









18. 10. 2004
Feeding Art to Orphans by Jerome Kugan
It’s just that, most of the time, art is treated as a charity project. And depending on who one speaks to, that may seem patronising at best. Having to confer pity on something we would like to be imbued with an independent spirit of some sort simply smacks of colonial condescension. And what is worse is when the projects funded are half-baked fantasies of self-obsessed artist(e)s such as (names withheld to protect the guilty). We need to move on, folks! A quick scan of the Kakiseni listings will reveal how provincial/parochial/pathetic our artistic ambitions have become. And yet what is even more shocking is that it’s what Malaysians seem to want.
So here’s a word to artist(e)s, sponsors and (the paying) audience (not those of you who get by on comps): it’s got to be a push-and-pull deal. Just as sponsors need to get over their unhealthy propensity to finance only the tried-and-true, not to mention the most boring and inane projects, artists and audience members really need to challenge themselves a bit more, in terms of what gets to the performance space. Just because so-and-so Tan Sri might not get it, we shouldn’t have to blind ourselves to the fact that we are not dumb.
But what if the art is a charity project? (Shock! Horror! Ohmigod, hide your children!)
Which is what DiGi Yellow Mobile is. Launched on June 15, 2002, DiGi has invited local and foreign artists from various disciplines to conduct one-day arts-oriented workshops for special and underprivileged children in different parts of the country.
What was that? Feeding art to handicapped and orphaned children? Wouldn’t it be better to concentrate on their more immediate needs, such as educating the largely ignorant public not to treat people in such disadvantaged situations as merely charity? (Gosh! How unorthodox.)
But going against the grain is what DiGi has done (to a certain extent anyway). In a way, this is funding to aid the arts in a different manner. Arts education for the young is a quickly dying art in our schools. Many of our public schools, especially in economically depressed (and artistically depressing) districts go without art teachers. (As though what Malaysia needs are more overseas-trained capitalists who, after realising what a corrupt hellhole this country is, migrate anyway.) It’s commendable that a corporate organisation such as DiGi Communications Sdn Bhd has been organising this arts-oriented project for an especially marginalised community.
Still, charity is the operative word here. Since we are concerned with the current state of the arts and how money is being spent in its service, I feel compelled to ask: How far can one take charity in the name of art – or is it art in the name of charity – before we lose all sense of dignity? Let’s go on a tour of the provinces.
On September 11, 2004, DiGi Yellow Mobile held its eleventh installment in Kuala Terengganu. Each Yellow Mobile initiative had its own special name, theme and programme, and this one was no exception. It was called “Dumelang”, which means ‘Hello’ in Setswana – the language of Botswana. The reason for the African connection is due to DiGi having invited six Botswana students from Limkokwing University of Creative Technology to participate in the workshop, which also included members of four local performance arts groups – Laasya Arts, Hands Percussion, Perunggu Edu.Tainment and Consultancy, and Sayang Dances. The official blurb for the event is that “it saw more than 100 underprivileged children aged between 7 to 13 years gather for a fun-filled afternoon learning to integrate African and Malaysian cultures.” Which is exactly what happened.
After a rather awkward speech from DiGi’s newly-instated CEO Morten Lundal and a hearty lunch, the children were divided into four colour-coded groups: the blue-coded children learnt Indian dance (Laasya Arts), red meant Chinese drums (Hands Percussion), yellow for Malay dance (Perunggu Edu.Tainment and Consultancy), and green is for the more ethnically lateral Contemporary dance (Sayang Dances). The children were then shepherded off to individual rooms where they were taught some tricks to perform at the end of the day. In the rooms, the children were further divided into two groups, with the secondarily-grouped children receiving instructions from the African students.
For approximately three hours, the children were taken through the paces of learning simple performance pieces. In the Indian dance room, the children were given batons and taught the hit-the-baton-to-music-and-dance-at-the-same-time routine that can be seen perennially at Indian cultural events. In the Chinese drums room, the children were taught the rudiments of hitting the hell out of barrel-stretched hide. In the Malay room, the kids were taught how to dance ‘gayung otah’ – a dance that was introduced to Terengganu-ites by Arab traders in pre-colonial times. In the Contemporary room, the children learnt how to sing ‘Ikan Kekek’ and make accompanying interpretative actions. Meanwhile, the African students guided the children in all four rooms to: sing a folk song which went “Dumelang! Dumelang!”, dance a funky dance accompanying a rather upbeat modern Afrobeat tune, do a tribal war dance, and beat drums.
