Culture making and community (2)
Posted by Paul | Filed under culture
In my last post I pulled together a few thoughts on making art and community. Widening this out a little, we can bring in similar ideas from the recent books on culture by James Hunter Davison and Andy Crouch.
Borrowing Justin Taylor’s summary of Davison:
Thomas Carlyle’s “great man of history” view — “the history of the world is but the biography of great men”—is mostly wrong.
Rather, “the key actor in history is not individual genius but rather the network [=community] and the new institutions that are created out of those networks” (p. 38). The more “dense” (active, interactive) the network, the more influential it could be.
Yes, there have been charismatic, heroic geniuses in history (Luther, Calvin, Wilberforce, etc.). But “charisma and genius and their cultural consequences do not exist outside of networks of similarly oriented people and similarly aligned institutions” (p. 38).
…
In history, “at every point of challenge and change, we find a rich source of patronage that provided resources for intellectuals and educators who, in the context of dense networks, imagine, theorize, and propagate an alternative universe.” Along with the elites there are often “artists, poets, musicians, and the like who symbolize, narrate, and popularize this vision.” New institutions give tangible expression by forming and enacting that culture. The result is a “vibrant cultural economy that gives articulation in multiple forms, and critical mass to the ideals and practices and goods of the alternative culture in ways that both defy yet still resonate with the existing social environment”.
In Culture Making, Crouch talks about the 3, the 12 and the 120 of any cultural project: the small group who ‘innovate and create a new cultural good’; and ‘concentric circles’ of people who add the weight that allow it to reach it’s full potential.
Absolutely no one makes culture alone. There may be periods of solitude where we work to shape our contribution to our own cultural sphere and scale. But for our work alone to bear any fruit at all, we will need to join a three. So one of the most important questions for our calling is, Who are your 3? Who are the few people you trust enough to risk creativing something together?
It is such communities, not just their famous representatives, that actually transform culture. Communities are the way God intervenes to offer, within every culture, a different and better horizon. To be Christian is to stake our lives on this belief: the only cultural goods that ultimately matter are the ones that love creates.
Culture making and community (1)
Posted by Paul | Filed under culture
What was emphasised to me most clearly from the Everything conference last weekend was the importance of community & relationship in cultural activity.
The seminar on art by Matt Hatch and David Sorley made the point best – probably because the message and the medium were so well matched.
In the discussion it was clear that the successful place of art in their church came from relationship; that the key was building trust (between the leaders and ‘creatives’ in the church) gradually over a number of projects. On top of this, the church, acting as a regular client, is effectively a benefactor of Sorley’s creative work both in and outside the church.
The words were backed up by the presentation – the interaction and conversation between the two of them during the seminar made the point just as clearly: here was something that worked because of their friendship and mutual confidence.
Broadening this out, maybe we can summarise the importance of relationship in this way: without building trust more adventurous and creative ideas would be dismissed, the community would be impoverished and creatives left frustrated; without regular clients/benefactors the work would be unsustainable.
A similar point comes out in Malcolm Gladwell’s article Late Bloomers. Taking Cézanne as an example he suggests that:
If you are the type of creative mind that starts without a plan, and has to experiment and learn by doing, you need someone to see you through the long and difficult time it takes for your art to reach its true level.
This is what is so instructive about any biography of Cézanne. Accounts of his life start out being about Cézanne, and then quickly turn into the story of Cézanne’s circle.
…
But for Zola, Cézanne would have remained an unhappy banker’s son in Provence; but for Pissarro, he would never have learned how to paint; but for Vollard (at the urging of Pissarro, Renoir, Degas, and Monet), his canvases would have rotted away in some attic; and, but for his father, Cézanne’s long apprenticeship would have been a financial impossibility.
So the first challenge for those wanting in make culture is to make relationships. To lose the caricature of the artist as heroic individual, or to put aside suspicion (depending which side of the fence you are) and to work on building trust and confidence with those around.
Tags: community, culture, Everything Conference
A random walk over culture, art, christianity, etc. with occasional photographs...