Emma Lake Campus To Close Until 2016, Future Under Review

According to a report by CBC News, the University of Saskatchewan is closing its campus at Emma Lake – home of the Emma Lake artist workshops –  citing budet cuts and the need for unspecified repairs. All arts and ecology programs at the campus will cease effective immediately. Here’s a statement from the university.

This is obviously very sad news – and very bad news for the arts in Saskatchewan. The Emma Lake campus has an international reputation, having hosted many prominent artists since its inception in 1935 – artists such as Anthony Caro, Frank Stella, and Barnett Newman. Over the years countless artists have attended the workshops at Emma Lake – including well-known Saskatchewan artists Joe Fafard, Wynona Mulcaster, Dorothy Knowles, and the Regina Five.

Is it just me, or does it seem like this province becomes more and more hostile to the arts with every passing month?

 

Author: Wanda Schmöckel

Wanda Schmockel is just trying to get by without shoving. You may follow her on twitter @vschmo

7 thoughts on “Emma Lake Campus To Close Until 2016, Future Under Review”

  1. It’s played a huge role in the growth of Saskatchewan’s arts community for sure, but the campus was also used for field work by biologists, soil scientists, environmental studies types and, according to the U of S announcement, it even offered courses on delivery of remote first aid and taking canoe trips.

  2. #1 Great points Greg.

    Vanda’s 1st paragraph sez it all.

    Budget cut’s & the need for unspecified reairs. Thanks to all of the Uof S students that have had to live in & study in an apparent shite hole of a shitty old fixture,( until now ), of UofS, “facilities”..

  3. American painter Will Barnet who lead a seminal workshop at Emma Lake in 1957 that contributed to the emergence of the Regina Five a few years later passed away on Nov. 13 at the age of 101. Here’s a link to the Washington Post obit.

  4. The usual attack on the arts argument is getting really old fast.

    Both the age, repairs, code structure improvements including funding issues of this Emma Lake campus were problems even when the previous NDP was running gov’t.

    It’s no surprise other satellite campuses in northern SK are experiencing similar problems to this one. Just because this place has alot of history significance doesn’t give it a special higher priority.
    Perhaps supporters of this place could get their creative juices flowing and find ways to help fund this place with repairs? Or find a different newer building altogether.

  5. “Just because this place has alot of history significance doesn’t give it a special higher priority.”

    What would give it a higher priority, m b?

    And don’t you think it’s worth asking why, in the midst of this so-called “boom”, our schools are being defunded? They keep telling us we’re rich, so where’s the money going?

  6. “Perhaps supporters of this place could get their creative juices flowing and find ways to help fund this place with repairs?”

    That’s right. Just look at all the great ideas the Riders came up with to raise funds for their new home. If they can do it, so can the arts community!

  7. Vanda. It’s a smaller satellite center serving a small amount of students who are taking a limited selection of courses offered there. Compare that to the U of S or U of R whom serve thousands of students and offer many courses. Do the math and it is a no brainer which places get a higher priority and a bigger chunk of the funds. This place isn’t as big a priority with it’s existing problems.

    The problem I have is how you and/or others are trying to distort this into something else other than what the actual issue is. This has nothing to do with an attack on the arts.

    The issues are to do with the actual building itself regardless of what it is designed to be used for or who lives in it or who uses it.

    Had this building been a hospital or health center, then you might try to distort this as an attack on healthcare.

    Had this building been an affordable housing project, then you might try to distort this as an attack on the poor.

    Had this building been a tourist complex or a hotel or a museum, then you might try to distort it as an attack on tourism and jobs.

    Had this building been burnt down by a dry weather forest fire, then you might try to distort it as an attack by Mother Nature because of Global Warming or Climate Change…..and so and so on!

    This 77 year old building is in a declining state of disrepair.
    Disrepair=Safety Issues.
    Safety Issues = Liability.
    Liability = Interpreation of negligence.
    Interpretation of negligence = Potential Costly Lawsuits
    Potential Costly Lawsuits = Shutdown of building.
    Plain and simple logic! Nuff Said!

    So, when 2016 is here, who knows what will officially happen. Either they have funds to repair it enough to become usuable again or they relocate the campus to another building.
    If supporters are determined to keep this 77 year old building, then find a way.

Comments are closed.