One of Europe’s most recognised figures in cultural affairs, with extensive experience in cultural governance, artists’ rights, and the European Capitals of Culture programme, Mary Ann DeVlieg is a guest of Larnaka 2030 for a major lecture as part of the CultureNext network conference. In this interview, she speaks about the role of culture in times of democratic crisis, polarisation, and threats to human rights.
What role do the European Capitals of Culture (ECOCs) play in today’s world? Are they an initiative that briefly activates culture in a city and then fades away, or do they leave a lasting legacy?
The ECoCs have been learning from their experiences since the inception of the cultural capitals programme in 1985. One of the many aspects that has changed significantly is the idea that the event must leave a legacy. This might include better infrastructure for the arts and culture, better support and visibility for artists and culture workers, a more diversified and accessible cultural offer for residents of the cities or regions that host the events. So, the short answer is that it is up to the bidding city to demonstrate that it will leave a legacy, and then do so!
Cultural policies are often designed from the top down. What impact does this have on culture itself, on participation, inclusion, and also on the freedom of the artist?
In a democracy, public policy ought to be cyclical, with constituents talking to politicians and policy makers who listen and shape policies that reflect the concerns. But the policy making cycle is slow and bureaucratic and too often the policies are finally in place when the current situations or issues have moved on. Thus, it is essential for policy makers to be in continuous dialogue with artists and culture workers as well as the public.
In practical terms, what does it mean to belong to a network such as Culture Next, and how does this influence its member cities?
Networks such as Culture Next exist for mutual support, exchange and learning. Ideally cities learn from the mistakes and successes of others, becoming inspired by what has been done, and creatively transforming that inspiration into something that fits their own situation, or alternatively that can positively challenge it.
The “ethics of care” is an issue you have raised and which is increasingly discussed. Could you explain it to us?
The ethics of care is a fully recognised branch of philosophy. It is a discipline but also a way of being in the world – a ‘practice’. Care is applied to one’s daily life and work, by using certain ‘values’ such as attentiveness (seeing around you and noticing if someone is in a difficult or awkward situation); responsibility (feeling you have a role to play in addressing this); competence (having or getting the competence required in the situation); responsiveness (insuring that the person or people you are assisting are aware and agree with the action to be taken – at best are even co-creating it); and finally trust and solidarity (standing up together to support one another on an equal basis).
Could you give us the dimension of how this applies to culture?
Care should be applied when we are working with colleagues, artists, the public and even funders. People in the arts are often working too long and too hard, especially in the ECoCs! Burn out is very common, and anyone with a family is often unable to devote that much time, or else torn between familial duties and their work.
You have worked extensively on issues concerning artists at risk. How has this field evolved in recent years?
The concept of the ‘artist-at-risk’ was likely inspired by the first Scholars at Risk conference at the University of Chicago in 1999 and first used to describe artists in 2005 when freeDimensional, a New York-based global organisation, was founded. The fatwa against Salman Rushdie in 1989 highlighted the dangers faced by all writers, not just journalists. The Cities of Asylum movement for persecuted writers began in 1993 and was expanded by ICORN, established in 2006 in Norway as the International Cities of Refuge Network, initially serving only writers. Freemuse, also in Norway, was founded in 1998 but later opened to all artists and joined by newer organisations like Berlin-based Artists at Risk and ARC in the USA. Individual artists’ residencies also welcome artists displaced due to persecution. While institutions like the UN and the European Commission are increasingly focusing on artists affected by displacement, countries are tightening visa regimes and some programmes, such as those for Palestinian artists, are being stopped due to political pressure. This situation is shared with human rights defenders at risk and relocated.
How is the experience of displacement connected to the discussion on cultural rights?
Everyone has the right to cultural rights, as they form part of internationally recognised and legislated human rights, like right to freedom of speech, religion, women’s rights, children’s rights etc. It means everyone has the right to speak their own language, sing their own songs, practice their cultures – as long as what they do does not impinge on another person’s human rights. That is the basic rule of human rights – you cannot obstruct the human rights of others when claiming to enjoy your own. So, if and when people become displaced due to conflict, militia, war, extreme poverty, climate disasters and now we can speak of genocide… those people also have the same human rights as anyone else. I firmly believe that we in the arts sector have a duty to ensure artists at least, but also others, have support to enjoy their cultural rights. We can’t save the world, but we can do our best in our own sector.
Today, there is much discussion in Europe about a crisis of democracy. What role can culture play in this context?
We cannot put our hands on our hearts and say culture is the foundation of democracy; history has shown us that this is patently untrue. However, we can see participation in the arts and culture – whether by creators, interpreters or participants – as a practice that asks us to slow down, look at the world around us, and think hard about what we experience. Participation in the arts helps us to look at the world through others’ eyes, to wonder why an artist or maker made certain decisions and what options would have given a different outcome. We then articulate our thoughts in discussions, writing or artwork. Arts and culture activities also bring us together in collective experiences, whether watching a film together or joining a dance. All of these activities, from thoughtfulness to shared involvement to articulation, give us a sense of self and others, and that is the foundation of a democratic society, one that respects other opinions while also having the courage to discuss and negotiate with our neighbours and with power.
Can culture function as an “institution of trust” in societies marked by polarisation?
If arts and culture activities are planned as such, and operate according to the values of care, I would say yes. But everything can be (and has been) manipulated, and culture is no exception. It can be (and is) used to separate, to divide and to create hierarchies. That’s why we have such serious responsibilities about what we do in the public space and with our communities.
What is the most critical and immediate change that the European cultural sector needs today?
In my opinion, the European cultural sector needs to wake up about the democratic decline and manipulative polarisation of communities which is now rampant including in Europe, and become much more involved in politics, liaise with other sectors, such as human rights, to fight for honesty in politics, respect for others in our societies, and uplifting of people who are marginalised and struggling. We have to walk the walk, not only talk the talk.
Mary Ann DeVlieg spoke at the 16th Conference of the European Network for Cultural Capitals, CultureNext, as part of Larnaka 2030, on Thursday, May 7, at 11am, at the Agios Lazaros Allilodidaskalion Hall.
