Upload
graham-jeffery
View
7.099
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Presentation for MECCSA 2013 about Remaking Society, an AHRC-funding Connected Communities Pilot Demonstrator project
Citation preview
Remaking Society: realising the potential of cultural activities in contexts of deprivation
An AHRC Connected Communities ‘pilot demonstrator’ project
Graham JefferyUniversity of the West of Scotland
Neill PattonThe Cadispa Trust
www.twitter.com/RemakingSociety
Process
• Co-designed research process with experienced community-based partners
• Four sites: Fraserburgh, Milton (N.Glasgow), N Tyneside & Bradford
• Each working in areas of high deprivation using participatory arts/media methods, but each v different (periurban/urban/suburban context; different media, different approaches/philosophies)
• Participatory arts/media not one thing but complex, variegated fields of practice
Aims
• Demonstrate how participation in cultural production in locations where people are experiencing increasing economic hardship can catalyse the creation of community and wellbeing.
• Explore the ways in which, through creative engagement with arts and media processes, participants can re-vision collective futures.
• Compare the different working principles and theories of community arts practice in the demonstration site organisations.
• Test methodologies for evaluating cultural practice as an integral component of socioeconomic regeneration.
• Provide a set of narrative insights, through cultural production, into the lived experience of poverty and social exclusion; broadening the range of evidence contributing to the UK national Poverty and Social Exclusion (PSE) Study (www.poverty.ac.uk).
explorations
• complexify current understandings of the social impacts of the arts:
• providing a grounded analysis of histories of practice andspecific creative processes
• exploring arts and cultural practices as community assets to be activated (i.e. arts not simply ‘brought in’ from outside to impact communities); cultural activity as ‘bringing community into existence’
• showing arts working within multi-agency arrangements; • uncovering conflicts over the rationales for arts evaluation
by different organisations (government NGO, corporate, commissioning, funding, etc.).
diverse perspectives on participatory arts
• Everyday participation vs ‘high culture’
• Outreach, engagement, conversation, encounter
• Most theoretically developed in models of ‘community cultural development’ in UK, Australia and the US (Kretzman/McKnight/Hawkes/Goldbard)
• Contested concepts and complex terrain
• The ‘value of culture’ debate
antecedents & arrangements
• Theatre Modo: European street theatre/circus traditions; celebratory arts companies such as Welfare State International: commissioned process within local authority/third sector partnership – focus on ‘engaging the disengaged’/‘circus with a purpose’
• www.theatremodo.com
• Love Milton: Odd Numbers - dialogical art strand led by artist Nicola Atkinson and architect Lee Ivett within multi-dimensional grassroots community regeneration project (gardening, new build community centre, social/cultural activities); ‘new genre public art/socially engaged art’?
• www.lovemilton.org
Issues• A more nuanced analysis of modes of cultural participation• Engagement at a range of different levels of intensity – policy pressures for
‘outcomes/impact’ but engagement is fuzzier and less linear than a simple input/output model
• Not a full ‘typology’ of cultural participation/community arts but a set of cases that yield different insights
• The tension between ‘artist led’ and ‘community led’ processes and the role of ‘facilitation’
• Locating the projects within theoretical/critical/philosophical frameworks• “Theatre Modo” & “Love Milton” use ‘brand awareness’ to promote/reshape
perceptions• Culture as a component of social wellbeing? • Temporary autonomous spaces? Models of modelling and mentoring?• Reshaping perceptions of place through shared, public, cultural practices
Tentative optimism?
• Although cultural policy debates are entrenched, the situation on the ground is dynamic, and tends to be driven by urgent pragmatism rather than ideological purism. Moving beyond a reliance on arguments about ‘instrumental’ versus ‘intrinsic’ benefits of arts participation, our study will provide rich narrative insights into the hypothesis that: “making art is a biological necessity…there is a fundamental connection to be explored between creativity and health as a pathologically optimistic expression of survival.” (White 2009 p. 6)