I am surprised at some of the assumptions and opinions voiced on this issue without much background or thought from folks who did not attend the meeting described in the News. I attended the meeting because I was curious to learn more about it and went away with a clearer picture and still a number of questions.
I do not believe this is an effort to make Northfield into something it is not, nor do I think there is an attempt to exclude alternative visions of Northfield. I do not believe either that this is an attempt to squander scarce community resources but is rather a proposed investment to meet a perceived need.
I don’t think I am in a position to say it is a good idea or a bad one and am surprised at those who feel they already know enough to condemn it. Following that, it is my belief that those at the meeting talked about a way to pool resources among various interested arts groups in order to hire someone to meet mutual needs but also to plan for a more inclusive more intentional all encompassing community arts effort.
I found it interesting when I asked who the stakeholders were in such an endeavor, it seemed that those at the meeting viewed a broad spectrum of the community as stakeholders. I believe this is an effort to address changes that have occurred in the Northfield arts community and how it views itself.
The arts in general are community building and I hope would be viewed by all as an important part of the community it is, no matter the theme, how we will promote ourselves. The arts are found in spiritual, educational and commercial endeavors. The Defeat of Jesse James is filled with the arts as a way of expressing that event and selling the town, from story telling to visual arts and handicrafts. ArtSwirl is an event that could emerge as a centerpiece of what some call ‘ART Town’ festivities; an event distinct from Jesse James Days. An arts coordinator could make it a central part of their job thus giving them a concrete reason to take charge of such things as an arts calendar and member lists.
The Arts Guild currently plays a major role in this event and some ask why doesn’t the Guild perform such a role for the arts community. Some would argue it already does. It is a good suggestion and perhaps the Arts Guild if it wanted to could serve such a purpose. But I think it is a problem for two reasons, one is financial and the other perhaps philosophical.
The Arts Guild exists because a few people wanted to get together and do things in the arts. They raised the funds, found space and made things happen. They have succeeded because they were clearly focused on putting funds into tangible things that people could see. They put their resources into buildings and performance, letting artists do stuff. Over the years this has changed some as they have hired staff to run the Guild, but most artists are not paid at all or very much for their efforts, preferring to have the funds go to the event. Payment was the opportunity to put your art or craft out there.
For the Arts Guild to apply its resources to a community wide arts effort will cause it to divert scarce resources but also to change the role it plays in the community. Something it could do but is not now doing.
What the Guild has done more recently is to offer arts opportunities to those who enter their world either through membership or participation in their events or offerings. It has done some outreach through cooperation with the schools. It has not found a way to offer support to emerging arts groups with a vision of their own. That’s my take on why ArtOrg came to be. This touches on the philosophical problem for the Guild. How does the Guild maintain control of its own resources and vision and encourage others? Maybe it can and perhaps as its relationship with ArtOrg evolves it can learn how to do this. But it may not want to. This is where an argument for a new entity to come into existence makes some sense. An entity that will also not feel compelled to define what is ‘art’ and what it is not. Most people aren’t even aware that such a question exists until they are forced to confront it.
Recently in the schools with the advancing of the ‘Arts Standard’ there was debate about whether or not the ‘industrial arts’ should be considered as ‘arts’ and a legitimate way to meet the ‘Arts Standard’. Should the arts only be considered to be music, painting, and writing? How do you limit what some view as creative expression? The goal of the ‘Arts Standard’ is to assure all students get exposure to a selection of arts. A goal of the Arts Guild may be to offer opportunities to community members of a selected list of arts. But what about handicrafts or building or manufacturing or fabrication of almost any kind? Both in design and execution the making of things requires skill and creative expression. Why not have a way to recognize this. If a group of quilt makers want to organize a festival and promote it as a part of ArtSwirl or through a community arts calendar why should they not be encouraged?
The COG proposal mentioned in the paper proposes to create such an entity through membership extended to arts groups. From the discussion it sounded as though any group that saw itself as an arts group could buy in and gain access to whatever services or benefit the coordinator might offer. The COG an entity that does not currently exist would develop a list of needs, generate funds through a membership drive, and develop a plan to meet the needs, which it seemed likely would be the hiring of a coordinator. COG, which would become an oversight board would be made up of members who would represent other members through a process yet to be determined.
I left the meeting with the sense that little would happen unless there was leadership from somewhere. There seemed to be interest from a wide variety of people (Guild, Carleton, School District, City, and others) and the leadership seemed to becoming from the Guild and NDDC. With Ross’s objections I wonder if things can move forward. I found the meeting an interesting exploration of a possible solution to a growing concern – how to coordinate and foster communication between various arts groups and how to utilize the arts as a way to promote and develop Northfield’s future on many levels.
I would like to hear more discussion of the pros and cons if for no other reason than to help those involved in arts groups or city development to think it through. There is merit in the discussion even if the coordinator is not the final solution to the problem. I think Northfield should think about itself as a center for artistic expression because I think that will enhance how it sees itself in every other realm whether that be a commercial and tourism center, education and religious/spiritual center, or a ‘shoot ’em up’ center for Old West nostalgia.
It took a long time and a combination of private and public efforts but the city did finally manage to develop the river walk area, which I believe all agree is an asset to the community. Perhaps as we look to adjusting to the Highway 3 construction and how to reconnect as a town thinking about the artistic assets of Northfield we can continue to create assets for the common good of Northfield.