Story 1: Wrapped in Green. 

In the summer of 2009, while I was busy at work on my installation The Gifts, I posted an entry up on my AN blog the shape of things, to mark the news that there was an uprising going on in Tehran and spreading across Iran (my mother’s place of birth) in response to the illegal rigging of the ‘election’ outcomes. I was following it on twitter (my first experience of using it) and I could not believe some of the tweets coming in, which, amazingly  at that time weren’t being blocked.. the authorities had been taken by surprise and it was a live feed, moment by moment for a number of days.

That uprising, which tragically ended in the killing, arrests and imprisonment of so many people –  including the shooting dead of the now mythical young woman Neda Aga Soltan and the arrest of the heads of the green movement themselves –  became known as the Green Revolution. Except it was never a revolution; it stopped before the wheel could turn to outrun the existing regime, unlike the Iranian revolution of 1979, which shaped most of my teenage years on many levels, despite being a kid growing up in suburban Kent  (more on that later).

As I was working with cloth, (one of my preferred media of choice) I tore off a piece of green ribbon from my box and tied it around my wrist, as much in solidarity with the protestors who were all doing this to identify themselves – as in remembrance of my late mother who had longed for this day, when a change might come that would give the people more freedom to determine their futures.  I felt full of hope  – and a renewed connection to her through the events. I may sound naïve, and I also know that true revolutions take time (there had been a call for an evolution not a revolution) and are far more complex than an uprising can give answers to, but it was an important moment and its echoes remain, as does the lack of freedom in that country.

By the end of the summer of 2009, all that remained was a feeling of a stunned silence at the brutality of the repression of the dissent and the underestimation of the Iranian governments capacity for violence against its people in a bid to prevent any change in the status quo, despite the initial peaceful and creative nature of the protests. I will never forget being tweeted a link to this video on YouTube (one of many featured here in an article on Huffington Post) shot in the dark on a Tehran rooftop during the blackouts, of a young woman reciting poetry amid the calls and cries of her fellow citizens, echoing over the city. Later that summer I went to see Patti Smith in concert, who towards the end of her gig rose like a crow out of the darkness and sang –or howled – a dark and powerful tribute to all those who had been on the streets, ending in her spitting and bellowing the refrain of the opposition movement: ‘Where is my vote?!’.. An Iranian in the audience called out an empassioned ‘Thankyou!’.

As at the time I was immersed in the wrapping of objects for The Gifts, and finding myself a new sculptural  language within that, I felt the need to make something in response to the events, which were turning sourer by the day. A deadly silencing was the main element I noticed in all this. And the green, previously very much identified with Islam and the Iranian flag, which now took on a new, reclaimed tone of hope and unity.

In my store I still had my Santoor, a Persian musical instrument – related to the dulcimer, that you play with small hammers, it has an ethereal like quality. My cousin had brought it back for me from Iran by request years earlier. I always had this romantic dream that I would learn it and play my children to sleep with it, if I ever got to have any.

When I then had my first child in 2004, and my mum disappeared in the Tsunami 3 weeks later, never to return, dreams like that disappeared for a long while, and the thought of learning anything new, apart from how to be a mother or adjust to being without one of my own, receded in favour of emotional survival strategies of a different kind. But I always made my work, it became even more crucial to my existence in the wake of these events and a whole new dimension came into my practice – that of relationship with a public and making space for them to materialise the work too. For several years the focus was on experiences of loss, and longing (the first being The Loom in 2005).

Alongside those big public and often complex works I had quiet times of making smaller works in the studio, initially all using objects that had belonged to my mother, as a form of grieving and transformative poetry making. I called that collection The Gifts of the Departed  (shown last year at Manchester Craft and Design Centre and documented on another of my AN blogs here ) and I still sometimes add to it, when I come across an object, or something of hers breaks and I can’t throw it away. I then progressed to using found objects triggered by fragments of Sufi poetry and there was more of an emotional distance in the work, which then became a relief and a different kind of journey.

Back to the Santoor and 2009. It had been in my possession for almost a decade, I had not found a teacher or been motivated to travel to find one, and, as the protests across Iran became more and more muted and the blood flowed, I found myself one afternoon taking it out, stripping and ripping up a large piece of bright green velvet, in readiness to mummify the instrument.