After the workshops, the children, facilitators and sponsors reconvened in the main hall to present what they’ve learnt. If I must put on my critical bib, I have to say the performances were patchy at best. Then again, these are 7 to 13-year-olds. And going by the brief contact time between the facilitators and their students, it’s a miracle that the children actually managed to pull off their show monkey presentations without too much loss of dignity.
But this was not a venue for ‘serious’ art. One wonders if it can be called ‘art’. Sometimes it felt more like ‘artless’ – even if the organiser’s mission apparent was not so much to produce ‘great art’ but rather to have fun. And true enough, albeit artlessly, like the best of much Malaysian art, seeing the kids enjoy themselves during the whole event (especially when gorging on the food; the fried chicken nuggets were especially popular) and watching how attentive and bright-eyed they were, it was obvious that that they did have ‘fun’. Considering the children’s backgrounds, it’s a pity that more couldn’t be done.
Alan Bligh, the emcee, who had been involved in several DiGi Yellow Mobile events, remarked that the KualaTerengganu installment was definitely livelier than some of the previous ones. And even though the children were never treated as more than a mass of smiling faces, occassionally a few DiGi staffers and workshop facilitators fall victim to the children’s charms. “You can see it in their eyes,” Bligh said. “They’re just so wonderful. The way they hold on to you towards the end of every event, it just makes you want to take them home. I’ve cried a few times thinking about what these kids have gone through. Some of them have gone through really horrible things. I sometimes wish we could do more.”
But more doesn’t seem to be in the offering, which is a shame. In an interview with the press, Lundal said that DiGi has no plans at the moment to commit itself to community art projects that are more long term or more focused on individual talents. “It’s not because we don’t see the value in it. We do this purely for the community. For the moment, we would rather concentrate on doing projects that would benefit more than just a few. However, we are still thinking of how to do more.” In a few words, it’s going to take time.
Still, DiGi Yellow Mobile is a nice effort, although it’s obviously no substitute for long term arts education programs, which would be more beneficial to our youth (regardless of whether their homes are broken or otherwise), especially those interested in pursuing careers in the arts. And here’s to hoping that one brief afternoon’s romp with art could spark a lifelong interest in the arts. There’s no question that art is a great healer. Whatever it is we think we’ve lost or could hope to lose, art has always been there to show us that it’s always been there. My only fear is the day would come when the young will chastise us for not having done enough. Or worse, that they don’t even know how to. Can we stand to lose that?
User Comments
| posted by Valerie Solanas wannabe |
| Description: "But this was not a venue for ‘serious’ art. One wonders if it can be called ‘art’. Sometimes it felt more like ‘artless’ " Your quotation marks seems to either: a) show your admirable intelligence b) your veiled sarcasm c) your intended sarcasm d) your inability to grasp what the notions mean (which personally to me, is the BEST reason of all, and I'm not being sarcastic here) e) your, (in your own words) "provincial/parochial/pathetic" attempts at labelling things Come on, what is "art"? I don't know. Is it avant-garde or is it kitsch? Is it abstraction or is it pop culture? Is it expression or is it weapon? What I do know is that the one who posits one over the other is just being as "provincial/parochial/pathetic" as the other. But then again, it’s nice to have one-sided arguments like yours, so as to counter the throngs of "provincial/parochial/pathetic" arguments (or as some would like to refer to them as “facts”) that we are constantly being bombarded with. Good job, Jerome Kugan, with the article! Your keen insight and willingness to tell the truth, your truth, whatever it may, be must be commended.
|
| posted by FillinArtist |
| Description: For other ppl out there...there is one project funded by british council. This project was done at Hospital Selayang in 2002 but there is no publisty put up by kakiseni to promote the programe.
