Comments

1. 10 Dec 2009

   Alex Hetherington

   Thanks for the character assassination Anthony. These were reflective thoughts post-process, they are not an argument, these ideas, however messy, or contradictory, come from experiences and motivations that are thankfully in the past. And ones that I don’t want to repeat. I also did not intend to tar a whole genre with the social worker tag, rather was referring to a specific presentation at Praktika where the discussion revealed that the artist in question preferred to see the activities as social work. I also don’t know what artists and communities expectations are of each other, but replacement social work I don’t think should be on the agenda. I do have an urge to work with people, or did; again, these thoughts come after the fact. I don’t possess a crystal ball, if you know what I mean. Anyway I regret now putting these statements online, I should shut up and go away. Oh wait I already did.

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment.

2. 9 Dec 2009

   Anthony Schrag

   Hi Alex.

   good comments. I am always one to appreciate critique – I think that is the only way we can develop and make better work, so its good to hear. I think it would be “a-critical” to assume that “community based arts” does not have a place within a critical and theoretical framework, so its good to raise some of the issues. In the spirit of dialogue, however, i bring up some points/responses….:

   I certainly have never suggested that artists who work within the “community” pretend to be social workers, and I don’t think many other people do – I think that exposes a real lack of understanding of the genre that people think that way….: for some, its about making “art” accessible, and for others its using “art” as a tool of social change. I think its flippant to tar everything with the same brush, not to mention damaging, as it perpetuates myths that it is about being a social worker… as we know, “art” is a many headed snake, and each one has a different face and mouth.. we have to accept that and not make assumptions that are not helpful. Its the same with something like “queer” artwork – personally, I am not much interested in exploring those ideas but I accept that they have a place in the world and are very important for people to explore.

   i think the flaw of your argument lies in your statement that this sort of work “creates expectations beyond what artists really offer a community” – what is it they offer a community? what do you think they could offer a community? It is slightly didactic to bring this up when, later, you bring up the question of “what is a community?” – I often think this is the very crux of socially engaged arts/community arts/public art… it is the very nature of those working in the field to look at what that community is, how they can interact with them, and what they can “really offer” them – (well, in my mind, GOOD artists do this) – and to step out of assumptions about what art is, what a community is and what can happen and how to make it happen…

   I cannot speak to your specific experiences in Falkirk and Lumsden – the infrastructure of these sorts of projects need to be flexible, and are often limited by bureaucracy, I agree… perhaps the effort of this discussion should be around finding a good and supportive but broad enough structure/model of working to support the people who work in this diverse field…. But I WHOLLY disagree with your statement “I think artists need producers. They need a diplomat.” – I certainly do not want to have a buffer between myself and the people I work with. If you feel that, I think you’re right in your comment that your “work does not fit well within community practice”… the urge, Alex, lies in working WITH people. if you don’t have that urge, then don’t work with people, in whatever community. And if you don’t want to work alongside and with them, then it is difficult to take your criticisms seriously, as it is the equivalent of a Spanish speaker critiquing Russian – we’re speaking two different languages. Perhaps a better metaphor is a diabetic critiquing a cake-maker. Or even better a synchronized swimmer critiquing a show-jumper (that is what you call someone who jumps over things with horses, right?)… yes, they’re both sports, but they do totally different things and the urge to do one does not necessarily match up with the outcomes and intentions of another.

   I am not suggesting we should not put ourselves into positions where we are challenged to do different things and work in different ways, nor that artists cannot critique other artists working different – on the contrary, I think we should encourage more dialogue and discussion, especially between “genres” as it can only help create a sense of solidarity and understanding (and in the face of uncertain budget restructuring, changes in funding etc), we really do need to pull together. But I think we also need to recognize the positives in the different ways of working (which you do, to some degree!). As you said, these were only your personal opinions, so I know you’re not speaking for everyone and I’m not suggesting you are. I just thought I’d raise the issues.

