SECTION ONE

ARTANDfHEmDINARYREFLECTDNSONARTNON-ARI/5I5AND POLCY-N,AKING/N/RTIAND

AWEWPANTBYC/ARANBTNSON,CHAIRPERSON A ACE.

From the beginning ofthe ACE p.olect in 1985 it was our intention to commision pamphletswjthin ou. arca ofintercst. $e wer€ not sumessful in this partly becaue potential authon who rcapproached were too busy, and paftly beuur we vere unable to find authors for particular topicswhich wejudged to be ofntrlevance. We continue to believe in the ne€d lor public debate as ancsntial element in ef€ctive policy-rnakiDg, eqpecially in the ans. h lhe case ofthe relatioro ofaflmd community in particular, we feh tha! an argumen! had to be made which would contribute tom understanding ofth;s as vet underdeveloped tendenq in I.ish afts poli.y-making. whilsiintending to be prcvocalive, such an argument should not be seen d a challen$ to, nor 6 analremalive to the main preoccupations oferisting policy. It is an aryrment 1br uclud;Dg this set ofcultual tendencies in the overatl puniew ollrish ans policy-making. Ard since this h a young andas }{t il-defined tendeDcy in Irish cultural lile there are many ways oftrying to undenland it- Whatfolows is one such way. It is written for policy'maken in the filst jnstance and is an attempt toexplore some ofrhe ideas at work in thinking aboul issues ofart, comunity and eduotion.Nonetheless, I hope that i! may also be ofintelesi to practitioners dd othen working in relaicd

Srying what de thirks ud thinking what de says,

In Philadelphia Hffi I Cnme Brien Friel faced the pmblem ofhow do convey the contrasts ofwhat Gar thought and u hat Gar eid by using one acior frr Gar public and one for Gar pivate.This reDsion between the publjc and the pri\ate, betw€en what one says and wha! one thinks,reemtes in the workings ofmost p€ople who wrile $ ilh th€ hop€ ofinfluencing something. There is

m overwh€lmjng lendency to presenl a 'finished' documen! one which has met and confrcnted thenec€ssary obslacles to being heard and undenrood by trying to dticipate them and to wite aroundor o!€r or thrcugh or under th€m. The result is often clear md polished, while remaining asubre uge. It rov have the initial appeal ofthe latterer or seducer, but likely as not ir will have thesame conrquences also - Ibelings olhaving been used or 'had', with all lhe negative cons€quences$ hich follow froln such fe€lj'gs.

ln rcflecting upon areas ofexpe.ienc€ which claim a special attention for the prc.cses bywhich things arc done, the better to imprcle whar is done, why not let Gar Public and Gar Privatespeak with one voice? Why not air in this esay some ofthe con€rns $'hich give it this shape Etherthan any other? At the outrt lefs oller a contmst between what I lhink I ought be saying ar well as

what I do say.

First, why is this essav b€ing written? Publicll one mighl continue to aselt that there is a needfor clear inlellectLral argumens which convincingly argue for changes and m-emphars in lrishcultunl policy-making, and $at $is esay Fts our such arSumentq but privately one mightwonder $'hen the bes! intellectua.l arguments ever had decilive e[ec! in nalters ofeducational,so.ial or cultunl policy-making in Ireland, or anryherc els€, for that Mtrer. Raiionality is not the

Whilsiintending to be provocqtive, such onorgumentshould not be seen os o chollenge lo,noros on o ternotivelo the moinpreoccupotions of exisling po icy.ltisonorgumenlfor including this setof culturoltendenciesin ihe overol purviewo[ rish ortspolicy moking.

final arhter in matteF public or political, at l€ast not ntionality ofthe son wh nrh t)r'$ ! rr{ ( [ 1 li[ rt rlto be made m dependingon the balancr achided between intelleclual argumorrs litr rrItrB II{Ind€€d, at some mute gut level, one can have a sympathy with this pnctical sr rsp i(io r ol t I tr'

inie-lle.tua.l. So, in addresing tlrcs€ who nake and inlom arts policy what is oft I o 1rr rl rl ir ly r ll , lr

Wihour declaring who they are, one night begin to visualize the Dmat is I'r'rsr rrrr. ir r t lr t',

policy-making and policy- influencing play, and try to figure out the ways in wh ii)lt t I [y rr rr hr n trtt'

ofthe ar€as with which one is conc€rn€d. Thb done, aryuments mighl then be Ibnn 'r

l{r.( I ir I hrr I I rr

way that when they rcad them there ;! the posiblity that a ftftain r€cognition, . (rl tirrcomfonableflavouroffmiliaritl will enliventheirreadingand b€gin towinthcm ovcr' l|iiDepatmcntal Secretary only attach€s signifienft tojob cr€ation, so lefs write ol\hc.i(

'l N lnlr r rl |r I

ofthe ans; that k€y politbian has a paticular xenophobia, $ arguments for nat;oral cr rll r rr . rrrlofi'ered; this key funder is known to want to conhibute to North-South peace prcccs{ s, v t

arguments for the rcconciling po$rN ofthe arts ar€ prcs€nted; that major industr;al arr I ; r rlit ir r lly

inltuential patrcn is known to have a penchant for a panicular arls activity, so i1s virtD* {t ('qtolled. But what is bcing done hen? This could go on forever How are you to know wlrat tt ,

includ€ or exclude? Ila billionaire eccenhic, with a knoM and proven softspot lbr collc(rl irrg

doorknobs should happen to take an int€rest in lreland, is thel€ an argument to be ollcrc< I r rl rt ir rg

doorknob collecting and aftistic ac.€ss?

We could o{Ier nanes for the argument'packages which are available ofilhe shclli amor rg

thcm are 'economic', 'noml guilf, 'national shame' and 'bandwagon' argum€nts in addit ir r r to

the pl€thom ofaesthetic md intellectual ones. But already one might b€ experiencing a (d 'rirr

letharey, a faniliar dQ,i a. From having prcviously urd these approac.hes, and from oltv tv h rg

similai uses by othen, one intuitively feels that on their own or even all together, they ran ly lrirr rc

the prr:tective defences oftheir targets. And you youMfprobably have your favourites anxn rg I I ris

library of 'ers to make'.lvhat makes for a favound argument? Usuallyr but not aluzys so simply, it h onc wh irrlt

prcvides rcasonably solid and ule grcunds fmm which to suNey th€ territory I1 is not simpl(

bmause social and cultural habitats are only partially tlere to be surveyed; once you rcalisr I hrrl I lrvery act ofsurveying them, ofhaving this panicular vantage point and point ofview, .tzrir I h irparticularc ltural world or dy oth€r, $en the rcally inteBting problems begin. So whc' o { l( ) wilbegin an argument for seriously altending to a particular aspect ofthe rclations ofcomrnrrn it irrr toanhtic and aesrh€tic experience? $hy not besin with the idea ofexp$ience itself.)

StartirA frcm'Experi€Dce1

Without being unduly obscur€ about jt, ther€ is a distincl;on to b€ made between ourexperienm dd our thoushts about our expedence. How we think about ou. experienc., thc

From our knowledge of lrish sociol ond culturolhislory we

^now lhoth gh quo'ity expe'ienes r

trese domoins hove rot been conmonploce irmosilivesond hove certoinly been obent in ihelivesofmony.

intellectual DIY kit which we bring to thejob, ptays a major paxt in sl1apine the qualitv olthat

"xperien' c.l p"nicula ll s\apes our memoricol ir:and ir i, our mFmorie" ol an e\pet iFntc rhar

ue rcI]e r upon u nen we want ro undemand uh"t it *a'aboutSo ifwi were to say thar the b€st staning point for undeNtanding what rea[y good afts

education might look like, or for recognising high quality community-situated ans adivitv, lYas a,expenace ofihem nther than an abstEct intell€ctual axgument then we would still have the

prcblem ofundentandingwhat dur means From our knowledg€ ofldsh social and cultuml .

Listorr we know that high quality experienc€s in th€s€ domains have not beeD commonPlace inmost lives md have certainiv been alxent in the lives ofmmy Consequently, an appeal to FrsonalerF-rienc.,ahhoushrhemoqrhnilFmearuolde\eiopngaprodu,ri\egloundeddialogu'run"rhensi< or a ppcaling only rorhoralftad) .on!intrd ol rhF \ alucofsu.h expcncn, c

But ifthis ii how things ar€, then the only option open to those convinced ofthe value ofsuchexperience, is to create the mnditions which favour thes€ experienc€s and allow them become more

€iued. And in the m€antirn€, for thor who ca"lnot be sloM their value the na1 b$t option is to

rell them ofit. And again we come back to rh€ distin€tion between experience and rcflection upon

-Ifitistob€uponexp€riencesofaparticulart}?ethatw€establishourvmtagepointfor

suweying the arts, connunity and education, then we must be careful not to pre$rme that th€ tem'elpdienie'has a single, generally accepted meaning Its history showsquite th€ opposite lt has

had many, often @ntradictorf meanings.Perhaps its nost widely und€$tood vemacula. m€aning h6 been that ofa private, {irst hmd

evenq thec;nnotationsofthishaveban Primarily individua.listic Experienceisomethingthathappem 'inside' an individual and is the individuah 'own'. The concern has b€en to undentandtG prcmses by which th€ individuai is able to construct exp€riences This is a p€rfecdy valid and

sefr.rl way ofthinkins about qp€rience, but it is only one t€m in the equation. Psychologieg

specialize in the explomtion ofthat padicular t€m. Another is dre ways ofexperi€nce which acultural world supplies to ia inhabit2nts. Such culturaly specific waF ofexperience Pre-exist anvnew member ofa society and are thought ofas beitg independent and 'outside' ofthat membef,History althrcpology, vxiology and other soc;al sciences take this as their focus. This is a morepublic dinension otexp€rience.'

