Your words say groundbreaking. Your actions say status quo.
Who knew collaborating with an arts organisation could cause so much professional and emotional distress? Watching everything that I had been advocating for years being dismantled bit by bit was a hard pill to swallow.
Back in December 2021, I submitted a proposal for a project focused on art and systemic change. The proposal was accepted and while my relationship with the partner organisation started off smoothly, I soon encountered challenges. These obstacles not only compromised my work ethics and values, but also threatened the very essence of the project and jeopardised the participants’ experience. It dawned on me that the organisation’s actions were actually perpetuating the same systemic issues that the project sought to challenge. Sadly, this experience was not new for me.
Dealing with unrealistic deadlines, unanswered emails, unclear roles, confused participants and my own struggle to be heard by the production team almost broke me. But a colleague reminded me of my responsibility to turn these struggles into something positive, not only for the people and ideas I had brought to the project, but also for myself.
Perhaps I’m a perfectionist. Maybe I care too much about the sector and my colleagues. Some might say I’m too sensitive or hold my values too rigidly. But honestly, what is worth caring/fighting for, if not the well-being of our communities and the systems that sustain us? After all, what else has the potential to liberate us all?
To effectively manoeuvre through a world that is becoming more complex and to strengthen our sector, we need to take a hard look at where we are at and how we, as a sector, are directly contributing to the problems we often claim to challenge.
In the following section, I´ll go over some of the key challenges I’ve faced in my recent projects, along with insights I’ve gathered from observations and discussions with colleagues. The goal is not to blame, but to illustrate what’s NOT working.
The Status Quo
- Precarious working conditions
I’ve lost count of the number of times I have stressed the importance of making fair pay a top priority on our agendas. We all know this is a deep-rooted structural problem that affects our emotional well-being and the quality and reach of our projects and working relationships.
The question, then, is why are we allowing it to happen? If arts and culture are key to helping society navigate uncertainty and imagine alternative futures, shouldn’t we support and resource these sectors properly? It is discouraging and infuriating to constantly have to fight for fair compensation and sustainable working conditions within the arts and cultural ecosystem. What is even more demoralising is hearing the director of the organisation you are working with using the project’s artistic nature as a means of convincing participants to accept lower fees.
This mindset is all too common in our sector, and it does no good for anyone involved. While it is true that distrust of funders, politicians and policymakers is a major reason for the precarious state of our field, we, as a sector, and as cultural and creative professionals, also have the responsibility to determine what we are willing to tolerate. And, perhaps even more importantly, what we choose to stand up and advocate for. We hold the power to make that change.
2. Bad Practices. Poor Quality Standards
I came across the book “La cultura no es una autopista, los museos podrían ser jardines” (Culture is not a highway, museums could be gardens) by Lucia Egaña Rojas and Giuliana Racco while working on this piece. What struck me most about the book is its advocacy for change and transformation. It challenges conventional norms and frameworks of art, artistic production and curatorial practice, and calls for the dismantling of oppressive institutional practices that perpetuate injustice.
Much like my own writing, the book recognises the need to confront and address harmful practices that affect our communities. It goes a step further and acknowledges that the arts and culture sector can wield oppressive power, silencing those who speak out against outdated systems. The authors addressed these complexities within the framework of a research project focused on racism, transphobia, homophobia and ableism for the Centre d’Art Santa Mónica in Barcelona.
This position resonates deeply with me, as I recently experienced a situation where my voice was almost silenced. The day before delivering a public presentation on the project “Think Systems”, I was urged by the partner organisation to avoid using the term “systems”, since they felt it might not be easily understood by an art audience. This not only felt like censorship, but it also implied that art audiences are incapable of grasping the concepts of “systems” or “systemic change” and threatened to derail the entire project.
Unfortunately, this wasn’t the only example of bad practice I encountered during this project. The planning and design of the main activities were conducted with minimal attention to detail and commenced only a month before the intended start date. This rushed approach allowed little room for thorough consideration of roles, objectives, content, or, most importantly, how we envisioned participants interacting and learning from the experience. As someone used to planning projects months in advance, this situation added a considerable amount of stress and jeopardised our chances of achieving a successful outcome.
