Art and Neoliberalism

The Raza Group’s “Art for love and freedom”.


As much as I am enjoying going back to school after years and my new Visual and Performing Arts in Canada course, I have to say that the guest speakers so far have been disappointing.

Our professor is Dr. Craig Morrison of the Concordia University music department. His lectures are thought provoking and quite inspirational. When I tell friends that have taken the course previously how much I am enjoying it, I am told that I am lucky because they all found it to be utterly boring. I shared this with Prof. Morrison and he gave his signature smile in response.

Our guest lecturer today was a Canadian artist named Scott MacLeod; a very nice man. His early works are bold, loud, powerful and engaging (Art for Love and Freedom 1988). All the new work he showed us left something to be desired. MacLeod, a handsome white Canadian thoroughbred mentioned his interest in hockey along with some socio-political "dabbling". His trip to Mexico in the 80's left an indelible impression on him because he met artists and environments of openness and an art-celebrating culture amongst the Mexicans. Mexican mural influences imbue his work. Along with two other artists he formed a group called the "Raza Group" inspired by Mexico. MacLeod explains that "raza" means "race" in Spanish, but I still do not understand the reason for that name.

MacLeod showed slides of how he along with his Canadian Raza group members have reached out to the First Nations in B.C., the "marginalized" peoples of Newfoundland and worked on some kind of "abused" women's program. It all seemed like superficial "dabbling" into issues without any real commitment or full appreciation for them. I understood the fun of their Newfoundland visit to mining towns and the hospitality of the people. That was real and did not feel like art "tourism". Next MacLeod showed us slides of famous classical art works that his "Raza group" have copied as restaurant decor for some restaurant in Montreal. I yet again failed to understand the significance of that work. MacLeod introduced some work with a First Nations artist that will be at the opening ceremonies of the Olympics, without a mention of the overwhelming criticism of the Olympics coming from Native activists all across Canada.

I asked MacLeod about contemporary issues facing Canada such as the war in Afghanistan to which he replied that the dangerous situation in that country prevents him from going and working with school kids in Kabul. Do you have to go to Afghanistan to critique Canada's role in the war? And he never mentioned any interest in a critique of the government or the status quo for that matter. The guy didn't even so much as make fun of Harper and his "arts gala" comments. Is that the trait of an activist artist?

MacLeod also showed us his first 22 minute documentary on the fall of the Berlin wall entitled "After the war with Hannelore- A Berliner war child's testimony 1945-1982". He interviewed a woman named Hannelore who was born in the mid fourties about her life around the Berlin wall. The film started with images from the holocaust museum in Berlin. A student rightly asked what the holocaust museum had to do with the Berlin wall? His response was that "it moved him". There was great animation and composite work in the documentary no doubt, however there was also a complete lack of recognition of the "other" wall that is being built as we speak and destroying peoples lives in the same if not even bigger way. MacLeod also failed to mention "that" wall until I grilled him about it and then too his response was unenthusiastic and vague. I liked the subject he chose for his documentary but the best thing about the film was still the quote "first comes food, then morals". I pondered upon the irony of using that quote. I would use it in a film in defense of the Hezbollah, the Iraqi resistance or even the Taliban and their defense of their homeland.

I think perhaps the lecture was not properly titled. Instead of "Art and Activism" it should have been called "Art and Neo Liberalism". I questioned Prof. Morrison about his choice of neo-liberal artists for our class. He felt that this might be enough material for a first year art course. However, I disagree. In my first year at Ryerson I had the privilege of taking an amazing Philosophy course that really challenged my entire way of thinking and helped me grow. That is what university education should be all about. Challenging the mainstream and growing. Otherwise we can already get the same brain washing nonsense on TV, in the news, in magazines, in Hollywood movies. Why go to school for it?

www.macleod9.com

www.no2010.com