U h.nexperienreolrhc ans sanaly.ed uharue lnd isa ro.es'olmut ual, onstru.tion inwhich the person recreates the al1 obj€ct dd the object constructs or recomtmcls some asp€ct ofthepenon. Tlie person and the work ofan 'make' and 'remake' €ach other i)r the most conple' andsubtle ways. ifthe anwork is genuin€ly inno\ative it may also have to cr€ate a cont€xt wh,ich wilshape experienm in a way thit is apprcpriate to its novelqa Emereing from theprivacy ofa gifted

artiit's world for the fint iirne, a picturc or a poem may have to count mongst its work the task ofbuilding iis own public.

Cliarly we need to undentand 'experien€' d something that is borh private and public' as -

smething simultdeously 'inside' and 'outside' the p€rson. Ifwe don't, then our undentanding of

Schools ond school curricuio hove beendescribed os instrumenh for the creotion o{minds. We mightolso describe culturol:nsti'uions such os museums, iheorres ondgolle'ies os i.1strU."lelts torlhe c.eoiionorexpedences.

,1.-1yf-,;'t*"*= w l n\ t,kea onc.winsed bjd And irhr da,ir ,,,(r,\r.,,ntrtroynamrcsot experien@, howcaD wr rr.tn,".g"m..r;'rtrlra.rnrJpr:il;;,:;ili:'*11 "8'\r"iFnw'orapr i'"r.,,k,,nlA, r',,p"n;c,lu, rlp*ore*p-;i- '-4i Pur\-makm8'horrldLrabourrl!nni',f,l,{i|r1rrlrr

Cuttural Ifftitutior6 ard th€ Creation ofErT,erienc€s.

.^. Sc hooh and schai cu ricu la havc been .t.t Me,. reuz . wc mshratsod", ,i1,..,1,,,*r .*i'.kg "r in5rrumenh lor thc'1,,,trr, (rl",irxt.

"insrrum"nsror rt.ireai;"";;';:"*:;':::1u^* hsmusum' 'r( rt\nrxr'{nrr'1irr

oLira e.cnr.rhrnu.ma, ,.uil:.;il:i'::ITI"D' c arcrhe ioinr l'mrrr riu'r"'r'r\"'r,rr'llrl."'".,,"h",.n;i..;;"#;:iil,;#:il;l].lt:.fit;1il:,,x:::lT,,:ijlilli:l1l,,H

. Take asan examph DL,btin.sNaLural Hjsrsnen\,'ronanrajina,ion"'.n,n"",,.n,u,.-oltse,'mar\'lcrionsqu.,r'op.n(di[l8t?rorhFpubl;,dwonderruj..u*,i.,"ru;il,1"'j''i"or,(hcnaruralaotldwa'in'.n*,'1,n",'r,'lilopened.DrD id Liv,nB;;;:iil;;: f-"Yid a' hrcpolosrui exh ,ir \' Fou! i,),:'hrruri.a. on" airn orr\. mul-u"m,*,"i,,"".]iI, 1,-.9.\'ah,ru'"onhNr..nrdiro\c;i,\I,bvprernrirg,amco"mne."'",.;;;;;il'.1'l'"T'1o\etonc'u'irhaL,'dr'urnarirc,r"rrrrr"raronoml r"mecr ospeak !.;;,.;il::;:",:9"rland' rah \4r'..n L)

' ra*incn,ionln,r

dominan,,on*in,ne.\p";.;;.."ii:;;#;*:"dF! rd'onnd F:nri'n"cmu$hav.r(r1,vcaacourd haercnndcirr, ;-;;t;.i':;:;l"l'""s r hcdi't',roaof rh'muvum inrhortrrryrh"ex.i,.m.nrora burscon;"e b-,, i,;..".1':flT,sas

Fnabline it" vi'l'oaropa'1i.iparc i"r.ne.jions o, rs wo, k,ib;;;;;""1;i1,il;_qiljll

"T:f,:i.;ii:l;l lllii*. -;

rnrcrdFrplrnaa and stx. jalisd. In rrme. DubijrcmooormFnr or an hisrori'ai*'a" or" v;.,o;..-) 'iroridn

\a urar Hi'ron \4u'rum u..am' rlnexhiLiride" vsurLe.trirfun,_,,.-,.*^.j.1--ll-"j1,,a,h,{orynurum.lLh".ir.chLecomcanjoin'r1

' -" .1' : L:-"," i;;;;,"il,:";JJ'l;iT' I.he ')p'

orexpFrjen'e h ni' r, thi' in!i,u,io,,nin.'e'n,h "Fn'ury id.a y

' i*" l, " *". i,,"a,il i:not oncolnoraleia aphanrdsmor'he la,,

rnr.Iecruaranda.srhan n_.;;l;:;;il:"r",,em@n'n winr.r.dnd hirh rhf emcpftrdins r hr posibit,r) onr,";J', r..-;""Lff'oland

l'@kshol' Th'r N a sr rons.ae rorderrinion acid,,u,he, iam. l";;.,;;;j;;"i,$jj:,cxp.,i* e.ro;r nou i, rs n"ar

-. vle coujd ten4hen lhe analysi\otthe r!De\n'\ruvumdndexrend iUoo'h.'.,",

" ". '..iii,,r,l:i'ri 'r'r'ar'db\DLblinsNarur"lHi'o^

andna,ioDdipa,15. Aran,. h;i;i;ffi;J,i.s-Fn.''hatit'"'.itrm," Lollcqe".an',.nrr;,.dcr:ory.terr , iarred m.rn m"; ,

'; ,;.;;;i ;;';:"'"rd ' on$crcrPa' h or

' hes' in'ri,,''

'nn\ i.

,nrcri^ rudre*p€nen.e panruldrttP':olan Ltii- apnh.ri. and

:--.,,Her $: wgutd fiDd al vx,ol .ubrtesrmitarrrres,nd dillern, .. D-rM mh oL, , ho.LnrnsIullotr. 8u / se rouk " ,uBt, iFnrtr tons.ime Irdca.inlomineuh. kind."r.,p.,;;"*ii,ll.ifiTruiijl:;iIJ,rillJ,l::iff,T"r:llI.

The discontinuity of 'Art'ond everydoy life is

octively enshrined in these greot buildings, just

os it is ln the lnfluentiol qestheticism of Clive Bell.

There iso growing belief thot the function ofsuch golleries ond museums is not tholofosophisticqted storehouse of 'works'; insteodlheir centrolfunction is, os Neison Goodmonhosorgued, "to moke work work".

intend to create are loday qujte $milar to €ach other but quite diferent lrcm th€ir origina.l

Then, the objects were qpected to speak lor rhemFlves: one side in the parrnenhip ofmakingexp€rienc w6 giv€n primacy. For rhis solemn tmDsaction to take piac€, suirably awe-inspiringbuildingswere reqund. The objecrsfilling rhese particular placeswer€ rvrench€d frcm theiroriginal contexb - domestic interiors, chur.hes and remplesj palaces dd pubtic plac€s, acrcsmillenia and made to seNe the social and political needs ofthese new q?es ofpublic instirution.Sometimes within these buildings anempts werc made to rcplicat€ the Fmblan.e ofthe originaicontext, as in the set-piec€s ofthe Naturdl Hisrory Mufum. Bur always rhese have th€ cotoralion ofthe institurion housilg and exhibiting them. They wiI have long since ceased ro r.urcrbr as theyoriginally did. They are now made ro function djf€rendy in line $'ith rhe n€eds ofthe musun orgallery

The impact on the visitor is, mo,\: often that not oveffhelming; smetimes it is one ofawe andreverence, sometimes ofdutilul borcdom, mosdy in b€tween. Either way an imprcssion oflv,har artis is conveyed to the public, md thar impr€ssion, which is conv€yed by the architectun as well as bythe exhibits, has in tlrc twentieth century involved an equation ofmus€um and cathednl, or chapelai the mor€ nodest level. AsJacques BaEun has shown us, 'Arr' has tak€n over and been giv€n romany ofthe redemptive powen ofr€ligion (Bmun, 1974).

Despite his mndenmation ofthe dryly erudite 'museum atmosphere' this is prcc;s€ly whatClive Bell aqued lor in his A.r of1913. "Now", wrcte Bell, 'lhough no relision cm €sape rhebinding wads ofdogna, thet is one that thmws them ofmorc easily and lieht-heanedly than anyother. That r€ligion is art lor art is a rclision" (p. 181 ). "ADd as", he conrinued ,lhroughout rheages, men and women hav€ gone to temples and churches in s€arch ofan ectasy inmmpatible withand rcmote from the prcoccuptions and activities oflabo.;ous humanny, so they may go to rhetemples ofan to experience, a little out ofthis world, emotions thar are ofanorher . . . Paironage ofthe Ans is to the cultivated class what rcligjous pnctif is ro the lower-middte . . .', (pp. t?s-i 76).Th€ dis.onrinuity ol'Art' and everyday lif€ is acri!€ly enshrined in these gtat buildings, jusr d ir isin the inilu€ntiai astheticism ofcuve Bell.

Yet sinc€ the establislment ofthese cathedrals ofcultur€ there have been qujr€ radical shifts inthe undentanding ofhow they should funcdon. No longer are their objects erptrted to rnakethemrlves clear in an unmediated way. Th€ artention has shifred !o that other parner in theconstruction ofexperience, the Frsn The novel idea ofmore recent times is that the percn needsro beprepared for his/her encounter wirh the a.t object. Attention to borh is now se€n ro beneceslary ifthe creatjon ofth€ type ofexperience disringuishing that pafticular insritutioD is ro beachieved. Th€r€ is a gmwing belidthat the function ofsuch galleries and nuseums is nor that ofamphisticated storehouse of'works'i inslead lh€ir central funcrion is, as Nelsn coodman hasargued, "to make works work" (G@dman, 1982).

