The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

Oakville Beaver Weekend, Sunday, Sept. 19, 1993 â€" 6 >OPUVION ; 467 Spears Road, Oakville, Ont. L6K 384 845-3824 Fax: 845-3085 ' Classified Advertising: 845-2809 ' Circulation: 845-9742 or 845-9743 Ian Oliver Publisher “Mammwsmmma Wat-3"} Ltd. clam “papa-mummies: “Em. Advance. Brawn" suit-“Sm Robert Glubey ‘4de Director 5‘3." cannon. em emu. e aim Independent! Norm Alexander Editor “3’" F'” m“ m“ "“8 ”a" w“ mm and Sun' swam rum Canaan'cn Mm. Mum-Aurora Ere-Bender. Nam York Moor. m Geoff Hill Circulation Director “mug“. T Beaver, .WMWMPSWWWM Teri Cans Ojfice Manager £61m” mom Lbcnl. Summon Mirror. mahmmaeawnpmaod hLA humuhmdmmwasmwybm a Tim Colee Production Manager WNMM...“ ................y-....m........, EDITORIAL 'WWWWN, Good news r I ‘he news this week that The Dominion of Canada Insurance Company (TDCI) will be moving its regional office in Mississauga to Oakville in the spring, is good news for everyone involved. It's a good move for The Ennisclare Corporation which has been strug- gling to fill its building on the North Service Road.The move will also add another 300 workers who will make use of town businesses. In making this move, TDCI is continuing a trend of some major infor- mation-based businesses who are finding that there is now little or no need to be located in an urban setting. The age of computerized communi- cations means insurance companies and similar operations, can move just about anywhere to carry on their businesses. Firms moving to smaller areas such as Oakville, say the decision can mean higher productivity thanks mostly to a happier workforce. We trust that holds true in this case. We welcome our latest corporate citizen and congratulate them on their good taste in choosing Oakville as their new home. Where's the money? Here we go. Liberal leader Jean Chretien, first off the mark with his sup- posedly tell-all game plan for Canada, has left more than a few holes in how he will both out the deficit and foster growth. And who can blame him? Outlined in his brochure called 'Creating Opportunity- the Liberal Plan for Canada' are policies on technology, environment , agriculture etc. But there are as many questions about his views as there are answers. No where, for instance, is there any message of hope for the east coast, particularly Nova Scotia, which has been ravaged by fishing bans. He's also dodged the minefield that is the controversial immigration issue. Chretien, like Campbell, wishes that entire issue wold fade into the woodwork, at least until either of them is in power and then they can completely ignore the problem. The Liberal view of dealing with the deficit is so riddled with caveats, that it's hard to tell exactly how they would meet their target of deficit reduction. Basically, Chretien is counting on govemmentâ€"stimulated employment pro- grams to boost the economy which would, (in theory at least) increase taxes and therefore reduce the deficit. The Liberals wold kill the $5.8-billion helicopter contract, yet it doesn't allow for the millions of dollars in penalties the government would incur“, it lists $325-million in defence cuts at a time when the Armed Forces need new and specialized equipment to deal with their changing role; they want to cut $225-million in grants to business yet will spend hundreds of millions in pub- lic works projects that would give the unemployed only short-terrn relief and create no new full-time jobs; they would replace the GST with a fairer tax sys- tem to consumers yet there are no details; they would spend $100-million in grants to people who want to make home improvements. And that's just the tip of the spending iceberg. There's no talk of a national industrial strategy. Nothing about where all this money will come from. And while Chretien and the Liberals hammer away at the jobs issue, which they say is paramount in the minds of voters, out comes a poll that says the majority of Canadians don't care about jobs so much as deficit reduction. Are you listening Jean? QUESTION OF THE WEEK r 8Q, The current federal election cam- ,' " THEOAKVHJEBEAVER paign will last 47 days. Should this time /" "â€"â€" period be shortened or extended? Give us your opinion on this topic by calling 845-5585, box 5012. All callers are allowed 45 seconds to respond and must provide their name, address and phone number for verificaâ€" tron. A sampling of the best answers will be published in the next Weekend edi- tion of the Oakville Beaver. / (/\ CALL8455585 WHAT READERS SAID LAST WEEK Due to a malfunction in our computerized phone system, results of the Question of the Week are not available. We are re-running the question and ask you to call in your comments. We'll publish a cross-section of those views in next Sunday's paper. . , l-‘I'rjfefi § (41' CI/l’ ӎ- Making something out of nothing rt is making something '> out of nothing and selling 't.- Frank Zappa Maybe Crazy Frank is right. Perhaps, that’s all there is to Art. Philosophers, poets, and sundry windbags have been trying to define Art in essays, treaties, dissertations, and critiques for centuries. Along comes a twentieth century pop musician who sums it up in ten words. It’s a perplexing question. If I had to define Art as it exists today, I’d have to say Art is what the experts say it is. Would anyone have looked twice at a Mondrian print or a Warhol painting if they hadn’t earned approving nods from big name critics? Same thing with music. When I hear Rhapsody in Blue by George Gershwin, it makes my heart soar. When I hear Die Gluckliche Hande by Schonberg, it makes my head ache. Yet, the experts sing the praises of Schonberg and dismiss Gershwin with a patronizing pat on the head as an amusing diversion. I don’t get it. I also don’t get why a divine phenomenon like Ella Fitzgerald is written off as a mere “jazz vocalist” while an Opera diva, screeching in unintelligible Italian, is revered as a musical genius. Then, of course, there’s painting. The Art Gallery in Ottawa recently took it in the shorts for lashing out over a million loonies to buy an American painting entitles Rothko L No. 16. Also known as Two Whites, Two Reds. Which is all we got for our money; a largely empty canvas daubed with white and red. It looks like a close-up of two truck fenders doing a courtship dance. But that’s okay â€" because it was a bargain. Other paintings by Rothko have sold for much more. Who can forget White, Yellow, Red on Yellow which fetched nearly $2-million U.S. last year? Or the immortal Black and Dark Red on Red ($2.3-million U.S.)? And, of course, Rothko’s best (ie. most profitable) number â€" the justly famous Black Area in Reds? An Art Gallery in California laid out $3.6â€"million for that little number two years ago. You think I’m making this all up, don’t you? Sorry chum, it’s all true. Which gives you some idea of how far gone the Art Biz is. But things just maybe turning around. We may have reached the apex of Art Looniness. I note with approval that Harvard University has announced it’s é investment plans for next year. They ' include a $10-million endowment for something called The House of Blues. The House of Blues is a blues club based in Cambridge, Massachusetts, but with plans to expand across the continent, possiâ€" bly with clubs in Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver. Think about it for a moment. Harvard University â€" one of the straightestâ€"laced, upper-crustiest Ivy League institutions this side of the Vatican, is buying into a blues club. Our own Marshall McLuhan once wrote: “I think of Art...as a DEW line, a Distant Early Warning System that can always be relied on to tell the old culture what is begin- ning to happen to it.” Another thinker, Robert Scull, wrote: “I think of Art as a great big river that just flows and it’s been flowing for thousands of years...Art doesn’t win wars, but it’s the only thing that remains after the civiliza- tions go. Nobody knows much about the politics of certain Egyptian dynasties, but people remember the Art, the great things that were created.” So, I suppose thousands of years from now, no one will remember Terry Fox or Wayne Gretzky or Margaret Atwood or, perhaps, even Canada They’ll just remember Rothko No. 16, Two Whites, Two Reds. Frightening thought, eh wot? by Steve Nease . WT lSiHROUGH ii-lE'lbYDEBARiMENT. Lit-ill