After silently asking forgiveness of the instrument for beginning the process of muting it forever (!), I began to slowly wrap and bind the instrument into a gradual silence. I didn’t finish this process until Spring 2012, three years later (santoors have a lot of strings.) by which time the Arab spring was happening all over the Middle East – inspired by the initial events in Iran – and well, that’s a whole different set of stories. I found a reference in a poem by Rumi called The Instrument that Cannot Be Played that fitted well what the object was becoming and the situation I was responding to. Here is the finished piece.

 

From that piece came a new collection of work, which is also on-going, called Silent Statements, some of which were shown last year at the 100 Years Gallery at New Players, New Roles by Fari Bradley. I always had this sense that a larger work along the same lines wanted to emerge from this collection. I had used children war toys in the first piece ‘Final Moments’ and the very process of wrapping those objects felt like a powerful statement which had  a lot of space in it to develop.

There is a whole body of work out there, some of it incredible, using de-commissioned weapons  to create artworks– take a look at this site or  this article for examples. Powerful.

However, for this new commission, in using new toys which are destined for play -violence not actual violence, there is a different dynamic at work, which the audience will have to gage for themselves, but out of which many related ideas come which I will be exploring on this blog over the next few weeks.

Right now I’m in the final days of fabricating the work on my studio floor in time for packing up at the weekend. There is also The Book of Debts VII to recite and burn this Sunday, before we take up Volume VIII up with us to sit alongside the installation at Imperial War Museum North (IWMN) (details here if you are in East London on Sunday and want to attend)


0 Comments

So I realise that I totally left this blog hanging a number of weeks ago. I got totally consumed by two things: a very short turnaround project that arrived suddenly that I could not resist, and the decline and death of my beloved grandmother. I have been thinking of her a lot in relation to debt and to war (which is what I am now focused on as we recite and burn the 8th Volume this week and I am up here in Manchester preparing for that). She was 16 and about to go to art college, when the war began and she met my grandfather. She never got her art education but was always creative and  one of my main early supporters, enabling me to spend hours painting and making at her dining room table and taking me to shows in london at an early age. I owe her a lot, and in spending some intimate time with her in hospital in her final weeks, and give an informal eulogy at her funderal I felt able to give back a very small of what she had given me – just the equivalent of interest – that is, the affirmation of her contribution to me as a human being.

Anyhow, on a less personal and more intimidating note,  although this is something I meant to explore weeks ago, I wish to speak about debt and war and get a few things clear in my own head and thinking, and share these.

Part of me, maybe because I am an artist  and debtor and have self judgements around both of these, feels unqualified to talk about things which are made of the hard, ‘patriarchal’ stuff of economics and  war combined.  This is I think is because I feel I don’t have the language or understanding of economics or international conflict to be credible, despite  having experienced and read quite a lot on the subject of debt and developed a recent installation, Child’s Play, on display at  IWMN. However, from reading and observing and sensing what is going on at the moment, talking to contributors, and the influx of messages and contributions to The Book of Debts in the wake of my interview with the Guardian this week on my own personal experience of deb., and because I have placed a Book of Debts in the Imperial War Museum a part of the Asia Triennial Manchester on the theme of conflict and compassion , I have a number of reflections/ questions which I feel compelled to make /pose .  Not making them would feel like a missed opportunity. And as an artist it is my role to ask questions, which I am sure may promote further questions back – at least I hope so.

I have been thinking and reading  about the relationship between debt and war, trying to get my head around it and this is what I learnt so far. It has often been said that banks – and nowadays corporate powers –  are  the driving force behind war and that war is the most efficient and profitable way of creating debt, fast. As we now know that banks are built on creating money from nothing (since the bank of England admitted it earlier this year, as David Graeber writes in this article ), i.e loans are created first and electronic currency to finance them second, this leaves them in the unique position of being able to create the means to create quick entry into conflicts that might not otherwise be possible. Which may explain why there are so many wars all going on concurrently in the middle of a global financial crisis?