Meticulous planning and thoughtful execution DO have a positive impact among the participants and the audience. They are also the cornerstone for facilitating structural change. The manner in which you go about designing processes, projects and relationships can either maintain the status quo or drive meaningful transformation. For example, this post comes from dancer and choreographer Mariana Arteaga ahead of the inauguration of the 2021 edition of Connecting the Dots, a project I initiated in Mexico City back in 2018. Check out the English translation below.
“Friends, on December 2nd, the Connecting the Dots Forum will open. This year, it is dedicated to dance and choreography, and I am honoured to have been invited to participate with my project #Pequeñasdanzasparareforestarelmundo. During this forum, we will share a part of the process with the audience.
The programme is great, featuring some amazing artists. However, what is more important to me is the considerate, generous, and warm way the CTD team has treated us artists.
We often only announce the final outcome of our work, rarely sharing the complicated negotiations, disorganisation and precariousness we experience when participating in forums or festivals. That’s why today, I want to publicly acknowledge and thank the CTD team for their incredible support, commitment and affection. Carmen Salas — director -, super Finella, Ana María, Mariana, Erik Mares, Andrea, Jorge and Jan Castañeda, thank you for everything!”
Artists, participants and organisations definitely pay attention when there’s real effort and thought put into the project’s design phases. Skipping this step shouldn’t be an option.
3. Collaborations are Often Transactional
I don’t romanticise collaborations or assume that they are a beautiful and effortless process where everything always goes according to plan simply because you are collaborating. In reality, collaborations can be challenging and often require compromise to find common ground. All collaborations typically encounter moments of conflict, disagreement, or even disconformity — just like in any other type of relationship. I understand there’s always a bit of give and take and I’m willing to be flexible-up to a point. However, what I’m not willing to do is compromise my standards, values, connections and reputation to align the project with the organisation’s agenda and funding.
Believe or not, that’s exactly what I experienced in a recent project. The organisation I teamed up with was so laser-focused on results that the key decision-makers overlooked the groundwork needed for a genuine collaboration to thrive. This resulted in a constant struggle on my end to maintain the essence of the project including the values, ideas and relationships. What they called a “collaboration” felt more like a transaction.
When it comes to values, I can’t help but think of historian Timothy Snyder, who recently said: “the things that you care about, your values, are what make you free”. This got me thinking: what’s the point of sticking with a collaboration if you can no longer see yourself and your values reflected in it? If you’re stripped of what you care about and what makes you free?
I’ll elaborate on this subject in a future article, since I believe we can harness the arts and culture potential to cultivate the type of collaborations, communities and networks that can guide us in navigating uncertainty.
4. Quantity over Quality
For a recent project, I was brought on as a co-curator of an international exhibition with a predetermined budget and theme. I wanted to ensure that our actions would have a positive impact on both people and the planet. To achieve this, I proposed a series of strategies including:
- Looking into different exhibition formats instead of sticking to traditional venues.
- Backing projects that do more than just “raise awareness” or address the climate crisis in a superficial way.
- Finding a good mix of international and local artists to boost community engagement.
- Offering fair opportunities for both established and up-and-coming artists.
- Setting realistic timelines.
- Allocating a sensible budget for production so participants can explore multiple ideas or projects and connect more deeply with the local context.
Unfortunately, none of these ideas were considered.
We still haven’t grasped that quantity does not always equal value and we’re still caught up in the capitalist mantra of “the more and the bigger, the better.” In such a context, supporting and resourcing well-crafted initiatives — regardless of their size — that prioritise people, relationships, the planet, attention to detail and fair compensation is an act of revolution. In fact, I would even go so far as to call it an “act of innovation.”
5. Standardised Approaches. Not Taking Action.
I’m not alone in thinking we need a deeper ecosocial commitment. Lately, there’s been growing voice calling for a different approach to art and curatorial practice — one that’s more responsible, practical and action-oriented. Artists, curators and funding organisations are all recognising that, while it’s crucial to tackle urgent social issues, we can’t just focus on aesthetics or theoretical debates. Now is the time to actively explore new paths to avoid stagnation and injustice, and to create real, impactful change.
Writer and critic Marv Recinto calls for a shift towards action and “praxis” in his 2023 piece “Eco Exhibitions Won’t Save Us: Artists and institutions seem content to merely ‘address,’ ‘engage with,’ or ‘respond to’ the climate crisis. It’s time for a concerted shift towards action.” Recinto also raises concerns about the proliferation of standardised formats and thematics that seem to dominate our sector, especially around the topic of art and ecology. She argues that, “While these exhibitions do doubtlessly have the potential to inform ideological narratives surrounding the ecological crisis, they can so often feel futile in the face of real environmental devastation.”
