Thoughts Provoked by "Europeana"

"Weird." It means strange, bizarre. "Weird" was how a group of people on an American Cultural Exchange chose to describe Europeana. I understand the anger this comment elicited in many of us. They were on a cultural trip and yet couldn't even take the time to try and understand what was going on in front of them. Instead, they dismissed the piece as "weird" and moved on with their lives. I get it. To some of us, Europeana was moving, thought-provoking, exploratory, and innovative. "Weird" is like a slap in the face.

But Euopeana was weird. What is more strange than plastic baby dolls falling from the ceiling? What is more bizarre than a group of people sobbing and laughing the tune of "Ode to Joy?" What is more outlandish than the contrast between the severe and serious words the actors were saying and their silly, comedic actions? Europeana was weird. But a good deal of us, as theater artists, or artists in general, have the tools to navigate pieces like this. To look at it and say, "Okay, that was weird, but what does it mean? Why was it weird? How do I feel about it being weird? Actually, is it weird? Or am I just not taking the time to understand it?" Someone who doesn't live and breathe art might not have those same skills. They might not value art in the same way. Or navigate it in the same way. Or know how to navigate it at all.

Often I find that I live in an echo-chamber. Especially when surrounded by artists. Especially at university. People I surround myself with believe the same things I do; about gender, race, politics, art, power, and morals. We talk and talk about the problems in the world. About how so and so believes this and how horrible that is and how we just wish we could eliminate all the injustice. Yet, there is never a second step. Always a "wow this is so bad," never a "here's what I can do about it." I often feel helpless. What can I do? And often I find myself looking to art. Can I address these problems in my art? Will it make a difference? Can I inspire change? The answer is yes. And no.

If I make art for my echo-chamber, if the people who are consuming it and understanding it are people who already agree with everything I'm saying, then nothing will change. The people I need to engage with and the people I need to listen to are people whose beliefs are different than mine. I have a new theory: by stepping outside the echo-chamber, by engaging with people whose beliefs are different than yours is how you make change. Or at least, that's a first step. Something beyond the "wow this is so bad."

I don't know if Europeana was making art for it's echo-chamber. I don't know if the intention was to spark a conversation or create change. But those students probably needed the message from Europeana more than I did. Yet, the art was not accessible to them, so they didn't get it. How do you do that, anyway? How do you balance your vision with one that is accessible? Maybe you don't. Maybe you can't. But maybe you can.

What do you think? Leave a comment, let's engage.