Article
The Contribution of the Arts to Animating Democracy
In addition to the role of the arts in social inclusion, economic development,
urban and rural regeneration, the case is being made for a more influential
role for the arts in civic dialogue, at least in the US. Americans for
the Arts' Animating Democracy initiative (www.artsusa.org)
proposes a third way between the arts as commentator and as change
agent in which arts organizations help communities and civic leaders
debate issues of concern but do not advocate particular action. What results,
it is argued, is a better-informed public, better able to express views
and to make decisions on complex issues, helping recover the decline of
social capital in this 'bowling alone' society.
The arts offer neutrality and a 'safe space'. Difficult issues are found
to be easier to explore when people debating such issues react to, or
are involved with, the creation of art. The inspirational case studies
provided include using anti-Semitic music to debate the Holocaust and
the rise of the new right, a dance project helping to identify a future
for a redundant military shipyard in New Hampshire, and a play in Seattle
exploring the issues of identity and race arising out of the Rodney King
verdict.
How relevant is this to Britain? Arts organizations undertake community
work, and collaboration with the corporate sector is growing. But promoting
civic dialogue is new and important territory. Common Purpose includes
some use of arts activity in their sessions with emerging city leaders,
and Groundwork uses the arts to promote ownership and participation in
development projects by people not used to having an involvement. But
the scope for the arts in civic dialogue is potentially significantly
larger.
We live in a period of rapid political, economic and social change, and
a democratic deficit means that few politicians receive anything like
a respectable mandate. The issue is whether the arts can consciously be
used as a vehicle for improving the quality of civic dialogue on intractable
social issues such as poverty, homelessness, racism, drug abuse.
I write this while reflecting on setbacks in Bristol where, on top of
the failure of the proposed Harbourside Centre concert hall, councillors
have now rejected a related commercial development. Harbourside is a complicated
site with four landowners. Developers had worked with the landowners for
five years to create a viable scheme. This failed to capture the imagination
of Bristolians, though few beyond its objectors and supporters seemed
aware of what the new scheme entailed, let alone the advantages and disadvantages.
The councillors' decision was not necessarily wrong. But wider debate
would have helped create a more informed judgment by all involved. The
arts could have helped here in creating and allowing a neutral, independent
debate.
Without a better-informed and involved citizenry not only in the
creation of visions, but also in the practicalities of implementation
decisions are made in a vacuum. I came away from the Harbourside
decision determined to raise the level of debate. The arts can help this
process in a way that all can benefit, as Animating Democracy shows. I
will be pushing in Bristol to see if the arts could be used to animate
democracy here debating issues of urban design, planning law and
processes, the opportunity costs of different development schemes in the
case of Harbourside.
Whether this effort will be successful will depend more on the current
low profile of the arts in the city and the limited funding available
for existing projects than on the merits of the case which is strong.
Perhaps the government should establish support for such work as it does
with business/arts partnerships?
Andrew Kelly Bristol Cultural Development Partnership
Kelly.bcdp@genie.co.uk
AEA Consulting LLC
Past issues:
Volume Two
Number 1 - Number
2 - Number 3
Volume One
Number 1 - Number
2 - Number 3 - Number
4 - Number 5 - Number
6
|