The ideo thoiwhot distinguishes 'Art' from otheroreos ofculture lies ln something ihqt ii doesroiher thon something thot il is is o recenione.

IT

Makirg Artmrks WorkThere is a ctear distincdon between making artworks, md making artworks work. The fiat

has to do with what Goodman calls execution, the €cond with what he cals imple,nentationB€hind this distinction li€s a th€ory which says:

- that human undeNtmding d€pends upon our ability to us€ symbols, to ur things that canstand for other things - the word 'pmm', for instance stands lor a oilmtion ofwords functioning ina particular way;

- that ther€ are many ditrerent types ofslmbol system (words, numb€rs, g€stur€s, pictures, andso on) and nany difi'erent wa) s in which they \rork and can be made to work;

that medings are made, like othe. prcducts ofhuman b€ings, and that they are made with

- thar the solt! ofmeanings which n is possible ro make in one system, say within amathematical system, arc quite ditrerent lrom those capable ofbeing fomulated within another,within a sculptunl qstem lor instdce;

- tha! a key question to ask ifyou want to unde.srand any pafticular $mbol is how is itlunctioning or working?;

- that the afts utilis€ symbol systems ofa particular type whic-]r arc made to work in distinctive

- that for an artwork to function aesthetically there must be a public dimorsion to it, with atleast oDe p€rson relating 1o the anwork, md with both peNon md vork making a conuibution tothe rcsultingexperience;

and that all ofthh is p€Nasively conditioned by the cuhure and the times and the contextwithin which it mcun.

Itisd frcult to find a simpl€r and morc succinct way to say thir. Paft ofour argum€nt involves

clearly rcognising how intellectually demdding ii is to understand aftistic and aesthetic

erperience. And consequently how challenging js thejob offinding a productive inte[€ctual basis

which willjusdfy sympathetic md clear sighted policy'making in the fields ofan, comnunity andeducarion. The.e are many mgles to a worthwhile building.

When Leonardo painted the 'Mona Lisa' it functioned j' a particular way as a Picture in a

culture whicl undeNtood the way in which picturcs like this worked. But when Marcel Duchampp€ncilled in the moustache and goatee on a print ofMona Lisa in 1919, it wd clear that afundmental shift had occuned in the way that ihis particular inage had come to function, as wella in imags generally. Now it was bound to the kNic€ ofa mdically di$erent set ofm€anings. Inthis new age ofreproduction Mona Lisa @uld be nade to app€a. on ttr shirts and billboards, as

herelfor androgynous, selling drinks or mocking the aspirations ofRenaissance art.VeMtilitv ofsubject and material mdks th€ artistjc and aesthetic lile olthe tw€ntieth century

And from the point ofview ofour preseni r€fl€ctions on the relatioDs ofart, community and€ducation, th€rc is the veMtility ofways in which aftworks ft,crion. Th€ idea that whatdistjnguishes 'Aft' I'om other areas ofculture h something that it doer mther than smething that it

Tn'swoyot lookirg ot tl'irgs noy hove l,ttle

diflicrirlv in oss;mrl;rrno Morer's Worey'rlies b.-rt

noy be reo.,,ceo tc qi i'dignon'silerce wl'en

corr'ortedwi'r o piece likeJoseoh Beurp s

1965 Performonce worl' How to Exploin

Pictures lo q Deod Hqre.

at"Kenrone.\ndni\on.rharha'NolurioMDimplrLarion.lorrhc"ef-undetrrandingofedumriontleninir"moJgFnFrours€trca*n*rhari"nuchwiderrh"nsch@lingandwhj"hshould include what is often r€f€n€d to as 'community arts')

It is a saG asumption that most cultural policy-maken, and most educationalistr, wouldaccepttheauthoityofaquestionlike'l44ralisaft?' That it may be an €xtremely dimcult question

to answer would be generauy amepted, but so also would be the beliefthat works ofan, when

stripped ofall but their 'esrnce', shar€ cenain basic common qualiti€s Those with an inter€st inthe historl ofthe ideas which have lomed and reliTmed arcund th€ notion of'Art in Westem

cultures, ioupled with an int€rest in the tlP€s oticl€ which aft (!€€n with Westem ey€t has plaved

in the gr€at @iety ofhuman societies, may f€el l€ss ceftain about dle us€tutness ofthis question

ihaD othen. \\rhat ifth€r€ is no 'eMnce'?\ 'llen hearing policy-malen md a!1s educatjonalists speak ofthe reasons why they think

what they are doing is importdt, one olten has the sense ofa large time-lag, an asychrcnony,between the int€llectual origitr ofthe ideas ofer€d lojustify their P?ctice and the changed natuEofthe afts in the tw€ntieth €ntury Unfortunately, much ofthe work evident in arts educationrens very much in tune and slDchrony with these ided. Like the Natural History Musum itsmells ofa pdt age, albeit only a rec€ntly p6t one. The id€a ofdrc 'beautiful' is no longer a cornmonone in criticim, a€sth€tics orpmctice bur it sti[ hd cun€ncy in vemularthinking about art So

has rhe aMciation ofan with demonstmble skilfulnes, and with th€ idea that good art h art that

'copies' some aspect ofthe world we[. This way oflooking at things may have litde difliculty inasimilating Monet's Waredt'bs but may b€ reduc€d to an indignant silence when conlronted witha piec€ likeJos€ph Beuys's 1965 Performance work I{o|| to Explain Picturcsto a Dead Hft Tl'epioblem is not that ar1 is not about such things; it is that an is about rnuch mort thar such things.

The belidthat the key to good educational pmctice and to good arts policy-roking resides

pdmarily in fie 'wiat rl art'? question is ctElengEd by the 'l4rhe, is alt?' question posed by Nelson

coodmn (Goodnan, l9?8). Apa;ntinsby Patrick Collins do€s not fulfil ilsfunction until it is s€en,

nor a poem by Seamus Heaney untit read or head. Our experienc€ ofth€ painting nuy b€ non"aesthetic in all sorts ofMys such c my use ofit nerely as a hrcscnen or as m investment stondaway in a \ault. While rmainins an arlwork in thes€ cases it does not function as one "Executionconsists ofmaking a work", argues Goodman, "implenentation ofma.king it work" (Goodnan,1982, p. 282). And, as many peopl€ who collect flotsam on shorelin$ or old oak in bogs or twhtqdpiecs ofold machinery will know, it is quite posible to mak€ something function aestheiicallywhich was not mad€ to do so.

The insight that works ofan requiE v€ry detailed attention ifthey are to be pmperlyimpi€ment€d, or Mde to work by allowing them to firnction aestheticaly, is the distinctively new

tr€nd in modem mukum, galleries, and artl centres. This m€ans that they take it to be pan oftheirresponsibility to so organize the wals in which their institutions create experiences that the 'works'pEseDted arc 'understood'. Ifthey are aftworks, this means that what and how they qmbolize willbr appr€hended, and in such a way that the power ofgood art to chang€ how p€ople perceive and

organ;ze thelNlves and their worlds wiu work ro best efect. Lecrur$ and class€s. bmts and wort_pa, k5- qork(hop6 by dni\rs and o i,i... guid.d roul\and qptnn inrdrurionatpoli.i.s in rhe.e areas,a rzll Faamphs otpm, rice, srared ro makeadworlc hork. \,\ften badl) don;rh.:f fom Cti\cBe!'s 'tyranny ofenditon'. Followins the same line ofargument w€ ca; ey arts education has, as adefinniv€ nsponsjbitity, a k€y cont.ibution ro nEke io th; implemenration ofaltworlc in oursociety. Similrly we un argue that m orgajrarion like the Ans Council will ody achi€ve its mostcoherent impact on Irish sociery with a proper balanc ofatr€ntion to pmvisions to. theinpl€mentation as well as lor the making ofanwork$

Intheexisting\yayofadninist€tivelyorderingirsworL educationand'comunirv afts,$ould torm

" laEe prn ofrh. AnsCoun.il s(on,riburion ro$ard. makingan$orks hor k. Thes.

are olrccent origin within its catalogue ofwork, and an: stil uncedainiy regarded. ThejNtifiableb""islo'"orFolrhh.aur'one"pr,rzltyinrctarionrorhe"morphou.anaotr*a ed.communirvan'. migh, bFexplored lunncr b) using rhe :deas ot I he prn ar; and rhe pubLi. ro$, her hirh rh. '

remgnition that aftjstic and aesthetjc work cd tuncrion in manv disennt wavs. -

Public-bing Artistic Work.

EveD in the p!€school thh intimate rclatioNhip between aesrh€ric functionj,g a.nd plbli@tionh"..inrormFd pFdasosic pr?.,itr lmagA made by.hitdren a r , rua;enraru.uge1f piiur._mdking arhun8 upon w?lh lor

"llroseF. Thcirwork in orher.uni utararea,tnor. F--","^

e"rlvagerhiFrprchrionolr.rcnc,F*i)ofpubharionnturd.nedCle,r\rhetun,rionseNedb\publi arjon in rh , FXample i,qune difiFrnrlrcm rhF ri".orpubtj, arion iniotved hhcn anestablished afi!! exhibits her wo.k. But in whar w?v?

A crucial and .elevant ditrercnce is $ar the esrablished arrist js exhibiting the work publicly inthe conscious *pectarion that her work will be alsess€d by very qrecific criteria. The* *itt t u". todo with the quality ofthe aftistic srarements she has made, and her achievement againstcomparative standards. And when the critics locate her work as bthg ,high, or ,lof on theirevalutive scales she won't be unduly sur?rised since this is par! ofth;e;e-plan ofartist and .rilicjn ou scietv She has @nsiously made her work ro function accordjng to th€ g€neral establishedrules ofthis particular an world.

