 |
| Photo: Maria Vlachou |
Since our confinement started, I had the opportunity of
reading many thought-provoking articles and participating in dynamic online
debates. There is a frequently expressed concern regarding the opportunity this
crisis presents to rethink our practices, redefine our values and the system of
valuing our work, develop relationships of proximity, respect and care both
within our organisations and with our communities.
Will it happen? Will we manage to defy the usual (known) barriers
and promote a new and necessary way of being and acting? Will we be able not to
win the war (of changing the world), but a few decisive battles? Franco “Bifo”
Berardi warned us back March that, when the quarantine ends,
humans “will get the chance to rewrite the rules and break any automatism. But
it is good to know, this won’t happen peacefully. We cannot foresee the shape
the conflict will take, yet we must begin to imagine it. Whoever imagines first
wins - one of the universal laws of history.”
A number of cultural organisations seemed rather
disorientated in the first days or weeks. It is normal, perhaps. Nevertheless, when
this kind of disorientation persists and a plan doesn’t seem to exist, it becomes
a trap. Organisations without clear missions and a sincere, humane relationship
with their diverse communities must be feeling an even bigger pressure at this
moment. A plan is needed. It’s not an option, though; it’s a must.
In
a recent post on Engaging Matters, Doug Borwick
asked the question: “Do you consider your organization’s deepest responsibility to be
to art or to people? I don’t mean what is your mission. (That’s a question for
another time.) Rather, in extreme instances, what is most important? If many in
your community are hurting, is your focus on art?”
It was a rhetorical question, we know it. Borwick went on:
“The tendency to
focus on art almost exclusively is one reason people outside of the arts view
our work as insular, out of touch, and/or irrelevant. In times of crisis, such
focus on art comes across as tone deaf.”
This is a fact further explored by Dan Spock on
Wunderkammer, when he asked the question: “Museums: essential or non-essential?”. Spock
reminds us that in the early 2000s Stephen Weil urged us to make museums matter
, to
create a reciprocal relationship with “the public”, to be for someone, to have
a purpose (or rather purposes). Most of us - museums and cultural organisations
in general - have not managed to move much forward, have not worked in that
direction. Our discourse may have
changed, no doubt (we talk more about being “with” - and not “for” or “about”),
but our practice shows otherwise. In times of crisis, our true priorities
become even more obvious: this is mainly about us and our peers, no matter how
hard we profess our commitment to people, other people, the society.
This crisis places us before our responsibilities and the
sincerity of what we say we wish for. “Whoever imagines first, wins”, wrote
“Bifo”. This is the time to do it. This is the time to decide which battles
must be won and imagine the way forward.
In the last days, I realised that, slowly, a wishlist is
being formed in my head. I'd like to share a first version of it.
Time
Time to work and time to enjoy. Doing less for more, rather
than more for the same. In the chapter “Perda” (Loss) from his book “Uma beleza
que nos pertence” (A beauty that belongs to us), Father Tolentino Mendonça
reminds us that God created the world in six days and on the seventh day he
took a rest. “Now the rest is not an appendix or a circumstantial finish of the
creation. The rest, this Shabbat, is the moment of joy and
contemplation; it is the moment of falling in love and enjoyment; it is the
moment of rejoicing.” We need time to contemplate what we do, enjoy and
rejoice, together with others.
Humanity
Regain or start applying the quality of being human and of
being humane. As cultural organisations started shutting-down in mid-March, my
inbox got full of emails announcing cancellations or postponements. Almost all
displayed a formal, factual language. No expression of feelings (God forbid!),
no empathy. And then, in the middle of all that repetitive wall of cancellation
announcements, an email with the title “A love letter to a caring community”. It
was a message from Globe Aroma, a space for the arts in Brussels that brings
together immigrants and locals. The letter expressed sadness, concern,
confusion. And it clearly stated that the decision to close was not made out of
fear, but out of love and care. This is a relationship between people, not
between organisations (buildings) and people (see previous posts on this here, here and
here).
Care and respect
What kind of values should orientate our work, our
practice? John Holden recently wrote that
“Post-Covid, the twin pillars of cultural policy should be social justice and
environmental concern. Justice starts from within. Care and respect start from
within. As big cultural organisations announced to their education staff that
they were being dismissed (and MoMA went as far as to inform that “It will be months, if not years, before we
anticipate returning to budget and operations levels to require educator
services), the treasurer of Play on Philly said that this
was the moment to support their freelance teaching artists and this would be “an
investment in our future [since] they represent the core of what we do.”
Appreciation
Not everyone in a team is good at what they are doing
(although, sometimes, it’s only a question of finding a more suitable place for
them – and other times it’s just a loss cause). But quite a few people are. And
not only are they good; they are interested, informed and dedicated. And, all
too often, they are set aside... Being interested, informed and dedicated also
means that one has ideas and opinions and wishes to use them (how
inconvenient…). Too many people, too many of our colleagues, are trapped in
organisations that want nothing from them - that is, apart from silence and
obedience. This becomes a collective loss. We need, we depend on, all of them
having the conditions to be the best they can. Mediocrity doesn’t make us move
forward.
Mission
Some cultural organisations are run by charismatic people,
who give them a clear, thoughtful direction. However, this is not just a matter
of charisma. All organisations should work on their missions, all (all members
of their teams) should know what their purpose is, why they do what they do and
who for. There is no doubt that, although no one is ever properly prepared for
a crisis, although there is always an element of surprise, organisations that
were previously informed about their purpose and their way of being have been able
to respond in a more sensible, coherent and oriented way.
One last note: some, if not all, of these issues, in order
to function as we dream, need knowledgeable, committed, intellectually honest
people who will not turn their backs on the small or large conflicts that are
always part of any attempt at change. They all require working in a different
and, a more demanding way. Do we really bother? It’s that this won’t happen
without us.
More on this blog:
More
readings
Dennie Palmer Wolf, Teaching artists as
essential workers: respect, collaboration and heft
François Matarasso, What are we saving and
why
No comments:
Post a Comment