Introduction
Arts-based teaching strategies in genocide studies are rapidly reaching a globally influential threshold. A growing body of pioneering courses and inspiring arts encounters have contributed to arts and aesthetics based public interfaces and pedagogical initiatives around the world. Global research in arts-based-learning demonstrates that these constructs are enriching and shifting direction in genocide studies and prevention. Still, arts-based education is ascribed only a secondary place rather than an integral one in genocide studies and prevention. This essay makes the argument that arts and culture initiatives, their conception, creation, curation, dissemination, and engagement can play foundational roles in orchestrating responsible memory, transitional justice processes, and sustainable, transformative genocide prevention. Consequently, the need to engage in structural curriculum development across the interface between arts education and genocide studies is essential. Full examination of academic inquiry, professional training, interdepartmental and inter-institutional collaborations in the study of genocide and its prevention can facilitate the emergence of a “grammar” for arts education that negotiates cultural history and collective violence.
Frameworks for Adopting Arts-Based Pedagogy in Genocide Studies and Prevention
Precisely how does arts and cultural expression and education elucidate the relationship between culture and conflict? What parameters in arts education and expression need to be re-imagined and what will dispel outdated institutional approaches, ethics, and practices to those that activate collective, creative, and constructive dialogue? What policy and educational paradigms in arts expression and education have proven to reduce the risk of conflict and / or mitigate escalation of conflict? What are the correlations between artistic and cultural engagements and their corresponding schools of education and how can they be designed to initiate and influence peace and reconciliation processes?
I work with two “frameworks” for considering the parameters for developing arts based educational curriculum as an essential component of genocide studies and prevention. First, I consider the U.N Framework of Analysis for Atrocity Crimes Tools for Prevention. This document examines and addresses the “risk assessment factors” in understanding how mass atrocities escalate. In this analysis mass violence is understood as a process, a set of risk factors and a continuum. Within this continuum, I argue that arts production, curation, appreciation, dissemination, and education is an essential tool for mitigating risk of mass violence at every stage of escalation. As the Framework for Analysis “risk factors” indicate, as systematic attacks escalate against civilian populations, opportunities for the arts to address violence decreases. Along with this deterioration, avenues to facilitate creative dialogue which builds trust, empathy, and social justice processes, proportionally decrease. One can conclude that the role of arts and culture’s influence can mitigate escalation of violent conflict, build awareness outside the conflict area, and foster local, regional, national, and international debate and dialogue that encompasses multiple points of view.
It is important to note that contemporary armed conflict and mass atrocity crimes have undergone a shift from earlier generations of historic, inter-state warfare to new patterns of violence which increasingly are attributable to contracted identity-based conflict. (Naidu-Silverman, 2015). The emergence of such patterns of violence can be identified in the Framework of Analysis by risk factors such as weakened or poor governance, increasing instability and triggering factors such as autocratic regime-change or natural disasters. Definable patterns of intergroup tensions can emerge from unaddressed past human rights violations or socio/economic, identity-based patterns of discrimination. According to the Framework for Analysis a lack of “mitigating factors” such as robust independent judiciaries, civil society, open-media, and international collaboration can deteriorate social cohesion to the point where escalation of violence becomes predictably imminent. What is not fully developed within this framework are those “mitigating factors” where arts-based initiatives can foster prevention. The framework only briefly outlines efforts that include “accountable national institutions, protecting human rights (and) managing diversity constructively” (Nations, 2014).
The second article that I use for articulating the specific conditions where arts and culture initiatives can serve as tools for prevention are from the essay “The Contribution of Art and Culture in Peace and Reconciliation Processes in Asia”, written by Ereshnee Naidu-Silverman, Senior Director for the Global Transitional Justice Initiative. In this article Naidu-Silverman builds on the Framework for Analysis by thoroughly identifying the parameters where arts and culture can mitigate conflict and violence, within different types of social constructs and during different phases of conflict as such:
“State Repression and Authoritarianism: During periods of state repression and authoritarianism, art and cultural activities can serve different purposes. For example, events such as music festivals, documentary films, and art exhibitions can raise awareness about the oppression.