Another artist advocating for a more transformative approach is James Bridle, who backs practices and works that “do the work”. But what does “doing the work” really mean, and how do we define these practices?
There is nothing new about these practices. They go by many different names, such as socially engaged art practices, community-based art, artistic activism, or what I sometimes refer to as non-object, processual art practices, and action-based art. These practices have been around for as long as art has existed, often without the recognition and support they deserve. What’s different now is the challenging social, political and environmental landscape we’re navigating.
Artist Domenico Dom Barra insightfully said a few years back:
“It is about shifting the focus from the art piece to the art practice and from the artist to the community, art can influence society with its practices. We should engage in those that can help nurture human values and positive counter-narratives. It’s about acting and not about making.”
I’ve come to understand through my discussions with artists and others in the art and cultural sectors that this approach has its limitations. These include challenges related to funding, resources, audience interest and engagement, as well as issues of status and reputation. All of these factors, along with the concerns mentioned in this text, are deeply intertwined with the pervasive impact of capitalism on our social and mental frameworks.
For example, during the “Think Systems” project, artist Miguel Braceli highlighted the lack of support for non-object-based art practices and those that fall outside of traditional formats and art spaces. In a discussion with artist Amor Muñoz during a road trip in the Yucatán Peninsula in 2017, she raised an interesting point about whether some artists might be hesitant/reluctant to work in socially engaged art practices due to fear of damaging/undermining their reputation in the art world. I also remember a conversation from nearly 10 years ago with curator Mónica Bello, who said that one of the biggest obstacles for these practices is the lack of interest from the dominant art world and its audience. More recently, in 2023, Alice Smits, the director and curator of Zone2source in Amsterdam, shared similar concerns in an email chat.
“Good to hear you are interested in the dialogue, I totally agree with you that it is important to find other ways of working in this field, that is also what I am trying to do at Zone2source in longer term programs such as our multi species school in which we are experimenting in Transdisciplinary teams with performative field explorations and research in relation to communities. However in terms of funding in the Netherlands it is still really difficult to not connect it to exhibitions and large public visibility, so we organize such research programs usually in relation to it, even while these programs could be said to be much more effective in relation to small scale audiences as participants. But I would be really interested to think and maybe work together with you to explore collaborations in this exploration for different ways of working and thinking together.”
Just as I was about to wrap up editing this article, I engaged in an interesting exchange with Nicolas Maigret (Disnovation.Org) regarding a Freeze Magazine post on Instagram. Since they back the message I’m trying to get across in this piece, I thought it’d be great to include them.
Message by Nicolas Maigret:
“Complex issue indeed.
Artists are obviously not forced to become engineers, designers, or social workers (Even though this is where our art collective is slowly heading ;-)
But the usual remoteness between aesthetic ends and the needed social effects is untenable. It makes me feel like looking at: aristocrats commenting on a football match from a distance.
Actually it would not be such a stretch to say that: much of the arts including “so called critical art” is stuck in a position of either entertaining / or commenting from a much too remote and comfortable position.
This attitude looks tolerable at a time when society is quiet > but today it is hard to stand. This week in Paris is the AI summit. Art there is the perfect example of this discussion.”
Conclusion
Despite the potential for the arts to provide a space for alternative thinking and action, real transformation remains difficult to achieve due to our own sector’s barriers. Let’s not forget that we’re still dealing with low fees, unpaid labour and systemic exploitation, poor practices and superficial collaborations, and the type of art that’s rooted in a capitalist mindset. It’s not surprising so many of us feel lost, demotivated, or infuriated with how stagnant our sector is during these difficult times. Unless we shift the current value system and start tackling the issues discussed here, we won’t be able to effectively deal with the challenges in the polycrisis.
A groundbreaking approach in the current context would be to align our actions with the well-being of both people and the planet. There are some pockets where these ideas are being implemented. I’ll share some with you in a future piece.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — —
This is the first part of a three-part series about Art and Change. In the second part, I’ll look into what makes collaborations successful or not, what we can take away from the good ones and how they impact our sector and society as a whole. Then, in the final part, I’ll highlight what’s actually working and who’s shaking things up.
