SECTION ONE
ARTANDfHEmDINARY REFLECTDNSONART
NON-ARI/5I5 AND POLCY-N,AKING /N/RTIAND
AWEWPANTBY C/ARANBTNSON, CHAIRPERSON
A
ACE.
From the beginning ofthe ACE p.olect in 1985 it was our intention to commision pamphlets wjthin ou. arca ofintercst. $e wer€ not sumessful in this partly becaue potential authon who rc approached were too busy, and paftly beuur we vere unable to find authors for particular topics which wejudged to be ofntrlevance. We continue to believe in the ne€d lor public debate as an csntial element in ef€ctive policy-rnakiDg, eqpecially in the ans. h lhe case ofthe relatioro ofafl md community in particular, we feh tha! an argumen! had to be made which would contribute to m understanding ofth;s as vet underdeveloped tendenq in I.ish afts poli.y-making. whilsi intending to be prcvocalive, such an argument should not be seen d a challen$ to, nor 6 an alremalive to the main preoccupations oferisting policy. It is an aryrment 1br uclud;Dg this set of cultual tendencies in the overatl puniew ollrish ans policy-making. Ard since this h a young and as }{t il-defined tendeDcy in Irish cultural lile there are many ways oftrying to undenland it- What folows is one such way. It is written for policy'maken in the filst jnstance and is an attempt to explore some ofrhe ideas at work in thinking aboul issues ofart, comunity and eduotion. Nonetheless, I hope that i! may also be ofintelesi to practitioners dd othen working in relaicd
de thirks ud thinking what de says, In Philadelphia Hffi I Cnme Brien Friel faced the pmblem ofhow do convey
Srying what
the contrasts
of
what Gar thought and u hat Gar eid by using one acior frr Gar public and one for Gar pivate. This reDsion between the publjc and the pri\ate, betw€en what one says and wha! one thinks, reemtes in the workings ofmost p€ople who wrile $ ilh th€ hop€ ofinfluencing something. There is m overwh€lmjng lendency to presenl a 'finished' documen! one which has met and confrcnted the nec€ssary obslacles to being heard and undenrood by trying to dticipate them and to wite around or o!€r or thrcugh or under th€m. The result is often clear md polished, while remaining a subre uge. It rov have the initial appeal ofthe latterer or seducer, but likely as not ir will have the same conrquences also - Ibelings olhaving been used or 'had', with all lhe negative cons€quences $ hich follow froln such fe€lj'gs. ln rcflecting upon areas ofexpe.ienc€ which claim a special attention for the prc.cses by which things arc done, the better to imprcle whar is done, why not let Gar Public and Gar Private speak with one voice? Why not air in this esay some ofthe con€rns $'hich give it this shape Ether than any other? At the outrt lefs oller a contmst between what I lhink I ought be saying ar well as
what I do
say.
is this essav b€ing written? Publicll one mighl continue to aselt that there is a need for clear inlellectLral argumens which convincingly argue for changes and m-emphars in lrish cultunl policy-making, and $at $is esay Fts our such arSumentq but privately one might wonder $'hen the bes! intellectua.l arguments ever had decilive e[ec! in nalters ofeducational, so.ial or cultunl policy-making in Ireland, or anryherc els€, for that Mtrer. Raiionality is not the
First, why
Whilsiintending to be provocqtive, such on orgumentshould not be seen os o chollenge lo, noros on o ternotivelo the moin preoccupotions of exisling po icy.ltison orgumenlfor including this setof culturol tendenciesin ihe overol purviewo[ rish orts policy moking.
final arhter in matteF public or political, at l€ast not ntionality ofthe son wh nrh t)r'$ ! rr{ ( [ 1 li[ rt rl to be made m dependingon the balancr achided between intelleclual argumorrs litr rrItrB II{ Ind€€d, at some mute gut level, one can have a sympathy with this pnctical sr rsp i(io r ol t I tr' inie-lle.tua.l. So, in addresing tlrcs€ who nake and inlom arts policy what is oft I o 1rr rl rl ir ly r ll , lr
Wihour declaring who
they are, one
night
begin to visualize the
Dmat
is I'r'rsr
rrrr.
ir r t lr t',
policy-making and policy- influencing play, and try to figure out the ways in wh ii)lt t I [y rr rr hr n trtt' ofthe ar€as with which one is conc€rn€d. Thb done, aryuments mighl then be Ibnn l{r.( I ir I hrr I I rr 'r way that when they rcad them there ;! the posiblity that a ftftain r€cognition, . (rl tirr
comfonableflavouroffmiliaritl will enliventheirreadingand b€gin towinthcm ovcr' l|ii Depatmcntal Secretary only attach€s signifienft tojob cr€ation, so lefs write ol\hc.i( N lnlr ofthe ans; that k€y politbian has
a
paticular xenophobia, $ arguments for nat;oral
'l
cr rll r rr
.
r
rl
|r
I
rrrl
ofi'ered; this key funder is known to want to conhibute to North-South peace prcccs{ s, v t arguments for the rcconciling po$rN ofthe arts ar€ prcs€nted; that major industr;al arr I ; r rlit ir r lly inltuential patrcn is known to have a penchant for a panicular arls activity, so i1s virtD* {t (' qtolled. But what is bcing done hen? This could go on forever How are you to know wlrat tt , includ€ or exclude? Ila billionaire eccenhic, with a knoM and proven softspot lbr collc(rl irrg doorknobs should happen to take an int€rest in lreland, is thel€ an argument to be ollcrc< I r rl rt ir rg doorknob collecting and aftistic ac.€ss? We could o{Ier nanes for the argument'packages which are available ofilhe shclli amor rg thcm are 'economic', 'noml guilf, 'national shame' and 'bandwagon' argum€nts in addit ir r r to
the pl€thom ofaesthetic md intellectual ones. But already one might b€ experiencing a (d 'rirr letharey, a faniliar dQ,i a. From having prcviously urd these approac.hes, and from oltv tv h rg similai uses by othen, one intuitively feels that on their own or even all together, they ran ly lrirr rc the prr:tective defences oftheir targets. And you youMfprobably have your favourites anxn rg I I ris library of 'ers to make'. lvhat makes for a favound argument? Usuallyr but not aluzys so simply, it h onc wh irrlt prcvides rcasonably solid and ule grcunds fmm which to suNey th€ territory I1 is not simpl( bmause social and cultural habitats are only partially tlere to be surveyed; once you rcalisr I hrrl I very act ofsurveying them, ofhaving this panicular vantage point and point ofview, .tzrir I h ir particularc ltural world or dy oth€r, $en the rcally inteBting problems begin. So whc' o { l( ) wil begin an argument for seriously altending to a particular aspect ofthe rclations ofcomrnrrn it irrr to anhtic and aesrh€tic experience? $hy not besin with the idea ofexp$ience itself.)
lr
StartirA frcm'Experi€Dce1 Without being unduly obscur€ about jt, ther€ experienm
dd
is a
distincl;on to b€ made between our
our thoushts about our expedence. How we think about ou. experienc., thc
knowledge of lrish sociol ond culturol lhoth gh quo'ity expe'ienes r hislory we ^now trese domoins hove rot been conmonploce ir mosilivesond hove certoinly been obent in ihe livesofmony. From our
intellectual DIY kit which we bring to thejob, ptays a major paxt in sl1apine the qualitv olthat c.l p"nicula ll s\apes our memoricol ir:and ir i, our mFmorie" ol an e\pet iFntc rhar "xperien' ue rcI]e r upon u nen we want ro undemand uh"t it *a'about So ifwi were to say thar the b€st staning point for undeNtanding what rea[y good afts education might look like, or for recognising high quality community-situated ans adivitv, lYas a, expenace ofihem nther than an abstEct intell€ctual axgument then we would still have the prcblem ofundentandingwhat dur means From our knowledg€ ofldsh social and cultuml . Listorr we know that high quality experienc€s in th€s€ domains have not beeD commonPlace in most lives md have certainiv been alxent in the lives ofmmy Consequently, an appeal to Frsonal
erF-rienc.,ahhoushrhemoqrhnilFmearuolde\eiopngaprodu,ri\egloundeddialogu'run"rhe
ppcaling only rorhoralftad) .on!intrd ol rhF \ alucofsu.h expcncn, c But ifthis ii how things ar€, then the only option open to those convinced ofthe value ofsuch experience, is to create the mnditions which favour thes€ experienc€s and allow them become more €iued. And in the m€antirn€, for thor who ca"lnot be sloM their value the na1 b$t option is to rell them ofit. And again we come back to rh€ distin€tion between experience and rcflection upon nsi< or a
-Ifitistob€uponexp€riencesofaparticulart}?ethatw€establishourvmtagepointfor suweying the arts, connunity and education, then we must be careful not to pre$rme that th€ tem 'elpdienie'has a single, generally accepted meaning Its history showsquite th€ opposite lt has had many, often @ntradictorf meanings. Perhaps its nost widely und€$tood vemacula. m€aning h6 been that ofa private, {irst hmd evenq thec;nnotationsofthishaveban Primarily individua.listic Experienceisomethingthat happem 'inside' an individual and is the individuah 'own'. The concern has b€en to undentand tG prcmses by which th€ individuai is able to construct exp€riences This is a p€rfecdy valid and sefr.rl way ofthinkins about qp€rience, but it is only one t€m in the equation. Psychologieg specialize in the explomtion ofthat padicular t€m. Another is dre ways ofexperi€nce which a cultural world supplies to ia inhabit2nts. Such culturaly specific waF ofexperience Pre-exist anv new member ofa society and are thought ofas beitg independent and 'outside' ofthat membef, History althrcpology, vxiology and other soc;al sciences take this as their focus. This is a more
public dinension otexp€rience. ' U h.nexperienreolrhc ans sanaly.ed uharue lnd isa ro.es'olmut ual, onstru.tion in or recomtmcls some asp€ct ofthe dd the object constructs person recreates the al1 obj€ct which the penon. Tlie person and the work ofan 'make' and 'remake' €ach other i)r the most conple' and subtle ways. ifthe anwork is genuin€ly inno\ative it may also have to cr€ate a cont€xt wh,ich wil shape experienm in a way thit is apprcpriate to its novelqa Emereing from theprivacy ofa gifted artiit's world for the fint iirne, a picturc or a poem may have to count mongst its work the task of building iis own public. Cliarly we need to undentand 'experien€' d something that is borh private and public' as smething simultdeously 'inside' and 'outside' the p€rson. Ifwe don't, then our undentanding of
Schools ond school curricuio hove been described os instrumenh for the creotion o{ minds. We mightolso describe culturol :nsti'uions such os museums, iheorres ond golle'ies os i.1strU."lelts torlhe c.eoiionor expedences.
