“The common element connecting art and politics is that they both are phenomena of the public world.”
The argument for cultural publishing begins with understanding that works of art, in Arendt’s words, “must find their place in the world,” just as the “products” of politics, that is: words and deeds, also need some public space where they can appear and be seen, where they can fulfill their own being in a world which is common to all – that is, the public commons.
Art objects cannot attain their inherent validity in private: they must be placed in the care of the keepers of public spaces, or the publishers of cultural magazines:.
Generally speaking, culture indicates that the public realm, which is rendered politically secure by the words and deeds of politicians, offers its space of display to those things whose essence it is to appear and to be beautiful.
In contradiction to this notion of culture, the arm of government known as Canadian Heritage has erased the concept of cultural publishing altogether by renaming it “micro-publishing” and deleting it from its list of heritage activities.