In Parsing “Engage” I addressed the fact that the meaning of the word engagement is dependent upon who is engaging with whom toward what end. This is a quick followup to that meditation. I recently ran across the following headline in an arts newsletter: “2015–The Year You Become Engaged in the Arts.” This fairly clearly shows that the intent is to bring people who are outside in. There is no indication of an awareness of a need for the arts to do any moving or adjusting. There is a desire to get the community engaged, but the heavy lifting is left to the community member to see the light and come enjoy the wonders of the arts.
I can see people understanding this to be community engagement. This is a marketing effort to get uninvolved community members to participate in the arts: the community engages with the arts. This assumes that there are large numbers of people who want to do that and they just need to learn about the opportunities. Certainly there are some, but it’s not likely that there are enough to have the kind of impact that’s going to be necessary to affect long-term sustainability.
Community engagement as it’s understood here and by my many colleagues who are laboring to move the dial on the arts’ relevance to society means that the arts engage with their various communities. It is a learning process whereby arts organizations come to better understand the community and thereby develop ways of being of greater value to it.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with artcentric engagement. It simply will do little to improve the arts’ prospects or perceived value. And it’s not what the engagement buzz is truly about.
Engage!
Doug
Photo:
Some rights reserved by joshbousel