Financing wars is VERY expensive (the US war in Iraq,  initial cost $1.7 trillion, will have cost around $6 trillion over the next four decades, counting the interest!) and the scope for continuing them has been regularly extended by borrowing. So wars have been a huge – and regular – way for banks to create the finance for monarchs and governments who want to try to expand their empires, colonies and spheres of enforced influence. This includes financing what often seem to be revolutions but turn out to be regime changes with devastating strings attached. There also the issue public bonds, but that is another story (which is so clothed in esoteric language I defy anyone not versed in business/economics to understand them, but then that is the idea….you can’t question what you can’t understand – hence the small print on loan agreements.. see the vocabularly used in this article)

War is also good for banks and corporate powers because a lot of material, equipment, buildings and infrastructure get destroyed in war. So countries go into massive debt to finance war, and then borrow a load more to rebuild what they just destroyed. Utterly surreal and devastating on a human level. But hey, great for business (ask George Bush).

The emergence of the big central banks has kept this age old tradition going. Specifically, the big banks or allied powers (ie the US to the Allies in WW1) loan money to governments and charge interest for the loans. With most loans there is a fixed term. And often , in consumer terms if a debt has not been paid within a certain time frame, i.e 6 years, it is written off. However, apparently war loans are perpetual, i.e there is no pay-by date and so we still have loans dating right back to the Crimean war, the Irish Potato Famine etc,

In the UK at the moment, in this time of ‘austerity’ (which, based on the fact that banks control the creation of money and money is made up by them rather than them being custodians of anything that actually exists in real time and space, is unnecessary and just creating massive and rapid inequality)  why does George Osborne apparently feels that we can now afford to pay our World War One loan off, the first payment in 67 years  of 218 m towards a 2bn debt ?

In many holy books, there was the idea of a Jubilee, a periodic writing –off of debts and freeing of slaves – every 7 years in the bible and every 50 years in the Torah. (one of my references for this project). This is the basis of campaigns to erase toxic and unjust debt by the Jubilee Debt Campaign, i.e  Argentina’s  current pursual by vulture funds (based on loans taken out by an previous regime to finance the junta), Pakistan’s crippling debt burden to the west which has resulted in the death of thousands of the poorest citizens,  would never be in a position to contemplate this kind of voluntary repayment. JDC are working on these issues, and a general Jubilee for Justice, which is being largely ignored by the political elites.

Why pay this war loan off now? Is this a PR move  to impress our US creditors to whom we owe a number of political favours ? Why are we repaying  debt incurred to finance a world war 100 years ago, prioritised over keeping the NHS healthy or meeting the basic needs of those who are falling into the cost of living gaps, barely affording to meet ends meet without going into massive debt themselves? Why hasn’t a jubilee been applied to this debt – or to all war debts , come to it?  Why are war loans ‘perpetual’ and not time-limited?? Who is profiting from the payback of this debt and  who is this debt really to? Why is it being packaged as being ‘value for money’ (apparently because there is a period of low interest at the moment,) and framed as a great opportunity ?

This kind of questioning is not only applicable to retrospective debt – whether war loans or other-  but also to our current global debt situation, Charles Eisenstein writes:

‘It is said that our children and grandchildren will be paying out these bailout and stimulus debts, but they could also simply be declared into non-existence. They are only as real as the story we agree on that contains them. Our grandchildren will pay them only if the story, the system of meanings that defines those debts still exist. ‘  (Sacred Economics, Charles Eisenstein)

This story, this system of meanings we are occupying at the moment, needs to and is being seriously questioned and will be transformed. There are plenty of thinkers /writers/activists/economists out there who have been doing this for a while and now this is becoming more visible. Among them I have met / noted  Brett Scott, Charles Eisenstein, Positive Money, New Economics Foundation, Ann Pettifor, (and all the speakers at the Jubilee Debt Campaign’s Life Before Debt Conference this Spring ).

Also , this Thursday 20th November, is the first time since 1844 that Parliament is debating the way that money is created  and although one wouldn’t expect the banks to hand over the power to control the way money is generated to a democratic body overnight,(here you go, we’ve had enough!)  it is a good sign that at least there is a high profile dialogue happening about it (lets hope it gets coverage..) , out of the alternative sphere of activism. I like that it is taking place on the same day we are burning the Book of Debts! And the same week as Restorative Justice Week, something I would like to have had a closer look at during this time, in terms of its relationship to the other theme of compassion, the antidote to conflict. Maybe that’s for the next project.

I am excited that I have 6 people reciting The Book of Debts VIII alongside me on Thursday and excited to say  that I will also be speaking about the project on Woman’s Hour, Radio 4 this Friday morning November 21st, when Book IX opens online .