w l n\ t,kea onc.winsed bjd And irhr ,1.-1yf-,;'t*"*= da,ir ,,,(r,\r.,,ntrtr oynamrcsot experien@, howcaD wr rr.tn,
"8'\r"iFnw'orapr i'"r.,,k,,nlA, r',, ".g"m..r;'rtrlra.rnrJpr:il;;,:;ili:'*11 p"n;c,lu, rlp*ore*p-;i- '-4i Pur\-makm8'horrldLrabourrl!nni',f,l,{i|r1rrlrr Cuttural
.^. t Me,. Sc
Ifftitutior6 ard
th€ Creation ofErT,erienc€s.
hooh and schai cu ricu la havc been .t.
in5rrumenh lor thc'1,,,trr, (rl",irxt. ,i1,..,1,,,*r .*i'.kg "r hsmusum' rt\nrxr'{nrr'1irr "insrrum"nsror rt.ireai;"";;';:"*:;':::1u^*c arcrhe ioinr 'r(riu'r"'r'r\"'r,rr'llrl oLira l'mrrr e.cnr.rhrnu.ma, reuz . wc mshratsod",
,.uil:.;il:i'::ITI"D' ."'".,,"h",.n;i..;;"#;:iil,;#:il;l].lt:.fit;1il:,,x:::lT,,:ijlilli:l1l,,H Take asan examph DL,btin.sNaLural
. Hjsr snen\,'ronanrajina,ion"'.n,n"",,.n,u,.-oltse,'mar\'lcrionsqu.,r'op.n(di[l8t? rorhFpubl;,dwonderruj..u*,i.,"ru;il,1"'j''i"or,(hcnaruralaotldwa'in'.n*,'1,n",'r,'l ilopened.DrD id Liv,nB;;;:iil;;: f-"Yid a' hrcpolosrui exh ,ir \' Fou! i,),:'hr ruri.a. on" airn orr\. mul-u"m,*,"i,,"".]iI, 1,-.9.\'ah,ru'"onhNr..nrdiro\c;i,\I, bvprernrirg,amco"mne."'",.;;;;;il'.1'l'"T'1o\etonc'u'irhaL,'dr'urnarirc,r"rrrrr" rah \4r'..n L) ra*incn,ionln,r raronoml r"mecr ospeak
!.;;,.;il::;:",:9"rland' ' dominan,,on*in,ne.\p";.;;.."ii:;;#;*:"dF! rd'onnd F:nri'n"cmu$hav.r(r1, vcaacourd haercnndcirr,
r.ne.jions o,
hcdi't',roaof rh'muvum inrhortrrry Fnabline it" vi'l'oaropa'1i.iparc i"
b-,, i,;..".1':flT,sas
k,ib;;;;;""1;i1,il;_qiljll
wo, rnrcrdFrplrnaa and stx. jalisd. In rrme. cmooormFnr or an hisrori'ai*'a" or" rs
r
;-;;t;.i':;:;l"l'""s
rh"ex.i,.m.nrora burscon;"e
Dubijr
v;.,o;..-)
lllii*. "T:f,:i.;ii:l;l \a urar Hi'ron \4u'rum
'iroridn
-;
u..am'
rln
exhiLiride" vsurLe.trirfun,_,,.-,.*^.j.1--ll-"j1,,a,h,{orynurum.lLh".ir.chLecomcan I.he orexpFrjen'e h join'r1 -" .1' : L:-"," i;;;;,"il,:";JJ'l;iT' ' ')p'oncolnoraleia ni' r, thi' in!i,u,io,, aphanrdsmor'he la,, nin.'e'n,h "Fn'ury id.a y l, " *". i,,"a,il i:not winr.r.dnd hirh rhf emc ' rnr.Iecruaranda.srhan n_.;;l;:;;il:"r",,em@n'n pftrdins r hr posibit,r) onr,";J', r..-;""Lff'oland l'@kshol' Th'r N a sr rons.ae ror derrinion acid,,u,he, iam. l";;.,;;;j;;"i,$jj:,cxp.,i* e.ro;r nou i, rs n"ar
i*"
vle coujd ten4hen lhe analysi\otthe r!De\n -. 'r'r'ar'db\DLblinsNarur"lHi'o^ '\ruvumdndexrend iUoo'h.'.,", Lollcqe".an',.nrr;,. andna,ioDdipa,15. Aran,. h;i;i;ffi;J,i.s-Fn.''hatit'"'.itrm," " ". '..iii,,r,l:i'ri on$crcrPa' h or hes' in'ri,,'' i. dcr:ory.terr , iarred m.rn m"; , ' ,;.;;;i ;;';:"'"rd panruldrttP':olan Ltii- apnh.ri. 'nn\ ,nrcri^ rudre*p€nen.e '; and '
$: wgutd fiDd :--.,,Her 8u / se rouk al vx,ol .ubrtesrmitarrrres,nd dillern, .. D-rM mh oL, , ho.Ln rnsIullotr. " ,uBt, iFnrtr tons.ime I rdca.inlomineuh. kind."r.,p.,;;"*ii,ll.ifiTruiijl:;iIJ,rillJ,l::iff,T"r:llI.
The discontinuity of
'Art'ond everydoy life is
octively enshrined in these greot buildings, just os it is ln the lnfluentiol qestheticism of Clive Bell. There iso growing belief thot the function of such golleries ond museums is not tholofo sophisticqted storehouse of 'works'; insteod lheir centrolfunction is, os Neison Goodmon hosorgued, "to moke work work".
intend to create are loday qujte $milar to €ach other but quite diferent lrcm th€ir origina.l Then, the objects were qpected to speak lor rhemFlves: one side in the parrnenhip ofmaking exp€rienc w6 giv€n primacy. For rhis solemn tmDsaction to take piac€, suirably awe-inspiring buildingswere reqund. The objecrsfilling rhese particular placeswer€ rvrench€d frcm their original contexb - domestic interiors, chur.hes and remplesj palaces dd pubtic plac€s, acrcs millenia and made to seNe the social and political needs ofthese new q?es ofpublic instirution. Sometimes within these buildings anempts werc made to rcplicat€ the Fmblan.e ofthe originai context, as in the set-piec€s ofthe Naturdl Hisrory Mufum. Bur always rhese have th€ cotoralion of the institurion housilg and exhibiting them. They wiI have long since ceased ro r.urcrbr as they originally did. They are now made ro function djf€rendy in line $'ith rhe n€eds ofthe musun or
gallery The impact on the visitor is, mo,\: often that not oveffhelming; smetimes it is one ofawe and reverence, sometimes ofdutilul borcdom, mosdy in b€tween. Either way an imprcssion oflv,har art is is conveyed to the public, md thar impr€ssion, which is conv€yed by the architectun as well as by the exhibits, has in tlrc twentieth century involved an equation ofmus€um and cathednl, or chapel ai the mor€ nodest level. AsJacques BaEun has shown us, 'Arr' has tak€n over and been giv€n ro many ofthe redemptive powen ofr€ligion (Bmun, 1974). Despite his mndenmation ofthe dryly erudite 'museum atmosphere' this is prcc;s€ly what Clive Bell aqued lor in his A.r of1913. "Now", wrcte Bell, 'lhough no relision cm €sape rhe binding wads ofdogna, thet is one that thmws them ofmorc easily and lieht-heanedly than any other. That r€ligion is art lor art is a rclision" (p. 181 ). "ADd as", he conrinued ,lhroughout rhe ages, men and women hav€ gone to temples and churches in s€arch ofan ectasy inmmpatible with and rcmote from the prcoccuptions and activities oflabo.;ous humanny, so they may go to rhe temples ofan to experience, a little out ofthis world, emotions thar are ofanorher . . . Paironage of the Ans is to the cultivated class what rcligjous pnctif is ro the lower-middte . . .', (pp. t?s-i 76). Th€ dis.onrinuity ol'Art' and everyday lif€ is acri!€ly enshrined in these gtat buildings, jusr d ir is in the inilu€ntiai astheticism ofcuve Bell. Yet sinc€ the establislment ofthese cathedrals ofcultur€ there have been qujr€ radical shifts in the undentanding ofhow they should funcdon. No longer are their objects erptrted to rnake themrlves clear in an unmediated way. Th€ artention has shifred !o that other parner in the construction ofexperience, the Frsn The novel idea ofmore recent times is that the percn needs ro beprepared for his/her encounter wirh the a.t object. Attention to borh is now se€n ro be neceslary ifthe creatjon ofth€ type ofexperience disringuishing that pafticular insritutioD is ro be achieved. Th€r€ is a gmwing belidthat the function ofsuch galleries and nuseums is nor that ofa mphisticated storehouse of'works'i inslead lh€ir central funcrion is, as Nelsn coodman has argued, "to make works work" (G@dman, 1982).
thoiwhot distinguishes 'Art' from other oreos ofculture lies ln something ihqt ii does roiher thon something thot il is is o recenione.
