For us and for our friends

From left to right: poet Odysseas Elytis, composer Manos Hadjidakis, theatre director Karolos Koun, Theatro Technis 1957, rehearsals of Bertolt Brecht's "The Caucasian Chalk Circle"  © Manos Hadjudakis Archive

News that Warren Kanders resigned from Whitney Museum Board left me truly pleased. After months of protests, the owner of Safariland (a company that produces “law enforcement products” – in other words, weapons, including the tear gas used against immigrants at the US border) was forced to leave, as many people felt that making money out of producing weapons and then philanthropically investing that money in culture and the arts is an oxymoron (to say the least).

Still on Maria Matos: a theatre's ethos

"Have a Great day!", by Vaiva Grainytė, Lina Lapelytė, Rugilė Barzdžiukaitė (Photo: Simonas Svitra). Maria Matos Theatre, 2017

Ethos: (Greek éthos, -ous) noun
distinguishing character, sentiment, moral nature, or guiding beliefs of a person, group or institution
Source: Merriam-Webster dictionary

Anne Pasternak became the director of the Brooklyn Museum in New York in 2015, succeeding Arnold L. Lehman, who had held the post for 18 years. Anne impressed me positively in her first interview for the New York Times when she stated: "I am excited to build on that ethos of welcome".

At the time of Pasternak's appointment, there were several voices criticising the choice of someone who had never worked in a museum before. However, this sentence, right at the end of the article in the New York Times, was enough for me to think: She got it! She understood "who" the museum she's going to work for is!

What Maria Matos means to me (or, why did I sign the petition)

On December 17, 2017, the newspaper Público published an interview with the Councilor of Culture of Lisbon, Catarina Vaz Pinto, where it was announced that "[the theatre] Maria Matos (MM) will have a very different programming model, with longer running periods and a greater concern in attracting audiences, in order to be profitable". The news was surprising to me, to say the least. I would say more, I remember that, as I read, I felt a kind of physical pain.

A national tragedy: what does "Culture" have to do with it?

On Sunday morning, the news surpassed our worst nightmare. The great fire in the area of ​​Pedrógão Grande (central Portugal) had taken the lives of 19 people. Throughout the day, this number kept rising. The country was in shock.

The Maria Matos Municipal Theater in Lisbon was the first to react. Not only did it announce the cancellation of that day’s performance, as a result of the declaration of national mourning, but it also informed its followers on Facebook about possible ways to help and kept updating this information. It remained solidarious and involved.

Resonance

It’s always a pleasure and an inspiration reading Nina Simon’s posts. But the ones I’ve always liked the most were those where she shares her learnings from being in a position of responsibility, such as Year One as a Museum Director… Survived! or her latest Why We Moved the Abbott Square Opening -  A Mistake, a Tough Call and a Pivot.

We’re all too used to museum directors – or other people with a responsibility to lead in our field – available to discuss happy endings. Rarely the process, never the failures. Even when they feel compelled to comment on actions and situations that receive negative criticism, there always seems to be a way of getting around the whole thing, finding justifications, concentrating on irrelevant details, offering alternative truths. Anything that can take our attention away from what should essentially be discussed. Anything but a clear “It’s true, we were wrong about this, we’re here to discuss it.”

Diplomatic silences

Nicola Sturgeon, Scottish First Minister

As the the Web Summit was coming to a close in Lisbon, a day after the results of the American elections became known, the Municipality of Lisbon placed some outdoors that read: “In the free world you can still find a city to live, invest and build your future, making brigdes [sic], not walls. We call it Lisbon”. The outdoors were classified as “anti-Trump” by the opposition, which preferred to think that this was “an abusive interpretation and that [the mayor’s] intention was not to disrespect the democratic choice of the American people, it was not a demonstration of ideological arrogance, it was not an opportunistic precipitation as a result of becoming dazzled with the international attention." In short, the opposition asked for explanations (read the article).

Peacocks, ostriches and a third way

Anne Pasternak, Brooklyn Museum Director (Photo: Erin Baiano for the New York Times)

A few weeks ago, I read about six curators at the Canadian Museum of History who expressed ethical concerns about the purchase of artifacts recovered from the wreck of the Empress of Ireland. These concerns included the manner in which the artifacts were collected and the fact that the museum paid for artifacts from an archeological site. Not only were their objections dismissed, but the museum hired a lawyer and threatened them with legal action, were they to repeat their concerns to anyone else. According to the museum President and CEO Mark O’Neill, “Internal discussions like this are normal, and frankly, making them public is not” (read more). This statement left me thinking which would be the ‘OK’ subjects to discuss in public and, frankly, how come the conditions of acquiring objects for the museum collections is not one of them.

One good idea, two responses and some lessons

It’s 125 years since Vincent Van Gogh’s death. Starting May 3 and for 125 days, the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam will be answering 125 questions regarding the painter, his life and his work. The museum invites anyone interested to ask a question to send it through their website and a page especifically created to present the results of this Q&A (watch the promotional video and visit the webpage).

