats.

Can’t wait until then hit 1/4 of their seats full and you all want to throw more money at the problem.

I saw this happen in my old home in Orlando Fl. They had a full subsidy, until they were caught stuffing those empty seats with free give aways to underprivileged kids, and anyone else they could find. That worked, as their main clientele left unhappy with who they had to sit with.

Bottom line, they folded, and the final comment from a staff member, was to joke about the tax money killin the opera.

Phil,

I am definitely not a Republican here in the States. You’ve got to be kidding. Don’t get me started on that one!

Winter,

The 1990′s American trend of giving tickets to underpriviledged kids worked to a small extent. It was worth a try. Audiences were decreasing, not because it the music was old-fashioned but because marketing failed. Managements alienated their employees by cutting their numbers of rehearsals, and so the quality level dropped. Programming dumbed down, and naturally the audiences went away. Then, the management development and marketing teams alienated thei “blue haired” donors by insulting them in the press and in their fund-raising letters. It was horrible. The successful arts organizations that survived made a balanced diet of old and new in their programming. They were smart because they knew that many of the older patrons had fortunes to give. It was very reckless then.

To all,

This situation is very complicated, and I really wish that those who were more informed about the details would pass judgment. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but it’s not healthy to inflame others against something you don’t understand.

I don’t consider it a given that the Opera should receive state support. The majority of regular goers probably belong to the upper layers of society and could pay their own way. A few of them probably don’t even understand a thing about the music but go to the opera because it is “fine”. Such people would only welcome the increased exclusivity that higher ticket prices would bring.

Still, €40M is a small price to pay for having a world class opera. This is not about poor national self-esteem, just a recognition of the facts. Finland needs every bit of good PR like this.

I like classical music in general, even though I don’t listen to it on a daily basis. The opera is not my particular favourite and haven’t gone there for quite a while.

This thread just prompted me to replace Stevie Wonder with Ludvig Van on the tray.

Voice from the grass-roots:
I’m pissed if I have to pay something I don’t want/can’t enjoy.
I have seen dress-rehearsals enough to figure out that I wouldn’t pay for seeing this (cloth-eared nincomboob me), and still I’m paying it in taxes. And I have talked with “intellectual opera fans”
enough to figure out that in most cases that money is pearls thrown in piglet (not offending any real ones, Liber Al).
Also I’m pissed that only YLE radio station (Q) that I would be intrested in, doesn’t reach my radio. Freakin’n frustrating and again my money thrown in the wind.
Now someone has nerve to think: “you can hear it through digi-TV”.
Like I would get a TV-set to listen radio. And walk aroud the house with it.
I’m not too rich, but I am not the poorest one who is paying for amusement for the richest.
If there is some poor unemployed opera fan in Utsjoki-Kevo, I’m glad to subsidise your ticket, just hop in bus.

Erm, I’ve been to the opera once, ten years ago. Yet, I don’t mind supporting it or other forms of art – as I feel their wellbeing is a needed reminder for us of what we as a species are, well, could be cpable of. I can’t disagree with the possible negative effects on quality tax money may cause, as I have no proof – on the other hand, neither do people supporting this thought, it’s just a theory.
But, how about you bloggers go find out, wether the tax on alcohol and smoking actually covers all costs of their consequences. I’m not a fan of either and wonder if I still have to pay for them…

This is just another form of the Maryland you Poop-you-pay tax. Thus the residents of southern Maryland are paying for waste treatment improvements in a statewide tax. But these taxes all go to Northern Maryland cities, as those of us in the remote areas have our own septic tanks. All for the environment no less.

Then you have the remote Finn’s who pay taxes so the rich city guy can have his culture. All for the opera no less.

Is the same thing guys.

This is so true: opera is political phenomenon in Finland.

€ 40 000 000 is thrown every year to the stiff form of singing and puffy clothes. That money is right away from lively theatre, film making and multimedia art. Our little culture is starving in small Finland because of ministers, politicians who wants to show off with megalomanic opera to their diplomatic quests.

Gov money is good and must in small coyntries, when it is wisely spent!

There would not have been directors like Bergman without Swedish support system.

€40M is not a small amount of money in in the small country named Finland, it is automatically away from other art forms! Our culture politics are in odd basis. There is money but it is shared dummy. Opera kills.

There is for example lack of support in quality of film making in Finland: scripts are bad. Very bad. There is no good script writers, because there is no money for extensive suopport to generate new writers and alternative scripts. Digital media has also screaming lack of quality content. There is only few good content makers, writers and minimal amount of the visionary art because lack of supportive money. (Nicholas, you should know this. Money is everything in making things real.)

There is no such highly supported opera in the world procentually as in Finland, not even close!
Here the opera is the sign of real culture hostality and ignorancy of our politicians. They don´t want rich, new and critical culture, only fascist form of flashy ancient art is enough for them. If we look procentually compared to art forms that Finns like, opera should have only €5M as support. The freelance theatres and several forms of music have low gov money support in Finland. Why should opera have the highest support?

Opera leaders did not pay all opera´s taxes in early 90´s and Ministry of teaching took cold bloodly straight off the money from the multimedia art. That also stinks. Opera can waste their budget time after time and politicians are always supporting their arrogant behaviour.
Opera leaders also promised, when the big and expencive opera building is going to be build, there would be possibility to show different form of arts. They lied.

Tax payers pay hard money to educate world famous Finnish opera singers and then they fly away to make good money at the world stages. Good for them. Good for world of opera.

“Toby hit the nail in the head in a sense: If Finland did not have an opera house, it wouldn’t be merely seen as a ‘rural poor backwater of Europe that it used to be’, it would BE a rural poor backwater of Europe. And this is hardly a view confined to elitists.”

Opera don’t make you cultured, boy, no matter what language you sing in and whether or not the fat lady sings. Finland is still, in many ways, a rural backwater, opera notwithstanding.

And Phil, I’m surprised you didn’t mention the recent article about the ugly, expensive and impractical Aalto Carrara Marble monstrosity that, after millions and millions of euros spent replacing the marble facing only a few years ago that the new marble is already warping and the taxpayers will, again, be shelling out millions to fix it. I don’t understand what people like about that building as it’s a modern architecture eyesore though I suppose it is quite difficult for the tourists to miss much like the Kiasma ‘beached whale’.

I’m all for funding the arts, but sometimes you just have to wonder what the people who ok the budgets define art as and whether they suppose that there is no end to the money. When the geriatrics begin to outnumber the taxpaying workers, they’ll maybe start to be a bit more careful in their funding as they’re budgets get stripped to the bone.

Not sure if I agree with that.

Clint’s new movie, Iwo Jima, looks like a real winner also. The cinematography looks spectacular! And I heard he is making 2 versions of the movie, one from the US and the other from the Japanese perspective. If that is true, I love the idea, it’s brilliant!