The Gentrification Of Black Creative Output Part 1 - Khahliso Matela

The title phrase was coined during a heated improvisational discussion about the value of Black Art versus the value attached to Black Creative products in the age of commodification.

And this has been a nagging dilemma for many thinkers I believe.

But, when we truly face the music, what are the lyrics to this hymn of libertarian arts and cultural dilution?

One is often tempted to quote from a plethora of texts that have tackled the subject in the past, but in this opinion piece, I would beg to venture into the topic from a purely synthetic point of view.

A synthesis perhaps of all the information amassed through reading, be it antithetic or otherwise.

The first question I ask myself is: “What effect has commodification actually had on creative minds within the black community?”

Did the free market system of globalization prepare our artists to be apt assailants of palatable norms and commercially viable trends, thus allowing them a chance to navigate within the broader economics of art?

Did the demands of commercialization mean art had to be marinated for plebeian tastes of the masses, or did the demands of the masses commercialize and commodify art?

I haven’t any eloquently outlined answers to these questions, but I acquiesce that I am of the impression that the scenarios posed above are congruent to how the wave of capitalist imperialism has been advancing globally.

The privatization of an entire people’s way of life by a few proprietors is a phenomenon that now affects all spheres of life, be it from water to shelter and the abandonment of freedom for security.

But such consistent violations of human rights can also signify an assault on free expression, which could eventually become translated into expressions of dissent by the masses which are not completely free but designed to seem free.

Perhaps a phrase such as “Freedom-Bound Expressions” will have meaning in future discourse about ideas of freedom of expression.

And the likelihood is that that design of an unreal sense of expressiveness is the tool needed by the powers that be to keep everyone under lock and key – which is not far removed from ‘the illusion of freedom’ most societies seem comfortable with, under repressive governments and dogmatic regimes.

But one could also ask, what is ‘true freedom’ in an age of surveillance technologies and privacy traded for narcissistic virtual exposure?

In the context of artists being custodians and practitioners of ‘freedom of expression’, has art produced by the black creative community become but a mirror that reflects remnants of egoisms harboured throughout years of deprivation and social excommunication?

Has our creative output become a mode of acquiring privileges and acceptance within ‘cannons of true art’, within the power structures that previously censored us?

Does our art mimic selfish dreams of affluence inherited from shattered dreams which could not be accommodated within the capitalist dream-machine without compromising dignities?

My answer is NO!

However, there exists an undeniable trend of ‘artists scouts’ who seem to possess a yard stick with which they measure the progressivity of art and notwithstanding that art’s commercial viability within the art-world.

These ‘scouts’ have an eye for ‘black art that is palatable to white consumption’; they identify niche techniques, execution media, installations which can be either replicated by white artists for the white market.

In other cases, they can go as far as to ‘brand’ a ‘black artist’ who seems not so rough around the edges, and one who can approximate their expression for the demands of the preferred consumers.

Now, if black artists are going to go this route of glossing up their innermost graves and tortured souls; only then can one say ‘the gentrification of black creative output’ is the future trend if we want to ‘make money’ through art.

Tom Fleming, UK consultant and specialist in the cultural and creative industries, speaking in Prato is quoted as saying "The economic downturn has shown that the creative industries sector benefits a relatively privileged sector. In a culturally diverse society, it is the white community, those with social capital, who are best able to access and participate in the creative industries".

And I cannot agree more with this statement because it is lucid and poignant.

The white community’s insidious inclination towards ‘romaticization before extinction’ or expropriation is what a small number of black artists are cautiously optimistic about, because it spell a number of traps laid out for black creative practices within the industrial complex characterizing the gentrification of black arts.

This elite sector of society which often possesses expendable income, tend to then inflate egos of certain artists, buy their artworks for peanuts scavenged often by galleries through commissions and leave for greener pastures in European or US art markets.

We all know of the plunder of colonialism, ‘collectors’ are raking in millions through works ‘solicited’ from ‘indigenous tribes’.

Question is, do black artists truly long for a separate, uncorrupted sphere of creative articulation that does not yield to the whims of global corporate patronage?

I am not speaking of an utopian longing for a discreet space for cultural expression free of corruption that is explicit and implicit of commodification of the arts, but the overthrown of the entire cultural order based on supremacist ideologies.

Hunter S. Thompson Archive

Where Paradise Grows

Photographed by: Paul Zisiwe

Where Paradise Grows

If you’ve lived in Johannesburg for a while, as most have, you’ve witnessed the phenomenon of neighbourhood change: residents replaced by a new population or displaced to make room for new housing or a non-residential project. New buildings are constructed, old buildings are renovated, and public space is repurposed.