Museum Next starts here

Christian Lachel, BRC Imagination Arts (Photo: Maria Vlachou)

It seems to me that the three words that were mostly heard at the 2015 MuseumNext conference were: emotion, stories, engagement. Words that clearly mark the change that has been taking place in museum attitude, aiming to establish, with the help of their collections, a better, more relevant and meaningful relationship with people - more people, different people, common people.

A presentation that was wholly dedicated to this subject was “Emotionalizing the Museum”, by Christian Lachel of BRC Imagination Arts. “Does the experience transform your guests and compel them to share it with others?”, Christian asked. And this is probably the right question to ask. Although the transformation we all so much desire to make happen might take time to be consciously acknowledged by individuals (if it is acknowledged at all), the compelling wish to share with others is a more immediate indicator of the occurance of a meaningful encounter. And the starting point is people’s heart, acoording to Christian. The process of creating an engaging experience is one from the inside to the outside and not vice-versa. One that aims to involve people through a meaningful story, looking then for the right tools and creating the appropriate physical environment for the encounter.

Christian Lachel, BRC Imagination Arts (Photo: Maria Vlachou)

Another issue that repeatedly came up was that of digital vs physical. At the same time that museums are racing to embrace the new digital tools and platforms in order to create more engaging and meaningful experiences, they often seem to take a step back, re-evaluating the advantages and strengths of the physical encounter.

An inspiring project of the Brooklyn Museum, the Ask Mobile App, has gone through these stages of thinking and evaluating (which are openly shared on the museum’s blog – a great example of professionalism, generosity, transparency and accountability that more museums should have the courage to implement). As Shelley Bernstein explained to us, at a time when the Brooklyn Museum is re-evaluating a number of points of contact with its visitors (its austere foyer, its confusing reception area, the lack of seating), it also wishes to improve their experience allowing them to ask on-site and in real time any question they might have regarding the objects or the exhibitions in general. The project is still being tested in its details and will be launched in June. 

Shelley Bernstein, Brooklyn Museum (Photo: Maria Vlachou)

At an earlier stage, the museum had members of its staff on floor and discovered that visitors loved engaging in conversation with them. Such a large museum would need a lot of people, though, to be able to cover all areas. In order to optimize the idea of the direct and in-real-time contact with a member of staff, they decided to turn to technology. A team of six people will be available to answer visitor questions sent through their mobiles using the Ask Mobile App. Evaluation so far has shown that people still consider this contact to be personal and the museum is confident that this will be one more way of fulfilling their mission of being “a dynamic and responsive museum that fosters dialogue and sparks conversations”. For one thing, the museum has discovered that people seem to take more time looking at the objects... looking for questions to ask!

Is there anything more personal and physical, though (and funny and inspiring), than being taken to a museum tour tailored to your needs and interests by Museum Hack? “I hate museums!”, this is how Nick Gray started his presentation. And he did hate them... once. Now all he wants is to share his passion for them with people who still hate them, people who feel that museums are not for them. A colleague from the Museum of Architecture and Design in Oslo called Museum Hack “our natural allies”. And aren’t they indeed! Nick’s favourite object at the Metropolitan Museum is the fragment of an Egyptian queen’s face. This is what he had to say about it (quoting from memory): “If these are the lips, can you imagine the rest? How beautiful she must have been? And although we don’t know who she is and which tools were used to make her, we know she’s made of yellow jasper. Yellow jasper was so-so expensive, that the only other object at the Met made of it is this tiny. In a scale of hardness from 1 to 10, where diamond is 10 and marble is 3, jasper is a solid 6. It makes marble feel like rubber...”. Aren’t museums f***ing awesome?!

Nick Grey, Museum Hack (Photos: Maria Vlachou)

My visit to the recently renovated International Red Cross and Red Crescent Museum somehow put all these thoughts and ideas to the test. It’s a museum that greatly combines the physical and the digital, using technology in order to enhance the meaning of the objects, to share powerful stories and to engage the visitor – both emotionally and intellectually – in the discussion of quite sensitive universal questions. The three main chapters of the story are “Defending Human Dignity”, “Restoring Family Links” and “Reducing Natural Risks” and each space/chapter was created by a different architect, proposing quite distinct environments. One of the most touching moments for me was in the room that exhibits the gifts offered by prisoners of different conflicts to the Red Cross delegate in charge of their case. It made me think of the beauty, sensitivity, creativity and humanity that can still emanate after the horror of barbarity, brief glimpses of a renewed hope. I must say, though, that the most powerful moment was touching the extended hand of a witness on a screen, a gesture that would trigger their testimony. A brilliant conception, linking the physical to the digital and creating a profoundly emotional and memorable experience.

I must say that in almost every museum visit, presentation and discussion during the conference, there was an underlying issue for me: can museums fulfill their social and educational role, can they be relevant and engaging, if they don’t also clearly assume their political role? Right on the first day, Gail Dexter Lord introduced the concept of soft power as “the ability to influence behaviour through persuasion, attraction or agenda setting”. How can museums exercise this power? "We cannot take sides", colleagues often exclaim. Oh, but we do... Sometimes with our silence or by pretending to be neutral; more often with the objects we choose to show or not to show, the stories we choose to tell or not to tell.

