| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 社會學研究所 === 105 === In 2011, Taiwan celebrated its 100th anniversary through series of activities, including the musical play directed by one of the most famous troupe in Taiwan and supported by Ministry of Culture. However, the play accidentally triggered the long-term complaint about the grant policy from artists. They questioned that the government assigned resource through their political preference. Minister of Culture delivered a public letter to clarify government’s neutral position; afterward, he even resigned for this controversial issue. The dispute indicated the art grant system is struggling between the political power and art autonomy.
The key question in this research is whether the grant system going through several stages of reform is now beneficial for the art autonomy and diversity, or as the artist worried about, the government still interferes in the artistic creation with direct grant mechanism. Thus, I begin with the normative argument to approve that no matter in the perspective of art or political field, they have a highly common consensus toward the idea of grant system. They both agree that an ideal grant system in democratic country should be beneficial for the development of art autonomy and diversity. Based on the statement, the research intended to empirically investigate whether there is the gap between the policy idea and consequence and what is the mechanism.
In order to answer the question, there is three parts of sub-questions in this research. First, by content analysis, I intend to make sure whether the art grant distributions indeed show the correlation with the cultural ideology preference of the governing party. According to the systematical coding data, I try to answer the controversial dispute about whether the ruling power interferes in the grant system. Besides, I want to explore how the mechanism works. Thus, I review the direct grant regulations for drama in The National Culture and Arts Foundation and Ministry of Culture. Through contextual analysis, I want to know how political manipulation is possible under the neutral-like grant regulations. Is there any inconsistency between the policy idea and regulation context? In the end, I interview stakeholders in the grant system. I want to show the agents under the same regulations have diverse interpretation and practice because of their different position and field accountability logic, which cause the concrete institutional consequence. Through answering these questions, I expect to come up with more accurate reflection and suggestion for the cultural direct grant policy.
|
|---|
