@Everybody
Check out another cool response to this post by Nicolette: http://nicobethel.net/blogworld/2009/08/29/ward-follows-up/

@Cyrus.
This is an excellent question. And yes if we could get Bahamian authors on the syllabus this would help out tremendously. This requires convincing a reluctant government apparatus to move in a direction that they are presently not willing to go.

And, I suppose, even if they did more of what you suggest the discussion might turn to why some books got in and others didn’t etc. “I know them long time, them people is mine…”

But I am not worried so much in what I have no direct control over. There are things you can change now, and there are things you can change later, and then there are other things.

Waiting for the government to move is not a good strategy to feed yourself. I’m not saying it won’t happen, and we need to push them, but I see this as one of those long term things that we need to work on. My focus in this series is more on what is in front of us, and what we can do now.

If I had to practically take my life in hand and beat a path through the crowd to get to the cash register at Bookworld last weekend in the wild ‘back to school rush’ ( cause we know how Bahamians like to secure books for their back to school kids) why are not more Bahamian authors’ works a mandatory part of the national curricula?

It seems to me that we have more that 50 times paid for that Mcmillian Press compound overseas and enriched foreign talent while not recognising and positively disenfranchising our Own.

What could the legitimate objections be to such a ‘radical’ proposal ??? Content?? Well if there is a view that, for example, “God’s Angry Babies” is too explicit in part for ‘innocent’ minds ( which would be an amazing argument in the face of what is dumped into homes courtesy of Cable Bahamas & satilite ) but if such an argument were advanced could not Dr. Strachan be approached about producing a “G” version for certain age categories ?? He may decline to produce such a version but no doubt he should be approached. BIG QUESTION: Who is driving the incorporation of Bahamian works into the national curriculm????…

Seems to me that there is no readier market in terms of financial viability and of course aculturating the students who will, after all need to acquire a taste and appreciation if they are to be future consumers of Bahamian art.

Seems to me that the artists have a right and in fact an obligation to the long term success and development of Bahamian art to demand such inclusion.

What an interesting series! Thank you so much for your views.

At the risk of stating the obvious, I see the issues you explore as falling into three categories:

First, there is “art” for art’s sake. The “easy” category. Just paint or write or film or sculpt whatever you want without concern or care for anything other than expressing whatever is within you using whatever your skills permit.

Second, there is “commercialism”. Also a pretty easy category. Give the people whatever you may have that they will pay money for. Do anything and everything to make as much money as you can, given your skills, knowledge, time and raw materials. The prostitute. McDonald’s.

Third, there is the most difficult of the three categories – “commercial art”. The balance between the above two. Express yourself with as much artistic integrity as possible, but in such a way that whatever is produced is marketable (salable) to permit you the revenue to put a roof over your house, food in your belly and buy the raw materials necessary to make your next artistic piece.

With balance comes compromise. Rarely will an artist ever hit upon that perfect formula (if it even exists) to create whatever she wishes and sell it “as is”. As soon as one introduces commercialism into the mix, there occurs a hierarchy within which the artist is rarely, if ever, at the pinnacle. Writers are under the thumbs of their editors who are under the thumbs of their buyers or corporate board or advertisers. Architects must bow to the wishes of their clients and to the demands of engineers and local by-laws. Painters must take into consideration the wishes of patrons, prospective patrons and gallery owners. As with (almost) all things in life, there will always be a “higher authority”.

The trick then, is striking a balance that the artist can live with – and that balance will be different for each artist. And what can be “lived with” is in turn a function of (balance between) each artist’s perceptions of needed income (do you need a shack or a palace) and artistic integrity (“If I make one more ceramic monkey I’m going to do myself in”). Is “postcard art” any less viable as art if it greatly pleases the owner as he gazes at it in his hand? Are numbered lithographs more of a “sell-out” than the single original painting if they enable multiple copies of the same piece to be enjoyed by many more people at the same time? Has the writer of a screenplay “sold out” if she agrees to edit a sexually explicit scene that she loves in order to permit the movie to get a PG-13 rating and thus get distribution? Is it our role to even judge these artists based upon their personal needs and choices?

These are not novel or unique issues – they are the artists’ dilemma that has existed since the time the artistically-inclined caveman discovered that his neighbour would provide him with food as he drew on the wall of her cave (“It’s nice, but could you move it a little to the left, please?”).

Perhaps the discussion of the commercialization of art can be boiled down to one simple question – “Will it sell”? If the market determines value or worth, then that which does not sell has no value. When we take the market part of the equation out of it, we return to art for art’s sake – the first category above. In that case, then the question (and focus) necessarily changes to simply – “Is it good”? And what is “good” is a subjective determination that will obviously differ from person to person (hence the age old debates – “The Beatles or the Rolling Stones”, “oil or watercolour”, “sail or power” and the ever-troubling “Ginger or Mary Ann”). But maybe, just maybe, if the artist focuses on making it “good” with total disregard for the market, if whatever is produced is “good enough” then perhaps a market may miraculously appear – and perhaps the quality of the resulting art may be “better” as a result.

And maybe all I have done here is restate much of that which you and Mr. Burnside have already said so eloquently, above.

Thank you again for this discussion.

More on Blogworld …

Being a prostitute in my mind has little to do with the side of your “Viability gauge” you choose to work on. Sacrificing quality and dignity for the money does.