The following question was posted last week (July 29th, 2010) on Facebook in preparation for a public discussion on a mural painted on Bay Street and Frederick Street by Maya Hayuk, a visiting-artist. Below the question is my personal response. Please ignore spelling, grammatical and structural errors :).
Who owns cultural expression? If a non-Bahamian paints a mural about Junkanoo, is that art work any less valid? Does culture depend solely on introspection, or is there value in outside perceptions?
First off, I don't think anyone can "own" cultural expression. It's something we do, something that's a part of us that in instances we control (the arts) and sometimes we choose not to (fried food and sweet-hearting). At the end of the day it's an experience, one that differs from person to person but has strong elements that are shared by a collective. We do however posses some form ownership, because culture is who you are and what you do and the individual and the collective are held responsible and accountable for it.
With regards to non-Bahamian art, if developing cultural diversity is the goal, the non-Bahamian perspective is a valid one. It allows us to better understand ourselves by providing a larger context to compare our own cultural development, structure and principals to. In actuality, simply the act of engaging a local community by a non-Bahamian brings about a different type of dialogue and can provide potential learning experiences no matter the intentions of the non-Bahamian. (Non-Bahamian is a strange term though, because what makes a Bahamian, a Bahamian? We live in a culture that has complex relations with the foreigner that skews what it means to be Bahamian or non-Bahamian.)
However, in the context of a touristic perspective (someone with external perceptions and assumptions of the place without any substantial connections with the place) a problem can arise. If a product (in this case a mural) from the a tourist or non-Bahamian perspective is used as a representation of ourselves (Bahamians) then it doesn't become an act of building cultural diversity but an act of distorting cultural identity.
There are many examples of this in formalized Bahamian visual art history. The objects from the tourist's eye become the prize Bahamian possessions and the objects from the Bahamian's eye are often grouped into some cultural abyss and are never claimed. An example of this and the damage it can cause is looking at contemporary Bahamian art.
Contemporary artworks created by Bahamians and speaking to issues Bahamians live with daily are often criticized as not being Bahamian, of being too international or American because of influences of different mediums and styles. Even though the content of the work is often an exploration of Bahamian place and identity, the objects and ideas are ultimately disowned by the masses and often are not recognized as a part of Bahamian identity until a much later date if ever. Yet what is typically considered traditional or "true-true" Bahamian art primarily shows content through the touristic perspective (beaches scenes, sunsets, boats, foliage, etc) and is held at the highest standard of what Bahamian art is and can be. The irony is that in The Bahamas representational and natural art was initially being produced by tourists or non-Bahamians and as more Bahamian born artists began to emerge the content and styles were adapted and claimed not simply as a part of Bahamian history (which it is) but as our identity, dismissing any other forms that challenge it.
In the case of Maya Hayuk's Junkanoo mural on Frederick and Bay, whether it was intended to be a response and/or dialogue to our culture or a representation of it, isn't extremely important. What is important is how we (the Bahamian public) choose to internalize the work and how we decide to place it within the conversation of our identity. The beauty of public art is that no matter the artist's intentions at the end of the day it's how the community responds to the work. It's in our court to decide if it adds to our experience or if it's limiting it...
- Jon Murray
P.S. Please respond
it is the artist interpretation of what junkanoo ment to them at the time of wanted it to meen something to them.
ReplyDeleteremember that there where a few foren artists brought in to paint for this little show for the public.
whats the problem?
ask and you shall receive, have you all got buyer remorse now that you received?
maybe it might of been better just to paint a bunch of poinciana trees and kids swimming for silver dollars dropped by tourists visiting from cruise ships..if this is how you people are going to respond to public art count me out of it... I will never be your dancing monkey again...
Always remember that art is subjective so we can never really determine what is the true make and model of Bahamian Art. Like Arjuna said; "it is the artist interpretation of what junkanoo ment to them at the time of wanted it to meen something to them."
ReplyDeleteI think the interpretation is brilliant and its a derivation of someone, an artist at that's identity.
What is Bahamian identity anyway? Is there a real definition?
It's not a part of Bahamian identity but it doesn't have to be. It's an expression of how she views this culture through the experiences she has had in her own. It shouldn't be seen as speaking for Bahamians or Bahamian culture etc. but rather an expression of how someone from an outside culture views our own. Again there is nothing wrong with that. It simply adds to our physical landscape. It is inconsequential to our identity and only makes an impact based on how highly we regard the options and interpretations outsiders have of our country and culture.
ReplyDelete