But mosi people would baulk at the prcsp€ct of€laluating the work ofpreshoolen in thesme wan and for very good reasn. We would ey thar such an aftist-ffitic game is not anapprcpr;at€ or desirable pan ofthe cultutal world ofpnschooten in our sociitv, and n\at the real\alu"ofFng"einginadki.aFe*rFri,a.riviie.lorloung,nildrenmusbra"r,\cdby"rand"id"rhd, arercl^dnr o rh.lun, r on, $hich su, h an;viric"rwF in rhFi' tire,. tn rhe unlikilr eventoralea.her-mounrjng d publi. ew ibjrion ot'u, h, hildrn, $or k a" rhough ir wercro i>- rFe"rdrd a5beine ofsimilar sign;ficana to that ofesablhhed adult artists, md of; critic accepiing jt on thortems and prcceeding !o evaluate it acmdingly, then we might ey that a double mhtake had bcnmad€. The kacher was rnistaken to pubticis€ it like this, and .he criric to evaluare it like thi!. The

The gomewould hove been ployed correctlybut without the coution of sympoihetic insight.Frequently this is whot hoppens in lhe oreocolled 'communiiy orts', ond itfuels thesuspicion ofjt. Bulon exominolion of thqtsomesuspicion con reveolos much oboutthegroundson which the obieclions ore mode os itdoes oboutthe obiectionol ospecls of'community orls'.

garne would have brn played conecdy but withour the caution ofsympathetic ibsighr. Frequentiythi! i! Irhat happens in the arca called 'communiry arts', and ir fuels the sspicion ofit. But aDexamination ofthat same suspicion can reveal as nuch about dre $ouds on which rhe objectionsarc mad€ ar i! does about the objectiohal alpectr of 'comunity art!'.

Tryilg to nake 6ens€ of 'C.'lrmuity Ads'.In Ireland very littl€ has ben published which would allow for a teasing out ofthe values and

beliels underpinning attitudes offavour or disfavour towads the idea of 'community atu'. In theabsence ofsuch public work one a.lways runs the risk ofbeing amusd ofs€ning up straw men or ofdis.eming pafticular idea! wh€re non€ €*t, ifone puts a geDeral fom on a set ofb€li€fs which€xpe.ienc€ has fitquenr]y encountered. The repoft byJohn O'Hagan and Christopher Dufy(1987)on the economics ofthe pe omingarts jn lreland s€ts foffard a cog€nt e@nomic aryumentfavouring community ans in lreland. The sam€ report also includes a briefinstructive h;tory ofthisarea which identifies paraliels between the New Deai policie ofrhe U. S. in the I930k andcommunity arts in lrclard during the 1980's. Foftunarely, on the disfavour side, the writer andcritic Anthony Cronin has pubiished a stimulating s€r ofessays which give substmce to wha! mightotherwhe be shadow (Crcnin, 1988).

Although he do€s not use the phmse 'community arts' in his collection ofesa)s Arr-6. r.fiePmple, Anthony Cronin\ sympathies and res€Nations have much to do with this area. His najorobjection is to the types ofpmctift which have em€$ed in sh@ls, nuseuns and ealleries as meamofpreparing and shaping pmples' erperience ofan and other worlc. Far frcm dev€iopingr€ceptivity and respoDs€, much ofwhat is raking piace in rhe naDe ofedu@tion - what hehenchantly calls the 'appantus ofintimidation' - is actively deltroying them. In this he shar€snuch in cornmon with Ciive BeI, although he may |trl uncomfonabl€ in the company of 'DeClive md Viryinia'. Therc is much truth in these criticisms But it is not necessarily, or at least notentinly, for the reaons which Mr. Crcnin o{ters. Bad practift, aDd institutions vhos€ pra.tic€s arenot in harmony with their avowed purpos€s, are norc convincing reasons rhan the theoretica.lrcdons which he ofen. His position relies on idea of initial receptivity', on conceptioro ofarr as'the attempt to atta;n pa{€ction', on the notion ofpledure as being central to aesthetic experienie,and on the idea that atists ar€ spcial people i, their seroitiviiies md innate or acquired powen olexpression'. There m strong Romantic contoum straping his viewing point.

He is led by this way ofthinking to query the us€Iulness ofmost 'art educarion' for adults, toobject to an being made into 'a mere pastime or social distractioD or even thempy', and romndem the belidthat most people have the capacity ro exF ience anktically (prcductiveiy),mther than aesthetically (receptively), in some degre€. He b€li€ves that 'Th€ art ofthe disposs€ss€dis seldom er€at, prccisely b€cause it is the art ofthe disposssd' (p. 35). Thes€ €ssals probablyexpress the vjews ofmany ofthoF jrt€rested in th€ ans in Ircland, sme ofwhom might morallyand politica. y w;!h it wer€ otheMir.

T

It is against such obj€ctions as these that the cale for g!€ater public exp€nditure on the'community arts' area must b€ made. Accepting the arguments ofercd by O'Hagan and DuIIy as

being the best available fiom an economic point ofvie\ our concentEtion wi[ be on ideas ofartand anists at play in th;s area.

As a phmle 'community aas'is not mtive to lrish ways ofthinkingabout lhe art! and society.

It €merBed from tn€ activisms and dpirations ofthe tate 1960\ in Britain. Ifit had a c€ntnlunifying idea it was its @mmitmdt to a folrn ofcultu.al democra.y. In pubiished fom its mostforceful proponents an Owen Kelly (1984) and Another Standard/The Shelton Trust (1986). Anearlier book by Su Braden (19?8) us€d the work ofwalter Benjamin to try md develop a Dewerlanguage to describe the changing working relationrhips ofanists md communities. Thesuppoftive role ofthe Gulb€nkian Foundation U.K. in the d elopment of€ach ofthelepenp€ctjves and pnctices is notewofhy.

The concept of'commuity afts' as deveioped by these wrire6, notably K€ n isexplicidypolitical. They oppos€ vhat they see as th€ hienrchical contml ofthe many by the Gw, they lavourdemocratic collective action over individualhtic action, and they identify the ability to urlanguge as a centnl concem ofcultural democmcy. Negotjation rather ttEn imposition i! thepnferred mute ofsuch cultural democmts in their move toMrds a nore €galitarian democracy.Power and the control ofthe means ofexpresion, including 'the arts', ar€ recurrent th€me! Theirprcemin€nt inter€st is in th€ alts as a m€ans, amongst other cultural praclic€s, for changing society

in rhe djlFclion of grtarer equality and democa.vTheir position reveals a clear idotificatjon ofan as an inr[unent ofpower which is to be

mobilised in a wider political stlr]ggle. They hav€ v€ry little to ey on the question ofthe public andprivate benefits olanistic and aesthetic exp€rienc€, nor on what distinguislx$ the arts from othercultural practices. Perhaps inevitably, by attending to one pafticular political mle ofan in society,and narginal;sine the derails ofth€ Frsonal and social elperienc$ ofan, rhis appmach tocommunity arts ha! itsefbecome maryinaljs€d. But there are othen.

The potential gounds for favounbly considering newer relations ofad and communitiesu hich we are a€uing lbr here have to do with the qualitia ofexperience which arc unique to theans, and with the tlT€s of empowement which they help to develop. But even ifdt mturc ofourpr€s€nt argum€nts dill€r in emphasis fron thos€ originating in the British mnmunity ansmovement, the tyFs ofmisundentanding wh;ch they ar€ liable to mfrt might not.

Orthodox Policy-making and roorlDrrunity Arts': Some Grourds for Ditr€r{tUnd€rstandings.

In the fist place, policy-makeN such as memb€n ofthe Ans Council, and the policy-shapensuch d the members otAosddna, will naturatly lend to apprcach qD6tions ofart md soci€ty Ii crm

the viewpoint ofrhe artist. This is because the majority ofthem are aftists. Ii js als becaus€ ArlsCouncil policv has evolved in that dn€ction. But the l95l Afts Act js $pecially jtte!€st;ng in the

While noiurolly ond rightlytheArts Councilin its

evolution over neorly four decqdes hqsbecomeo moinsloy ond support for hish oriisls,i1s underwriting legislotion does nolusetheword 'ortist' ololl. And in its foremostfunciion itspecificolly mentions the'pub ic'os being thosewhose interesiin lhe orts is to be stimuloted.

However,lhequeslion roisedbyourpresenlorgumenlishowhoslheArhCouncilcomeiothink qboutthis ond its relqted functions?

responsibility which it plaas upon the Arts Council to 'ttimulate public int€rcst in i,\e axts" (3, 1a).

This js the fint specifi€d functioD olthe Als Council. Its other three lunctions are as tullom:"(b) pronote the knowledge, appreciation and practice ofthe arts.

(c) assist in inprcving the standards ofthe art!.(d) organis€ or asrist in the organising ofexhjbjtions (within or without the State) or wo*s of

an and artistic craftsmanship. "$hile naturally and rightly the Ans Council in its evolution over nearly four decades has

b€come a mainstay and support for lrish artists, its undemriting legislation des not us the word'artjsC at all. And jn its 6remost functioD it specih€lly nentions the 'public' as being thore whoaintercst in the atu is to be stimulated. Clearly the Art! C.ouncil has the widest possible discrctionunder the l95l AIts Act in finding ways and developing polici€s which will fum this mandate. Thelast decade has seen major developments in this arca with the implementation ed expansion ofaneducation policy, a rceional development policy:, m arts catre policy, md an incipient 'communityarts' policy. The ACE €xperimenta.l proj€ct is part ofthe Arts Council's policy ofdevelopment inthese ar€as. Thes€ w€rc ato t]re four arcas which the Arts Councit, iD its submission to the 1987\{hite Pap€r on the arts, A cress atd Oppottunity, identified as being olp.imary impoitanc€ forthe d €lopment ofth€ afts in lreiand. In its very title, that $hite Paper endomed th€se aspirationsand jncorporated th€m as €ntral culturzJ objectives.

