This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/26/exhibit-b-london-slavery-brett-bailey

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
The Exhibit B slavery show has value - but who was it aimed at? The Exhibit B slavery show has value - but who was it aimed at?
(about 1 hour later)
There’s one unarguable thing to be said about the imbroglio that engulfed the Barbican this week over the staging and then cancellation of Brett Bailey’s anti-racism installation Exhibit B: what a fine mess. The rest is less defined. As with so much involving artistic expression, on stage or on canvas, there is what seems readily apparent on the surface, and that which lies beneath.There’s one unarguable thing to be said about the imbroglio that engulfed the Barbican this week over the staging and then cancellation of Brett Bailey’s anti-racism installation Exhibit B: what a fine mess. The rest is less defined. As with so much involving artistic expression, on stage or on canvas, there is what seems readily apparent on the surface, and that which lies beneath.
Bailey’s installation, using black actors to depict the horrors of slavery and charting how the poisonous residue blights the present day, was displayed to critical acclaim at the Edinburgh International Festival, but the Barbican’s attempt to stage it in south London was snuffed out at birth after 200 protesters held a noisy demonstration on the opening night. Almost immediately the five-night run was cancelled.Bailey’s installation, using black actors to depict the horrors of slavery and charting how the poisonous residue blights the present day, was displayed to critical acclaim at the Edinburgh International Festival, but the Barbican’s attempt to stage it in south London was snuffed out at birth after 200 protesters held a noisy demonstration on the opening night. Almost immediately the five-night run was cancelled.
Bailey is a phenomenon. Fearless and provocative. There is no doubt that in matters of race and culture, and of the noxious history that fuses the two, his view would chime with many liberals. Thus one can see why he was keen to make his contribution on the matter of slavery. But I can also see why – given the gruesome composition of his work – demonstrators were so intent on stopping him.Bailey is a phenomenon. Fearless and provocative. There is no doubt that in matters of race and culture, and of the noxious history that fuses the two, his view would chime with many liberals. Thus one can see why he was keen to make his contribution on the matter of slavery. But I can also see why – given the gruesome composition of his work – demonstrators were so intent on stopping him.
The Barbican had the legal right to stage these scenes of live actors depicting images of slavery subjugation, the better to emphasise the barbarities for those who hadn’t already grasped them. I believe the protesters also had the right, within the law, to raise angry voices and make life difficult. That is what they did on Tuesday night, with drums added for volume.The Barbican had the legal right to stage these scenes of live actors depicting images of slavery subjugation, the better to emphasise the barbarities for those who hadn’t already grasped them. I believe the protesters also had the right, within the law, to raise angry voices and make life difficult. That is what they did on Tuesday night, with drums added for volume.
There is inevitable emotion on both sides. It’s no surprise that the Barbican, in the eye of the storm, raises a flag for freedom of expression, saying this should trump excessive sensibilities and what it condemns as mob rule. But for all that emotion, the events culminating in the cancellation of Exhibit B followed a cold and traceable logic.There is inevitable emotion on both sides. It’s no surprise that the Barbican, in the eye of the storm, raises a flag for freedom of expression, saying this should trump excessive sensibilities and what it condemns as mob rule. But for all that emotion, the events culminating in the cancellation of Exhibit B followed a cold and traceable logic.
There have been reports that the show could not go on because the demonstrators were fearsome enough to cause the live performers, visitors and security staff to fear for their safety. Certainly we know the demonstration was boisterous. The road leading to the Vault, the gallery hired by the Barbican, was blocked and the entrance impeded.There have been reports that the show could not go on because the demonstrators were fearsome enough to cause the live performers, visitors and security staff to fear for their safety. Certainly we know the demonstration was boisterous. The road leading to the Vault, the gallery hired by the Barbican, was blocked and the entrance impeded.
But we also know from British transport police – first on the scene because the venue is next to Waterloo station – that by the time they arrived the protesters were already dispersing, and that they were not moved to make a single arrest. No arrests from a predominantly black protest – that itself seems an anomaly. The fact is that the Barbican decided the hassle of coping with continuing protest outweighed the benefits of showcasing the work.But we also know from British transport police – first on the scene because the venue is next to Waterloo station – that by the time they arrived the protesters were already dispersing, and that they were not moved to make a single arrest. No arrests from a predominantly black protest – that itself seems an anomaly. The fact is that the Barbican decided the hassle of coping with continuing protest outweighed the benefits of showcasing the work.
