WARNING: This post will most interest
community engagement geeks like me.
In Not (Exactly) about El Sistema, I introduced the notion that the nature of an orchestra (separate from the content of the music performed) was an important factor in its effectiveness as a tool for transforming young people’s lives. That provides me with a good segue to consider whether individual art forms might be particularly well-suited to specific types of engagement.
To date, there has been little need to consider this. Artists and arts organizations that become interested in engagement work do that work in the media in which they are expert. No decisions need be made. But the academic in me began wondering whether there might be things about the nature of the different forms (like the character of an orchestra that makes it a good fit for El Sistema’s mission) that make them better for one type of work or another. If so, artists might focus their attention on those approaches best suited to their art. And multi-arts organizations could make choices in the art form they employ in engagement programs.
So, here are some preliminary thoughts. (Yes, you guessed it, this comes from Building Communities, Not Audiences.)
The different arts have vastly disparate characteristics. While generalizing leads directly to over-simplification, there may be some merit in quickly outlining differences that may have an impact on their merits for specific community arts projects.
The performing arts take place in time. Participants and observers, to experience them, need to be in a particular place at a particular time for a particular duration, unless, of course, they are recorded and presented at another time. Even then, however, the experience takes the length of time that it takes. They gather groups of people (performers and audiences) together. In addition, live performing arts events are different each time they are presented, even if the basic “text” of the experience is the same. (No two live performances of a piece of music are ever identical.)
More specifically, theatre uses the vernacular language of its culture and is ideal for presenting and examining contemporary issues. Music and dance reflect deep cultural roots and are thus sometimes more understandable across cultures than theatre. Particularly when abstract (like instrumental music), they can be excellent vehicles for cross-cultural sharing and for developing an appreciation of differences. A further thought on music differentiates between vocal and instrumental as well as solo and ensemble. Vocal performance does not necessitate purchase of an instrument; ensemble performance is available to more people. For participatory projects, vocal ensembles provide the greatest access to the most individuals.
The visual arts are not as time-bound as the performing arts. Works have a form and presence for extended durations of time and are (usually) not dependent upon viewers being in place at a particular time. They have, thus, an advantage in extended presence over dance, music, and theatre. Representational art (with photography being a particularly accessible example) is an ideal way to illustrate conditions in need of change. Abstract art can express feelings about a subject in a particularly powerful way. Public art can be a place marker or serve the role of setting a particular location apart.
None of this is to say that any art form need be precluded from any type of community engagement work. But if one has a choice, these ideas (and the improvements on them that will inevitably come over time) may be helpful.
Engage!
Doug