Because cities are dynamic, with competing interests, change takes place in cycles. Over time, a single block can go from lower income to higher income population and vice versa; from uniform housing stock to a mix of styles to all new; from residential to industrial to residential; and on and on. Change at the neighbourhood level is the result of complex forces including financial investment, demographic trends, new cultural projects, expanding institutions, and government programs.

Art and Creative businesses are also being affected by this phenomenon of gentrification, (a catchphrase commonly used) and robust investment is required for arts and culture business enterprises to be competitive in their own right as participant in the constant transformation of any living spaces and the economics of city dwelling.

Lately, terms such as "creative economy," "creative class," and "cultural economy" are becoming more common among urban planners, arts administrators, economic developers, and business and municipal leaders. These terms need exhibit tangible results such as jobs as they have become the new terminology linking culture and the economy, and should also indicate recognition of the connections among the fields of planning, economic development, and arts and culture.

As an inevitable by-product of city growth, creative precincts are mushrooming all over Johannesburg and many investors have seen the financial benefits for artists and their communities, as well as the corporate sector itself. With rising commercial rents having closed many traditional artistic businesses like galleries and performance spaces, there is a niche market which creative precincts exploit, which has been dramatically characterised by social adaptation in the face of gentrification.

On the exhibition

Recently I attended a walkabout with curator Ingrid LaFleur who brought the work of Detroit-based artist collective, Complex Movements, to Johannesburg.

And upon seeing the title of the exhibition I could not help but be attracted to the what I presumed to be ‘participatory approach to city/community development’ to paraphrase the description provided by the curator. I naively expected a visceral exploration of imaginative neo-scientific concepts regarding city development and community development.

In my mind, the exhibition promised a replenishing of social ecosystems through various media of art harmonised with architecture, transportation systems, park systems, sanitary systems et al.

From a creative stand point, a reference to Afro-futurism as an artistic perspective from which the artworks should be analysed; further posited a dilemma of interpretation of representation versus the reality of what is the installation itself.  

Besides the exhibition being comprised mainly of miniaturised recreations and photographs of the original exhibition held in Detroit, one could also feel the vicariousness of the experience as it lacked the mystery of the promised.

Like a sister of mine asked: ‘Why do we get watered down versions of the original exhibition. The case being the same with pop acts like Rhianna and Beyonce (to mention a few) who give sub-standard shows when touring South Africa as opposed to when performing in Europe or the US. Why does this also have to apply to such a ‘participatory’ exhibition?’

However, there are themes the exhibition explores that range from: Cultivating “Natural” Cultural Districts; From Creative Economy to Creative Society; Migrants, Communities and Culture; Financing Artists’ Workspace; and Culture and Market Value Analysis (MVA) – which are interrelated issues from any artists’ and their community’s perspective.

This experiment in repurposing the old is eloquently defined by Jeremy Nowak as true “community development or place-making, largely directed to older, economically disadvantaged areas. Place-making involves businesses, households, government and civic institutions in efforts to increase economic opportunity, the quality of public amenities, and flows of capital into the built environment.”

Artists are expert at uncovering, expressing and re-purposing the assets of place – from buildings and public spaces to community stories. The Complex Movements troop thus managed to provide a formidable example of how art communities can accommodate themselves within any community. Through improvisational dialogue, local artists discovered the perils of an art of individual assertion within and against the group; art was identified as social capital.

One obscure norm that characterises places accomodating art communities becomes their exclusivity which often alienates the common man. This leniency towards selectivity is now identified as what has been the resilient virus that has gnawed to the detriment of many community development art projects. When integral association with the broader community is essential for making art economically viable; it therefore means that art should serve purposes of benefitting the sources from whom inspiration for art is drawn.

Rather than condemning commodification as an unwarranted threat to the ‘authenticity’ of local cultures, artist sought formulae of collaborating more and more, their works intended to generate consensus and to challenge media stereotypes.

In simple terms, everyone echoed the anthemic words by Ron Karenga in “on Black Art”.

He wrote:

“Black Art must be for the people, by the people and from the people. That is to say, it must be functional, collective and committing.

Soul is extra-scientific, that is to say, outside of science; therefore we will allow no scientific disproof of it.

All that we do and create is based on tradition and reason, that is to say, foundation and movement. We began to build on a traditional, but it is out of movement that we complete our creation.

Art for art's sake is an invalid concept; all art reflects the value system from which it comes.

We say inspiration is the real basis of education. In a word, images inspire us, academic assertions bore us.

Our art is both form and feeling but more feeling than form.

Our creative motif must be revolution; all art that does not discuss or contribute to revolutionary change is invalid.”