Group Discussion 1: Artist Residencies and ‘Cultural Dialogue’

moderators: Odile Chenal, ECF and Jakob Myschetzky, Inklusion

This session will tackle the role and perception of residency programs as forms of ‘cultural dialogue’ and cultural exchange.

In Europe, expectations of artists' mobility are high in the light of recent political developments and on-going conflicts. “Cultural understanding” and “intercultural dialogue” are now key objectives. Some feel that mobility of artists can play a role in this process. Artists bring in a contemporary image of their home countries and receive a contemporary image of the countries they visit.

However, artists and host institutions are generally involved in residency programs for an entirely different set of reasons. Moreover, the resident artist’s viewpoint or practice can collide with the social, political, or religious context of the residency program. Residences initially conceived as a platform for dialogue can become of site of confrontation. In other cases, self-censorship can arise as a way to mollify controversy and relieve cultural tension. But this comes at the steep price of authenticity, professional development, and honest discourse.

Statements for Discussion

1. Why are residencies so important for funders? For artists? For host organisations? What are realistic expectations?
   

2. Can artist mobility contribute to “cultural dialogue”?
   

3. One-way programs or two-way exchange, does it really matter?
   

The issue of ‘cultural dialogue’ is interesting for artists who consider their residence as an opportunity to exchange with and work in a different environment.  

1. To what extent is a residency a dialogue? And what are the necessary conditions to make a residency a time for dialogue?  
   

2. What is the artist expecting from this ‘dialogue’, in terms of inspiration, artistic work and development?
   

3. How are the artists in residence, and the host organisations, dealing with the issue of different artistic (and political) standards? Are they topic for discussion? With whom?
   

4. How does work this idea of dialogue – or confrontation – when the artist in residency is showing his/her work in the local context?  Which is here the role of the host organisation?
   

5. What are the funders expecting in terms of ‘dialogue’ and why?
   

 

In order to ensure lively debate and leave room for in-depth discussions, we will be limiting the number of people per group to a maximum of 15 participants. We therefore invite you to send us an email stating what sessions you would like attend by March 17. Places will be available on a first come first serve basis.