The ideo
Makirg Artmrks Work There has to do
is a
ctear distincdon between making artworks, md making artworks work. The
fiat
with what Goodman calls execution, the €cond with what he cals imple,nentation
B€hind this distinction li€s a th€ory which says: - that human undeNtmding d€pends upon our ability to us€ symbols, to ur things that can stand for other things - the word 'pmm', for instance stands lor a oilmtion ofwords functioning in a particular way; - that ther€ are many ditrerent types ofslmbol system (words, numb€rs, g€stur€s, pictures, and so
on) and nany difi'erent wa)
s
in which they \rork and can be made to work;
that medings are made, like othe. prcducts ofhuman b€ings, and that they are made with - thar the solt! ofmeanings which n is possible ro make in one system, say within a mathematical system, arc quite ditrerent lrom those capable ofbeing fomulated within another, within a sculptunl qstem lor instdce; - tha! a key question to ask ifyou want to unde.srand any pafticular $mbol is how is it lunctioning or working?; - that the afts utilis€ symbol systems ofa particular type whic-]r arc made to work in distinctive
- that for an artwork to function aesthetically there must be a public dimorsion to it, with least oDe p€rson relating 1o the anwork, md with both peNon md vork making a conuibution the rcsultingexperience; and that all ofthh within which it mcun.
is
at to
p€Nasively conditioned by the cuhure and the times and the context
Itisd
IT
frcult to find a simpl€r and morc succinct way to say thir. Paft ofour argum€nt involves rcognising how intellectually demdding ii is to understand aftistic and aesthetic clearly erperience. And consequently how challenging js thejob offinding a productive inte[€ctual basis which willjusdfy sympathetic md clear sighted policy'making in the fields ofan, comnunity and educarion. The.e are many mgles to a worthwhile building. When Leonardo painted the 'Mona Lisa' it functioned j' a particular way as a Picture in a culture whicl undeNtood the way in which picturcs like this worked. But when Marcel Duchamp p€ncilled in the moustache and goatee on a print ofMona Lisa in 1919, it wd clear that a fundmental shift had occuned in the way that ihis particular inage had come to function, as well a in imags generally. Now it was bound to the kNic€ ofa mdically di$erent set ofm€anings. In this new age ofreproduction Mona Lisa @uld be nade to app€a. on ttr shirts and billboards, as herelfor androgynous, selling drinks or mocking the aspirations ofRenaissance art. VeMtilitv ofsubject and material mdks th€ artistjc and aesthetic lile olthe tw€ntieth century And from the point ofview ofour preseni r€fl€ctions on the relatioDs ofart, community and is the veMtility ofways in which aftworks ft,crion. Th€ idea that what 'Aft' I'om other areas ofculture h something that it doer mther than smething that it
€ducation, th€rc distjnguishes
Tn'swoyot lookirg ot tl'irgs noy hove l,ttle diflicrirlv in oss;mrl;rrno Morer's Worey'rlies b.-rt noy be reo.,,ceo tc qi i'dignon'silerce wl'en o piece likeJoseoh Beurp s 1965 Performonce worl' How to Exploin Pictures lo q Deod Hqre.
corr'ortedwi'r
at"Kenrone.\ndni\on.rharha'NolurioMDimplrLarion.lorrhc"ef-undetrrandingof edumriontleninir"moJgFnFrours€trca*n*rhari"nuchwiderrh"nsch@lingandwhj"h should include what is often r€f€n€d to as 'community arts') It is a saG asumption that most cultural policy-maken, and most educationalistr, would accepttheauthoityofaquestionlike'l44ralisaft?' That it may be an €xtremely dimcult question to answer would be generauy amepted, but so also would be the beliefthat works ofan, when stripped ofall but their 'esrnce', shar€ cenain basic common qualiti€s Those with an inter€st in the historl ofthe ideas which have lomed and reliTmed arcund th€ notion of'Art in Westem cultures, ioupled with an int€rest in the tlP€s oticl€ which aft (!€€n with Westem ey€t has plaved in the gr€at @iety ofhuman societies, may f€el l€ss ceftain about dle us€tutness ofthis question ihaD othen. \\rhat ifth€r€ is no 'eMnce'?
\ 'llen hearing policy-malen md a!1s educatjonalists speak ofthe reasons why they think what they are doing is importdt, one olten has the sense ofa large time-lag, an asychrcnony, between the int€llectual origitr ofthe ideas ofer€d lojustify their P?ctice and the changed natuE ofthe afts in the tw€ntieth €ntury Unfortunately, much ofthe work evident in arts education rens very much in tune and slDchrony with these ided. Like the Natural History Musum it smells ofa pdt age, albeit only a rec€ntly p6t one. The id€a ofdrc 'beautiful' is no longer a cornmon one in criticim, a€sth€tics orpmctice bur it sti[ hd cun€ncy in vemularthinking about art So has rhe aMciation ofan with demonstmble skilfulnes, and with th€ idea that good art h art that 'copies' some aspect ofthe world we[. This way oflooking at things may have litde difliculty in asimilating Monet's Waredt'bs but may b€ reduc€d to an indignant silence when conlronted with a piec€ likeJos€ph Beuys's 1965 Performance work I{o|| to Explain Picturcsto a Dead Hft Tl'e pioblem is not that ar1 is not about such things; it is that an is about rnuch mort thar such things. The belidthat the key to good educational pmctice and to good arts policy-roking resides pdmarily in fie 'wiat rl art'? question is ctElengEd by the 'l4rhe, is alt?' question posed by Nelson coodmn (Goodnan, l9?8). Apa;ntinsby Patrick Collins do€s not fulfil ilsfunction until it is s€en, nor a poem by Seamus Heaney untit read or head. Our experienc€ ofth€ painting nuy b€ non" aesthetic in all sorts ofMys such c my use ofit nerely as a hrcscnen or as m investment stond away in a \ault. While rmainins an arlwork in thes€ cases it does not function as one "Execution consists ofmaking a work", argues Goodman, "implenentation ofma.king it work" (Goodnan, 1982, p. 282). And, as many peopl€ who collect flotsam on shorelin$ or old oak in bogs or twhtqd piecs ofold machinery will know, it is quite posible to mak€ something function aestheiically which was not mad€ to do so. The insight that works ofan requiE v€ry detailed attention ifthey are to be pmperly impi€ment€d, or Mde to work by allowing them to firnction aestheticaly, is the distinctively new tr€nd in modem mukum, galleries, and artl centres. This m€ans that they take it to be pan oftheir responsibility to so organize the wals in which their institutions create experiences that the 'works' pEseDted arc 'understood'. Ifthey are aftworks, this means that what and how they qmbolize will br appr€hended, and in such a way that the power ofgood art to chang€ how p€ople perceive and
organ;ze thelNlves and their worlds wiu work ro best efect. Lecrur$ and class€s. bmts and wort_ pa, k5- qork(hop6 by dni\rs and o i,i... guid.d roul\and qptnn inrdrurionatpoli.i.s in rhe.e areas, a rzll Faamphs otpm, rice, srared ro makeadworlc hork. \,\ften badl) don;rh.:f fom Cti\c
Be!'s 'tyranny ofenditon'. Followins the same line ofargument w€ ca; ey arts education has, as a definniv€ nsponsjbitity, a k€y cont.ibution ro nEke io th; implemenration ofaltworlc in our society. Similrly we un argue that m orgajrarion like the Ans Council will ody achi€ve its most coherent impact on Irish sociery with a proper balanc ofatr€ntion to pmvisions to. the inpl€mentation as well as lor the making ofanwork$
Intheexisting\yayofadninist€tivelyorderingirsworL educationand'comunirv afts, $ould torm laEe prn ofrh. AnsCoun.il s(on,riburion ro$ard. makingan$orks hor k. Thes. " are olrccent origin within its catalogue ofwork, and an: stil uncedainiy regarded. ThejNtifiable b""islo'"orFolrhh.aur'one"pr,rzltyinrctarionrorhe"morphou.anaotr*a ed.communirv an'. migh, bFexplored lunncr b) using rhe :deas ot I he prn ar; and rhe pubLi. ro$, her hirh rh. ' remgnition that aftjstic and aesthetjc work cd tuncrion in manv disennt wavs. -
Public-bing Artistic Work. EveD in the p!€school thh intimate rclatioNhip between aesrh€ric functionj,g a.nd plbli@tion h"..inrormFd pFdasosic pr?.,itr lmagA made by.hitdren a r , rua;enraru.uge1f piiur._ mdking arhun8 upon w?lh lor Thcirwork in orher.uni utararea,tnor. F--","^ "llroseF. e"rlvagerhiFrprchrionolr.rcnc,F*i)ofpubharionnturd.nedCle,r\rhetun,rionseNedb\
publi arjon
in rh , FXample i,qune difiFrnrlrcm rhF ri".orpubtj, arion iniotved hhcn an her wo.k. But in whar w?v? A crucial and .elevant ditrercnce is $ar the esrablished arrist js exhibiting the work publicly in the conscious *pectarion that her work will be alsess€d by very qrecific criteria. The* *itt t u". to do with the quality ofthe aftistic srarements she has made, and her achievement against comparative standards. And when the critics locate her work as bthg ,high, or ,lof on their evalutive scales she won't be unduly sur?rised since this is par! ofth;e;e-plan ofartist and .rilic jn ou scietv She has @nsiously made her work ro function accordjng to th€ g€neral established established
afi!! exhibits
particular an world. But mosi people would baulk at the prcsp€ct of€laluating the work ofpreshoolen in the sme wan and for very good reasn. We would ey thar such an aftist-ffitic game is not an apprcpr;at€ or desirable pan ofthe cultutal world ofpnschooten in our sociitv, and n\at the real rules ofthis
\alu"ofFng"einginadki.aFe*rFri,a.riviie.lorloung,nildrenmusbra"r,\cdby"rand"id" rhd, arercl^dnr o rh.lun, r on, $hich su, h an;viric"rwF in rhFi' tire,. tn rhe unlikilr eventora lea.her-mounrjng d publi. ew ibjrion ot'u, h, hildrn, $or k a" rhough ir wercro i>- rFe"rdrd a5 beine ofsimilar sign;ficana to that ofesablhhed adult artists, md of; critic accepiing jt on thor tems and prcceeding !o evaluate it acmdingly, then we might ey that a double mhtake had bcn
mad€. The kacher was rnistaken to pubticis€ it like this, and .he criric to evaluare it like thi!. The
The
gomewould hove been ployed correctly
but without the coution of sympoihetic insight. Frequently this is whot hoppens in lhe oreo colled 'communiiy orts', ond itfuels the suspicion ofjt. Bulon exominolion of thqtsome suspicion con reveolos much oboutthe
groundson which the obieclions ore mode os it does oboutthe obiectionol ospecls of 'community orls'.