|
| posted by Disgruntled |
| Your conscending article isn't merely an insult to Malaysian artists, it's an insult to the children as well. Never have I thought that Kakiseni, a haven for insighful, well-written articles, would be reduced to publishing this pitiful excuse of an essay which would be better off on a blog. It smacks of crass commercialism and it incenses me to know that DiGi exploits young, gullible children as an advertising vehicle, no different from the Datuk-datuks who give "charity luncheons/dinners/teas" at welfare homes at every given opportunity. It is evident that Jerome Kugan has not done his homework. He is neither a social worker, Malaysian school student, nor has he had much exposure to those "underpriviledged" kids. One has got to question his authority in writing this story. In fact, as someone who has been working in a welfare home since 2002 on a voluntary basis, I can accurately state that for all the glittery glamour and feelings of goodwill the DiGi ppl are trying to stir up, these 3 hours would be of no benefit whatsoever to the children unless there is a follow up plan. If DiGi had really intended to "do this purely for the community" and make it worth their while, they would at least attempt to finish what they have *started*. I suppose we should know that too many potatoes spoil the gulai - in attempting to carry out a project of massive porpotions that would "benefit more than just a few", DiGi ends up benifiting noone in particular - except for themselves. What a waste of time and money. I understand that Kakiseni is an advocate of free speech, so I won't question their integrity in publishing this article, but I think that people who attempt to write for this esteemed platform should at least be acquainted with their chosen subjects. Calling an indian dance "hit-the-baton-to-music-and-dance-at-the-same-time" instead of giving it it's proper name is degrading, ditto "hitting the hell out of barrel-stretched hide". Your patronising tone is most "provincial/parochial/pathetic", especially when implying that younger Malaysians would blame the older generation for the death of "art". We're not stupid (I'm 17, one of "the young", BTW) and you shouldn't underestimate us like that. As for Alan Bligh's soppy sentiments that sound as if they were gleaned off a greeting card, I'm inviting him (and anyone who's interested) to come join me for a romp during one of my classes. See how much fuzzy feelings you've got left after that.
|
| posted by jerome |
| you're right. i'm not a social worker. i've never professed to be one. i don't know what it's like to be in an orphanage, or rehab, or an old folks' home. heck, i'm not even sure if art is all that. i merely wrote what i observed and surmised. what you wrote is very intriguing. i would love to meet up with you and spend a day or two at your workplace and experience how you see the whole thing. you can contact me at hutan_hitam@hotmail.com
|
| posted by Haiyoh Donchbelaidat |
| Social Worker, Your post is articulate and well put. I am most impressed with your manner however I find it hard to believe you are 17 years old and have been through the Malaysian education system. If you are who you say you are, it is refreshing to know that there are young Malaysians out there that make the difference in our society. I hope you straighten Jerome out. He needs some guidance with his observations and conclusions.
|
| posted by alex |
| My God, the two of you are prime examples of how the Malaysian education system has failed us. First of all, Disgruntled, your misreading of Jerome's article is incredible. Did you even read through the whole article before launching into your poison pen letter? In the last paragraph, Jerome wrote "Still, DiGi Yellow Mobile is a nice effort, although it’s obviously no substitute for long term arts education programs, which would be more beneficial to our youth (regardless of whether their homes are broken or otherwise), especially those interested in pursuing careers in the arts." clearly stating his position on the DiGi project. To have done nothing is bad, but not doing enough is worse. Your concerns and criticisms, although championly out, are completely misplaced. And Haiyoh, you obviously didn't read the article either. Very very sad.
|
| posted by Social Worker a.k.a. |
| With all due respect, Alex, my comment wasn't merely a "poison pen letter", and yes, I read the entire article. Several times in fact. I actually printed it out because reading online takes a lotta time and $. BTW, any venom in my words would have been directed to the article, and not Jerome. And if you'd read my previous comment carefully, I was refering to the *way* the article was written, the tone, which made the whole thing sound like a commercial. I understand that the best writers in the world make mistakes sometimes, and that's why I came back to this article. Maybe I'm not that good at expressing myself, but this article seems to echo my sentiments. http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2004/10/26/features/9202278&sec=features "Right Spirit, Wrong Medium" ~ Thor Kah Hoong. And Jerome, I'll get to you - when I've got access to my POP3 mail and when I'm not so busy. Or you can contact me through my blog: www.obscure-reality.tk
|
| posted by pang |
| writers in the world makes mistakes. Sure. But sometimes the worst readers assume the mistake is the writer's. Darling, I think you are still one reread short of comprehension. How is it you are unable to differentiate the writer from his subject? Perhaps your anger toward the subject (Digi) clouded your senses so much that your selective reading of the text resulted in you confusing Jerome with Digi. For your benefit, let me clarify: Jerome is a human being, Digi is not. Just because a writer writes about a thing, doesn't mean he approves of the thing. You have a problem with the 'tone' of the article? That it sounded like a commercial? I think it is obvious there are people who have disagreed with your reading. In fact, I don't think you even know what 'tone' is. Your head was probably steaming so much that the 'tone' just floated pass without grazing even one hair. Jerome is covering a Digi event in which they sponsored underprivileged children for an afternoon of exposure to the arts. What? You don't like the idea? It is 'patronising'? Okay, so the Digi event is problematic to you. But was Jerome promoting Digi? No. Was he saying that teaching dance to orphans is a good thing? He didn't say that either. What did he say? "Considering the children’s backgrounds, it’s a pity that more couldn’t be done." And also: "But more doesn’t seem to be in the offering, which is a shame." And earlier in the article: "Wouldn’t it be better to concentrate on their more immediate needs, such as educating the largely ignorant public not to treat people in such disadvantaged situations as merely charity?" To put it easily for the benefit of easily-incensed comprehension-challenged idealistic youths, Jerome is saying: The public should be educated NOT to treat people in such disadvantaged situations as merely charity. Isn't that exactly what you are saying, oh young social worker? I admire your passion, but perhaps you should learn to be slower to anger. Sigh, don't you just love it when people get into Heated Agreement? Now, let's hear you make suggestions to how corporations can REALLY help.