More than taking sides, though, assuming our political role is to assume that there is actually more than one side to every story and to allow for space for these views to become known, to be discussed, so that citizens may get better informed, see their own views being challenged, meet and listen to the ‘other’, develop empathy and understanding, take a stand. Museums are not islands and, as Tony Butler (Derby Museums / The Happy Museum Project) said, “What’s happening out there is as important as what’s happening inside”. Isn’t it urgent, and doesn’t it make sense, that museums in the 21^st assume their role in promoting democracy?

Gail Dexter Lord (Photo: Maria Vlachou)

More on this blog:

What have we got to do with this?

What have we got to do with this? (ii)

'Just' a museum, 'just' an artist?

The long distance between California and Jerusalem

The educational dimension

Silent and apolitical?



Links that might be of interest:

Black Cultural Archives

Brooklyn Museum blog

cogapp

Curators Without Borders

International Red Cross and Red Crescent Museum

Locatify

Museum Hack

The Happy Museum Project

Uzeeum

The educational dimension

Last October, during the intermission of a performance of Brahms' “Requiem” by the Saint Louis Symphony, twenty three protesters sitting in various parts of the auditorium stood up and sang “Requiem for Mike Brown” (the black unarmed youth that was shot by a policeman in Ferguson). Some members of the audience were shocked, others applauded, the same happened with the musicians on stage. Noone interrupted the protesters, noone called the police. Maybe because what happened made sense, at that place, at that time, in that specific context. Music being an integral part of protest in Ferguson, this, acoording to one of the organizers, was an attempt to “speak to a segment of the population that has the luxury of being comfortable. You have to make a choice for just staying in your comfort zones or will you speak out for something that’s important? It’s not all right to just ignore it”. (read full article)

The recent killings of black people by police in different US cities have provoked an intense soul searching among cultural institutions in that country. In a recent joint statement from museum bloggers and other culture professionals regarding Ferguson and related events, one reads:

“The recent series of events, from Ferguson to Cleveland and New York, have created a watershed moment. Things must change. New laws and policies will help, but any movement toward greater cultural and racial understanding and communication must be supported by our country’s cultural and educational infrastructure. Museums are a part of this educational and cultural network. What should be our role(s)? (...) Where do museums fit in? Some might say that only museums with specific African American collections have a role, or perhaps only museums situated in the communities where these events have occurred. As mediators of culture, all museums should commit to identifying how they can connect to relevant contemporary issues irrespective of collection, focus, or mission. (...) As of now, only the Association of African American Museums has issued a formal statement about the larger issues related to Ferguson, Cleveland and Staten Island. We believe that the silence of other museum organizations sends a message that these issues are the concern only of African Americans and African American Museums. We know that this is not the case.”

Last August, serious controversy involved the decision of Tricycle Theatre not to host the UK Jewish Film Festival, for the first time in eight years. The reason was that the festival received support from the Israeli Embassy in London and, given the ongoing assault on Gaza at the time, the Board felt it was “inappropriate to accept financial support from any government agency involved”. They offered to provide alternative funding, but the Festival did not accept (read full article). The conflict in Gaza was also the reason why participating artists in this year’s São Paulo Bienal (later supported by the bienal curators) called on the organizers to return funding from the Israeli Conusulate. Negotiations resulted in the removal of the conusulate logo from the general sponsors and its association only to the Israeli artists that had received that specific financial support (read full report).

We may agree or disagree with the decisions taken by these organizations. But the questioning of the role of cultural institutions in today’s society, especially their educational role, must be permanent, constant. Just like Rebecca Herz, I believe that they shouldn´t act irrespective of their mission (as it is suggested in the above mentioned statement of the US museum bloggers), but any museum collection or theatre /orchestra / festival programme can have a connection to contemporary life and help shape the kind of society we need or dream of. As the work of many contemporary artists is a response to contemporary life issues, it is not unusual to find this kind of connections, and the fertile thinking associated to them, in the programming of theatres, companies or galleries (the Maria Matos Theatre, the Gulbenkian Programme Next Future or the alkantara festival are the first to come to mind, among the organizations whose programming I follow in Portugal, but there are others). Museums or orchestras presenting works that are not contempoarary are not used to linking their collections or concerts to contemporary life though or, if they do, it does not become obvious to me. Quite often I find myself thinking “What is the point of this exhibition or concert?”, “Why is this relevant?”, “How does this connect to contemporary portuguese society and its diversity?” (the inspiring work of the Orchestra of the Age of the Enlightenment comes to mind once again...)