- Serves as an early warning of conflict
- Supports resistance
- Raises awareness
- Promotes rebellion
In-conflict: While conflict contexts may prove dangerous for artists, when accessible, safe, local performing art events, and traditional ritual ceremony (or art expression) , for example, could serve the following goals:
- Relativizes the conflict
- Shows sympathy and concern for those affected
- Serves as a coping mechanism
- Renews hope.
Post-conflict: In the aftermath of conflict, there is a range of recovery and reconstruction needs. Activities such as commemorative ceremonies, memorialization initiatives, performing art productions, film and visual art could serve broader rehabilitation and reconciliation needs:
- Healing and therapy
- Creates spaces for dialogue and engagement
- Facilitates empathy
- Promotes new identity formation
- Recognizes victims
- Fosters cross-cultural fluency
- Builds tolerance
- Rebuilds trust.” (Naidu-Silverman, 2015, 10)
She outlines the importance of the relationship between constructive dialogue and safe, creative spaces and practices that allow for reflection and peacebuilding between people with differing “ideas, opinions and assumptions to come together to listen to each other without making judgments or particular conclusions.” Encounters within these constructs, she elucidates, can “provide opportunities for former opponents to create joint imaginary solutions to social issues”. (Naidu-Silverman 2015, 10) Essential reconciliation measures such as empathy, cultural sensitivity, advocacy and education as well as evaluation for best practices are all employed in arts arenas where mitigating intolerance, discrimination and identity precursors to violence can be addressed structurally, constructively and creatively.
uilding from these two frameworks, it is clear that connecting the public with difficult histories through arts and cultural expression demands that educational institutions employ innovative pedagogical tools which address this intersection. I reiterate Naidu-Silverman’s points to provide a foundational set of markers to establish these paradigms for curriculum development for aesthetic genres, whether creating, curating, studying, researching, or providing a visitor experience of the “culture-conflict” relationship.
Interdisciplinary curriculum that does not limit or prescribe the function of art can support the learning of conflict history and memory as organic, innovative, and creative prevention strategies. In order to facilitate the breadth of contributions to reconciliation through arts and culture that Naidu-Silverman outlines, educational facilities need to broaden the study of current trends to include the full spectrum of arts genres and modalities engaged in addressing “difficult knowledge”. New paradigms in arts pedagogy which encourage academic and community debate and dialogue toward social cohesion, creative and inclusive community as agents for positive change can be universally incorporated.
In considering new concepts for pedagogy, expanding educational disciplinary horizons to include the study of comparative aesthetics, art criticism and current artistic knowledge are also critical new paradigms. Some key general questions to consider: What is the dynamic between pedagogy of artistic production, expression, and analysis within a situational / identity construct of social aesthetics related to collective trauma? How is artistic expression influencing the aesthetics of collective / public memory, memorialization, and the national and international debates over collective remembrance of traumatic events? What are the thematic / pedagogical links between academic learning, public experience of aesthetic works, heritage curation, collective memory, transitional justice, and atrocity prevention? And what are best practices to consider for implementing a curriculum that fosters integration between academic learning and public arenas of cultural knowledge?
I introduce for discussion here nine forms of aesthetic expression and pedagogical approaches / questions considering new paradigms for instruction. Each of these sections re-imagine concepts which explore public cultural expression and spaces, aesthetic considerations in public memory, cross cultural understanding, community building, and atrocity prevention as exemplars.