|
| posted by joo lee |
| read jerome kugan's blow-by-blow account with a great deal of distaste. this is self-promotion at its lowest - and art just happened to be the medium. we have to ask ourselves if there is any lasting value in this kind of project. you descend on a group of underprivileged children, shower them with attention for a whole day and then leave, never to see them again. how do these children benefit? will learning a folk song from botswana make any difference to their lives or help them do better in school or give them some hope for the future? it's not poor jerome who should be vilified (as some readers have been wont to do) but the organisers of this disgraceful farce. ps i know of one company which has a foundation that buys school bags and school uniforms for scores of underprivileged children at the beginning of every school year to give them a positive start. the company don't make a big deal about it because they believe it's their social responsibility. perhaps other corporate citizens should start thinking along this line.
|
| posted by 2 Cents |
| I had thought of writing a different letter, but your latest editorial proved me wrong. Read on to find out why. Pang, sometimes I wonder why you like to belittle people so much by resorting to labels. The "tone" of your reply to the "easily-incensed comprehension-challenged idealistic youth" makes you sound like one yourself. You did not even attempt to justify some of your accusations, e.g. "In fact, I don't think you even know what 'tone' is." I wonder why you do this. I could come up with a million reasons, but only you know yourself. But I wonder whether you are just a partisan fighting for those who put food on the table for you. Alas, you confounded me. You bitched about your writers in your editorial. Hence, there is nothing more for me to say except that you have proven me wrong. Congratulations. However, I take one issue with your statement "Now, let's hear you make suggestions to how corporations can REALLY help." Well, corporations do not help. They cannot. They exploit. That is their nature. It's up to you or Disgruntled Social Worker or whoever to debate whether that is ethically right or wrong. I'm just here to point out something that is so apparent, yet most of us choose to placate ourselves by thinking otherwise. Let's look at an example: A corporation sponsors a theatre production. Now, surely the corporation is doing it for their own benefit. And so is the theatre company. Do you seriously think that the theatre company really wants to "help" the corporation? No, it just chooses whichever sponsor that justifies their cause. This is called capitalism. Call it whatever you may, but you get the idea. I will not say whether this is ethically right or wrong, that is for you to decide. Call me a nihilist if you will, I will be wont to your labels. - your old friend whom you dissed, 2 Cents
|
| posted by 2 Cents |
| joo lee, You said, "will learning a folk song from botswana make any difference to their lives or help them do better in school or give them some hope for the future?" If that's the case, then a lot for what passes as art does not fit the description. Unless you are quick to label them entertainment or lowbrow culture. Which would be the typical intellectual or bourgeois thing to say. Why bourgeois, because they want to escape those forms of art/culture in order to move up the ladder to a more refined one. "Lah, filem Yusuf Haslam lagi", "Bollywood lagi?", "WWF pun nak tengok". Do these sound familiar? They sound familiar because they (the objects of contention in the statements) never cease to replicate themselves. The reason is simple, there is a demand for them. Which means that a large number of the population likes them. And would this large number happen to be all from the upper-middle or upper classes? Some, maybe, but they tend to be from the working or lower-middle classes. Yes, yes, lots of assumptions here. I'm not trying to make a sweeping conclusion, though I might have already inadvertently done so, so I'll end here before I get mocked by Pang again. Anyway, to sum up my reply to you, dear otherwise erudite joo lee, Botswanan folk songs exist. A day for the kids to be exposed to that existed. To rob them from this opportunity whatever your moral/political bent is, would be a grave injustice.