This brings me once again to a recurring issue on this blog: accountability and responsibility. I don´t see cultural institutions as islands, cut off from what is happening around them. I believe they should make it clear for people how what they have to say or show can be relevant to them and a way of finding meaning; they should share their vision and objectives publicly and take responsibility for fulfilling them; they should be a public forum, where people can find comfort, but also the necessary discomfort. They clearly have an educational role (in the sense of providing what the Ancient Greeks called “paideia”), one that I wouldn´t necessarily make depend on what happens (or doesn’t happen) at school or at home and one that doesn’t firstly depend on an education department, but on the director him/herself.

Two museums directors and a curator will be with us next Tuesday, 16 December, at the Gulbenkian Foundation conference “What places for education? The educational dimension of cultural institutions” (more information). Charles Esche (Director of Van Abbemuseum and one of the curators of this year’s São Paulo Bienal), David Fleming (Director of National Musems Liverpool and President of the International Federation of Human Rights Museums) and Delfim Sardo (Curator, University Professor and Essayist) will challenge us to think on our responsibilities and practices in the current social and political context.

Note: For those who cannot be in Lisbon, the session will be livestreamed from 10am Lisbon time. The link for the livestream as well as a number of papers, posts, interviews in english may be found on the conference webpage (in “Oradores” and in "+Info")

More readings :

Jean-François Chougnet, Le MuCEM ne doit pas devenir un musée pour touristes

Laura C. Mallonee, A scramble to save protest art, from Ferguson to Hong Kong

Maddy Costa, Can a relationship with theatre change people’s relationship to society?

Rebecca Herz, Should museums respond to the grand jury verdicts in Ferguson and NewYork City?

Sunny Hundal and Nock Cohen, Was the Tricycle Theatre right to ask the UK Jewish FilmFestival to ‘reconsider’ its funding?

More on this blog:

Paideia: where education and culture meet

Broken clay pots

Silent and apolitical?

Preserving for what?

“Either...or” or simply “and”?

Comfort and disturbance

Being ‘just’

Crise oblige? (ii)Programming challenges

The long distance between California and Jerusalem

An apology of criticism

Critical thinking is a mental and emotional function in which someone - based on his/her knowledge and information available – decides what to think or do in relation to a specific situation. The result is a substantiated opinion. It is subjective. It may be positive or negative. It must be intellectually honest.

There is a tendency to associate solely negative aspects to the word ‘criticism’ and to see it as an attack. That´s why many times a critique provokes reactions such as “criticising is easy…”; or a hasty clarification by the ‘attacker’, such as “please, don´t take this as a criticism”; or even the need to declare that the ‘attacker’ has nothing personal against his/her ‘target’.

A couple of weeks ago, I reacted – critically - to the interview of a national museum director and, specifically, to a statement regarding an issue that is of extreme importance to me in our profession. This means that, based on my knowledge and the information available, I decided what to think of that statement and I shared that thought. Other people reacted to my criticism, agreeing or disagreeing or adding other aspects to the process of critical thinking. At a certain point, though, a colleague intervened to say: “One shouldn´t speak ill of colleagues on Facebook”. This intervention has kept my mind busy since.

I see a distinct difference between speaking ill and criticising. Speaking ill can only be negative and there is something too personal in it, something too sentimental, something that ends up neutralizing the strength of arguments and severely affects the credibility of the critic. Speaking ill is not constructive, it might be temporarily ‘therapeutic’ for the speaker, but it is ineffective.

Criticism is something different. Criticism is the wish to be aware, to put one’s knowledge in good use, to contribute for something better (through positive or negative appreciations) and also to assume responsibility. Thus, criticism is not easy.

Very little critical thinking is shared in public, with the exception, perhaps, of whatever relates to the governement and politicians in general – which makes me think that maybe we don´t feel as responsible for this country´s political life, thus, criticising (or speaking ill) becomes easy... In what concerns everything else, and considering specifically the cultural sector, public criticism and debate regarding decisions, positions, projects is rather limited. The professionals of the field might be feeling that all this is beyond their control and this feeling of impotence makes any intervention seem hopeless. Others might not like the exposure public criticism brings along, wary about personal/professional relationships that tend to get mixed up on these occasions. Others still might not like to take the responsibility of criticising publicly. Thus, as criticism is actually seen as something negative, as an attack, it is better kept behind closed doors, ‘in the family’, or, better still, untold. For some people, it shouldn´t be happening on social media. (I can´t help thinking that, when a couple of years ago I wrote positevely about an interview of the same national museum director, nobody told me I shouldn´t be doing it on Facebook; I suppose it was not considered criticism).

I envy cultural bloggers in (mainly) the US and the UK, who contribute to the open debate and criticism of all important matters, keeping the dialogue alive, their voice heard and the interested public informed. They are too intelligent to fall into the trap of ill speaking. This is an act of responsibility. This should be an expected act in a democracy. All important, major, things must be discussed openly, positive and negative things must be largely debated, responsibility must be assumed. The direction of all public cultural institutions concerns us all, starting from the professionals of the field.