Visual Art
Visual art and memory are integrally linked. When information comes into our memory system from sensory input it needs to be encoded so that we can store and retrieve information. The “image” is one of three forms of encoding that enable the mind to store and process information. (Acoustic or sound, and semantic or meaning are the other two encoding forms we use to create, store and retrieve a memory.) What can we learn, and how can we teach about the creative process of visual art in reckoning an “artist’s truth” and memory construct of a massive atrocity? What is the “language of images” and how do we interpret acculturated “constructions” in works of art as a curated truth and memory of collective violence? How does the aesthetic experience with a visual art object broaden predetermined ideas into a deeper understanding and help engage the viewer into new and diverse ways of thinking? The intersection of visual arts education and conflict prevention offers new dimensions in creating, viewing, and exploring visual art as a constructive interface between reality and imagination, truth and memory, prevention and art practice.
Photography
Photography has played an indelible role in documentation, interpretation, witness, litigation, collective memory, and artistic encounter in the visual survey of genocidal specter since the inception of the art form to the present. All known 20th and 21st century mass atrocities claim a copious if not contentious legacy of dissemination of photographed visual documentation. Discourses on their uses and abuses are the subject of over a century of global evolution in visual vocabulary and adaptation to this singularly unique and critical image based aesthetic form of creative expression. Curriculum development in the intersection between pedagogy in photography, genocide studies and prevention should incorporate early critical works on photography and mass atrocity and contemporary developments. Some key questions to consider are the following: What is the role of photography and the relationship between photograph, photographed, and public perceptions? How are dimensions in digital photographic shifting the entire field of contemporary genocide studies? What new digital methodologies, technologies, practices and ethical dimensions in will support and challenge conventional paradigms and re-imagine new approaches in the interface of photography with genocide studies and prevention?
Music
Intuitively, the experience of creating, listening and contemplating music seems a distant star to the catastrophic trauma of the experience of genocide. Yet, the culture of sound dimensions, and of musical compositions could not be more “attuned” to capturing and expressing what might be the ultimate terror, the bottomless grief, the staged propaganda or the trans-generational legacy of genocide; that echoes in the hearts and minds of all human beings. What are the intersections between music and genocide? Was music available during genocidal massacres? What music was created by survivors, witnesses, or musicians from unrelated creative spheres? How has music been incorporated into understanding the paradox of opposites, transcendent soundscapes redefining the abyss of genocide? How can music literature, theory and practice pioneer pedagogical approaches, reflections and perceptions on the study, practice and performance of music and genocide?
Literature
The international relevancy and impact of vibrant world literature that analyzes an aesthetic conveyance and response to mass violence has never been more timely and potentially globally catalytic. The world of letter arts represents a huge consortium of deeply complex genres that demand artistic reflection and reader appreciation toward awareness and understanding in the creative exploration of the nature and consequences of mass violence. Critical literature that resonates across spatial and temporal limitations, and that harnesses the power to impact national and international dialogues on “finding words in the age of violence” are recommended key pedagogical considerations in developing curriculum.
Film
Narrating genocide through film is one of the most widely distributed forms of acculturated communication on the subject around the globe. Cinematic representational genres, from epic historical depictions, intimate memoirs, drama, comedy, and musicals to innovative mixed-media creations all struggle to contain and convey the mammoth historical overlays and contemporary interpretations of the unfathomable reality and tragic legacies of mass violence. Yet film and its industry undeniably, has popularized genocide awareness more influentially than any other creative medium of expression. What is the confluence of the foundational and current issues in the examination, comparison, and challenges within the field of filmography and genocide scholarship? In what ways does film pedagogy confront the problems of manipulated narrations of collective memory, historiography and the boundaries between filmed narrations and realities in the aftermath of mass violent crime?
Theater and Dance
The transformative / transcendental power of experiencing a theatrical / dance production is a universal phenomenon that spans over 2500 years of human history. Theater as a form of historical representation, of the staging of traumatic, memory has a unique role in the larger purpose of inquiry and conversation about genocide and prevention. Dance as a form of spatial and kinetic movement exploring “creative geopolitics” and “place-responsive choreography” can deepen understanding of the relationship between trauma and the body, historical staging, and contemporary experience. What new methods and questions of performative “re-presentation” of collective historical processes and shared experiences of mass violence through acting and dance performance arts can be envisaged in theater and dance pedagogy?