|
| posted by white rabbit |
| I am confused... Do artists want funding or don't they? Isn't the whole idea of arts sponsorships supposed to be a win-win situation? I suppose 'real artists' expect to be given the freedom and resources to express themselves on a silver platter with no strings attached, while corporations should provide these resources and stand in the sidelines oohing and aahing with the rest of the adoring public (at least the few who have the privilege to access high art). Just my thoughts really, please feel free to educate my ignorance on what our arts scene really needs/wants. Next, does the digi project claim to be encouraging high art? I suppose this is a question for Jerome since he was at the event. If so, then it would be a gross mistake on the organiser's part. But if, it meets the promise of the official blurb (from what I have read of the project) and is merely a day when the company gives a treat (of a different kind) to the children of lesser means who wouldnt normally be exposed to different forms of culture, then why are we arguing this moot point? Jerome asks: How far can one take charity in the name of art – or is it art in the name of charity – before we lose all sense of dignity? - People, it was about fun! Are we so consumed by art and its dignity that we forget we are allowed to have fun as well? Goodness knows these children need to have fun, and if digi wants to 'do charity' involving art - then good for them I say. Disgruntled Social Worker thinks the company exploits young, gullible children as an advertising vehicle. Would DSW prefer then that these children not have these opportunities at all? Can homes/charitable orgs realistically expect funding if they were not 'exploited' in a certain way. Sad, but its the realistic truth - altho these companies would need to draw a fine line to the extent of what gains they expect from corporate sponsorships such as these. With all this debate, perhaps digi and other companies should go back to the safe, tried and tested sponsorships of 'feeding the children' as Jerome so eloquently put it - Buka Puasa here we come!
|
| posted by zulkifli mohamad |
| Well done Jerome! you have done some stirring, at least people are talking about it. May be you are good at that. It was interesting reading all the comments. Lets make Malaysia a good place for breeding young artistes and creative people, for haven sake, that programme was just an activity by a corporation, well done, please continue to do so. Anybody is welcome to do workshop as long as you have resources and intention, if not for art, at least for activity that will bring good name for the corporation, and children to enjoy and eat. Education is way beyond that, but that is good tiny start! Bravo volunteers, please continue! as for Malaysian or foreign writers ( Jerome, are you Malaysian?) please get involve more to know more and read more and not just listen and comment, stop writing to simply comment of other people just because u have friends who also doing some workshops in arts! be positivelah, more event the better!
|
| posted by dreaming creep |
| i have to agree on the point that 2 cents made with the fact that coorperations would only do anything that benefits itself and that it is their nature. is it ethically wrong for them to do so while promoting that they've done a big thing for the society or whoever else but themselves? hell yes. Digi put on another mock-show, just like any other big cooperation usually do once in a while, example: sunway lagoon organizing a crappy as hell "art fest" called "splashing fun colours". it wasn't art, nor charity, just marketing strategy and advertising tool. so they now know about botswanian dance, so what? even bigger the mockery is that limkokwing students were there, wow, now that's a win-win situation, for limkokwing and digi only that is. will they ever do something truly beneficial? only if in return, it is to their best financial interest. are artists simply waiting for everything to be handed to them? to some end yes. but unfortunately coorperations are just assholes who do not change, so if artists of any field need their help, they'll just need to play by the assholes' rules and that is: bring them more cash in return. can you do that without selling out? surprisingly, yes. ever heard of soundscape? the prime group of bands who are also the sole bulk of the chinese indie music scene(yes, there is such a thing). their main large events are sponsored by Tiger beer and extreme(an extremely copy-everything-from-the-japs-and-honkies-make-shitty-t-shirts-and-charge-insanely-expensive-prices company) yes, those are coorperations, but the music is real, and the music is pure, and the music is ultimately original. how do the cooperations benefit? Tiger gets a boost to its image as being THE unofficially COOLEST BEER to drink if you think you're DIFFERENT. and Extreme gets the advertising they need by printing shitty and huge logos on the event t-shirts. in both cases, the corrupt corps earn more cash in the long run thru brand-building. the thing is, being sponsored and indirectly being associated with these corps thru ur events doesn't necessarily mean you're selling out, and it doesn't necessarily mean you will be forever associated with the brand. what really matters is how you use them to meet your own end, for soundscape, its a chance to bring real music to the chinese community, open a new music market in the chinese music scene. and people won't even give a damn as to who sponsored your gig if you don't let the corps over-control you and if your gig is great enough. people only thing people remember is you and your art. do you remember which film company produced "fight club" or "trainspotting" or "first take, final cut"? or which record company produces "radiohead" or "portishead" or "mogwai" or "observatory" or "Lang Mang"? don't ask the devils to change, that's impossible. instead start learning how you can play with the devils without selling your soul. (completely)
|
Related Links
print | e-mail to a friend | post comment




