When the struggle against apartheid ended with the first democratic elections and citizen protests forced the German Democratic Republic (GDR) to open borders including the Berlin Wall, it again proved how essential civil engagement is as a precondition for change.
Political, economical and social analyses of the so-called peaceful revolution of 1989 in the GDR have been extensive. Yet it is only in the past decade that the cultural aspects have been highlighted, with questions raised regarding the continuing fragmentation of German society and the reality that the East is still a far less flourishing landscape than what was hoped for, and even promised.
Willy Brandt’s famous 1989 statement ”Growing together what belongs together” is today still unfulfilled, with resistant attitudes towards unification still persisting. To what extent culture could be a catalyst for nation-building is one of the central questions reflected upon during the three-day conference Exceeding the Limits: Art Strategies against the Establishment at the Goethe-Institut this past week.
It is hardly surprising that Germans historically do not have a particularly positive relationship with their nation or with ideas around nationhood. Raising the issue of what ”nation” means still causes discomfort to German intellectuals. Such discussions cannot take place without the awareness of the national megalomania under the Nazi regime.
It is for this reason that controversy invariably surrounds institutional endorsement of a particular cultural expression or movement. The political will to define a ”cultural canon” is so highly problematic. Who, after all, decides what defines a nation’s culture, which aspects and movement are to be officially embraced, and which ignored?
Nevertheless, even within these ongoing debates, there is at least one factor about Germans that still holds true: their constant reflection and tireless investigation of ”who they are”. I suspect this sounds quite familiar to South African ears, and it may be a much broader concern we share between our two societies than the historical parallels of the years 1989, 1990 and 1994. Within this context, one starts to ask how memory and identity manifest in the contemporary arts, in both Germany and South Africa, and how an understanding of these metaphorical expressions can further our own self-understanding.
We recognise contemporary artists for their talent to create images that reflect the consciousness of our time. We assume their analytical competence to interpret complex social processes, and appreciate their power to mediate and transform our perception of reality, enabling us to experience things anew. Artists’ own roots and individual identities may inspire them, but international exchange and dialogue are equally important. Within our globalised world, any artistic influence could be a mere mouse click away, and certainly no longer limited to geographic borders.
Global migration is recognised as one of the leading social phenomena today, and the art world not only reflects this multiculturalism, but also artistically engages its implications. Isn’t it anachronistic to use the arts as a tool for ”national” interests in a world that praises international diversity? To what extent does the artist feel him or herself belonging to a national culture?
The conference Exceeding the Limits: Art Strategies against the Establishment reminds us of different strategies of resistance against oppressive systems in South Africa and the GDR 20 years ago. Artists have always been agents of change, protesting against intimidation and for democracy.
One cannot justly compare social and political conditions without analysing their historical implications, but one can attempt insights into different contexts, and different struggles, where artistic interventions clearly influenced political processes. Questions around the relationship between remembrance and contemporary cultural practice as acts of freedom remain pertinent today.
As Desmond Tutu says: ”… there is something in human beings which refuses to be manipulated, which proclaims for all to hear and see that human beings are creatures of the spirit too. They are made for something better than that which they are experiencing. They can dream dreams, they can work like anything to realise the apparently unrealisable — to try to bring utopia to earth.” (Quoted in Sue Williamson’s Resistance Art, 2004.)
Art as a potent means, and as an end in itself, may be best reflected upon within this humanist perspective.
Peter Anders is the director of cultural programmes at the Goethe-Institut South Africa