The National Art Gallery: My Verdict Is In

Last October the National Art Gallery (NAG) in Ottawa banished its free entrance to permanent collections and began charging a basic fee. The NAG presented the following argument in an official press release:

Faced with rising costs to maintain its operations, the National Gallery of Canada will begin charging admission to its permanent collection. The new fee structure will be implemented October 1, 2004.

“The decision to introduce admission fees is not an easy one to make. However, the rising costs of doing business, caring for the collection and operating the Gallery and CMCP facilities required the Gallery to re-evaluate its current practices,” said Donald R. Sobey, Chairman of the Board of Trustees.

“We believe that the revenues from the permanent collection will help the Gallery to continue to offer Canadian and international exhibitions and dynamic programming,” said Pierre Théberge, Director of the National Gallery.

Being a chronic fence-sitter, I had to appreciate the obvious fact that money simply does not flow easily to organizations and institutions in the arts sector. Obviously the NAG, a Federal Crown Corporation, is a huge building which must surely incur many expenses.

However, when I learned of the implementation of an entrance fee, my first reaction was a mixture of great disappointment and frustration. I used to drop by the NAG several times a week, either to mill around the collections or sometimes just to sit around in the Fountain Room or Garden Area to meditate. I remember sitting in the Fountain Room with a friend and explaining that, in my eyes, being there was the equivalent of sitting in a quiet church pew, where I imagine religious people might find comfort, solace and an improved clarity of mind. But when the announcement was made, I wondered if these new fees would prevent me from dropping by and discovering art as often as I used to. At first, I felt certain that this would affect the frequency of my visits. But after some thought I tried to convince myself that I should support this art-based institution - government or not - and pay the price. After all, I could get a discount as a university student.

However, it's been over three months since the new fees were introduced, and the verdict is in: I have not been at the National Art Gallery since. Apart from feeling embarassed at my failed attempt to support the gallery, I still cannot dismiss the original feeling of frustration over the situation. Why did they take away my most accessible place of knowledge and peace? I realize now that, as much as I appreciate the visual arts, the driving force behind my repeated visits was the element of accessibility and freedom that stemmed from the free admission. The simple knowledge that I could get away from the city and walk into a world of imagination and creativity - whenever I wanted and without any fee - is what compelled me to return and discover something new each time. There was also the magic in feeling as though the Canadian government could and was supporting a major art institution. There, it felt as though our Canadian art was allowed to exist for everyone and at any time. But now, it has been seemingly forced to join the ranks of all other major institutions and assimilate with their methods of operation.

On one hand, I continue to appreciate and even agree that it takes a lot of money to run such an operation, and that the money has to come from somewhere. Most other galleries and museums in the country (and the world, for that matter) charge an entrance fee. But I was so proud and so righteous when the NAG was free - it felt as though at least someone, somewhere understood that the public will be more apt to support the arts sector once it gains a more solid knowledge and appreciation of art. And in my opinion, the only way to do that is to make art more accessible to its people. Currently, school curriculums do not focus on the presence and importance of artists (culturally and even historically) in Canada. So it seems the only way to inform young people and the rest of the population would be to make the viewing and education of art more appealing and available to all - which means to keep it free of charge. But, with this implementation of fees, this will only create a reduced amount of visits by locals like myself, perhaps becoming the kind of place to experience once a year when relatives are in town, or when a special exhibit passes through. What will happen to the permanent, Canadian exhibits now? Are they in danger of losing their own audience?

Still, I am glad to spend a few moments thinking of the situation with the NAG. Perhaps the only thing to do is to adjust my ways and to make a greater effort to visit the gallery on a regular basis once again, and to pay the fees that are required to do so. However, note that this decision has come after much reflection and with a new resolution to change my ways. For others who may have let their visits dwindle subconciously after the implementation, the same realization may not come so easy.