   Im not sure what i’m getting at. I am a bit tired and distracted by incessant christmas things, when, frankly, i want it all to just go away! California must be nice and warm – hope you’re enjoying it!

   That, however, is my 2 cents. for what its worth.

   anthony schrag

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment.

3. 8 Dec 2009

   Alex Hetherington

   Rocca and I have been in contact through FaceBook and she asked me to add one of our correspondences as a comment to her blog page at Public Art Scotland. I said I would add the comment but I think now that the original comes across as a little harsh. I am now in California and the attitude here has sunk into my skin and I have decided to re-edit it somewhat – to present a more considered stance. I hope this helps stir some debate and adds to her developing Masters project. These comments are mine alone and does for infer agreement from any of the artists, collaborators or participants on the projects that I am discussing.

   Hi Rocca

   First Praktika. Essentially yes, I was able to use this experience to understand that my work does not fit well within community practice and I feel a dissenting voice was necessary for the publication to indicate or suggest not only my frustrations but also some of my peers; and to create some dissent within the project of the workshops itself which at times was very much about boasting and self-congratulation, not to mention forms of moral superiority, and in one project a real dismissal of how theory, of any kind, fits within community art, social engagement or relational aesthetics or whatever you want to call this genre. I also dismiss any ideas that artists should operate or pretend to be social workers. This, I believe, is disrespectful to that profession and creates expectations beyond what artists really offer a community. I want to take a very objective stance with my work, becoming emotionally involved, becoming a therapist does not fit well with my process.

   Also I think many artists work in this area for financial reasons and with PARTNERS a sense that it can support and develop personal practice, so there’s an in-built lure. For someone like me anyway, whose work is not financially successful or commercially viable. Some artists of course see personal practice and their social engagements as intertwined, this is not the case for my work. I depend(ed) on these projects to sustain my modest work in performance, installation and curating. They will/did finance these activities. I don’t have/didn’t have a choice. The choice I make now is less work. Fewer projects. Fewer applications. I also think that many artists want to work in this area to sense what it is like, (how would one know the genre without participating) but for me the lure was professional development, and that’s maybe selfish. The reason I don’t want to work with it any more are the contingencies surrounding it. And that’s another comment. At some other time.

   I have worked on two PARTNERS projects, first at SSW, in Lumsden, which was a successful development between community work and personal practice, the split for me, however schizophrenic worked well because we had a producer, a liaison between the community and the artist (at first they thought I was a qualified art teacher, for instance, and that led to a whole heap o’ trouble, which I don’t want to discuss). I think artists need producers. They need a diplomat. In Falkirk, the second residency, whcih was the focus of the PRAKTIKA discussions and presentations, this level of production and liaison was absent, making my approach to it all the more difficult. I am not saying there was not support and dedication within the arts team there, I believe that there was a gap between expectation and delivery. Having said that the abrasiveness between the forms of engagement were quite exciting, but this was not an intention. And I wouldn’t do it again. I believe I was hired as an artist and object to being made to become a designer, producer, publicist, etc. Perhaps some people might suggest that in given the project I was in a very privileged position, and I agree. However being hired as a visual artist is not the same as being hired as arts administrator. Or is it? Does it come with the territory that the contract between the producer and the artist means that the artist must deliver a range of skills independently of the resources available. To be more than just an artist. My misgivings about some elements of a commitment to the arts there, a suspicion of contemporary artists and their activities and their usefulness, has been borne out by the effective closure of the Park Gallery, where we presented two exhibitions, and the end of Big in Falkirk, which we were not involved in, but did program events round. Anyway I ramble. I think we achieved a great deal but I don’t think it was ever perceived to be of any worth. You just have to look at some the cheapo press we were given. One day out of 365 given the Daily Mail treatment, misquoted, misaligned, lied about, vomited on. I have to say that two members of the arts team there, were fantastic and the gallery staff at the Gallery were one of the best groups to work with. I feel a great deal of resentment that their dedication and belief has been suspended over a political puppet fight in the face of arguments surrounding the recession. It’s so small minded. It’s so medieval.