Which brings me to another point: criticism is associated to accountability. When Nina Simon completed her first year as director of the Santa Cruz Museum of Art and History, she wrote the post Year one as a museum director... Survived!. Both accountability and criticism stem from a deep sense of responsibility and Nina´s text is the perfect example of what I would like to see happening here.  But it´s not happening. In a country where those holding public positions are not expected to be accountable – that is, to openly define their objectives and to regularly explain what it is that they do, how, why and how successful they are in it - criticism might actually make less sense and we enter a vicious circle. A circle where few substantiated opinions are heard publicly, having no impact whatsoever, and where things happen anyway, no matter what, and success is declared... no matter what. We even consider normal that someone with a public position might be defending the indefensible, might not be giving an honest opinion, out of duty to his/her superiors. A vicious circle, a game, where we sacrifice our intellectual honesty. What´s the gain? And at what cost?

More on this blog

“Either...or” or simply “and”?

Just like in football

So, what´s the plan?

Clash of cultures

More readings

Nina Simon, Year one as museum director... Survived!

"Either...or" or simply "and"?

Nicholas Penny, National Gallery director (photo taken from the Guardian) 

Two museum directors in London announced this month that they will be stepping down as soon as their successors are appointed: first, Sandy Nairne from the National Portrait Gallery and then Nicholas Penny from the National Gallery. Two museum directors who are thought to have been very successful in this job.

Although neither has specified some special professional reason for stepping down (at least, my Google search hasn´t brought something up), Guardian´s Jonathan Jones believes the reason might be the increasing pressure on London museum directors due to populist expectations, a media assumption that every exhibition must be a hit and a political belief that galleries should provide not just well-run collections, but entertainment and education for everyone. And he states:

“(…) Are we about to see a new technocrat generation of museum bosses who keep their heads down, put PR first and do all they can to meet goals defined by politicians and the press? (…) That kind of pressure doesn't exactly leave much room to experiment. Museums cannot just be machines for entertaining us. They should have a quieter side where the art comes first, the crowds second and a scholarly side that reveres someone like Penny. This looks depressingly like the end of individuality in the museum world.” (read the article)

It´s getting harder and harder for me to understand why museums are still and constantly faced with dichotomies: objects or people; scholars or technocrats; quietness and reverence or publicity and accessibility. Does it have to be like that? Isn´t it possible to strike a balance? Can´t they be ‘AND’?

When reading Elaine Heumann Gurian´s ”Civilizing the museum” a couple of years ago, I remember experiencing a great sense of relief when reaching the chapter “The importance of ‘and’”. She was commenting on the American Association of Museums report Excellence and Equity (a report that was distributed to each and every museum studies student in 1993 at UCL, where I was studying). One reads:

“(...) This report made a concerted attempt to accept the two major ideas proposed by factions within the field – equity and excellence – as equal and without priority.” Further down: “(...) for the museum field to go forward, we must do more than make political peace by linking words. We must believe in what we have written, namely that complex organizations must and should espouse the coexistance of more than one primary mission.” And also: “It has occurred to me that perhaps my whole career was metaphorically about ‘and’.”  

We must believe in what we have written, that´s one point. And the other point is probably that we must go ahead and do what we write or talk about. Because it´s not impossible to do it. Who´s the best person for the job? Can it be one person only? Would teams which involve professionals with different sensibilities manage to reach multiple objectives in a more balanced way? Are we trying to set up this kind of teams? Is everyone heard equally?

“Publicity and accessibility are everything”, Jonathan Jones writes in a negatively critical tone in his article. Publicity might not be everything, but accessibility certainly is. Museums are for anyone who might be interested in them, but not all people approach their contents with the same level of knowledge or interest and with the same kind of needs. It´s a hard job, indeed, but, should museums wish to fulfill their mission, they need to have a quieter side and they need to have a celebration side. They need to please those who know and they need to enchant those who don´t know as much or who know nothing. It was as early as 1853 that British naturalist Edward Forbes wrote: “Curators may be prodigies of learning and yet unfit for their posts if they don´t know anything about pedagogy, if they are not equipped to teach people who know nothing.” Those people matter too. Those people might matter even more.

As I write about these dichotomies, one more need emerges for me as a professional, but as a citizen too. I would like to hear the voices of those responsible for managing our museums (and cultural organizations in general) regarding these issues. I would like to hear clear statements, I woud like to feel there is a vision behind them. I would like to know on what kind of plan I may base my criticism. Jonathan Jones is concerned about technocrats who keep their heads down, I am concerned about directors (museum, theatre, orchestra, library directors) who keep their mouths shut. I was in a debate some time ago where someone said “Fortunately, I was never asked to take up positions of directorship and that means I have always been able to say what I think.” Is this fortunate? Isn´t it profoundly worrying?