brn played conecdy but withour the caution ofsympathetic ibsighr. Frequentiy thi! i! Irhat happens in the arca called 'communiry arts', and ir fuels the sspicion ofit. But aD examination ofthat same suspicion can reveal as nuch about dre $ouds on which rhe objections garne would have
arc mad€ ar i! does about the objectiohal alpectr of
Tryilg to nake
6ens€ of
'comunity art!'.
'C.'lrmuity Ads'.
In Ireland very littl€ has ben published which would allow for a teasing out ofthe values and beliels underpinning attitudes offavour or disfavour towads the idea of 'community atu'. In the absence ofsuch public work one a.lways runs the risk ofbeing amusd ofs€ning up straw men or of dis.eming pafticular idea! wh€re non€ €*t, ifone puts a geDeral fom on a set ofb€li€fs which €xpe.ienc€ has fitquenr]y encountered. The repoft byJohn O'Hagan and Christopher Dufy (1987)on the economics ofthe pe omingarts jn lreland s€ts foffard a cog€nt e@nomic aryument favouring community ans in lreland. The sam€ report also includes a briefinstructive h;tory ofthis area which identifies paraliels between the New Deai policie ofrhe U. S. in the I930k and community arts in lrclard during the 1980's. Foftunarely, on the disfavour side, the writer and critic Anthony Cronin has pubiished otherwhe be shadow (Crcnin, 1988).
a
stimulating
s€r ofessays
which give substmce to wha! might
Although he do€s not use the phmse 'community arts' in his collection ofesa)s Arr-6. r.fie Pmple, Anthony Cronin\ sympathies and res€Nations have much to do with this area. His najor objection is to the types ofpmctift which have em€$ed in sh@ls, nuseuns and ealleries as meam ofpreparing and shaping pmples' erperience ofan and other worlc. Far frcm dev€ioping r€ceptivity and respoDs€, much ofwhat is raking piace in rhe naDe ofedu@tion - what he henchantly calls the 'appantus ofintimidation' - is actively deltroying them. In this he shar€s nuch in cornmon with Ciive BeI, although he may |trl uncomfonabl€ in the company of 'De Clive md Viryinia'. Therc is much truth in these criticisms But it is not necessarily, or at least not entinly, for the reaons which Mr. Crcnin o{ters. Bad practift, aDd institutions vhos€ pra.tic€s are not in harmony with their avowed purpos€s, are norc convincing reasons rhan the theoretica.l rcdons which he ofen. His position relies on idea of initial receptivity', on conceptioro ofarr as 'the attempt to atta;n pa{€ction', on the notion ofpledure as being central to aesthetic experienie, and on the idea that atists ar€ spcial people i, their seroitiviiies md innate or acquired powen ol expression'. There m strong Romantic contoum straping his viewing point. He is led by this way ofthinking to query the us€Iulness ofmost 'art educarion' for adults, to object to an being made into 'a mere pastime or social distractioD or even thempy', and ro mndem the belidthat most people have the capacity ro exF ience anktically (prcductiveiy), mther than aesthetically (receptively), in some degre€. He b€li€ves that 'Th€ art ofthe disposs€ss€d is seldom er€at, prccisely b€cause it is the art ofthe disposssd' (p. 35). Thes€ €ssals probably express the vjews ofmany ofthoF jrt€rested in th€ ans in Ircland, sme ofwhom might morally and politica. y w;!h it wer€ otheMir.
It is against such obj€ctions as these that the cale for g!€ater public exp€nditure on the 'community arts' area must b€ made. Accepting the arguments ofercd by O'Hagan and DuIIy as being the best available fiom an economic point ofvie\ our concentEtion wi[ be on ideas ofart and anists at play in th;s area.
T
As a phmle 'community aas'is not mtive to lrish ways ofthinkingabout lhe art! and society. It €merBed from tn€ activisms and dpirations ofthe tate 1960\ in Britain. Ifit had a c€ntnl unifying idea it was its @mmitmdt to a folrn ofcultu.al democra.y. In pubiished fom its most forceful proponents an Owen Kelly (1984) and Another Standard/The Shelton Trust (1986). An earlier book by Su Braden (19?8) us€d the work ofwalter Benjamin to try md develop a Dewer language to describe the changing working relationrhips ofanists md communities. The suppoftive role ofthe Gulb€nkian Foundation U.K. in the d elopment of€ach ofthele penp€ctjves and pnctices is notewofhy. The concept of'commuity afts' as deveioped by these wrire6, notably K€ n isexplicidy political. They oppos€ vhat they see as th€ hienrchical contml ofthe many by the Gw, they lavour democratic collective action over individualhtic action, and they identify the ability to ur languge as a centnl concem ofcultural democmcy. Negotjation rather ttEn imposition i! the pnferred mute ofsuch cultural democmts in their move toMrds a nore €galitarian democracy. Power and the control ofthe means ofexpresion, including 'the arts', ar€ recurrent th€me! Their prcemin€nt inter€st is in th€ alts as a m€ans, amongst other cultural praclic€s, for changing society in rhe djlFclion of grtarer equality and democa.v Their position reveals a clear idotificatjon ofan as an inr[unent ofpower which is to be mobilised in a wider political stlr]ggle. They hav€ v€ry little to ey on the question ofthe public and private benefits olanistic and aesthetic exp€rienc€, nor on what distinguislx$ the arts from other cultural practices. Perhaps inevitably, by attending to one pafticular political mle ofan in society, and narginal;sine the derails ofth€ Frsonal and social elperienc$ ofan, rhis appmach to community arts ha! itsefbecome maryinaljs€d. But there are othen. The potential gounds for favounbly considering newer relations ofad and communities u hich we are a€uing lbr here have to do with the qualitia ofexperience which arc unique to the ans, and with the tlT€s of empowement which they help to develop. But even ifdt mturc ofour pr€s€nt argum€nts dill€r in emphasis fron thos€ originating in the British mnmunity ans movement, the tyFs ofmisundentanding wh;ch they ar€ liable to mfrt might not.
Orthodox Policy-making and roorlDrrunity Arts': Some Grourds for Und€rstandings.
Ditr€r{t
In the fist place, policy-makeN such as memb€n ofthe Ans Council, and the policy-shapen such d the members otAosddna, will naturatly lend to apprcach qD6tions ofart md soci€ty Ii crm the viewpoint ofrhe artist. This is because the majority ofthem are aftists. Ii js als becaus€ Arls Council policv has evolved in that dn€ction. But the l95l Afts Act js $pecially jtte!€st;ng in the
While noiurolly ond rightlytheArts Councilin its evolution over neorly four decqdes hqs becomeo moinsloy ond support for hish oriisls, i1s underwriting legislotion does nolusethe word 'ortist' ololl. And in its foremostfunciion it specificolly mentions the'pub ic'os being those whose interesiin lhe orts is to be stimuloted. However,lhequeslion roisedbyourpresenl orgumenlishowhoslheArhCouncilcomeio think qboutthis ond its relqted functions?