0 Comments

So I realise that I totally left this blog hanging a number of weeks ago. I got totally consumed by two things: a very short turnaround project that arrived suddenly that I could not resist, and the decline and death of my beloved grandmother. I have been thinking of her a lot in relation to debt and to war (which is what I am now focused on as we recite and burn the 8th Volume this week and I am up here in Manchester preparing for that). She was 16 and about to go to art college, when the war began and she met my grandfather. She never got her art education but was always creative and  one of my main early supporters, enabling me to spend hours painting and making at her dining room table and taking me to shows in london at an early age. I owe her a lot, and in spending some intimate time with her in hospital in her final weeks, and give an informal eulogy at her funderal I felt able to give back a very small of what she had given me – just the equivalent of interest – that is, the affirmation of her contribution to me as a human being.

Anyhow, on a less personal and more intimidating note,  although this is something I meant to explore weeks ago, I wish to speak about debt and war and get a few things clear in my own head and thinking, and share these.

Part of me, maybe because I am an artist  and debtor and have self judgements around both of these, feels unqualified to talk about things which are made of the hard, ‘patriarchal’ stuff of economics and  war combined.  This is I think is because I feel I don’t have the language or understanding of economics or international conflict to be credible, despite  having experienced and read quite a lot on the subject of debt and developed a recent installation, Child’s Play, on display at  IWMN. However, from reading and observing and sensing what is going on at the moment, talking to contributors, and the influx of messages and contributions to The Book of Debts in the wake of my interview with the Guardian this week on my own personal experience of deb., and because I have placed a Book of Debts in the Imperial War Museum a part of the Asia Triennial Manchester on the theme of conflict and compassion , I have a number of reflections/ questions which I feel compelled to make /pose .  Not making them would feel like a missed opportunity. And as an artist it is my role to ask questions, which I am sure may promote further questions back – at least I hope so.

I have been thinking and reading  about the relationship between debt and war, trying to get my head around it and this is what I learnt so far. It has often been said that banks – and nowadays corporate powers –  are  the driving force behind war and that war is the most efficient and profitable way of creating debt, fast. As we now know that banks are built on creating money from nothing (since the bank of England admitted it earlier this year, as David Graeber writes in this article ), i.e loans are created first and electronic currency to finance them second, this leaves them in the unique position of being able to create the means to create quick entry into conflicts that might not otherwise be possible. Which may explain why there are so many wars all going on concurrently in the middle of a global financial crisis?

Financing wars is VERY expensive (the US war in Iraq,  initial cost $1.7 trillion, will have cost around $6 trillion over the next four decades, counting the interest!) and the scope for continuing them has been regularly extended by borrowing. So wars have been a huge – and regular – way for banks to create the finance for monarchs and governments who want to try to expand their empires, colonies and spheres of enforced influence. This includes financing what often seem to be revolutions but turn out to be regime changes with devastating strings attached. There also the issue public bonds, but that is another story (which is so clothed in esoteric language I defy anyone not versed in business/economics to understand them, but then that is the idea….you can’t question what you can’t understand – hence the small print on loan agreements.. see the vocabularly used in this article)

War is also good for banks and corporate powers because a lot of material, equipment, buildings and infrastructure get destroyed in war. So countries go into massive debt to finance war, and then borrow a load more to rebuild what they just destroyed. Utterly surreal and devastating on a human level. But hey, great for business (ask George Bush).

The emergence of the big central banks has kept this age old tradition going. Specifically, the big banks or allied powers (ie the US to the Allies in WW1) loan money to governments and charge interest for the loans. With most loans there is a fixed term. And often , in consumer terms if a debt has not been paid within a certain time frame, i.e 6 years, it is written off. However, apparently war loans are perpetual, i.e there is no pay-by date and so we still have loans dating right back to the Crimean war, the Irish Potato Famine etc,

In the UK at the moment, in this time of ‘austerity’ (which, based on the fact that banks control the creation of money and money is made up by them rather than them being custodians of anything that actually exists in real time and space, is unnecessary and just creating massive and rapid inequality)  why does George Osborne apparently feels that we can now afford to pay our World War One loan off, the first payment in 67 years  of 218 m towards a 2bn debt ?