There is no doubt that there is a great difficulty in dealing with managers or directors with an opinion. In this kind of democracy of ours, someone who takes a certain position is expected to show a kind of ‘loyalty’ that stops him/her from publicly sharing their views (especially when contrary to a government´s positions). I am not defending that each and every issue, each and every disagreement, should be dealt with in public. Nevertheless, there are issues that concern us all. When the State appoints certain people to certain positions, I would like to know what´s expected of them. Once those certain people accept the job, I would like to know what they aim to do and how they plan to go about reaching the objectives. And if they feel that they are not given the conditions to do their job well or if they don´t feel they are up to what´s expected of them, I wish to know about that too. When two museum directors (in London or elsewhere) announce within two weeks from each other that they are leaving, I would like to understand why. When other museum directors (in London or elswhere), keep on staying despite the state of the affairs, I would also like to understand what´s keeping them.

Guest post: "Born leaders, made leaders", by Assis Carreiro (Belgium) and Thomas Edur (Estonia)

I often think about what makes a good leader; a great leader. That person who has the vision and derermination to trace and follow a path, and, at the same time, is able to inspire, gather and lead many others, essential for accomplishing the mission. So, I got very interested when my friend Caroline Miller, Director of Dance UK, wrote to me about Rural Retreats, an international think tank looking at the future of ballet and dance. The sessions bring guest speakers from the world of business, sport and the arts to interface with the dance leaders and to share experiences and allow opportunities to think 'out of the box' about the place of dance in today's society. Are great leaders born or made? Or is it a bit of both? Assis Carreiro, the Artistic Director of the Royal Ballet of Flanders and the person who conceived and launched Rural Retreats, and Thomas Edur, Artistic Director of the Estonian National Ballet, give us their insight and tell us about the challenges they´re facing. Interestingly, they both talk about egos; and they both talk about people...mv

Assis Carreiro with Lynn Seymour and Karen Kain at Rural Retreat 2012. 

As the founder and producer of the Rural Retreats, I approached the latest gathering of Artistic Directors from around the globe with exictement, but also nervousness, since for the first time I would not only be playing host but also taking part, as I had just become Artistic Director of the Royal Ballet of Flanders. This latest edition was, therefore, a double bonus for me. On the one hand, I got to produce a think tank that I am very passionate about and committed to delivering to a community of leaders - desperate for support, peer discussion, debate and stimulation from guest speakers from other professions. It has been evident from the success of past gatherings how crucial and necessary they are to the well-being and development of existing and future dance leaders. On the other hand, the weekend was just what I needed four months into the role of artistic director - an opportunity to learn and listen, to ask lots of practical questions about the day to day job and deeper, philosophical questions and thoughts about the art form that we are all so passionate about.

When I conceived the Retreats twelve years ago, I would never have thought for a moment that I would one day be leading a company. But, as time went by, I thought it was a challenge I would relish and... here I am. I have to say that I couldn't have done this job before now. I needed not just professional work experience but life experience - that is crucial and it is the wealth of experience that I can grab from my very deep bag that helps me find solutions and keeps me sain. And, having a family, whilst adding constant challenges and negotiations, also keeps me sain and makes me realise that there is more to life than ballet. They are also the most amazing support system and fan club when the going gets tough!

This is very much a people job. As Artistic Director, I am responsible for careers - their development - and these are fragile and short careers and it is all personal. Dancers are constantly being judged and difficult decisions made. I really do have to park my ego and look after 52 egos plus the artistic team, guest choreographers and repetiteurs, administration team, board members and, of course, the needs of our public. It is juggling a lot of plates at breakneck speed, always with a smile and a strong, clear and positive attitiude...

The challenges:

1) Money, money, money: if there was the right amount we could just do our jobs, but it is a constant frustration and challenge and, in these difficult times, we really have to think out of the box of how to survive and continue to keep our art form relevant and vibrant and understood by the wider world, outside our small but fragile one. 

2) Being new: I am new so I have to prove myself to everyone and gain their trust. That takes time. I had to put together an entire season in only 2 weeks - which was sheer madness, but I did it and the team rallied around me to make it a reality. This has been amazing and I hope have slowly begun to gain their confidence and trust - as always the proof is in the pudding.

3) Every day is a steep learning curb in year 1: I am not afraid to ask questions and I joined a company with a wealth of experience, so I ask and learn and I can also teach from my 32 years working in the profession, in a range of companies and roles that have given me the confidence to take this new one on.

4) People: getting the right people on board to come on the journey and follow my vision. If they aren't right, they should find another boat to sail, as we need to work together as a tight knit team of committed individuals. It is hard in dance, because it is often not about whether people are great or not, but whether they fit into the new way of working and are open to change and new ways of moving forward. In Antwerp I am really trying to create a strong ensemble of dancers and fortunately inherited a strong base from which to do this, but the technical and production teams and administration are equally critical in making the whole ship sail in the right direction.

5) The joy: there always has to be some! The work of wonderful choreographers performed by incredibly talented dancers and then seeing the audiences's reaction; that makes it all worthwhile and the wonderful enjoyment of programming for both and taking them on a journey - and me too!

Assis Carreiro became Artistic Director of Royal Ballet of Flanders in September, 2012. She was Artistic Director & Chief Executive of England’s DanceEast between 2000 and 2012, where she created Rural Retreats, a series of international think tanks supporting the developing of dance leadership for existing and future artistic directors;  Snape Dances, an international dance series at Snape Maltings; and the National Centre for Choreography. She led DanceEast’s capital project, which in 2009 culminated in the opening of the £9-million Jerwood Dance House on the Ipswich waterfront. During 1998/99, Assis was dance programmer at DasTAT for William Forsythe’s Ballett Frankfurt. From 1994-96, she was Director of DanceXchange in Birmingham and went on to work for Wayne McGregor|Random Dance. Prior to moving to the UK in 1994, Assis was Director of Education, Community Outreach and Publications for the National Ballet of Canada.

__________________

Estonian National Ballet (Photo: Harri Rospu)

I've been Artistic Director of Estonian National Ballet for nearly four years. I took on this role after being a principal dancer, performing for many years with the English National Ballet. The transition from being a self-contained freelance principal dancer to dealing with, and being responsible for, a company of over 70 people was huge. I had been thinking about how to deal with this over the years, because I knew I wanted to be an Artistic Director one day. A few years ago, I'd taken part in DanceEast's Retreat for future dance company directors and spoken to other colleagues about the role, but nothing really prepares you for the reality.

Lessons leraned?

1. Don't do it for the ego, do it if you like to pass on your knowledge.

2. Teach somebody something and you will learn about yourself and your leadership style.

3. Communication and talking to people is vital - yet you will be overwhelmed with work and find you don't have time to talk to people. Make time, it's essential.

4. Try and be reasonable and fair.

5. Be prepared for long hours and huge demands on your time - but recognise you must find a balance for your life outside work to stay sane.

When I attended DanceEast's Retreat in England this year I had the chance to spend time with 27 other Artistic Directors of dance companies from around the world. We not only shared our challenges and opportunities, but also heard from speakers working in elite sports, psychology and opera. We had lots in common.

Estonia is a small country and every country is facing different challenges, but finance is always the big question. It affects the artistic work we can create, but it can never stop us from creating. Sometimes I think it's a creative opportunity to have your resources squeezed. Lavish production budgets can mean that you throw away the opportunity to express only with the body. That's what it's all about - music and the body.

For me personally, the challenge that concerns me most is dealing with individual artists. I am constantly thinking about how to develop them, not just in the immediate future, but in the long term. Keeping them motivated and fresh can be hard. Dancers are strong and independent and often this characteristic is overlooked because the art form is silent. This isn't something that society easily relates to. Everything is about self-promotion, being interviewed on television, having your voice heard - whilst dance is about showing what you can do, rather than talking about it. Very few dancers will become famous and those who will, will soon after be at the point when they retire from dancing.

Being the Artistic Director of a ballet company means your most important asset is the dancers. You are dealing with people who are striving to achieve something and sometimes they can be misunderstood. All professional dancers are working towards achieving their peak physical performance. It’s very similar to dealing with talent in sport. My challenge as a leader is to show them that if they listen to me they will see themselves dancing better and this is a long term process. As an Artistic Director you have to show results, and when one dancer succeeds, another will follow.

Thomas Edur has been Artistic Director Estonian National Ballet since 2009. Thomas became an acclaimed international ballet star, performing as a principal and guest artist with the world’s leading dance companies, both as a soloist and in a world-renowned partnership with his wife, Agnes Oaks.  He is also a teacher and choreographer with a lifelong commitment to promoting excellence in dance. In 2001, Thomas was presented with the Order of the White Star by the President of the Estonia.  In 2010, her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II  appointed him Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (CBE), in recognition of his services to the arts in the UK and to the UK-Estonia cultural relations.

________________

My thanks to Caroline Miller for all her help.


Further reading

Rural Retreat 2012 report

Also on this blog

Leaders are needed

Comfort and disturbance - Part II

I was curious to find out where the quote from my last post came from: “Art should comfort the disturbed and disturb the comfortable”. I did a search on Google and the name that came up with most frequency (although there seem to be at least two more contestants) is Cesar A. Cruz, Mexican poet, educator and human rights activist. I suppose that every sector - be it the social, the educational, the political, the media, the artistic/cultural sector - honestly wishing to have an impact on people´s lives aims at the same thing: to comfort the disturbed and to disturb the comfortable.

This is exactly what Washington has been for me these last weeks. I am always somewhere between the two, sometimes leaning on the comfort side, others on the disturbance. For all good reasons, I suppose.

I could talk about a lot of things, but I´ll only talk about two: two people, whom we had the privilege to meet. These are their stories:

Yvette Campbell, an ex-Alvin Ailey dancer, is the President and CEO of Harlem School of the Arts (HSA). In January 2011, she accepted the invitation to head the HSA at a time when it was carrying a significant debt and was facing closure. Apart from the existence of the debt, she diagnosed the following issues: the school was mainly known to older people who had some memories of it from the 60s; the building was quite prohibiting, visually inaccessible, hiding the ‘treasures’ it kept inside (Yvette, herself being a dancer, had never walked into it); there was a need to re-tell the story, to the immediate but also to the larger community, and to build a ‘family’ that could contribute (also and especially financially) towards the school’s sustainability. It was around these problems and needs that Yvette Campbell built her strategy, focusing heavily on good institutional marketing and being open to every opportunity that would help the school be 'the talk of the town', placing it into people´s minds and hearts.