Howev€r, lhe qu€stion rais€d by our present argument is; how has the Ans Council come to.,thk about th;! and its related functions? Is it po$ible to identify some ofthe mys in which the ArtsCouncil as an institution makes s€ns€ ofits mandate?

All thinking is from a point ofvie\ nomally the pojnt ofvi€w ofthe perso! doiDg thethinking. But when we think about many isues in ordinarv life our viewpoints have ar a matte. offact been inherited, rather thm developd by ourrelves to Mtch the novelty ofthe situationconfmnting us. In the cN ofArts Councils as they have evolved in the postwar yean one couldhypothesise that a domiDant point ofview which successive incumbents ofArts Councils haveinherit€d is that ofrhe 'g€neralised artist'. One might fufther speculate that it is the viewpoint ofapanicular idea ofm anist. And ifthese were true it would b€ interesting to imagin€ the view ofartseducation md comnunity-situated ans etivity which this vie$,point would aford, and how itwould hartoni* with the lunctions ofthe Ans Council as specified by th€ Alts Acl

The primary inter€sts ofan organiution strcngly inlluenced by the viewpoint ofthe'general;!€d artist' will natu.allv lie with the aftist. The interests ofthe public will tend to beundentood jnsofar as ihey rclat€ to those ofthe aftist. Ind€ed th€ intercsts ofthe public as they relateio the dts my bf raken to be identical with those ofth€ artist. What is gtrod lor the artist is good lorth€ public. Unlortunately, when the fimncial pool from which bo$ drink is as shallow as it ir now,what is pod for the public - * argued by mmunity aftists and othen may not be good for theanist. And her€ li€s an immediate surce offriction.

A s€cond and related surce ofdilliculty revolves around the distinction alrcady madebetween the exmution and the implementation ofaftworks. The recognition ofthe artist\ nftd for

'88:4@tu2

a prcperly rcceptive public has be€n a majorstimulus iD the ds€lopment ofArts Councils' inter€stin improving 'accs' to the axts. Attention was paid to the public becaur the needs ofanistsrequired it. Arguably this has b€€n a mor€ poknt influence than the other argumeDt in0uencingthinking on th€ n€ed for grater acc€ss which has to do with the 'rightr' ofth€ $€at najority ofthetax-paying public to be embled to enjoy panicipating in anistic and aesthetic practic€s. What erth€ir r€lative balance ofinfluence both ar$merts ar€ no&'standardly used tojustjfy gr€ater acc€s

This div€nification ofthinking and €xtension ofthe horizons ofarts lDlicy-making demands amor€ detailed e\aminalion ofsuch notions ar 'arthC, ttmdards', md 'benefits' ofaa.

$hat is it to be m artist? The conventional definition would be smebody who practises one ofthe fine ans. But the idea ofdle 'fine arts' as djslinct from the tiber:l arts or from skilled ardenlhip i!a ninet€enth century one, as is the abstmct notion of'Art'. Th€ir association with id€s ofthe'creative' and 'imagiDative' is ofsinild p€di$te, as Ra).mond Williarns rcminds us. An wa!closely r€lat€d to skill€d naking and wa contrasted wi& nature which allows beautilul things to belound rather than mad€. The distinctions betw€en such skilb and rheir us€s arc related, accordingto Williams, ''to the chang€. inherent in capitalist comoditt production, with its sp€cializationmd rcduction ofus€ values to exchang€ values" (Williams, 1981, p. 34). The dificulties pos€d to theans by such notions ofcommodity and exchange led - as a defense, in Williamr opinion to thefunher distinction between the lse arts and the uselul arts.

But clo* smtiny ofthe practical neaning ofL\ese ditiDctim disolves the boundaries. Evenwhen they can honesdy claim that their int€ntions are 'artistic' most artists are, according toWilliams, efectiveiy d€alt with as 'tkilled workeN producing a cerlain kjrd ofmarginalcommodity". That this is the cas€ is bome out by even a cuNory exanjnation ofthe day to day workofan Arts Council se€king the b€st posible deals for thos€ whom it has come to see as its primaryresponsibility, a.tistsr subsidi€s, myaltie!, taxation prcblems, promotion, marketing, display andnew product d€velopment would, to use th€ languagr ofconnerce, desrib€ much ofthat work.

The evolution ofarthtic practice in the lwentieth century has turther chipped away thesecurity ofour inherited ninete€nth century distinctions. Hardly any assumption ofthese andearlier aesth€tic thmries and pmctices has remained unchall€nged, not to say actively defiled by thetwentieth c€ntury A few examples frcm th€ visual arts will sufice. Dada, in Hans Ar?\ words, "Iellupon the fine ans", in an efon to free itrlllrcn the pasr with its ideas ofskill, harmony and beauty.Anoth€i distinction to go was that betw€en the made and the found. In l9l4 Marcel Duchampetlibited his r€adlmad€ urinal which he called FouDta; and ironi@ y lign€d'as R. Mutt. This isnow solenrJy rcgarded as a most significant artwork and to an eye shaped by nineteenth centuryaesthetic ideas has had rnny ev€n more outrag€ous succrssors. By playing with the rules ofthe ar1game - placingenbamssingobj€cts in atiltic corFxts, forexample, th€rcby making $em.lirncrbn as anworks - these and many other anists have chang€d the rlles ofthat gam€. Actualpractic€ lorces change in thinking and drorising about such practice. Aesthetic theory a! a rule, islhe camp-folow€r olanistic pEctice.

The huih is thotfully commiJted orlsh oredifferenifrom peop e whose work lies in otherfields notso much forwhotthey ore osforwhotthey do.

FA

Y

The 'sp€cial people' sEtus claimed for and by ani$s in virtue of,,their rnsitivities and innateoracquiro poM^ofopn.i)on andrheubFing.ubiF.rro.a,aresorjcatimp"rdri\ewhi"hha.robcobev"d lo, be mo,r pdn no kno$ingsh)o,evenho$ . Ealunh4obje.rtn,o hF belier,harordinary people should also be encouraged to become skjlled maken in the anl It is fairly saG to saythat most pdrpl€ engagirg in non-roLrtine uork ofany kind which h open-ended as Ega;ds itspmp€r conclusion do so without necessarily being able to say in detail how or why thet do n. Howmany people could ev€n explain how it is thar they walk? Most preople who respond to rhe human.aX ro undcr"und, ould al€ de".rib. I r." rlpeol in\ olunr,^ imput.ion AndTanyr;Fnr.r.have rlso btsn.onsumed ov rhei {ork. smc tne,alh.

The r rutn L rhar .ul\ , ommitLed an i.rszr dille'r er,r rrom pcopte\ ro.F \ork trf. in ou "rfields not so much for what they are as for what they do. People become much olwhat they arcbecaus€ of$hat they do. Anists d a sociauy ideDrifiable group diller enomously fron each orheron all the si$ificdt dimensions olhunan being. Wlat unires them ;s not that they an rhe livinggem-cFll.ot$m.'dvinedajmonhi.hun:quFproph.r!ormy.ri,algirr..fhelar"uniredbywhat they do, their rostery ofthe means io do ir, and their menbenhip ofa ctms ofworken uirohave been an identifiable gmup since rhe Middle Ages. There is a muc-h strcnger car for sayingthar rhere i. d difiemn.eoldegre rr, rr rhan ot kind beru+n an i.sand non ir.r..

There is, to rcphmse that dsenion, a continuity between art and everyday tife. Tbe appaEnrdiscontinuity hd its rcots ir c€nain ofour inherjred ways ofthinking about ,An,. Thes€ in lurninluence h. M). in $hi, h ue rfl n r upon ouransri, orrA.hni' ;\po iFn'. t hF dironr,uir',.salso stnped by the wals in which cuhuEl insritutions ser about their fomation olour expe.ience of

There arc parallels bftween spo,rsworlds and arlworlds which illuminate some ofthe issuesconceming the mturc ofartists' sp€cialness and rhe extenr ofoverlap or cont;buity ofrheirrnsib;lities and skills with thor ofnon-atrjsrs. The degrees ofbeing-an-artist arc analoeous in manyr.pecr.ro rho*olbeirg

"n-a,hh,r.'l he diJlern.r odhe"n rhe highesr qualirv r, rn it in e.. hand thelowest is manifestly obvious; but the eKellem me€$ into the very good as rhe ;edioffemerges into the bad. That is mosr clearly sren ifwhat you are evaluating is the qualitv ofaparticular ryp€ or'activity. But standards ofmeasur€menr and evaluarion must. as Aristotlereminded u' be appmpriare Io rharsnich i. being mFAurd. And rn hp an". a" in lpor..-hFconkntious question ofstandards can only be clarifi€d when we art clear about the nature andpurposes ofthat which we ar€ evaluating.

BJ' the standards ofmtioDal hurling, a lo.al march between rwo parishes may not b€ lerygt)od. But to look at it like this nay be ro confus e har each is doing. While there nay be aI srrx ofsimjlarities betwe€n rhem the local match may be highly succesful as a fom ofrelaxation andre$ealion for the play€n and that may have been its primary funcrioq whercas the function ofanAll-Ircland is quire dillel€nr. 14t .anjudge the standards olan actjviry\ [u,crb, in tems ofwhether it was succesfut or unsuccesful,just as we can evaluate irs r),pe in rems ofwhether i! wa!good or bad. P€rhaps we shouldjudg€ adistic activiries in educationa.l or communjry rttines ar

Bozun hos written thot "The dogmo thotdoilylife is hiviol, coupled with q denunciotion oflhose who do no'ogree, hos been reoeotedinnumeroble times by ortists qnd theirqdvocoles, nol wilh regret bul wilh scorn. "

having ben sutressfui or not, by rcfening to their avowed funciion, mther than merely evaluatingthem as being good or bad as types ofart.