In many holy books, there was the idea of a Jubilee, a periodic writing –off of debts and freeing of slaves – every 7 years in the bible and every 50 years in the Torah. (one of my references for this project). This is the basis of campaigns to erase toxic and unjust debt by the Jubilee Debt Campaign, i.e  Argentina’s  current pursual by vulture funds (based on loans taken out by an previous regime to finance the junta), Pakistan’s crippling debt burden to the west which has resulted in the death of thousands of the poorest citizens,  would never be in a position to contemplate this kind of voluntary repayment. JDC are working on these issues, and a general Jubilee for Justice, which is being largely ignored by the political elites.

Why pay this war loan off now? Is this a PR move  to impress our US creditors to whom we owe a number of political favours ? Why are we repaying  debt incurred to finance a world war 100 years ago, prioritised over keeping the NHS healthy or meeting the basic needs of those who are falling into the cost of living gaps, barely affording to meet ends meet without going into massive debt themselves? Why hasn’t a jubilee been applied to this debt – or to all war debts , come to it?  Why are war loans ‘perpetual’ and not time-limited?? Who is profiting from the payback of this debt and  who is this debt really to? Why is it being packaged as being ‘value for money’ (apparently because there is a period of low interest at the moment,) and framed as a great opportunity ?

This kind of questioning is not only applicable to retrospective debt – whether war loans or other-  but also to our current global debt situation, Charles Eisenstein writes:

‘It is said that our children and grandchildren will be paying out these bailout and stimulus debts, but they could also simply be declared into non-existence. They are only as real as the story we agree on that contains them. Our grandchildren will pay them only if the story, the system of meanings that defines those debts still exist. ‘  (Sacred Economics, Charles Eisenstein)

This story, this system of meanings we are occupying at the moment, needs to and is being seriously questioned and will be transformed. There are plenty of thinkers /writers/activists/economists out there who have been doing this for a while and now this is becoming more visible. Among them I have met / noted  Brett Scott, Charles Eisenstein, Positive Money, New Economics Foundation, Ann Pettifor, (and all the speakers at the Jubilee Debt Campaign’s Life Before Debt Conference this Spring ).

Also , this Thursday 20th November, is the first time since 1844 that Parliament is debating the way that money is created  and although one wouldn’t expect the banks to hand over the power to control the way money is generated to a democratic body overnight,(here you go, we’ve had enough!)  it is a good sign that at least there is a high profile dialogue happening about it (lets hope it gets coverage..) , out of the alternative sphere of activism. I like that it is taking place on the same day we are burning the Book of Debts! And the same week as Restorative Justice Week, something I would like to have had a closer look at during this time, in terms of its relationship to the other theme of compassion, the antidote to conflict. Maybe that’s for the next project.

I am excited that I have 6 people reciting The Book of Debts VIII alongside me on Thursday and excited to say  that I will also be speaking about the project on Woman’s Hour, Radio 4 this Friday morning November 21st, when Book IX opens online .


0 Comments

So I realise that I totally left this blog hanging a number of weeks ago. I got totally consumed by two things: a very short turnaround project that arrived suddenly that I could not resist, and the decline and death of my beloved grandmother. I have been thinking of her a lot in relation to debt and to war (which is what I am now focused on as we recite and burn the 8th Volume this week and I am up here in Manchester preparing for that). She was 16 and about to go to art college, when the war began and she met my grandfather. She never got her art education but was always creative and  one of my main early supporters, enabling me to spend hours painting and making at her dining room table and taking me to shows in london at an early age. I owe her a lot, and in spending some intimate time with her in hospital in her final weeks, and give an informal eulogy at her funderal I felt able to give back a very small of what she had given me – just the equivalent of interest – that is, the affirmation of her contribution to me as a human being.

Anyhow, on a less personal and more intimidating note,  although this is something I meant to explore weeks ago, I wish to speak about debt and war and get a few things clear in my own head and thinking, and share these.