In the months that followed Yvette Campbell´s arrival, Harlem School of the Arts  made sure they kept the media regularly informed on their activities and the determination to keep the school open. In April 2011, just three months after Yvette took up her position, there was an opportunity for a feature article on the new Director in Essence, which helped to significantly boost the school´s visibility. (Photo: Kwaku Alston)

Among the many things Yvette shared with us, I would like to highlight two. First, her relationship with the HSA team. Yvette did not bring in with her a ‘dream team’ to make a ‘miracle’ happen. When taking up her position, she started by finding out what each member of the team was doing. She then shared her vision and objectives with them, she explained what the goal was and told them what she expected from each one. Those who didn´t live up to the expectations were invited to leave, just like Yvette thinks that she should be asked to leave if she didn´t do her job. She aims to have a focused, motivated and dedicated team and she wants to be surrounded by people who are smarter than her in their own fields. The second point I would like to highlight is her relationship with the ‘family’. Yvette made herself accountable from day 1 to the school´s stakeholders and to those who might be able and interested in helping fulfil its mission (especially financially). She realized she had to share the story, so she´s been sharing information on the evolution of the project by personally sending detailed reports to a few dozen people (initially on a daily basis, then weekly and then monthly). She calls these “the CEO reports”. This is her way of keeping them all informed on the progress the school (and herself as CEO) is making in achieving the established goals and also of keeping them all involved in this collective effort, reminding them of the need for their support. Listening and watching Yvette Campbell, we have that very distinct feeling that we have in front of us a natural-born leader. Her energy, enthusiasm, determination, her structured thinking make us feel that she’s the right person at the right place. Thanks to her and the rest of the HSA team, a year and a half later the school is back on track and towards paying off its debt, becoming a financially heathy arts institution.

Our second remarkable encounter was with Taro Alexander. Taro, an actor and teacher, stutters since the age of three. He spent years and years trying to be just another cool boy and not to be seen as a freak; trying to hide, with a number of tricks, the fact that he stuttered (but not when on stage). He personally knows what a struggle this is for a lot of children and young people, who form part of a community of 60 million people around the world. So, in 2001 he founded Our Time, an organization that helps children who stutter to improve their confidence and communication skills through theatre. At the same time, it assists parents and teachers, including speech therapy teachers at schools, the majority of whom are very little prepared to deal with stuttering. This is a small organization of 5, working at the moment with approximately 150 children, hardly what could be of interest to potential sponsors and donors, looking for large projects that can offer the desired visibility and recognition. Thus funding has always been an issue and one of the ways of tackling it was the organization of an annual event, a gala, in order to raise funds. Things were quite difficult in the beginning, where the organization ended up actually losing money. But Taro Alexander and his team kept focused, continued with their work, continued organizing a good quality and exciting event, and managed to have better and better, albeit modest, fundraising results. Their best year ever was 2010, when Carly Simon, a famous singer - who also stutters -, accepted the invitation to be that year’s honoree, attracting a lot of people to the event and helping to raise more money.

The year of 2010 was the turning point for another reason. Taro Alexander was asked to give his opinion on the script for a new Broadway play on King George, the king who stuttered. Later on, it turned out that the script actually became a Hollywood film, starring Colin Firth, Helena Bonham Carter and Geoffrey Rush. Taro was invited to the premiere. He was overwhelmed by the film and by Colin Firth´s performance. As soon as it finished, and overcoming his shyness, Taro went to congratulate the screenwriter, David Seidler (a stutterer himself), and asked him if he would accept to be the 2011 honoree in the annual Our Time fundraising gala. He accepted, but the fact that he was not a very known person was a reason of concern for some people involved in the organization of the gala regarding the impact his name would have on the fundraising effort. But just look at what happened in the months that followed: people talked more and more about the film; The King´s Speech was awarded every possible prize, including the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay for David Seidler; Colin Firth would not be able to attend the Our Time gala, but agreed to be Honorary Chair; the singer Carly Simon accepted the invitation to perform. 

The fundraising gala was a huge success and also the award for a decade of consistent and dedicated work. Taro Alexandre and his small team are now trying to carefully build on this success, considering the organization´s concrete mission and its resources. One thing they are certainly doing better and better is registering and sharing their impact, a primary way of communicating with their ‘family’, with existing and potential new members and donors.

Why were these two encounters particularly important? What did we take away?  We took away the comfort: about the things that can and are being done. We took away the disturbance: about the things that can, and should, but are not happening. And we were also reminded that it takes courage, persistence and determination: from overcoming one’s shyness, to dealing with teams, to bringing about significant change. Because going against the wall is part of the process.