This analogy between artists and atHeks (it i! not an analogy b€twe€n art and spoft) he\xillustrate the notion ofcontinuity, as well as the dillerent emphases involved in evaluating quality oftunction as against quality oft}?e. Ther two id€as arc impodant in anal',sing the r€lationsb€twe€n art, community and eduotion.

The scale ofa.cess and pafticipation achieved in spoft is one to which Arts Councils apire, butthe persona which 'Art' has cr€ated for itsefis a major obstacl€. Many contemporary aftistsenergetically disown this view yet, asJacques Balzun reminds us, €ven the newest ar1 "owes thepublic attention it receives to the old do$u ofArt, One and Indispensable" (Barzun, l97{, p. l2).In which car we may ask in whoc image has An created itselP

DoeE Art R€dccm Ordirary l,if€, o! Shourd Mnrlry Life Redeem Art?

The implicit contempt for ordinary lives in the uttennces ofmany b;hop-artists ofthe ChurchofArt has not gon€ unnoticed. BaDun has writt€n that ''The dogm that daily life is trivial, coupledwith a denuDciation ofthose who do not agree, has been repeated innume.able tim€s by artists andtheir advocates, not with Egl€t but wiih scorn." (p. 37). H€ lets Ern€st Hemingway exemplily thearrcgmce and factual ineptitude ofthe cliamsofsellglorilying High A't; "A country, finally,erodes md the dust blows away, rhe people die and none ofthem wer€ ofany importancepemanently, €xc€pt thole who pmctic€d the ats . . . A thousand yean nakes rconomia silly and awork olart endures forcver. " (p. l8). FEgments ofart cetainly remain, but mor€ olten than notbecause they have dre durability ofphysica.l objects. But many other cultural achievenents also

endure over millenia - ahievements ofocial organiution, Iaw, science and engineering, forirutance. So also do structures ofthought and feeling, values and inter€sls, shaped and pasd on bythe nillions ofanonymous dead. Litde thing! like this €scaped the broad rcach ofHemingway's

Y€t elen with someone as sympathetic to demmratic panicipation ar Sir Roy Shaw we lmdsimilar b€lieG op€ntins. In his Art a,d rle People (1987) he calls approvingly upon Sir KennethCla.k to make this poinr "The poet and the artist ar€ important precisely because they are notaverage men: beour in *nsibility, jnt€Iig€nc€ and power ofinvention th€y far €xced rheavenge". What is wrong with this is obviously Dot that it is often t.ue: it is wrong bsause ir ; oftennot true. There are very good artists and poets a'd very bad ones: ome work very intelligently andsme do not som€ are highly invenlive and some utterly deriutive. The same qualiries atlribut€dby Clark, and approved ofby Shaw, &uld be gnnted to many other q?$ ofperson and worker.

Generalizatiom like Kenneth Clarke\ are actively hamful. Too often and too readily does

this tnx ofth;nking capilulate to the languagr ofmysterious exceptionality. Our reason forreGring to this again is thar Roy Shaw used this assertion in that pan ofhis discusion ondemocracy and excetlence which rccalled his experience, as Seffetary-General ofthe Arts Councilofcreat Britain, wi$the issueof communityats.

ln this climote, orgumenls forvulnerobleextroordinoriness, especiolly when its

representolives ore relolivelyfew in number,rnoy seern lo corry more weightthon those forvulnerqble ordinoriness. And i{the further cosecon be mode, Hemingwoy-siyle, thottheextroordinoryfew redeem lhe ordinory mony,then the grip on the little purse tightens still

leb'l

furiher.

u/'*'@

&,pll

Thepoet RoyFu €r had r€sign€d lrom the A1s Council becaus he Glt dlat suppon forcommuniiy afts was a wdte ofmoney. While he disaer€ed with some ofFuller's detailedjudgments,Shaw Mites that he muld not quarel with his general principle that "Public money forrhe aftscannot pmp€rly be dispenrd without a strcng r€gard by the dhpeming body for standards of€xc€Il€nce and principles ofvalue". That goes without sayin$ but the implication that communityorient€d artr activity is excluded by this principle should not go without comment. If'communityans' npnsentatives did in fact cal upon Roy Shaw to @nsider their case without reGrence to isuesofquality th€n he was quite .ight to consider that cas€ coldly. Ifthey insisted upon replacing'conventional amthetic stmdardr' with 'audience respons€' as the nain criterion, agaiD he wasquite right to rej€ct it. It is uhen we come to Shaw's next djficulry with thh lobby that we hear therecun€nt leitmotifofdificulty between the intell€ctual traditions shaping rhe thinkiDg ofmanyartist policy"make.s and tbe €mergent tndition which shapes the more populist tendencies. Th;s ;his dismissal ofthe alleged "egalitarian rj€ction ofmy qualitiative distinction betwe€n the artht ofgenius and the weil-m€aning amateur." But with this chmcterisation Sir Roy Shaw hff enteredthe freld of micaturisation. H€ se€ms to realise this within the spac€ ofa few lines when he invok€scommon seffi to prent his b€li€f that sone Fople ar€ mor€ gifted than otheN This much toneddown ass€ftion is ofcour$ true. Again the diflicdty lies not with the reality ofdifler€nc€s, gr€at orsmall, betw€en anists and the resq it lies with the ass€rtion ofthe realiry ofdjlcr€te, djscontinuoustyp€s. Ifw€ must us€ the language ofmystery in talking ofaft and anists then let u! address the r€almysteries, dd not the r€lics ofanother age.

Th€rc is not, nor should there b€, any confiict ofinter€st betw€€n supports desjgned to fost€rmd encouEgE aftists and supports which focus upon the development ofthe artistic and aestheticlives ofnon-anists. lndeed the symbiotic relatiom between artists and their publia favour amutuality ofHp€ct and support. The condition for this b€ing true is that by 'intenst' we meanartistic or aesthetic function. The diversely focused cultural traditions do different things indiflerent ways for difer€nt reasons, aDd ar€ subject to mntinuous fomation and transfonnation. Ademocncy can acconmodate such a pluralism ofactivity and aim.

But ifby 'interest' we mean an immediate economic int€rest then there is, as we obs€wedabove, a delnite on{lict ofinterct. As things stand now the sometines latent, sometimes oven,.friction between the traditions is reminiscent ofa hungry family tryin8 to share out aD inadequatesupply offood. Th€ir mntext is a centml source oftheir conflicts. Th€se intern€cine suspicions andsnipings owe much oftheir vitality to the cor€ct p€rception that th€ mor€ sp€nt on the one the l€ss

available to spend on the other.In this climate, arguments for mlnemble extraordimines, especially when its rcpresentatives

are rclatively few in number, may Fem to carry more weight dtan thos. for wlnembleordinarhes. And ifthe further cas€ can b€ made, Hemingway-style, that the extraordinary fewr€d€em the ordinary mann then the grip on the litde pune tight€ns still funher.

Ifwe nust weigh the value ofeach approach in th€ distorting scal€s ofpublic sub,sidy for theans - thereby amepting a mn{lict when there should be none - what is to b€ eid for the

Forsome people ordinory life is os exiensive oson encyclopoedio; forothers iiis qsthin qsosociqlwelfore booket. Somedeoihs con becommemoroted with ihe ikesof o MozortReqrie'a, otle'swith os mp e rhyming verse i

the ln Memoriom columns of ihe EveningHerold. Some loves ore celebroted byodes toone'scoy mislress; olhers bylhe proxy veaesond imoges ofo Vo entine cord.

But occess must olso involve focilitoting theexperience ofmoking orlworks byolher thonf ully commiiled ortists, ond for publics otherthon lhosewith o speciolist interesl in oporliculor ortform.

ordinarbes ofat and its desirability? Ifart rather rhan 'Art' can be an hamonious pan ofordinary everydav lives will it have been a good thing for Exrraordinary An to have beenfansfoirn€d into ordinary alt?

ArqTheordinary d'Acc€ss,.For sone people odinary lile js as extensive as an encyclopaedia; li]r othe6 it is as thin as a

social wdfarc b@klet. Some deaths crr be comemorated w'th the likes ofa Mozan Requiem,othcn with a simple rhymingveAe in the 1D Meoouam cotumns ofthe Ev€ning Herald. Someloves are celebrated by odes to one\ oy mistres; othen by the prcrf, ven€s dd inag€s ofa

Aa is a way ofliving, a means ofpowef, It is this in at leasr rwo s€rs€$ one involves the €xercis€and dcmonstration ofpower in an unanbiSuously public way (a Lovett Pearce dd GandonParliament Hour,rBank oflrcland, for example, or a San Stephenon Central Bank): the otherinvolves the possssion ofthat power by individuals and groups to quite litera.Uy manufactunel.ments oltheir oM lives. It is this latter understanding ofaft as a meaDs olprivate and publicpower that most helpfully develops our undentanding ofwhat a genuine access policy {br the artsn ieh, mFao. Apfriall) as ir rel"r". ar and on mun rr.

A key question conceming any neatr ofpower is who conrols or pors€sses it. Some peopl€ canneither rcad nor wdte. Clearly th€v aft jn a less powedul position than literate people who are notallowed to freely .hoose ryhat' to read or saite. In an open denocmcy the aspintion is towards bolhfreedoms lor a moy citizens ar can avail ofthem. Such freedoms are comentones ofan opendemocracy's theory ofwhat it is and is to be.

But merely allowing lhe public tojuxtapose therrelves w;th an adwork, by letring them in tose€ pictures in a gallery fo. instance, is not g€nuine access. cmnting som€one this kind ofames nayamounr to litile more than al.ioni,g them to look at. Genuine acces would work towards aablingthem to s€e it. Works ofan are €xecuted accordins to conventions, however ambiguous and.nderFm:n.r.. To undFr.rand hor and u ren rh"l fun. rion r'esrhe i.all) .equ iraa (ubrleeducaiion and developmeDt. To apprcpriately experience rhe aesthetic rcquircs more.