Part of me, maybe because I am an artist  and debtor and have self judgements around both of these, feels unqualified to talk about things which are made of the hard, ‘patriarchal’ stuff of economics and  war combined.  This is I think is because I feel I don’t have the language or understanding of economics or international conflict to be credible, despite  having experienced and read quite a lot on the subject of debt and developed a recent installation, Child’s Play, on display at  IWMN. However, from reading and observing and sensing what is going on at the moment, talking to contributors, and the influx of messages and contributions to The Book of Debts in the wake of my interview with the Guardian this week on my own personal experience of deb., and because I have placed a Book of Debts in the Imperial War Museum a part of the Asia Triennial Manchester on the theme of conflict and compassion , I have a number of reflections/ questions which I feel compelled to make /pose .  Not making them would feel like a missed opportunity. And as an artist it is my role to ask questions, which I am sure may promote further questions back – at least I hope so.

I have been thinking and reading  about the relationship between debt and war, trying to get my head around it and this is what I learnt so far. It has often been said that banks – and nowadays corporate powers –  are  the driving force behind war and that war is the most efficient and profitable way of creating debt, fast. As we now know that banks are built on creating money from nothing (since the bank of England admitted it earlier this year, as David Graeber writes in this article ), i.e loans are created first and electronic currency to finance them second, this leaves them in the unique position of being able to create the means to create quick entry into conflicts that might not otherwise be possible. Which may explain why there are so many wars all going on concurrently in the middle of a global financial crisis?

Financing wars is VERY expensive (the US war in Iraq,  initial cost $1.7 trillion, will have cost around $6 trillion over the next four decades, counting the interest!) and the scope for continuing them has been regularly extended by borrowing. So wars have been a huge – and regular – way for banks to create the finance for monarchs and governments who want to try to expand their empires, colonies and spheres of enforced influence. This includes financing what often seem to be revolutions but turn out to be regime changes with devastating strings attached. There also the issue public bonds, but that is another story (which is so clothed in esoteric language I defy anyone not versed in business/economics to understand them, but then that is the idea….you can’t question what you can’t understand – hence the small print on loan agreements.. see the vocabularly used in this article)

War is also good for banks and corporate powers because a lot of material, equipment, buildings and infrastructure get destroyed in war. So countries go into massive debt to finance war, and then borrow a load more to rebuild what they just destroyed. Utterly surreal and devastating on a human level. But hey, great for business (ask George Bush).

The emergence of the big central banks has kept this age old tradition going. Specifically, the big banks or allied powers (ie the US to the Allies in WW1) loan money to governments and charge interest for the loans. With most loans there is a fixed term. And often , in consumer terms if a debt has not been paid within a certain time frame, i.e 6 years, it is written off. However, apparently war loans are perpetual, i.e there is no pay-by date and so we still have loans dating right back to the Crimean war, the Irish Potato Famine etc,

In the UK at the moment, in this time of ‘austerity’ (which, based on the fact that banks control the creation of money and money is made up by them rather than them being custodians of anything that actually exists in real time and space, is unnecessary and just creating massive and rapid inequality)  why does George Osborne apparently feels that we can now afford to pay our World War One loan off, the first payment in 67 years  of 218 m towards a 2bn debt ?

In many holy books, there was the idea of a Jubilee, a periodic writing –off of debts and freeing of slaves – every 7 years in the bible and every 50 years in the Torah. (one of my references for this project). This is the basis of campaigns to erase toxic and unjust debt by the Jubilee Debt Campaign, i.e  Argentina’s  current pursual by vulture funds (based on loans taken out by an previous regime to finance the junta), Pakistan’s crippling debt burden to the west which has resulted in the death of thousands of the poorest citizens,  would never be in a position to contemplate this kind of voluntary repayment. JDC are working on these issues, and a general Jubilee for Justice, which is being largely ignored by the political elites.

Why pay this war loan off now? Is this a PR move  to impress our US creditors to whom we owe a number of political favours ? Why are we repaying  debt incurred to finance a world war 100 years ago, prioritised over keeping the NHS healthy or meeting the basic needs of those who are falling into the cost of living gaps, barely affording to meet ends meet without going into massive debt themselves? Why hasn’t a jubilee been applied to this debt – or to all war debts , come to it?  Why are war loans ‘perpetual’ and not time-limited?? Who is profiting from the payback of this debt and  who is this debt really to? Why is it being packaged as being ‘value for money’ (apparently because there is a period of low interest at the moment,) and framed as a great opportunity ?

