Arts & International Affairs Volume 5, Number 1, Summer 2020 | Page 5

ARTS & INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
sector that took place in May 2019 at Heilbronn University in Germany. We considered
ourselves lucky and privileged to have had amazing participants from around 20 countries
and all continents. We are aware that being able to convene with colleagues from
African countries for instance is unfortunately and for a variety of reasons�that urgently
need to be addressed�by far a matter of course. However, we are also aware that an
invitation to debate issues of exclusion and (in)equality does not in and of itself redraw
or rebalance lines of power (Durrer/Henze 2018: 3).
A central concern that had been raised not only during the Annual Gathering’s discourses
but throughout the entire work of the network, was whether democracy can be managed
through a discourse of diversity (Taylor Brown et al. 2019; Cuyler 2015; Dubois
2016; Purwar 2014: 1; Schonfeld/Sweeny 2016). How can democratization of the sector
be achieved by avoiding what some authors even call a "Benetton model of diversity"
in which diversity becomes an aesthetic style or an opportunity to give organisations a
better image (Ahmed 2012: 53) but does nothing to address the deep causes of exclusion
and power imbalances in the arts (Canas 2017)?
Gargi Shindé’s text about her work for Chamber Music America (www.chamber-music.
org) and her referral to both unintended bias as well as a history of blatant racism and
active discrimination in orchestras gives compelling insights. That minorities, who created
music, which has than become a national cultural commodity, despite questionable
authenticity, did and do not actually participate in its commercial success particularly
but not exclusively in the USA, is as much discussed in post-colonial theory as is the
role of ideology in the production of pop music (George 2005). Gargi’s work for grant
equality is therefore unfortunately as important as hopefully superfluous someday soon.
Mihai Florea’s timely take on the funding policy of the Arts Council England, that has
to be understood as exemplary for other funding bodies as well, fits in this context. Mihai,
co-founder of Nu Nu theatre, critically examines the funder’s requirements when it
comes to e.g. diversity and participation�often referred to by practitioners as ticking
boxes. However, it is not only the funding policy that is in the focus of this text but
also the ‘role’ artists have to play in these ‘publicly funded’ contexts. We need more bold
texts like this and courageous authors like Mihai. It is unfortunately still a dicey thing to
criticize a funder when you depend on their support. However, it will only be possible
to improve funding strategies for the better when funders allow critical but constructive
feedback and ideas on aspects of sustainability and measurement�unfortunately not
many (neither practitioners nor researchers) dare to provide it (Henze 2017: 64).
Jason Vitorillo also asks questions concerning budget allocation and cultural governance
referring to his native Philippines. He critically examines the policy of the National
Committee for Culture and the Arts. The allocation of support goes to a few and
not necessarily to the ones that seem to have the highest impact on society despite all
difficulties to measure this.
2