I just returned from the annual meeting of AFS, where I participated as a workshop leader during pre-conference professional development workshops on digital audio fieldrecording & digitial preservation for folklore fieldworkers, as well as presenting on/chairing a panel entitled, “Placing Ethics: Public Folklore and the University Setting.” You can find the program as well as other info about the 2009 meeting here.
There was a lot of energy in sessions and the hallways around topics connected to cultural policy and cultural sustainability. Folklorists have been immersing themselves in high-level dialog at the federal/national level in the U.S. for a few years now, and having Bill Ivey on Obama’s transition team certainly raised the profile regarding the kinds of understandings and approaches that folklorists contribute to cultural issues (for more on/from Ivey, go here, here, here, or here).
Two sessions stood out for me related to cultural policy and cultural sustainability. The first featured Richard Kurin discussing the question, “Does the U.S. need a Secretary of Culture?” This was actually to be a debate between Kurin (against the idea) and Ivey (for the idea), but apparently their schedules did not allow them to be on site at the same time—so I only heard Kurin’s side of the debate. It was a convincing and cogent presentation, in which he outlined quite clearly how a cabinet-level ‘culture’ position would most likely be a bad idea. In large part, his argument rested on the notion that government (in the end) regulates things, and most people in the U.S. would likely recoil at the idea of ‘culture’ being regulated; he had many other supporting points that nuanced his position, and most folks in the room appeared to side with him (again, remembering that Ivey was not actually there…). Kurin did state—rather strongly— that the only argument for such a position is that it would possibly contribute to a centralized ‘voice’ advocating for more arts & cultural funding for the public sector. Situating such a ‘voice’ in the West Wing, however, presents too many dangers and compromises.
The other session I found quite engaging was an informational session presented by Rory Turner about the new M.A. in Cultural Sustainability that he has helped craft at Goucher College. Go here for more info. It’s an exciting-sounding program that brings together folklore, cultural policy, arts management, and social justice in a flexible training program geared toward community-centered work. Much of what Rory had to say caused me to reflect on the kinds of training/education we do here at the UO AAD program, though we do not overtly use the “sustainability” word when dealing with culture or cultural processes. Watch the blog on their site as they lead up to the launch.
Overall, the meeting was great and Boise offered a lot to explore. One of the coolest things was a public art piece just outside the convention center. A series of four sidewalk lamps lining a main pathway into the courtyard outside the center, this installation comprised mechanical ‘puppets’ inside each lantern that performed percussive patterns when triggered by passing pedestrians (via motion sensors). This was cool during the day—as it is largely unexpected—but even cooler at night since the ‘puppets’ become kinetic shadows inside their luminous homes. Well done, Boise!