This more complete concept ofa.cess inciLrdes all thar is involved in the idea ofimplementinean aftwork as discussed above. Elements ofeducatjon, the design ofdisplan rh€ organisation ofconte\t, documentation and the proasses ofpublication generally are involved in this. But acc€s!must alo inolve facilitating $€ €xperientr ofmaking aftworks by other than fu y committedartists, and {br publica othe. than those wilh a specia.list inkrest in a parricular aft fom. Even CliveBell argued this in I9I3: "In no age can ther€ b€ more than a Gw fiBr-rare artists, but in any lheremight be rnillions ofgrnuine ones" (p. 185).

The ceiling plac€d upon the numbe. offullrime prolessioMl arrists which a society can sustainis constnined by lhe size and rconomic level ofd€velopnent ofthat sciety. qualty ofartwork, likeany other spccialis€d and demanding labour, k clos€ly related ro th€ tjme spfnt at it, ar well as todisipline, skill and ability. Obviously, it should be a cenrral aim ofa national arts policy to supponsuch anists in every posibie way.

But the personol ond sociql benefits whichfollow from enobling o much orger numberofinteresed rdivid.-rols q.d grouos to porlicipoteir the meors fo.c'mti^g tl-eirowr orlislico^doestl'e'cexpe'iences, perhopslo.lheiownlocolpub ic, should be o comp emenloryoim ofo notionol orls policy.

But the p€^onal and social benefits which lollow from enabling a much larger nmber o1

interested individuals md gmups to patti.;pate in the mffifot oeatibg the;t ow artisl;( andaestleti expeibrceq perhaps 6r their own local public, should b€ a complemenrary aim ofanationa.l art policy. CetaiDly the prirnary funcrions ofthe Afts Council und$ rhe 1951 Ans Actinvite such poticies. This is prccisely what that newly organising tendency in Irish cultuml lilegmuped under the 'community ans' banner ! requesting. Ii is also part ofwhat good arts educatioh

Som€ Public and Pr;wte Benefirs ofrhe A'ts.Ifthe arts can be herded bg€ther, as they are in this plural noun, can we ey what it is that

dhtinguishes thejr particular power from that ofother cultural institutions such as, tbr exanlple, thesci€nces or spoft? And ifwe can, is ir also polsjble io ey what benefits accrue to individuals andsocieties lrom a widesprcad ability to ercrcbe this power, albeit to widely varying degres orstandards, and lor ditrercnt functions? It is on such gmDds thar the caF for inctuling thisdimension oflrish cultuml life r€sts.

. Even a panial msw€r to th€se qustions is b€yond the scope olan 6say ofpamphlet length. It

would requin: a general thmry ofsocial, percnat and societal devetopment. B;t ce;tralsed ;rrspolicy-makeB strould have at least skelelal answen ro them ifaccess in its fuller rnse is one oftheircentral policies. The most we cm do herc is to suggest som€ head;gs tor a construciive answer.

Art male andshapes experiences which an unique ro itsett Sonetimes these are lmtinglvmcmoFble, more often they are not. Love$ ofaft do not live, to bon crw a phmse fmrn Sa-"", ,,;"a continuous orgasm ofaesthetic perception".

It is not continuous beaus€ most art is nor ofa quality which would favour it nor are *r:always open to such pals ofexp€dence ev€n when in rhe presence ofwork ofthat quality. Whenthe happy conjunction occurs, which js rclarively nrcly ev€n tor the adepr, the co-catedelperi€nce is amongst th€ finest thar human life knows. It was upon these retarively rare peaks ofexFri€nce ofthe initiated thar the detached edifice ofHigh A€siheric Expfrience was erected, likeon€ ofKing Ludwig's extnvagant Ba\arim Msrl€s. But most experience ofan is more at<in ro aterraced house, often pa$jrg moticed within the experjenc ofan ordinary da)l

W, poJhv mus nor aliou rhF indgF oi An ro ob.cur rh. s orkings otan. A: wF rmptipd n rhebeginning. rhe mrabofan areprrcrprible marFnah painr, ear-gur and uood, human bodie,andin"nimarejone..Flluloidand lighr. Fr.. whic}ammad"rotun"rionmeanrnCluUyin"on\Fnrionalwal r butway"alua.,opcn ro"hange ThFy make meaning", ma,e $a',ol u;d.urandina, tommemori*. dnd bind peoph rogrrher tlmugh mode"olcommunic.rion s 1i.h arc uniqu"ty rhFi!own. Lives which have th€ power to mtively participate in this, whether at the level otprcductionor re-cr€ation thrcugh rcc€ptjon, ar unquestionably richer lives than thos€ which cannot.

Livs lived in possion ofthes€ powers wol]ld ar the pubtic lev€l, for example, be morc iikelyto undemtand how man-made envionments, good and bad, create pa.all€l qualities ofexperieniefor their inhabitmts, and to delrmd the best posible srandads of design and planning; toplay

with the posibilities ofhouse demration, garden design or pemnal app€annc; to makethemselves heard jn demand! for high standards in the products ofbrcadcdting md recordingindustries, oltheatrcs and conc€n halls.

At a moft pri\ate l€vel therc would be a e€neral undentanding that meanings in lile must bemade as well as found; that se]f-knowlede€ is aU the gltater ifyou have coluland ofthe sFnbolicmeans with which to make that knowledg€, ahd that the sharine ofexperience ofall softs, which is

something that lies at the corc ofb€ing hunan in everyday life, would b€ thin to the point ofdisappearance without netaphon and nusic, images and ena.tments.

These are genenl sorts ofrcasom which distinguish the social functions ofthe arrr from those ofother cultura.l institutio$. These are also the sotr ofbenefrts which would accrue publicly andprivatdy were the powen involved in posrsing the means ofart more genenlly md sLiifullyavailable in society. $&ether the exercis€ ofthese powe6 is always to the gDod ofthe person orconmunity is an issu€ b€yond our prcsent scope. But the need for them to be skilfuly andintelig€ntly deployed is nor.

Spmdina Timc, Making Living: The qucsti@ of&t, Leisue and Un€mproyment.

Time is a maierial in the manufacture oflives. It is als a force in the deov oflives. Fmm onepoinrolview ir.ould bevid rh"t the\trug8lF ro.onri:,lrhFr\prndirurolrine i\oneofrhecenralstrugglm ofhunan hitory Like other commodities time is owned. "My tine is not my own" is aubiquitous uying ofthose caring for young childr€n. A traditionally felt division in the sns of'having' time has been between the rime an ernploy€r pos€sses by virtu€ ofpaying an employee forit, and the r€st ofthe worker's time which he ca.lls his 'fr€e' tim€. Fr€e becaus€ it is up to him how hechooses to 'sp€nd' it. Whenj to follow the metapho\ one spend! something one is exchanging onething for anoth€r, and expecting some return ofcomparable value. Sp€nding time on something isusually linked to the quaiity ofthe ftsulting experience.

The quality ofmuch 'frce' time, especia ylor thos whos€ paid work is unetisfying, d€riv€s inthe initial phaser frcm a process ofcontrast lrith the unsatidyine quality ofthe time they k[. Butafter a while it is a comon elperience that time 'hangs heavily on your hands' unles there is

smethjng elr you wish to sp€nd it on. What w€ call bor€don, ftrstration, irritation or being 'fedup' are all qua.Lities ofthe *p€ri€nce as,cociated wjth this. We are ov€rfed on the monotonous surfeit

In fact the intuition that we are in iis grip and poss€ssed by it nther than it being oun i! thecorect one. The free quality has ineluctably tumed into bondage. This i! th€ rnore commonexperience ofuriemployment. It is also a fr€quent elp€rience ofthe retir€d. Leisurc m€rg€s intoledargy This is the problem for which the arts are often prcpored as a fom ofsocial therapy.

A glib alsociation ofart and lejsure, $peciatly when the ida olleisun is extended to includethe unlife time ofthe un€mploy€d, will inevitably lead to an emasculated undentanding andexperience ofthe arts. For most p€ople exp€rienc€ with aft can b€ no substitute for paid, srcjallyvalued work. That h becaus€ lor most p€opl€ th€ functions ofart ar€ dill€rcnt to thos€ ofpaid

qe

ordlng

lb murt bcNrnbolicri which is

rtol

lorn thosc ofcly andlltullyllon olrd

yrnant.

I lrcm onc

oftha ccntral

! Enlc ofatlrPloycc forr hlm how he

rngrngg't.Fncthmg

's

lng, dcrivca incy !cll. Butr rh.lt i!olb.ing'fedrtonous surGit

loul! hth€nmon

ncfg.s into$craPY.!dto includerdingandrid,

'ociaIYE ofp.id

emplolmeni, and dFr€for€ cannot substitute for them. Anthony Cronin is quite correct when hesays that "to pre*uppose a soci€ty in which all questiom ofwork sat;rfactio\ s€eing the end-pmduct-of-one'sJaboun satisfaction werr to be loaded on to art is to presuppose a monstrosity. Butm equal monstrosity, and one with which we are all too fmiliar, is a wiety in which most peoplehave no exp€rienc€ ofthe ordering, aDealling, compasionating and re-vivi$ing power ofan atall" (pp.l3-14).

The questior is one ofhow most peopl€ are to hav€ that €xperience. One view, the traditionalone, is ttrat they should do so as recipients ofthe work ofothen rrho arc fuly'fledged artists. Theother is that ofdle cultuEl democmti€ tendency which argues that th€y should be enabled to havethe experienc ofprcduction for purposes appropriate to thems€lves, ar w€I as the aestheticqperiences of rec€ption.