Museums
Critical theory on museology, critical museum studies, theorizing museum practice, and the study of the evolution of the museum in contemporary public discourses are essential learning spheres to explore prior to addressing the equally important questions as to why global communities are increasingly reckoning with the legacy of mass atrocities and trauma through the creation of memorial museums. The paradigm of the “museum” as an institution where the “museum curator as authority” is decentralizing to “visitor with engagement agency” as part of the visitor experience, world-wide. Memorial museums are often on the front lines of grappling with inclusiveness, cultural persuasion, and best practices with contentious histories. Questions on new paradigms in museum studies, theory and practice that explore the intersections of cultural venues and atrocity crimes, human rights and curatorial considerations include (but are not limited to) the following: How can the museum of conscience today dispel old trends in mono-vocal, authoritative curatorial practices and incorporate self-reflective, performative, and custodial roles? How do these visitor cultural sites build inclusivity in presenting contentious histories? How can dialogue, reconciliation and political transformation be curated where potentially antagonistic viewpoints can co-exist?
On Memorials and Monuments
Memorials and monuments represent a tangible, object-based expression of material culture that mark a physical representation of collective memory. They represent expressions of “public memory” which are shaped by interpretative recollections. Memorials and monuments stand at the center of dialogue, debate, controversy and global, public remembrance of events, ideas and those individuals who are recognized for shaping history or who make claims to public memory. Understanding the scholarship and critical theory on the history and evolution of monuments and memorials is an important orientation to understanding the evolution which structures the plethora of contributions and problems of contemporary memorials and monuments addressing collective trauma, memory, and their contentious counter-memories. The discourse between history, memory and place are crystallized in the monument. From generation-to-generation agendas of the dominant culture often ascribe the cultural context of a public monument or memorial. As cultural norms shift, or political power structures shift, the representational attributes of a monument or memorial can be seen as an anathema or misrepresentation to current collective sentiments. Thorough and integrated critical inquiry on the history and current trends in memorials and monuments can support a global network of remembrance that frames debates through commemoration and conversation.
On Digital Space
The implementation of digital technology into arts / aesthetic expression and experience represents a burgeoning constellation of disciplines which has revolutionized arts production, distribution, curation, and viewer / listener experiences. Combined with digital platforms for testimony, documentation and story based digital learning the impact on the “culture-conflict” interface is nothing short of revolutionary. First and foremost, digital platforms improve access and accessibility to information / objects and performances and the potential for spatially condensed dialogue. Bringing artifacts to light with augmented reality tools greatly enhances the dimensions of learning through layered, immersive, experiential interface. Gaming technology offers constructed immersion experiences with disparate geographical locations, cultures and histories challenging more static conceptions of all aspects of life. A “deterritorialization” and “reterritorialization” (Bisschoff, 2017) of place and space will inevitably re-define cultural horizons.
In the wake of the trauma induced by the pandemic of Covid-19 there has been a catastrophic demise of “in-person” forms of performance and visual arts encounters. In response, innovative platforms, and practices on digital media have broken new ground in mediating these challenges and have ushered in creative responses on the cultural frontline. Re-structuring, re-imagining, and re-building the cultural community through digital spaces and with the integration of digital technology will redefine our relationship to arts expression and experience, overall. Incorporating skills in adaptive learning, metacognition, collaboration, and resilience are critical learning dimensions that need to be addressed in working with digital space, arts expression, and experience. New analytic enquiry in theoretical links between digital media, creativity, methods, and practices are essential new paradigms to consider.