'88:4 @tu2
responsibility which it plaas upon the Arts Council to 'ttimulate public int€rcst in i,\e axts" (3, 1a). This js the fint specifi€d functioD olthe Als Council. Its other three lunctions are as tullom: "(b) pronote the knowledge, appreciation and practice ofthe arts. (c) assist in inprcving the standards ofthe art!. (d) organis€ or asrist in the organising ofexhjbjtions (within or without the State) or wo*s of an and artistic craftsmanship. " $hile naturally and rightly the Ans Council in its evolution over nearly four decades has b€come a mainstay and support for lrish artists, its undemriting legislation des not us the word 'artjsC at all. And jn its 6remost functioD it specih€lly nentions the 'public' as being thore whoa intercst in the atu is to be stimulated. Clearly the Art! C.ouncil has the widest possible discrction under the l95l AIts Act in finding ways and developing polici€s which will fum this mandate. The last decade has seen major developments in this arca with the implementation ed expansion ofan education policy, a rceional development policy:, m arts catre policy, md an incipient 'community arts' policy. The ACE €xperimenta.l proj€ct is part ofthe Arts Council's policy ofdevelopment in these ar€as. Thes€ w€rc ato t]re four arcas which the Arts Councit, iD its submission to the 1987 \{hite Pap€r on the arts, A cress atd Oppottunity, identified as being olp.imary impoitanc€ for the d €lopment ofth€ afts in lreiand. In its very title, that $hite Paper endomed th€se aspirations and jncorporated th€m as €ntral culturzJ objectives. Howev€r, lhe qu€stion rais€d by our present argument is; how has the Ans Council come to .,thk about th;! and its related functions? Is it po$ible to identify some ofthe mys in which the Arts Council as an institution makes s€ns€ ofits mandate? All thinking is from a point ofvie\ nomally the pojnt ofvi€w ofthe perso! doiDg the thinking. But when we think about many isues in ordinarv life our viewpoints have ar a matte. of fact been inherited, rather thm developd by ourrelves to Mtch the novelty ofthe situation confmnting us. In the cN ofArts Councils as they have evolved in the postwar yean one could hypothesise that a domiDant point ofview which successive incumbents ofArts Councils have inherit€d is that ofrhe 'g€neralised artist'. One might fufther speculate that it is the viewpoint ofa panicular idea ofm anist. And ifthese were true it would b€ interesting to imagin€ the view ofarts education md comnunity-situated ans etivity which this vie$,point would aford, and how it would hartoni* with the lunctions ofthe Ans Council as specified by th€ Alts Acl The primary inter€sts ofan organiution strcngly inlluenced by the viewpoint ofthe 'general;!€d artist' will natu.allv lie with the aftist. The interests ofthe public will tend to be undentood jnsofar as ihey rclat€ to those ofthe aftist. Ind€ed th€ intercsts ofthe public as they relate io the dts my bf raken to be identical with those ofth€ artist. What is gtrod lor the artist is good lor th€ public. Unlortunately, when the fimncial pool from which bo$ drink is as shallow as it ir now, what is pod for the public - * argued by mmunity aftists and othen may not be good for the anist. And her€ li€s an immediate surce offriction. A s€cond and related surce ofdilliculty revolves around the distinction alrcady made between the exmution and the implementation ofaftworks. The recognition ofthe artist\ nftd for
prcperly rcceptive public has be€n a majorstimulus iD the ds€lopment ofArts Councils' inter€st 'accs' to the axts. Attention was paid to the public becaur the needs ofanists required it. Arguably this has b€€n a mor€ poknt influence than the other argumeDt in0uencing thinking on th€ n€ed for grater acc€ss which has to do with the 'rightr' ofth€ $€at najority ofthe tax-paying public to be embled to enjoy panicipating in anistic and aesthetic practic€s. What er th€ir r€lative balance ofinfluence both ar$merts ar€ no&'standardly used tojustjfy gr€ater acc€s a
in improving
This div€nification ofthinking and €xtension ofthe horizons ofarts lDlicy-making demands a mor€ detailed e\aminalion ofsuch notions ar 'arthC, ttmdards', md 'benefits' ofaa. $hat is it to be m artist? The conventional definition would be smebody who practises one of the fine ans. But the idea ofdle 'fine arts' as djslinct from the tiber:l arts or from skilled ardenlhip i! a ninet€enth century one, as is the abstmct notion of'Art'. Th€ir association with id€s ofthe 'creative' and 'imagiDative'
is
ofsinild p€di$te,
as
Ra).mond Williarns rcminds us. An wa!
closely r€lat€d to skill€d naking and wa contrasted wi& nature which allows beautilul things to be lound rather than mad€. The distinctions betw€en such skilb and rheir us€s arc related, according to Williams, ''to the chang€. inherent in capitalist comoditt production, with its sp€cialization md rcduction ofus€ values to exchang€ values" (Williams, 1981, p. 34). The dificulties pos€d to the ans by such notions ofcommodity and exchange led - as a defense, in Williamr opinion to the funher distinction between the lse arts and the uselul arts. But clo* smtiny ofthe practical neaning ofL\ese ditiDctim disolves the boundaries. Even when they can honesdy claim that their int€ntions are 'artistic' most artists are, according to Williams, efectiveiy d€alt with as 'tkilled workeN producing a cerlain kjrd ofmarginal commodity". That this is the cas€ is bome out by even a cuNory exanjnation ofthe day to day work ofan Arts Council se€king the b€st posible deals for thos€ whom it has come to see as its primary responsibility, a.tistsr subsidi€s, myaltie!, taxation prcblems, promotion, marketing, display and new product d€velopment would, to use th€ languagr ofconnerce, desrib€ much ofthat work. The evolution ofarthtic practice in the lwentieth century has turther chipped away the security ofour inherited ninete€nth century distinctions. Hardly any assumption ofthese and earlier aesth€tic thmries and pmctices has remained unchall€nged, not to say actively defiled by the twentieth c€ntury A few examples frcm th€ visual arts will sufice. Dada, in Hans Ar?\ words, "Iell upon the fine ans", in an efon to free itrlllrcn the pasr with its ideas ofskill, harmony and beauty. Anoth€i distinction to go was that betw€en the made and the found. In l9l4 Marcel Duchamp etlibited his r€adlmad€ urinal which he called FouDta; and ironi@ y lign€d'as R. Mutt. This is now solenrJy rcgarded as a most significant artwork and to an eye shaped by nineteenth century aesthetic ideas has had rnny ev€n more outrag€ous succrssors. By playing with the rules ofthe ar1 game - placingenbamssingobj€cts in atiltic corFxts, forexample, th€rcby making $em .lirncrbn as anworks - these and many other anists have chang€d the rlles ofthat gam€. Actual practic€ lorces change in thinking and drorising about such practice. Aesthetic theory a! a rule, is lhe camp-folow€r olanistic pEctice.
The huih
thotfully commiJted orlsh ore differenifrom peop e whose work lies in other fields notso much forwhotthey ore osforwhot they do. is
The 'sp€cial people' sEtus claimed for and by ani$s in virtue of,,their rnsitivities and innate
oracquiro poM^ofopn.i)on andrheubFing.ubiF.rro.a,aresorjcatimp"rdri\ewhi"hha.ro bcobev"d lo, be mo,r pdn no kno$ingsh)o,evenho$ . Ealunh4obje.rtn,o hF belier,har ordinary people should
also be encouraged to become skjlled maken in the anl It is fairly saG to say that most pdrpl€ engagirg in non-roLrtine uork ofany kind which h open-ended as Ega;ds its pmp€r conclusion do so without necessarily being able to say in detail how or why thet do n. How many people could ev€n explain how it is thar they walk? Most preople who respond to rhe human .aX ro undcr"und, ould al€ de".rib. I r." rlpeol in\ olunr,^ imput.ion AndTanyr;Fnr.r. have rlso btsn.onsumed ov rhei {ork. smc tne,alh. The r rutn L rhar .ul\ , ommitLed an i.rszr dille'r er,r rrom pcopte\ ro.F \ork trf. in ou "r fields not so much for what they are as for what they do. People become much olwhat they arc becaus€ of$hat they do. Anists d a sociauy ideDrifiable group diller enomously fron each orher on all the si$ificdt dimensions olhunan being. Wlat unires them ;s not that they an rhe living
gem-cFll.ot$m.'dvinedajmonhi.hun:quFproph.r!ormy.ri,algirr..fhelar"uniredby
what they do, their rostery ofthe means io do ir, and their menbenhip ofa ctms ofworken uiro have been an identifiable gmup since rhe Middle Ages. There is a muc-h strcnger car for saying thar rhere i. d difiemn.eoldegre rr, rr rhan ot kind beru+n an i.sand non ir.r.. There is, to rcphmse that dsenion, a continuity between art and everyday tife. Tbe appaEnr discontinuity hd its rcots ir c€nain ofour inherjred ways ofthinking about ,An,. Thes€ in lurn inluence h. M). in $hi, h ue rfl n r upon ouransri, orrA.hni' ;\po iFn'. t hF dironr,uir',.s also stnped by the wals in which cuhuEl insritutions ser about their fomation olour expe.ience of There arc parallels bftween spo,rsworlds and arlworlds which illuminate some ofthe issues conceming the mturc ofartists' sp€cialness and rhe extenr ofoverlap or cont;buity ofrheir rnsib;lities and skills with thor ofnon-atrjsrs. The degrees ofbeing-an-artist arc analoeous in many
it
FA
Y
r.pecr.ro rho*olbeirg he diJlern.r odhe"n rhe highesr qualirv r, rn in e.. h "n-a,hh,r.'l and thelowest is manifestly obvious; but the eKellem me€$ into the very good as rhe ;edioffe merges into the bad. That is mosr clearly sren ifwhat you are evaluating is the qualitv ofa particular ryp€ or'activity. But standards ofmeasur€menr and evaluarion must. as Aristotle reminded u' be appmpriare Io rharsnich i. being mFAurd. And rn hp an". a" in lpor..-hF conkntious question ofstandards can only be clarifi€d when we art clear about the nature and purposes ofthat which we ar€ evaluating. BJ' the standards ofmtioDal hurling, a lo.al march between rwo parishes may not b€ lery gt)od. But to look at it like this nay be ro confus e har each is doing. While there nay be aI srrx of simjlarities betwe€n rhem the local match may be highly succesful as a fom ofrelaxation and re$ealion for the play€n and that may have been its primary funcrioq whercas the function ofan All-Ircland is quire dillel€nr. 14t .anjudge the standards olan actjviry\ [u,crb, in tems of whether it was succesfut or unsuccesful,just as we can evaluate irs r),pe in rems ofwhether i! wa! good or bad. P€rhaps we shouldjudg€ adistic activiries in educationa.l or communjry rttines ar
Bozun hos written thot "The dogmo thotdoily life is hiviol, coupled with q denunciotion of lhose who do no'ogree, hos been reoeoted innumeroble times by ortists qnd their qdvocoles, nol wilh regret bul wilh scorn. "
having ben sutressfui or not, by rcfening to their avowed funciion, mther than merely evaluating them as being good or bad as types ofart. This analogy between artists and atHeks (it i! not an analogy b€twe€n art and spoft) he\x illustrate the notion ofcontinuity, as well as the dillerent emphases involved in evaluating quality of tunction as against quality oft}?e. Ther two id€as arc impodant in anal',sing the r€lations b€twe€n art, community and eduotion. The scale ofa.cess and pafticipation achieved in spoft is one to which Arts Councils apire, but the persona which 'Art' has cr€ated for itsefis a major obstacl€. Many contemporary aftists energetically disown this view yet, asJacques Balzun reminds us, €ven the newest ar1 "owes the public attention it receives to the old do$u ofArt, One and Indispensable" (Barzun, l97{, p. l2). In which car we may ask in whoc image has An created itselP DoeE
Art R€dccm Ordirary l,if€, o! Shourd
Mnrlry
Life Redeem Art?