   The problem is also with my scepticism over what community means. This comes from my experiences living and working in the US and Scotland, stems from my background, and from experiences of the internet, and social web sites, where virtual communities mirror real-life ones in ways which are progressively more rewarding and sustaining. For instance I know longer need ask people what they are doing; I already know. The information people supply, openly and publicly, becomes a kind of community. My American friend thinks I am shy and weird and this comes from the way we consume information about each other on open platforms like facebook, flickr, twitter, myspace etc. It could be the end of talking for me.

   For me now the motivation in my practice is to work in specifically in performance, and continue my practically practice in postproduction, before I become a total recluse behind a framework of Wall-to-Wall Comments, Tweets and abbreviated annotations.

   Anyway I hope this does not come off as aggressive, my experiences of working in community have been varied, but mainly disheartening. I do though continue to work in art education, which I enjoy, mainly to people who are artists, are studying art or wish to pursue a career in the arts. I’m afraid to say that I will stick to the community I know and understand and avoid ones, now, that I feel I have no place within.

   Best for now Alex H

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment.

4. 26 Nov 2009

   Rocca Gutteridge

   And many thanks to Alicia Bruce for her input:

   It’s often difficult to generalise a workshop as they always have a different remit, funding body etc. Personally, I feel it’s better to give participants an experience without dwelling too much on outcome. The process and what happens during that process is important. If they leave with new skills which they can put into practice that’s great.

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment.

5. 26 Nov 2009

   Rocca Gutteridge

   Many thanks to Andrew Crummy for the info below:

   Rocca, I can get you info on community arts in scotland. Also the essays I did my cultural planning course. The guy to speak to is David Harding, great guy.
   http://www.davidharding.net/article05/index.php

   The other person to contact is Arlene Golbard http://arlenegoldbard.com/2007/05/09/my-new-crush/

   She recently organised a trip to the whitehouse.

   She too is part of WCAD. Neil Cameron http://www.neilcameron.com/ he is very much admired by the Beltane Society. Reg bolton of course http://www.regbolton.org/

   Well of course in certain worlds community Art is very much a dirty word. In other worlds (mainly outside UK) it is held is high esteem. The ones who tend to be negative don’t really understand what it is about.
   Edinburgh and Scotland are very much poineers. The very image of the street performers at The festival fringe comes out out of reg, Neil, Mike, Ken at Theatre workshop.

   Actalive, Janet Feldman. Is another of course. My mother who is 89, to this day continues to get people from all over the world, who want to know about The Craigmillar festival society. Like Easterhouse festival Society and many of the poineers. Documentation can be difficult to get.
   If you can get Owen kelly “storming the citidels” is great, Community mural by Alan Barnett another. The birth of Theatre Workshop Edinburgh is important, because it also harks back to The Theatre Workshop in London Joan Littlewoods.
   Ken Wolverton (WCAD as well). Kevin Ryan charnwood arts (WCAD). Linda Burnham communityarts.net
   Judy bacca, Jon Pounds both usa. Judy Bacca is fantastic.
   Of Richard Demarco.
   Art with People is very good. Bromley By bow healthy Living centre is another. http://www.bbbc.org.uk/
   Liz gardner fablevision (Cultural planning)
   Ruth Wishart journalist knows a lot (retired)
   Galgael http://www.galgael.org/place/govan.aspx
   Community action Network http://www.can-online.org.uk/
   http://www.can-online.org.uk/pages/lord_mawson_biography.html
   CAN create the Healthy Iiving Centres, around the UK.
   A lot of people don’t realise how influencial community arts or related arts have been and created so much.
   The “welfare state” in England. Greenwich murals Workshops,

   There is loads and loads.

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment.