Thursday, January 24, 2008
What's up with elitism?
I recently returned from an amazing professional development opportunity in the UK, a Rural Retreat for Emerging Artistic Directors and Producers in Dance. I have lots to share about the experience and will do so in the next few weeks, but for now I want to talk about elitism, or rather, ask a question. This morning I came across a quote about elitism from the late Richard Bradshaw of the COC. Elitism was a hot topic of conversation at the retreat. Bradshaw was quoted as saying:" The essence of the collective ritual, wether it's religion, sport or art, is to bring people to the highest point of excellence to create an elite to which people aspire - and then open up the elite so that it is accessible to everyone. That is the opposite of settling for the lowest common denominator." Is this true or a justification for support of the high arts? What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
It's actually a very sound philosophy - as philosophy. The act of elevating the best of us to a position where they are visible and celebrated does act as a catalyst to bring up the standard among the rest of us. The place where the theory falls short in practice is in exactly the same place where human beings are engaged in its reality. There is currently no antidote to hubris. Likewise, self-indulgence and arrogance are tragically incurable, except possibly through life-threatening epiphanies. The best of us, once they know they are the best of us, are apt to shut out the possibility of opening ranks, an essential element of Bradshaw's theory. Without the opening of ranks to engage aspirations, to share knowledge and to maintain a continuously evolving definition of 'best' the 'elite' which Bradshaw spoke of remain apart and as a result irrelevant to the broader body of the practicing community. Dangerous. We should, rather, engage in a practice which acknowledges that there is no permanent 'best' status, that there is no end to learning, and that even aspiration has something to contribute to the development of the form.
did you spell whether incorrectly in the quotation?
wether
Main Entry:
weth·er
Pronunciation:
\ˈwe-thər\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle English, ram, from Old English; akin to Old High German widar ram, Latin vitulus calf, vetus old, Greek etos year
Date:
before 12th century
: a male sheep castrated before sexual maturity; also : a castrated male goat
Yes, 'whether' was incorrectly spelled, my mistake. Thanks belladonna for your thoughtful response to the question about elitism. I am curious about the link you have made between elitism and self-indulgence and arrogance. A definition I found for an elite defines it as "a group of people considered to be the best in a particular society or category especially because of their power, talent or wealth." This is problematic because there is no non-normative or subjective way of defining 'best', an issue you so rightly point to . I am personally leery of hierarchies as models for behaviour and at the Centre for Creation and within the company we work very hard to acknowledge them and question their existence. But I am not sure that self-indulgence per se is necessarily synonymous with elitist behaviour. Arrogance, however, is another matter all together: I agree that in the most abusive iterations of elitism, hubris and arrogance are inextricably linked to it. What I find somewhat interesting in Bradshaw's view (as I understand it) is that the onus on this (admittedly) self-defined group of 'best' practitioners is to generously and pro-actively find ways of, as you point out, inviting learning and encouraging aspiration. To me it comes down to artistic excellence that generate products that come out of a way of working that refutes hierarchies in favour of horizontal models, ones that ask the practitioner to work deeply, commitedly and honestly in response to their vision as they have described it. Going back to the definition quoted above, I am inclined to feel less negatively about elitism when it comes out of this (again, I'll admit it, rather subjective) idea of talent as its defining value rather than wealth or power. The later two fully negate honest access, regardless of aspiration or desire to learn. Perhaps the former is what Bradshaw aspired to.
Here's another interest link about elitism: http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/080339.php
Post a Comment