The implicit contempt for ordinary lives in the uttennces ofmany b;hop-artists ofthe Church has not gon€ unnoticed. BaDun has writt€n that ''The dogm that daily life is trivial, coupled with a denuDciation ofthose who do not agree, has been repeated innume.able tim€s by artists and their advocates, not with Egl€t but wiih scorn." (p. 37). H€ lets Ern€st Hemingway exemplily the arrcgmce and factual ineptitude ofthe cliamsofsellglorilying High A't; "A country, finally, erodes md the dust blows away, rhe people die and none ofthem wer€ ofany importance pemanently, €xc€pt thole who pmctic€d the ats . . . A thousand yean nakes rconomia silly and a work olart endures forcver. " (p. l8). FEgments ofart cetainly remain, but mor€ olten than not because they have dre durability ofphysica.l objects. But many other cultural achievenents also endure over millenia - ahievements ofocial organiution, Iaw, science and engineering, for irutance. So also do structures ofthought and feeling, values and inter€sls, shaped and pasd on by the nillions ofanonymous dead. Litde thing! like this €scaped the broad rcach ofHemingway's
ofArt
Y€t elen with someone as sympathetic to demmratic panicipation ar Sir Roy Shaw we lmd similar b€lieG op€ntins. In his Art a,d rle People (1987) he calls approvingly upon Sir Kenneth Cla.k to make this poinr "The poet and the artist ar€ important precisely because they are not average men: beour in *nsibility, jnt€Iig€nc€ and power ofinvention th€y far €xced rhe avenge". What is wrong with this is obviously Dot that it is often t.ue: it is wrong bsause ir ; often not true. There are very good artists and poets a'd very bad ones: ome work very intelligently and sme do not som€ are highly invenlive and some utterly deriutive. The same qualiries atlribut€d by Clark, and approved ofby Shaw, &uld be gnnted to many other q?$ ofperson and worker. Generalizatiom like Kenneth Clarke\ are actively hamful. Too often and too readily does this tnx ofth;nking capilulate to the languagr ofmysterious exceptionality. Our reason for reGring to this again is thar Roy Shaw used this assertion in that pan ofhis discusion on democracy and excetlence which rccalled his experience, as Seffetary-General ofthe Arts Council
ofcreat Britain, wi$the issueof communityats.
ln this climote, orgumenls
forvulneroble
extroordinoriness, especiolly when its representolives ore relolivelyfew in number, rnoy seern lo corry more weightthon those for vulnerqble ordinoriness. And i{the further cose con be mode, Hemingwoy-siyle, thotthe extroordinoryfew redeem lhe ordinory mony, then the grip on the little purse tightens still furiher.
le u/'*'
b'l
@
&,
pll
Thepoet RoyFu €r had r€sign€d lrom the A1s Council becaus he Glt dlat suppon for communiiy afts was a wdte ofmoney. While he disaer€ed with some ofFuller's detailedjudgments, Shaw Mites that he muld not quarel with his general principle that "Public money forrhe afts cannot pmp€rly be dispenrd without a strcng r€gard by the dhpeming body for standards of €xc€Il€nce and principles ofvalue". That goes without sayin$ but the implication that community orient€d artr activity is excluded by this principle should not go without comment. If'community ans' npnsentatives did in fact cal upon Roy Shaw to @nsider their case without reGrence to isues ofquality th€n he was quite .ight to consider that cas€ coldly. Ifthey insisted upon replacing 'conventional amthetic stmdardr' with 'audience respons€' as the nain criterion, agaiD he was quite right to rej€ct it. It is uhen we come to Shaw's next djficulry with thh lobby that we hear the recun€nt leitmotifofdificulty between the intell€ctual traditions shaping rhe thinkiDg ofmany artist policy"make.s and tbe €mergent tndition which shapes the more populist tendencies. Th;s
;
ofthe alleged "egalitarian rj€ction ofmy qualitiative distinction betwe€n the artht of genius and the weil-m€aning amateur." But with this chmcterisation Sir Roy Shaw hff entered the freld of micaturisation. H€ se€ms to realise this within the spac€ ofa few lines when he invok€s common seffi to prent his b€li€f that sone Fople ar€ mor€ gifted than otheN This much toned down ass€ftion is ofcour$ true. Again the diflicdty lies not with the reality ofdifler€nc€s, gr€at or small, betw€en anists and the resq it lies with the ass€rtion ofthe realiry ofdjlcr€te, djscontinuous his dismissal
Ifw€ must
us€ the language ofmystery in talking ofaft and anists then let u! address the r€al not the r€lics ofanother age. Th€rc is not, nor should there b€, any confiict ofinter€st betw€€n supports desjgned to fost€r md encouEgE aftists and supports which focus upon the development ofthe artistic and aesthetic lives ofnon-anists. lndeed the symbiotic relatiom between artists and their publia favour a mutuality ofHp€ct and support. The condition for this b€ing true is that by 'intenst' we mean artistic or aesthetic function. The diversely focused cultural traditions do different things in diflerent ways for difer€nt reasons, aDd ar€ subject to mntinuous fomation and transfonnation. A democncy can acconmodate such a pluralism ofactivity and aim. But ifby 'interest' we mean an immediate economic int€rest then there is, as we obs€wed above, a delnite on{lict ofinterct. As things stand now the sometines latent, sometimes oven,. friction between the traditions is reminiscent ofa hungry family tryin8 to share out aD inadequate supply offood. Th€ir mntext is a centml source oftheir conflicts. Th€se intern€cine suspicions and snipings owe much oftheir vitality to the cor€ct p€rception that th€ mor€ sp€nt on the one the l€ss available to spend on the other. In this climate, arguments for mlnemble extraordimines, especially when its rcpresentatives are rclatively few in number, may Fem to carry more weight dtan thos. for wlnemble ordinarhes. And ifthe further cas€ can b€ made, Hemingway-style, that the extraordinary few r€d€em the ordinary mann then the grip on the litde pune tight€ns still funher. Ifwe nust weigh the value ofeach approach in th€ distorting scal€s ofpublic sub,sidy for the ans - thereby amepting a mn{lict when there should be none - what is to b€ eid for the
typ€s.
mysteries,
dd
Forsome people ordinory life is os exiensive os on encyclopoedio; forothers iiis qsthin qso
ordinarbes ofat and
sociqlwelfore booket. Somedeoihs con be commemoroted with ihe ikesof o Mozort Reqrie'a, otle'swith os mp e rhyming verse i the ln Memoriom columns of ihe Evening Herold. Some loves ore celebroted byodes to one'scoy mislress; olhers bylhe proxy veaes ond imoges ofo Vo entine cord.
ArqTheordinary
the thon byolher experience ofmoking orlworks f ully commiiled ortists, ond for publics other thon lhosewith o speciolist interesl in o porliculor ortform. But occess must olso involve focilitoting
its desirability?
Ifart rather rhan 'Art'
ordinary everydav lives will it have been fansfoirn€d into ordinary alt?
a
can be an hamonious pan of good thing for Exrraordinary An to have been
d'Acc€ss,.
For sone people odinary lile js as extensive as an encyclopaedia; li]r othe6 it is as thin as a social wdfarc b@klet. Some deaths crr be comemorated w'th the likes ofa Mozan Requiem, othcn with a simple rhymingveAe in the 1D Meoouam cotumns ofthe Ev€ning Herald. Some loves are celebrated by odes to one\ oy mistres; othen by the prcrf, ven€s dd inag€s ofa
Aa
is a
way ofliving, a means ofpowef, It
is
this in at leasr rwo s€rs€$ one involves the €xercis€
and dcmonstration ofpower in an unanbiSuously public way (a Lovett Pearce dd Gandon Parliament Hour,rBank oflrcland, for example, or a San Stephenon Central Bank): the other involves the possssion ofthat power by individuals and groups to quite litera.Uy manufactun el.ments oltheir oM lives. It is this latter understanding ofaft as a meaDs olprivate and public power that most helpfully develops our undentanding ofwhat a genuine access policy {br the arts n ieh, mFao. Apfriall) as ir rel"r". ar and on mun rr. A key question conceming any neatr ofpower is who conrols or pors€sses it. Some peopl€ can neither rcad nor wdte. Clearly th€v aft jn a less powedul position than literate people who are not allowed to freely .hoose ryhat' to read or saite. In an open denocmcy the aspintion is towards bolh freedoms lor a moy citizens ar can avail ofthem. Such freedoms are comentones ofan open democracy's theory ofwhat it is and is to be. But merely allowing lhe public tojuxtapose therrelves w;th an adwork, by letring them in to se€ pictures in a gallery fo. instance, is not g€nuine access. cmnting som€one this kind ofames nay amounr to litile more than al.ioni,g them to look at. Genuine acces would work towards aabling them to s€e it. Works ofan are €xecuted accordins to conventions, however ambiguous and .nderFm:n.r.. To undFr.rand hor and u ren rh"l fun. rion r'esrhe i.all) .equ iraa (ubrle educaiion and developmeDt. To apprcpriately experience rhe aesthetic rcquircs more. This more complete concept ofa.cess inciLrdes all thar is involved in the idea ofimplementine an aftwork as discussed above. Elements ofeducatjon, the design ofdisplan rh€ organisation of conte\t, documentation and the proasses ofpublication generally are involved in this. But acc€s! must alo inolve facilitating $€ €xperientr ofmaking aftworks by other than fu y committed artists, and {br publica othe. than those wilh a specia.list inkrest in a parricular aft fom. Even Clive Bell argued this in I9I3: "In no age can ther€ b€ more than a Gw fiBr-rare artists, but in any lhere might be rnillions ofgrnuine ones" (p. 185). The ceiling plac€d upon the numbe. offullrime prolessioMl arrists which a society can sustain is constnined by lhe size and rconomic level ofd€velopnent ofthat sciety. qualty ofartwork, like any other spccialis€d and demanding labour, k clos€ly related ro th€ tjme spfnt at it, ar well as to disipline, skill and ability. Obviously, it should be a cenrral aim ofa national arts policy to suppon such anists in every posibie way.
But the personol ond sociql benefits
which follow from enobling o much orger numberof interesed rdivid.-rols q.d grouos to porlicipote ir the meors fo.c'mti^g tl-eirowr orlislico^d oestl'e'cexpe'iences, perhopslo.lheiown locolpub ic, should be o comp emenloryoim of o notionol orls policy.
But the p€^onal and social benefits which lollow from enabling a much larger nmber o1 interested individuals md gmups to patti.;pate in the mffifot oeatibg the;t ow artisl;( and aestleti expeibrceq perhaps 6r their own local public, should b€ a complemenrary aim ofa nationa.l art policy. CetaiDly the prirnary funcrions ofthe Afts Council und$ rhe 1951 Ans Act invite such poticies. This is prccisely what that newly organising tendency in Irish cultuml lile gmuped under the 'community ans' banner ! requesting. Ii is also part ofwhat good arts educatioh Som€ Public and
Pr;wte Benefirs ofrhe A'ts.
Ifthe arts can be herded bg€ther, as they are in this plural noun, can we ey what it is that dhtinguishes thejr particular power from that ofother cultural institutions such as, tbr exanlple, the sci€nces or spoft? And ifwe can, is ir also polsjble io ey what benefits accrue to individuals and societies lrom a widesprcad ability to ercrcbe this power, albeit to widely varying degres or standards, and lor ditrercnt functions? It is on such gmDds thar the caF for inctuling this dimension oflrish cultuml life r€sts. Even a panial msw€r to th€se qustions is b€yond the scope olan 6say ofpamphlet length. It . would requin: a general thmry ofsocial, percnat and societal devetopment. B;t ce;tralsed ;rrs policy-makeB strould have at least skelelal answen ro them ifaccess in its fuller rnse is one oftheir central policies. The most we cm do herc is to suggest som€ head;gs tor a construciive answer. Art male andshapes experiences which an unique ro itsett Sonetimes these are lmtinglv mcmoFble, more often they are not. Love$ ofaft do not live, to bon crw a phmse fmrn Sa-"", ,,;" a continuous orgasm ofaesthetic perception". It is not continuous beaus€ most art is nor ofa quality which would favour it nor are *r: always open to such pals ofexp€dence ev€n when in rhe presence ofwork ofthat quality. When the happy conjunction occurs, which js rclarively nrcly ev€n tor the adepr, the co-cated elperi€nce is amongst th€ finest thar human life knows. It was upon these retarively rare peaks of exFri€nce ofthe initiated thar the detached edifice ofHigh A€siheric Expfrience was erected, like on€ ofKing Ludwig's extnvagant Ba\arim Msrl€s. But most experience ofan is more at<in ro a terraced house, often pa$jrg moticed within the experjenc ofan ordinary da)l W, poJhv mus nor aliou rhF indgF oi An ro ob.cur rh. s orkings otan. A: wF rmptipd n rhe beginning. rhe mrabofan areprrcrprible marFnah painr, ear-gur and uood, human bodie,and in"nimarejone..Flluloidand lighr. Fr.. whic}ammad"rotun"rionmeanrnCluUyin"on\Fnrional wal r butway"alua.,opcn ro"hange ThFy make meaning", ma,e $a',ol u;d.urandina, tom memori*. dnd bind peoph rogrrher tlmugh mode"olcommunic.rion s 1i.h arc uniqu"ty rhFi! own. Lives which have th€ power to mtively participate in this, whether at the level otprcduction or re-cr€ation thrcugh rcc€ptjon, ar unquestionably richer lives than thos€ which cannot. Livs lived in possion ofthes€ powers wol]ld ar the pubtic lev€l, for example, be morc iikely to undemtand how man-made envionments, good and bad, create pa.all€l qualities ofexperienie for their inhabitmts, and to delrmd the best posible srandads of design and planning; toplay
with the posibilities ofhouse demration, garden design or pemnal app€annc; to make themselves heard jn demand! for high standards in the products ofbrcadcdting md recording industries, oltheatrcs and conc€n halls.
At
moft pri\ate l€vel therc would
be a e€neral undentanding that meanings in lile must be found; that se]f-knowlede€ is aU the gltater ifyou have coluland ofthe sFnbolic means with which to make that knowledg€, ahd that the sharine ofexperience ofall softs, which is something that lies at the corc ofb€ing hunan in everyday life, would b€ thin to the point of disappearance without netaphon and nusic, images and ena.tments. These are genenl sorts ofrcasom which distinguish the social functions ofthe arrr from those of other cultura.l institutio$. These are also the sotr ofbenefrts which would accrue publicly and privatdy were the powen involved in posrsing the means ofart more genenlly md sLiifully available in society. $&ether the exercis€ ofthese powe6 is always to the gDod ofthe person or conmunity is an issu€ b€yond our prcsent scope. But the need for them to be skilfuly and intelig€ntly deployed is nor. a
made as well
as
Spmdina Timc, Making Living: The qucsti@
qe
of&t, Leisue and Un€mproyment.
maierial in the manufacture oflives. It is als a force in the deov oflives. Fmm one poinrolview ir.ould bevid rh"t the\trug8lF ro.onri:,lrhFr\prndirurolrine i\oneofrhecenral strugglm ofhunan hitory Like other commodities time is owned. "My tine is not my own" is a ubiquitous uying ofthose caring for young childr€n. A traditionally felt division in the sns of 'having' time has been between the rime an ernploy€r pos€sses by virtu€ ofpaying an employee for it, and the r€st ofthe worker's time which he ca.lls his 'fr€e' tim€. Fr€e becaus€ it is up to him how he chooses to 'sp€nd' it. Whenj to follow the metapho\ one spend! something one is exchanging one thing for anoth€r, and expecting some return ofcomparable value. Sp€nding time on something is usually linked to the quaiity ofthe ftsulting experience. The quality ofmuch 'frce' time, especia ylor thos whos€ paid work is unetisfying, d€riv€s in the initial phaser frcm a process ofcontrast lrith the unsatidyine quality ofthe time they k[. But after a while it is a comon elperience that time 'hangs heavily on your hands' unles there is smethjng elr you wish to sp€nd it on. What w€ call bor€don, ftrstration, irritation or being 'fed up' are all qua.Lities ofthe *p€ri€nce as,cociated wjth this. We are ov€rfed on the monotonous surfeit Time
is a
In fact the intuition that we are in iis grip and poss€ssed by it nther than it being oun i! the corect one. The free quality has ineluctably tumed into bondage. This i! th€ rnore common experience ofuriemployment. It is also a fr€quent elp€rience ofthe retir€d. Leisurc m€rg€s into
ledargy This
is the problem for which the arts are often prcpored as a fom ofsocial therapy. A glib alsociation ofart and lejsure, $peciatly when the ida olleisun is extended to include the unlife time ofthe un€mploy€d, will inevitably lead to an emasculated undentanding and experience ofthe arts. For most p€ople exp€rienc€ with aft can b€ no substitute for paid, srcjally valued work. That h becaus€ lor most p€opl€ th€ functions ofart ar€ dill€rcnt to thos€ ofpaid
ordlng lb
murt bc
Nrnbolic ri which is
rtol lorn thosc of cly and
lltully llon rd
ol
yrnant. I lrcm onc oftha ccntral !