Bailey is unhappy. The Barbican is unhappy. The protesters, while claiming vindication, lament the failure of negotiation with the actors and the board of the Barbican. Index on Censorship unequivocally attributes culpability. “The Barbican’s mishandling of this work means that they have failed the artist and the audience,” it says. “The work is now not going to be shown, so their very vocal support for Exhibit B is totally compromised. And, by being taken by surprise at the hostile response to the work, they have acted defensively, instead of proactively opening up dialogue with black artists and audience at the earliest stage of considering putting on this work.” A stinging verdict from those one might have expected to embrace the Barbican’s concerns about free expression. As ever, the devil lies in the detail.Bailey is unhappy. The Barbican is unhappy. The protesters, while claiming vindication, lament the failure of negotiation with the actors and the board of the Barbican. Index on Censorship unequivocally attributes culpability. “The Barbican’s mishandling of this work means that they have failed the artist and the audience,” it says. “The work is now not going to be shown, so their very vocal support for Exhibit B is totally compromised. And, by being taken by surprise at the hostile response to the work, they have acted defensively, instead of proactively opening up dialogue with black artists and audience at the earliest stage of considering putting on this work.” A stinging verdict from those one might have expected to embrace the Barbican’s concerns about free expression. As ever, the devil lies in the detail.
But even then, the cancellation of Exhibit B prompts a slew of intriguing questions about this collision of art with 21st-century Britain. Was Brett Bailey, as a white South African – and a provocative artist – incapable of making his genuine point about the depth and continuation of racism to the present day without inevitable blowback? I don’t think so. Racism is a problem to be owned, addressed and confronted by everyone. But in using black actors to make his point – with his narrative embracing slavery – he risked accusations that an exploitative history was being replicated. When those inevitable accusations came, neither Bailey nor the Barbican seemed equipped to negate them. But even then, the cancellation of Exhibit B prompts a slew of intriguing questions about this collision of art with 21st-century Britain. Was Brett Bailey, as a white South African – and a provocative artist – incapable of making his genuine point about the depth and continuation of racism to the present day without inevitable blowback? I don’t think so. Racism is a problem to be owned, addressed and confronted by everyone. But in using black actors to make his point – with his narrative embracing slavery – he risked accusations that an exploitative history was being replicated. When those accusations came, neither Bailey nor the Barbican seemed equipped to negate them.
Might a black director with the same idea have evaded the dust storm? Probably not, but the historical baggage, and thus the dynamic, would have been different so the backlash might have been of lesser ferocity. Might a black director with the same idea have evaded the dust storm? Probably not, but the historical baggage, and thus the dynamic, would have been different so the backlash might have been less ferocious.
Is it a work of value? That depends who is conducting the valuation. A friend – white English, sensible, liberal – saw the installation and considered it a defining work, a life-changer, revealing the depth and depravity of slavery in a way nothing else had previously. Most affecting of all, he said, was the fact they were alive. “Always you could see their eyes,” he told me. “I thought they were models and then realised they were looking at me, and I couldn’t look at them. It made me think about all manner of things, including why I couldn’t look them in the eye.” That’s a reaction of real value.Is it a work of value? That depends who is conducting the valuation. A friend – white English, sensible, liberal – saw the installation and considered it a defining work, a life-changer, revealing the depth and depravity of slavery in a way nothing else had previously. Most affecting of all, he said, was the fact they were alive. “Always you could see their eyes,” he told me. “I thought they were models and then realised they were looking at me, and I couldn’t look at them. It made me think about all manner of things, including why I couldn’t look them in the eye.” That’s a reaction of real value.
And yet it leads to a question integral to the protests. Central to the cost-benefit analysis of the work’s undoubted quality was the question: who was it for? For a black audience, many of whom would rather not dwell on the depth of one-time subjugation? Or for a white audience, to reflect on just how horrific slavery was? And was the discomfort of so many of the former justified to achieve the latter? Is this where we stand when it comes to assessing slavery; have we seen so much that we now have to humanise the vilest abuses to feel anything at all?And yet it leads to a question integral to the protests. Central to the cost-benefit analysis of the work’s undoubted quality was the question: who was it for? For a black audience, many of whom would rather not dwell on the depth of one-time subjugation? Or for a white audience, to reflect on just how horrific slavery was? And was the discomfort of so many of the former justified to achieve the latter? Is this where we stand when it comes to assessing slavery; have we seen so much that we now have to humanise the vilest abuses to feel anything at all?
My friend saw Exhibit B in Edinburgh, where it was lauded by many visitors and the critics. But the Barbican is different. London is different, with 11% of its population of 8 million having origins in Africa or the Caribbean. Different worldview, different tradition of activism; altogether a different dynamic. One of many factors: geography doomed Exhibit B.My friend saw Exhibit B in Edinburgh, where it was lauded by many visitors and the critics. But the Barbican is different. London is different, with 11% of its population of 8 million having origins in Africa or the Caribbean. Different worldview, different tradition of activism; altogether a different dynamic. One of many factors: geography doomed Exhibit B.