All g€nuine exp€ri€hces olaft, whether the ar*tic ones ofprcduction or the resthetic ones ofnception, involve workofa sk €d,pe unarldemandingsort. At its b€st, commun;ty-orientedalts practice aims to creat€ those conditions where ordinary p€ople can sp€nd time working withvdious ar1 foms so that riey can male the sort ofdiller€nce to derown lives which only the artsalow It ; upon ;sues such as ther that an waluation ofthe succds or failure ofsuch pretices

It should be no surprise that community arts as a cultural tendency is so associated with thepoor, the unenployed, the nargina.l. Thes€ arE rhe on€s for whom tlrc formal education syst€m hasbeen an unhappy erperience offailure and irnlevance: these arc the ones whos€ €veryday lives ar€mstheticaly threadbare: theF are the on€s whose time has the exchmge va]ue ofdole money: theseale the one! with such litde power to ma,te living or 'a living'. Conditions make their living forth€m, and thet don't make it easy. So ifcomrnunity afts also se€ms to be pr€occupied with questionsofpower lhis is only b€caus€ it has come to be valued amongsl the r€latively pow€rle$.

The undentanding ofdle powen ofart among$ educaton, artistr lrho hav€ worked in schoolsard local communities, ordinary people in urban lat complex€s and in communiti€s thmughoutIreland, and the public conpri!€d ofyoung p€ople (in their out"of-school incamations) who arc sovital to Ire.land\ vibmnt popular culture, is higher and morc sophiticated now than it has werb€en before. With this undentanding has also mme a realistion ofthe needs that mut be met ilthemany pmm;sing but rulnerable bu& are to nowel

Foremost amongst thes€ ar€ the ne€d to improve standards thmugh mor€ and b€tter trainingat all levels; to develop th€ infrastructur€ ofarts centr€s on a national scale and to support therbpmptrly; to develop more orgmically nlated arrs plicies so that a.ll the organisatiorx, public mdprivate, which have an inkrest in dpects ofthis work cd collaborate to the best posibl€ e$eq todevelop mor€ sophhticated uays ofevaluation; and to encourage critical *if-oatuation andd€bate. Th€s€ ar€ issues to which rhe ACE r€port wil r€tum.

This esay has moved back aDd forth b€twe€n the privat€ and the public. Itsjustification fordoing so h that experienc€ is both private and public, and that adstic and aesthetic €xperi€nc€ ar€

esp€cially so. It has arSued that our wals ofthinking about the rclarions ofaft and sciety, ar r I I lx.vantage point fmm which we do so, shape the qpes ofproblem we will encounter and soluti(n I wrmay prcpose. Th€ €ssay has explor€d sone posibl€ ways ofthinking about cuhurat instiluti(n $ rrinstrumeDts deliberately cmfted for the creation ofexperienfts and asks how we might undcNtn I I Ithh. It suggesb as useful a distinction betwe€n policies airned at making adworks, a;d policicsa;med at making artsorks work. It atlacks the idea that ther€ js some identfiabte ess€m to art. n$stalicand historically questioDable. Insr€ad it slggEsts that a more dynamic and helpful way ol'thinking about an is to ask whar ir does, how it functions, and ho$, it is always deve6ping bacauv:human wa).s ollivins are continuallv chansins. From this penpective it argum thar i,oEy-mak(,rshould attend to thege and quality oftunctions ofan as well as to fie qutiry ofparticular rype, ot'art fom. Thjs wouid then open up ways ofthinking which could altow for a more detailed d.iappreciative undentanding ofwhat it is that rnany skilled communiry anists and arts educatoE anrtrying to do. It would also give some dircctions for ways in which rhe qua.lities ofthh work and itsstandards could be monitor€d.

Followinga briefdcLounro, *r derelopnenr ofth" idea ot i ommunir) an. we dren 14 .o

'dentil) "omeofth. rca.onr uh1 onhodox an.poli, y p.hpe.r,vecnight haic dificut,y rn

amommodating this particula. tend€ncy\ requesr! for help. Specifrcally we sp€culate that thepenpectiv€ ofthe 'generalied anisd mighr tacirly be dominant, that panicuiar mnceptions ofanand artist might be taken lor gnnted, and thar an active beliefiD arr as extnordinarv tndadditional to ordinary ljfe m[ht be implicitty accpted.

The argum€nt pres€nted herc ir rhar our concept ofodinary lived lives must b€ €xpand€d sothat the public and privat€ benefits ofaft, lvhich ar€ brie{ly des$ibed, can becone a part ofeveryday life md not a rcfuge from n. There is a public point ofview on the afts which is notciincidental with that ofartjsts, and which musr also be taken into account in national atu policy-nakjng. Ordinary lives must contain the '€xrnord;narines' ofart, and not b€ r€nder€d oen moregrey by contmst with it. The relation between ad and ordinary lives slxould be plac€d c€ntre srageso that we might b€u€r undeBtand why rhe appar€nt divorce ofthe two came ibour and betterund.6r,nd rhee\.:rinC po.,iD iliries ora r.onr iliarion.

Already much ofthe work being done is ofa quality rojustify the cal for ordinary tife roreclaim as much ofan for itsefd it apprcprjately can. As familiariry with such work - and alr€adyit is very divene - glws jn time, the skeleton ofthe abstract arguments presented here will pulsewith specifrc examples.

In the middl€ ages art had not yer bemme an autonomous sociai institurion and was, asJohanHuizinga put it, 'ttill wnpped up in life". Actual cuirural criric! likeJacques Bau un havev€nturcd to pmphesise that ar will r€rum ro rhe medi€val mmmunal patrem. Ifwe had b find oneenmple fron the ACE prcject to support tNs ir would be Macnas and their h?nsfomation ofrh€quaiiry ofth€ festivals to which they ontributed. Medieval life was grearly brightened by festivals.These "foms ofcollective cheerfulnes", 6 Huizinea caled them, ofer a good example ofthereincamatjon ofart oD the streer, to take one kind ofplac where thh an happ€a. Narumlly, rhis

--

md &cl.ty, and rhehI lnd &lution wetud lnttilulionq,"! tflltht undcNrandlr, mdpolicics[! alcncc to art. asi hdl{Ll wav ofltloplng hcauselhrl pollcy-rnakenfptftlculsr &De, or! dchl.d gnJI lt cducaton arelhfi !ro* and ilc

rr t& thcD rv t.llodw lndrt! ihlr theEnolptioD! ofartrrylnd

t|!op.nded sorrprn oflioh I hottrd tru Dolcv-lcna cuin rn,i*!d ccntrc staptrtrhd b€trer-

xylife tok - rnd slr€advur will pulr

d wrr, aeJohanh havrhd to find onmalion ofthed by festivals.pl. ofthctullllt rhi,

kind of'retum' must not be undeNtood as a soft ofhistorical r€er€ssion. Itstead it should b€ anatural part ofordinary living in late twentieth centurf lreland.

Th€ most encoumging thing about communityrriented and comnunity-siinted aftsactivity in Ireland tu that it ;! led by demand. Ther€ h no c€ntra.lis€d progEtrme dictating whatshould happen and when, no dogmatic idea ofwhat 'community arts' is or should be. Mary diverseactiviti$ such as festivals and class€s, atu c€ntres and caftl renovations, community th€atEworkshop's and local publishing ventures, heritage parls and video proj€ctr, skills €xchans€workshops and anistr residencies, ar€ caling out for encourag€m€nt and suppot. ThiDkers onmauen cultural may be struggling to make seis€ ofthem, but what they ne€d is for lexible policy-maken to nake nore and better mom lor them.

REFEREI'ICES Another Standard. (1986). Cutturcand Democncy: Th€ Maibra Londonr ComediaPublishing Company.

Bauu,J. (1974). Tle Us€ and AbuseotAtt. PincEtoc: Princeton Univenity Pr€$.

Bell, C. (1913, 1958). An. New York Capricom Books"

braden, S. (19?8). ArtasrsandPeopie London: Routledg€ & Kegan Paul.

Cronin, A. (1988). Artfo. tlePeople Dublin: Raven Afts Pres.

Dewey, J. (1934, lgsg). An zJ Exper'ence New York C. P PutDm's Sons.

Eisner, E. (1982). Cqzlbn nd Cunhulun: A Basis b Decidihs what to Tbach. London:Longman.

Frere, P (.1972). Pedagogy oi'&e OpprEs'ed Hamondsworth: Penguin.

Coodman, N. (1978). Wap otworldmak;rs. tndiar\apoljsr Hackeu Publishing Compan)a

Goodnan, N. (Spring, 1982). Impleentation ofthe arts. TheJounal otAesthetkr d Andrnraisn, \aL, 3, 281-283.

Gov€mm€nt Publicatiom. (19s1). ArtsAct, 195J. Dublin The Stationery Offrce.

Govemment Publications. 11973). AttsAct, 1973.Dahlin The Stationery Oflice.

Govemment Publications. l\!]E7). Accdsandopptun;ty: A Wh;te Paryon Cultuftl Pol;cy.Dublin: The Stationery O{hce.

Huizinga,J. (1924, 1972). The lvaning otthe Middle Age* Harmondsworth I Penguin.

KeUy, O. (1984). CorrDD ity, An Md the State: Stom;rg rhe Crrade.ls London: ConediaPublishing Compary.

O'Hagan,J. and Dufty, C (]9A?). The Perfoming Arts and the Public Purc: An EcononicArr]'sri'. Dublin: Th€AftsCouncil.

Shaw, R. (1987). Ati ad rl'e Peop.le. I,ondonrJonathaD Cape Ltd.

Winiarns, R. (1981). Lelvotds: A Vocabulary ofcuLwe a,dSmrbry Iindon: Fonrana/CroomHelft.