Drama 302

I am doing very well in the course (yay!). So far of the three assignments I have written and gotten back I am quite satisfied with my marks! Yesterday I wrote my next assignment on "Funding for the Arts in Canada". On Monday we talked about different sides to the argument (for and against) and we basically can write about anything on or related to that list. I wrote about Sarah Polley and the whole Becel/Heart and Stroke Foundation Film thing that happened just prior to the Oscars. I think that while it is noble and all that to not associate with a product (selling out, ahem), it is a much different thing for someone who is independently wealthy than for someone who might need those corporate funds to pay their bills. So in some ways I think it is irresponsible for Ms. Polley to make this grand stand on the issue. I also wonder why she did not know where the money was coming from ahead of time... Perhaps she did and this was a way for her to make her film and make a stand at the same time. After all she did not prevent the Heart and Stroke Foundation from using the film, she only removed her name after the fact. I wish I could have written more than a page (we are not allowed) because I could've talked about the implications for hours. But there are many, many, many artists out there who started their careers in commercials and there are many, many, many Arts Organizations and Individuals who rely on corporate sponsorship to operate. What does Sarah Polley think about them? Are they selling out? Or are they merely finding a legitimate way to finance their art?