Government needs to rediscover the value of cultural diplomacy
American pianist and composer Kenny Werner says that artists combine language and technology to “say something”. “They express something from very deep in their soul, or their deepest thoughts, political statements, love of homeland, love of self and of others, or just something that needs to be said! Maybe they’re just having fun.”
It’s this “something” that appeals to audiences locally and abroad, making music and other branches of the arts powerful vehicles for communication across cultures. It’s the bucketfuls of this “something ”— the stories he told the world about SA and the fun, often expressed with boyish charm, he had while doing so — that earned the late Hugh Masekela such a huge following globally. A number of SA artists, including Nduduzo Makhathini who has something deep from his soul to share with the world, have followed in Bra Hugh’s footsteps.
But the role of the arts is much more than simply a vehicle for reaching out across cultures. It has become a tool for development, a role recognised by policymakers everywhere but in SA. By recognition, I don’t mean words, but deeds — investment in the development of the arts and support for artists.
Renowned economist Amartya Sen noted in 2014 that music and smiling are important not only for a liveable human life, but as a part of a creative process which has profound economic and social implications, even as it enhances cultural lives.
“The celebration of creativity in the arts can work hand in hand with the appreciation of the diverse sources of economic progress,” noted the Nobel laureate in his foreword to a World Bank report, “The Creative Wealth of Nations: How the Performing Arts Can Advance Development and Human Progress”, by Ugandan musician Patrick Kabanda.
Sen’s linkage of music with smiling is derived from Julius Caesar’s complaint about Cassius, his long-time friend who became the instigator of his assassination: “He hears no music; seldom he smiles.”
The rest of the world sees value in the arts, investing dollops of money in the development of artistic talent, which policymakers elsewhere recognise as the building blocks of the creative economy, contributing hundreds of billions of dollars to trade among nations.
Yet SA ignores the arts, a sector that has the potential to enable young people to say
“something” while making money at the same time. In the process, they can increase SA’s exports and contribute to socioeconomic development.
The arts are the most neglected aspect of SA’s public policy. The institutions set up to serve and promote the arts are among the most dysfunctional of the state. Despite many years of vociferous complaints by artists, government has made little effort to improve its support.
This is curious given that even politicians appreciate the power of music to bring people together. That’s why election campaigns are often accompanied by music, a point noted by the late Bhekumuzi Luthuli, the maskandi musician (a derivative of musikant, Afrikaans for musician), in Phaka Msholozi, his searing commentary on the plight of musicians and how they are treated by politicians.
In its recent document explaining SA’s approach to diplomacy, government acknowledges the role of culture, which it describes as both “a tool for diplomacy and a contested terrain, to win the hearts and minds of the local and international communities”.
It notes that SA has a rich history of cultural diplomacy, pointing to its role during the struggle against apartheid. “Cultural diplomacy is an opportunity to promote and spread our culture and values, particularly through education, art, music, books, film and digital media. Cultural diplomacy is not simply about ‘culture’ in the narrow sense. It is about SA influencing the ideas and outlook of states, international organisations and non-state actors to pursue its national interests and enhance its geopolitical standing.”
It identifies the economic, cultural and social aspects of sport and sporting mega-events as potentially “a valuable tool for SA to address our developmental challenges”.
That’s nice talk. But the reality of what government does in support of the development of culture tells a different story. The SA government lags far behind its peers in developing its creative economy.
There’s no single definition of the creative economy, according to Unctad, the UN body that monitors trade and investment. It’s an evolving concept centred on creative industries which, according to Unctad, are at the crossroads of the arts, culture, business and technology.
Creative industries comprise activities such as folk art, festivals, music, books, paintings and performing arts as well as more technologyintensive subsectors such as the filmmaking, broadcasting, digital animation and video games, and more service-oriented fields such as architectural and advertising services. All these activities use creative skills intensively and can generate income through trade and intellectual property rights.
Unctad adds that Africa’s share in the global trade of goods and services by the creative industries remains below 1%. This despite the continent’s wealth of creative talent. It reflects the weakness of domestic policies and also global systemic biases.
Public policies aimed at creative industries, advises Unctad, must be informed by the recognition of the cross-cutting and multidisciplinary nature of the creative economy, with its widespread ramifications. Public policy must emphasise the “creative nexus” between investment, technology, entrepreneurship and trade.
The creative economy can generate income and jobs while promoting social inclusion, cultural diversity and human development. Even SA’s politicians will say this when speaking to artists. What remains is for government to put its money and supportive policies where its mouth is. SA’s artists have demonstrated that they have something to say. They need an enabling environment.