Conclusion
Imagination is the catalyst and defining principle for all art expression. In this essay I have made a case for initiating and implementing arts / aesthetic-based pedagogy as standard curriculum requirements included in all post-secondary genocide studies and prevention programs. Re-imagining curriculum is now an essential aspect of education across the planet in the wake of Covid-19. The arts are no exception and have the added challenges of re-inventing traditional methods of practice and appreciation which require hands-on instruction and audience attendance and participation. As we witness Covid-19 re-structuring and destabilizing the entire globe, the time to re-imagine the role of the arts and arts pedagogy is now. Attempts to polarize, consolidate power, restrict access to goods and services and the rise of serious violations of international human rights and laws have taken hold in many countries. We are experiencing an equivalent rise in risk factors associated with mass atrocity crimes in these same locations. As I mentioned in my opening paragraphs, as risk factors for violence escalate opportunities to address violence through arts and aesthetic expression decrease proportionally. Furthermore, the arts community has experienced a disproportionate decline in the ability to operate, due to the fact that “non-essential” activities have been necessarily curtailed to stave off risk of Covid-19 infection at performances or public access indoor spaces. Re-imagining the role of arts in genocide studies and prevention programs should include broadening its scope to the innovations of digital technology to augment and disseminate arts encounters and educational opportunities. There is no better time than NOW to incorporate the proposals for framing arts education within the rubrics of the U.N Framework of Analysis for Atrocity Crimes Tools for Prevention and Naidu-Silverman’s prevention recommendations within curriculum and across academic disciplines. I have introduced central questions to re-imagine learning constructs for each of the nine main branches of art expression to facilitate incorporating new paradigms for building atrocity prevention standards into course and curriculum design. As challenging as this moment in global affairs is, the opportunity to dispel old parameters and instill new paradigms could not be more advantageous. Re-imagining prevention through education and thinking through art has never been more critical nor more important.
Bibliography
Ahmed & B. Crucifix (eds.). (2018). Comics Memory: Archives and Styles. Palgrave MacMillan.
Bennett, J. (2005). Empathetic Vision: Affect, Trauma, and Contemporary Art. Stanford University Press.
Bisschoff, L. (2017). The future is digital: an introduction to African digital arts. Critical African Studies, 9:3. 261-267. Taylor Francis Online.
Crowder-Taraborrelli, T., Wilson, K. (2012). Film and Genocide. University of Wisconsin Press.
Dean, D., Meerzon, Y., Prince, K. (2015). History, Memory, Performance. Palgrave MacMillan.
Gabriel, S. P., Pagan, N. (2018). Literature, Memory, Hegemony: East/West Crossings. Palgrave MacMillan.
Goodall, J., Lee, C. (2015). Trauma and Public Memory. Palgrave MacMillan.
Keightley, E., Pickering, M. (2015). Photography, Music and Memory: Pieces of the Past in Everyday Life. Palgrave MacMillan.
Klimczyk, W., Swierzowska, A. (eds.). (2018). Music and Genocide. Peter Lang Publishers.
Lehrer, E., Milton, C., Patterson, M.E. (2011). Curating Difficult Knowledge: Violent Pasts in Public Places. Palgrave MacMillan.
Milton, C. (2014). Art from a Fractured Past: Memory and Truth-Telling in Post Shining Path Peru. Duke University Press.
Naidu-Silverman, E. (2015). The Contribution of Art and Culture in Peace and Reconciliation Processes in Asia. Danish Centre for Culture and Development.
Sodaro, A. (2018). Exhibiting Atrocity: Memorial Museums and the Politics of Past Violence. Rutgers University Press.
Torchin, L. (2012). Creating the Witness: Documenting Genocide on Film, Video and the Internet. University of Minnesota Press.
United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect. (2014). Framework of Analysis for Atrocity Crimes: A Tool for Prevention.
Waller, J. (2016). Confronting Evil: Engaging our Responsibility to Prevent Genocide. Oxford University Press.
Young, J. (1993). The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning. Yale University Press.