Plain talk

By Mursi Saad El-Din

Not so with me. I am always happy to receive UNESCO publications which provide handy references to many subjects that concern us, covering a wide range of topics from the environment and education to illiteracy, museums and development.

One particular publication which I find really illuminating is Sources, a magazine which appears monthly. It deals with issues varying from communication to bioethics, with a dozen other specialisations in between. One particular issue which I found fascinating was Profession Artist, which dealt in detail with the problems of professional artists.

The issue contained details about the life of a dancer in Bali, a painter in France, a Canadian film-maker, a Chinese calligrapher, musicians in the Cameroon, a theatre troupe in Peru, a poet in Lebanon and a Ukrainian author. The diverse working conditions of this mixed group are set against a common backdrop highlighting the state's role and responsibility in promoting the arts in an increasingly liberal atmosphere.

The leading article started with a well known though all too often ignored fact: whether they be painters, dancers or playwrights, professional artists of all stripes walk a tightrope.

"In industrialised countries they must fight to be considered professionals. With the exception of a handful of celebrities, few can survive solely by their art, while many live below the poverty line. This financial drama builds in developing countries where modernisation often threatens the artist's traditional role in society and work either in terms of creativity and freedom of expression or because of insufficient legal protection."

The status of the artist has preoccupied UNESCO for some time now. In 1980 UNESCO held a meeting in Belgrade to come up with recommendations concerning the status of the artist. Again, in June of last year, UNESCO organised another meeting in Paris which discussed what had actually resulted from the Belgrade recommendations.

The main goal of that meeting was to recognise that artists, writers etc constitute a profession, atypical but a profession nonetheless. Of course it is difficult to lump together such a motley crew and, rather than pretending to compare the situation of a writer with that of a dancer, the meeting stated that the unity of the profession came not "from details of the exercise thereof, but from the vocation of that profession within society. In short, that artistic development is vital for a harmonious society."

The document went on to say that member states have a duty to protect, defend and assist artists. It further called upon them to "make arrangements by close coordination of their policies relating to culture, education and employment among other things, to define a policy for providing material and moral support for artists."

Now the role of the state seems to be shrinking, either because of the decentralisation of administrative powers or because civil society has started taking responsibility for tasks previously left to government.

A number of proposals were considered during the Paris meeting. One of them was a proposal for a form of indirect government support, with laws stipulating, for example, that the contractor constructing a public building devotes 15 per cent of the budget to artistic installations. Of course there are always arguments for and against any kind of state interference in the arts.

Yet another issue raised by the meeting was that with globalisation "people are increasingly looking to market products outside their borders." But at what cost to local cultures, asked the conference. This is an issue which I shall deal with in a future column.