Perspectives - Continuing the Conversation

Unhappy consciousness clings to the belief in the sheer weight of things, to which it is bound by its instinct for self-preservation. In for a penny, in for a pound. At two thousand marks net a month, the counter-enlightenment quietly begins; it banks on the fact that everyone who has something to lose comes to terms privately with his unhappy consciousness or engulfs it with ‘engagements’.
Precisely because it is lived as a private disposition which absorbs the world situation, the new cynicism is not as strikingly noticeable as would befit its concept. It surrounds itself with discretion, as we shall see, a key word of charmingly mediated alienation. The accommodation which knows about itself, having sacrificed its better knowledge to ‘objective determinations’, no longer sees any need to expose itself offensively and spectacularly. There is nakedness which no longer has an unmasking effect and in which no ‘bare fact’ appears on whose ground one could stand with spirited realism. The neo-cynical accommodation to the given has an aura of plaintiveness; it no longer is self-confidently naked. For this reason it is also methodologically difficult to render this diffuse, hazy cynicism articulate. It has withdrawn into a mournful detachment which has internalised its knowledge, useless for attacks, like a curse. The great offensives of cynical impudence have become a rarity; ill humour has taken their place, and there is no energy left for sarcasm. ... The peevishness which follows the offensives doesn’t open its mouth wide enough for enlightenment to take a step forward.”

(‘Cynicism - The Twilight of False Consciousness’, PeterSloterdijk)

I like the provocations format because it gives the debates a structure and a credibility. The challenge is to keep the provocations relevant, well written and challenging. That means they need to be confident and succinct. I don't care if you agree with them - that's not the point. They need to prompt responses, launch debates and flush out some truths. Quality intellectual exchanges but with a real purpose, namely to help inform Creative Scotland's policies, attitudes and actions.

The Hans Abbing provocation is a great example. I know people who found his provocation challenging, annoying and plain wrong. But, reading all the responses, it seems to me that his argument is still in the centre of the ring and punching hard - no one has delivered a knock-out blow.

Some people may be uncomfortable with a public agency being associated with something that is deliberately provocative and, to an inevitable degree, somewhat unstructured. I personally think that Creative Scotland has to be new, different and appropriate for Scotland's future. An organisation with a sense of fun, an enjoyment of challenge, an acceptance of risk and perhaps a little touch of mischief.

For you, the audience and our chorus, the invitation is to join in. Take up the challenge. Fight your corner. This site poses no threat and makes no promises. Only the arguments are at stake.

But, and here comes the rabbit punch, these arguments are vital. Scotland has some very big questions to answer: How are we going to sustain our artistic community through difficult financial times? How can we grow our intellectual economy? How can we nurture and develop the natural creative talents of our people - and keep them living and earning here? How should we promote our own culture at home and abroad? What is the place for cultural traditions in a fast-paced, faster-changing world? How should we value high-amateurism compared to professionalism? Etc, etc.....

So many questions. Not (yet) so many answers. And every sensible country in the world is asking itself the same questions. This is a race. The countries that find the right answers will start winning the cultural and economic prizes. And it starts by us facing up to the big questions - however difficult, however uncomfortable.

Perspectives can’t be the only channel for engagement operated by Creative Scotland but it could, perhaps should, become an important one. We have learnt a lot over the past few months about to structure and manage a website like perspectives. We will keep learning and we will keep developing.

We're trying to generate similar kind of discussion in a different area (see the forum at http://idea.ed.ac.uk). We haven't got nearly as far as you and hope to learn from your site. Only a few months in? This is impressive!
Coming to Dumfries on Friday to learn more....

over 30,000 pages. The content has been viewed by people from Mongolia to Mexico - as well as Motherwell and Montrose. I think that is an impressive debut.

Secondly, it takes time and commitment to build a website's reputation - especially one that isn't deliberately sensationalist. This is a very new venture and a learning experience for all those who have worked to get it established. We deliberately didn't go overboard on the marketing and we were careful not to over-hype and over-promise. This is a long-term commitment from Creative Scotland. The new organisation will seek not just to use new media and new technologies but to lead and to experiment. These may be baby-steps but the ambition is definitely to run and not walk.

Thirdly, can I suggest that the artistic and creative community in Scotland isn't yet comfortable about publicly debating uncomfortable matters. A big generalisation but, as a nation, don't we have a bad habit of skirting around the difficult issues and of sometimes taking a selective view of our own predicament? Perhaps this is more a reluctance to table opinions in public rather than an unwillingness to consider the difficult or the awkward. The reality facing all of us who care about the arts and the creative industries in Scotland is that we can no longer avoid confronting uncomfortable issues and we now need to make some very difficult choices.

As examples, I hope that 'perspectives' moves on to debate two very real and very challenging subjects in 2010. The first is the need for Creative Scotland to design and implement a new funding model. The current Scottish Arts Council and Scottish Screen funding models are very different and both have attracted some criticism. Creative Scotland will need a new funding model - one that is efficient, effective and helps to transform quality, access, participation and recognition. That may well necessitate a change in who gets funded and how. The options for the new Creative Scotland funding model will need to be identified and discussed. And that is where I hope 'perspectives' is established enough to help carry this critical, uncomfortable and unavoidable debate.

The second issue is around the whole development of the creative economy. Scotland has stumbled through the agrarian economy, the industrial economy and has just seen the very real limitations of the service economy. We need a new economic model, one that isn't so dependent on what we can dig up or on what could be done cheaper elsewhere. Can I politely suggest that we need to base our economic future around the one thing we can depend on. Ourselves. Or more specifically, our brains. Some call this the creative economy. Others use the broader term, the intellectual economy. Either way, it requires creative practitioners and creative thinkers to be recognised and valued for their economic contribution. And it challenges all those who cling to the division between pure art and applied art. The creative industries is not a Creative Scotland backwater. It is mainstream and we need to consider how we make Scotland into one of the world’s most advanced creative economies. I see perspectives as a vehicle for that consideration.

So, don’t be downbeat. We are making real progress. Which is a good job – because we have a long, long way to go.

Richard Smith, Implementation Director, CS'09 Ltd, 21 December 2009