Enlc of
atlrPloycc for r hlm how he
rngrngg't. Fncthmg
's
lng, dcrivca in
cy !cll. But r
rh.lt i!
olb.ing'fed rtonous surGit
loul! hth€ nmon
ncfg.s into
$craPY.
emplolmeni, and dFr€for€ cannot substitute for them. Anthony Cronin is quite correct when he says that "to pre*uppose a soci€ty in which all questiom ofwork sat;rfactio\ s€eing the endpmduct-of-one'sJaboun satisfaction werr to be loaded on to art is to presuppose a monstrosity. But m equal monstrosity, and one with which we are all too fmiliar, is a wiety in which most people have no exp€rienc€ ofthe ordering, aDealling, compasionating and re-vivi$ing power ofan at all" (pp.l3-14). The questior is one ofhow most peopl€ are to hav€ that €xperience. One view, the traditional one, is ttrat they should do so as recipients ofthe work ofothen rrho arc fuly'fledged artists. The other is that ofdle cultuEl democmti€ tendency which argues that th€y should be enabled to have the experienc ofprcduction for purposes appropriate to thems€lves, ar w€I as the aesthetic qperiences of rec€ption. All g€nuine exp€ri€hces olaft, whether the ar*tic ones ofprcduction or the resthetic ones of nception, involve workofa sk €d,pe unarldemandingsort. At its b€st, commun;ty-oriented alts practice aims to creat€ those conditions where ordinary p€ople can sp€nd time working with vdious ar1 foms so that riey can male the sort ofdiller€nce to derown lives which only the arts alow It ; upon ;sues such as ther that an waluation ofthe succds or failure ofsuch pretices
It should be no surprise that community arts as a cultural tendency is so associated with the poor, the unenployed, the nargina.l. Thes€ arE rhe on€s for whom tlrc formal education syst€m has been an unhappy erperience offailure and irnlevance: these arc the ones whos€ €veryday lives ar€ mstheticaly threadbare: theF are the on€s whose time has the exchmge va]ue ofdole money: these ale the one! with such litde power to ma,te living or 'a living'. Conditions make their living for th€m, and thet don't make it easy. So ifcomrnunity afts also se€ms to be pr€occupied with questions ofpower lhis is only b€caus€ it has come to be valued amongsl the r€latively pow€rle$. The undentanding ofdle powen ofart among$ educaton, artistr lrho hav€ worked in schools ard local communities, ordinary people in urban lat complex€s and in communiti€s thmughout Ireland, and the public conpri!€d ofyoung p€ople (in their out"of-school incamations) who arc so vital to Ire.land\ vibmnt popular culture, is higher and morc sophiticated now than it has wer b€en before. With this undentanding has also mme a realistion ofthe needs that mut be met ilthe many pmm;sing but rulnerable bu& are to nowel Foremost amongst thes€ ar€ the ne€d to improve standards thmugh mor€ and b€tter training at all levels; to develop th€ infrastructur€ ofarts centr€s on a national scale and to support therb pmptrly; to develop more orgmically nlated arrs plicies so that a.ll the organisatiorx, public md private, which have an inkrest in dpects ofthis work cd collaborate to the best posibl€ e$eq to develop mor€ sophhticated uays ofevaluation; and to encourage critical *if-oatuation and d€bate. Th€s€ ar€ issues to which rhe ACE r€port wil r€tum.
!dto include rdingand rid, E
'ociaIY ofp.id
This esay has moved back aDd forth b€twe€n the privat€ and the public. Itsjustification for doing so h that experienc€ is both private and public, and that adstic and aesthetic €xperi€nc€ ar€
esp€cially so. It has arSued that our wals ofthinking about the rclarions ofaft and sciety, ar r I I lx. vantage point fmm which we do so, shape the qpes ofproblem we will encounter and soluti(n I wr may prcpose. Th€ €ssay has explor€d sone posibl€ ways ofthinking about cuhurat instiluti(n $ rr instrumeDts deliberately cmfted for the creation ofexperienfts and asks how we might undcNtn I I I thh. It suggesb as useful a distinction betwe€n policies airned at making adworks, a;d policics a;med at making artsorks work. It atlacks the idea that ther€ js some identfiabte ess€m to art. n$ stalicand historically questioDable. Insr€ad it slggEsts that a more dynamic and helpful way ol' thinking about an is to ask whar ir does, how it functions, and ho$, it is always deve6ping bacauv: human wa).s ollivins are continuallv chansins. From this penpective it argum thar i,oEy-mak(,r should attend to thege and quality oftunctions ofan as well as to fie qutiry ofparticular rype, ot' art fom. Thjs wouid then open up ways ofthinking which could altow for a more detailed appreciative undentanding ofwhat it is that rnany skilled communiry anists and arts educatoE anr trying to do. It would also give some dircctions for ways in which rhe qua.lities ofthh work and its standards could be monitor€d.
d.i
Followinga briefdcLounro, *r derelopnenr ofth" idea ot i ommunir) an. we dren 14 .o 'dentil) "omeofth. rca.onr uh1 onhodox an.poli, y p.hpe.r,vecnight haic dificut,y rn amommodating this particula. tend€ncy\ requesr! for help. Specifrcally we sp€culate that the penpectiv€ ofthe 'generalied anisd mighr tacirly be dominant, that panicuiar mnceptions ofan and artist might be taken lor gnnted, and thar an active beliefiD arr
additional to ordinary ljfe
m[ht
be
as
extnordinarv tnd
implicitty accpted.
The argum€nt pres€nted herc ir rhar our concept ofodinary lived lives must b€ €xpand€d so that the public and privat€ benefits ofaft, lvhich ar€ brie{ly des$ibed, can becone a part of everyday life md not a rcfuge from n. There is a public point ofview on the afts which is not ciincidental with that ofartjsts, and which musr also be taken into account in national atu policynakjng. Ordinary lives must contain the '€xrnord;narines' ofart, and not b€ r€nder€d oen more grey by contmst with it. The relation between ad and ordinary lives slxould be plac€d c€ntre srage so that we might b€u€r undeBtand why rhe appar€nt divorce ofthe two came ibour and better und.6r,nd rhee\.:rinC po.,iD iliries ora r.onr iliarion. Already much ofthe work being done is ofa quality rojustify the cal for ordinary tife ro reclaim as much ofan for itsefd it apprcprjately can. As familiariry with such work - and alr€ady it is very divene - glws jn time, the skeleton ofthe abstract arguments presented here will pulse
with specifrc examples. In the middl€ ages art had not yer bemme an autonomous sociai institurion and was, asJohan Huizinga put it, 'ttill wnpped up in life". Actual cuirural criric! likeJacques Bau un have v€nturcd to pmphesise that ar will r€rum ro rhe medi€val mmmunal patrem. Ifwe had b find one enmple fron the ACE prcject to support tNs ir would be Macnas and their h?nsfomation ofrh€ quaiiry ofth€ festivals to which they ontributed. Medieval life was grearly brightened by festivals. These "foms ofcollective cheerfulnes", 6 Huizinea caled them, ofer a good example ofthe reincamatjon ofart oD the streer, to take one kind ofplac where thh an happ€a. Narumlly, rhis
--
md &cl.ty, and rhe hI lnd &lution we
tud lnttilulionq,"
! tflltht undcNrand lr, mdpolicics
[! alcncc to art. as i hdl{Ll wav of ltloplng hcause lhrl pollcy-rnaken fptftlculsr &De, or ! dchl.d gnJ
lt
I lhfi
cducaton are and ilc
!ro*
t& thcD rv llodw ln rr
t.
drt! ihlr
the EnolptioD! ofart
rrylnd
t|!op.nded
so
rrprn of lioh I hot trd tru Dolcvlcna cuin rn,i* !d ccntrc stapt rtrhd b€trerxylife to k
- rnd slr€adv
ur will d
pulr
wrr, aeJohan
h havr
hd
to find on malion ofthe
d by festivals. pl. ofthc
tullllt
rhi,
kind of'retum' must not be undeNtood as a soft ofhistorical r€er€ssion. Itstead it should b€ a natural part ofordinary living in late twentieth centurf lreland. Th€ most encoumging thing about communityrriented and comnunity-siinted afts activity in Ireland tu that it ;! led by demand. Ther€ h no c€ntra.lis€d progEtrme dictating what should happen and when, no dogmatic idea ofwhat 'community arts' is or should be. Mary diverse activiti$ such as festivals and class€s, atu c€ntres and caftl renovations, community th€atE workshop's and local publishing ventures, heritage parls and video proj€ctr, skills €xchans€ workshops and anistr residencies, ar€ caling out for encourag€m€nt and suppot. ThiDkers on mauen cultural may be struggling to make seis€ ofthem, but what they ne€d is for lexible policymaken to nake nore and better mom lor them.
REFEREI'ICES
Maibra
Another Standard. (1986). Cutturcand Democncy: Th€
Londonr Comedia
Publishing Company.
Bauu,J.
(1974).
Tle
Us€ and
Bell, C. (1913, 1958). An. New
AbuseotAtt. PincEtoc: Princeton Univenity Pr€$.
York Capricom
Books"
braden, S. (19?8). ArtasrsandPeopie London: Routledg€ & Kegan Paul.
Cronin, A. (1988). Artfo. tlePeople Dublin: Raven Afts Pres. Dewey,
J. (1934, lgsg). An
Eisner, E. (1982).
zJ
Exper'ence New York C. P PutDm's Sons.
Cqzlbn nd Cunhulun: A Basis b
Decidihs what to Tbach. London:
Longman. Frere, P
(.1972). Pedagogy
oi'&e OpprEs'ed Hamondsworth: Penguin.
Coodman, N. (1978). Wap otworldmak;rs. tndiar\apoljsr Hackeu Publishing Compan)a
Goodnan, N. (Spring, 1982). Impleentation ofthe arts. TheJounal otAesthetkr drnraisn, \aL, 3, 281-283.
d
An
Gov€mm€nt Publicatiom. (19s1). ArtsAct, 195J. Dublin The Stationery Offrce. Govemment Publications. 11973). AttsAct, 1973.Dahlin The Stationery Oflice. Govemment Publications. l\!]E7). Accdsandopptun;ty: A Wh;te Dublin: The Stationery O{hce.
Paryon Cultuftl
Pol;cy.
Huizinga,J. (1924, 1972). The lvaning otthe Middle Age* Harmondsworth I Penguin. KeUy, O. (1984).
CorrDD
ity,
An Md
the State:
Stom;rg
rhe Crrade.ls
London: Conedia
Publishing Compary.
O'Hagan,J. and Dufty, C (]9A?). The Perfoming Arts and the Public Purc: An Econonic Arr]'sri'. Dublin: Th€AftsCouncil. Shaw, R. (1987).
Ati ad
rl'e Peop.le. I,ondonrJonathaD Cape Ltd.
Winiarns, R. (1981). Lelvotds: A Vocabulary ofcuLwe a,dSmrbry
Helft.
Iindon: Fonrana/Croom