Taking art to the community

Press, 20 July 1979, Page 10

Taking art to the community

The Christchurch Arts Centre, after four years establishing itself on a firm footing in the old university buildings in the middle of Christchurch, is about to take a giant step outward. In a two-pronged programme, the centre is about to launch an active campaign to take art,, in its various disciplines, to the community — instead of passively sitting in the old buildings, waiting for the public to come. The first move will be the appointment of a programme organiser, a post for which applicants were interviewed this week. He will be charged with selecting artists or writers for whom the Arts Centre will provide materials, facilities, and working space, and on the completion of their projects will find a way to bring them before the public eye. The second part, if the Government approves, will use the temporary-employ-ment programme to provide mobs for as many as a dozen persons working in the visual and performing arts. One reason, for the ventures, according to the general manager of the Arts Centre (Mr Brett Riley) is the continued exodus to seemingly greener fields, in the North Island and overseas of promising young performers and artists. He believes these people are leaving because of a

lack of stimulation here. Artists are well catered for by the three main galleries, but their exhibitions seldom attract much publicity. Established actors, musicians, and singers have useful outlets in the Court Theatre, the choirs, and various other organisations such as the Canterbury Repertory Theatre Society, Elmwood Players, and other groups; but many talented performers have nowhere because their work is not in the acceptable “mainstream” of culture. The university is a strong centre of activity, but tends not to have very wide contact with the public; and a whole range of activities in a variety of arts disciplines — avant garde art, alternative art, call it what you like — is being suppressed for want of nutlets, Mr Riley says. That is where the Arts Centre can help. “We are uniquely situated to take a vigorous" role in the promotion of the arts,” , Mr Riley said. “We have the space, we have the facilities, and we have the administrative staff. It is time to make a major move out of our landlordly role to take a more active part in the promotion of the arts.” Mr Riley sees the siting of sculpture in public places, street theatre, and outdoor art exhibitions and concerts as ways in

which' the programme could be applied. But at first the venture will be on a modesty scale. The programme organiser will have a fairly free hand, but will have to make every attempt to avoid duplicating established outlets and organisations. He will also play a major role in the second prong of the venture, the proposed employment of artists under the Government’s temporary-employ-ment scheme. For some

time the Arts Centre has employed maintenance staff — carpenters, painters, and so on •— under the scheme, and now, prompted by the success of a Wellington programme, it has applied to employ a group of working artists. The Wellington programme, known as “Autumn 79.” employs 33 people, who include artists, a street-theatre group, dancers, and a puppetry troupe. Though it has po. established headquarters like the Arts Centre, and has been working from an old house owned by the Wellington City Council in Willis Street, it has been a remarkably successful venture. Artists employed under the scheme have brought their message -before the public in a variety of

ways,- by street performances, festival appearances, and performances in shopping malls. The phrase “public involvement” is a hackneyed one, but it is the key to the success of these ventures. In all the planning, the public have been an important factor. It has not so much been a case of taking art into the community as of involving the community in, art. Outdoor sculpture designed to touched or

sat on as well as looked at is one way in which this can be made to work. Outdoor drama or concerts are other possibilities; yet another is the painting of “temporary” murals on building sites. But it will be up to the artists themselves to find a way to reach the public. If the employment scheme is approved by the Government, the Arts Centre will call for applications, and all artists who apply will have to offer a three-month programme or project. In the case of the performing arts, this could take the form of a series of outdoor performances, visits to schools, or the development of a new repertoire for public performance.

The possibilities are limited only by the initiative of the artist, and

as Mr Riley says only artists with initiative will succeed in the programme. They may even, when the three months is up, find that they have generated job opportunities, as has happened in Wellington, where the Frog theatre troupe clowns are in great demand from advertising agencies. Mr Riley envisages the work scheme as being complementary to the centre’s “outreach” plans; and, he says, there should be no shortage of talent to make them successful. He sees an educational role for them, too. An artist working at the centre on a particular project could receive groups of school pupils in his studio, talk to them about it, and let them watch him working; in this way, by repeating the visits, children could be taken on a creative journey through the development of a variety of arts disciplines. Thus the schemes will not only provide working space and facilities at no cost to tjie artists, play a strong role in education, and bring a wider range of “alternative” art styles before the public eye; they will provide an outlet for talents that are now being suppressed or driven away for lack of opportunity to perform — talents like those of the highly trained musicians who have been unemployed since the collapse of the Canterbury Orchestra many months ago.

By

DERRICK ROONEY