This kind of questioning is not only applicable to retrospective debt – whether war loans or other-  but also to our current global debt situation, Charles Eisenstein writes:

‘It is said that our children and grandchildren will be paying out these bailout and stimulus debts, but they could also simply be declared into non-existence. They are only as real as the story we agree on that contains them. Our grandchildren will pay them only if the story, the system of meanings that defines those debts still exist. ‘  (Sacred Economics, Charles Eisenstein)

This story, this system of meanings we are occupying at the moment, needs to and is being seriously questioned and will be transformed. There are plenty of thinkers /writers/activists/economists out there who have been doing this for a while and now this is becoming more visible. Among them I have met / noted  Brett Scott, Charles Eisenstein, Positive Money, New Economics Foundation, Ann Pettifor, (and all the speakers at the Jubilee Debt Campaign’s Life Before Debt Conference this Spring ).

Also , this Thursday 20th November, is the first time since 1844 that Parliament is debating the way that money is created  and although one wouldn’t expect the banks to hand over the power to control the way money is generated to a democratic body overnight,(here you go, we’ve had enough!)  it is a good sign that at least there is a high profile dialogue happening about it (lets hope it gets coverage..) , out of the alternative sphere of activism. I like that it is taking place on the same day we are burning the Book of Debts! And the same week as Restorative Justice Week, something I would like to have had a closer look at during this time, in terms of its relationship to the other theme of compassion, the antidote to conflict. Maybe that’s for the next project.

I am excited that I have 6 people reciting The Book of Debts VIII alongside me on Thursday and excited to say  that I will also be speaking about the project on Woman’s Hour, Radio 4 this Friday morning November 21st, when Book IX opens online .


0 Comments

Child’s Play : the material of the work  

We were installing yesterday at IWMN and the installation is up. The Book of Debts piece is also almost ready, just awaiting lighting. It was a very productive day, thanks to a brilliant team of staff and volunteers. Am just doing final edits on my Letter to Visitors to invite them to contribute to The Book which will hang above the jars of ashes of the remains of the previous books.

The wrapped war toys are already evoking some interesting responses, though the installation isn’t yet open to public view. One of the threads of the work, connected to the broader theme of conflict, is the issue of using these children’s war toys (amongst other objects) as material in themselves and how that might land with viewers, both children and adults . Am I fetishing these objects, critiquing them and/or asking the audience what their position is on them and their place in the lives of our children and our own psyches?

Being a mother myself, with a 6 year old son who loves to engage in imaginary conflicts on a daily basis with whatever he can find, I am constantly trying to work out my position on this. Wooden swords and sticks seem ok, but replica guns not (though we do have water guns and a foam pop gun somewhere in our house).  Allowing children to play things out with props of some kind feels natural and necessary, to totally disallow this feels like a form of control that is not healthy or helpful. Yet introducing life-like props such as plastic hand grenade, guns, bullets – all of which you can buy really easily (as I have been doing for this work, only landmines seem impossible to find) which look just like what is out there on the news and being used to wreak destruction and bloodshed on a daily basis, feels like a confusing and irresponsible message.

And yet we allow our son to play strategic war games like Clash of Clans on the ipad which have graphic visual accuracy; although not first person violence, they involve you sitting back to watch your troops lying in wait, then periodically massacring the enemy (though you can also ‘heal’ them). So are we hypocrites?  Are we allowing the natural expression of violence that we all contain (though seems to be particularly pronounced in my son as opposed to my daughter) and needs to be dissipated through play, or are we encouraging the rehearsal of violence later out in the real world? Is this contingent on what is used to play the violence out? Or is it contingent on how emotionally connected and free to express themselves children are in other areas? I don’t have a single position or answer but this blog is one way of possibly moving towards one.

 

According to writer, psychotherapist and conflict resolution facilitator Arlene Audergon in her enlightening book The War Hotel which I am half way through and shall be referring to regularly, children know better than us the difference between the real and the imagined and use strategies of play to process, personify and integrate conflict in far more natural ways than we can often accept or understand as adults.

She illustrates this through the symbolic  idea of the ‘Bogeyman’ (synonymous with terror) and how our relationship to him changes from child to adulthood;

Most of us grown-ups, the world over, imagine and pretend that the bogeyman existed only in our childhood. Growing up, we deny the existence of the Bogeyman. We lose access to mythic reality. The problem does not lie in believing in the Bogeyman. The problem lies in denying the existence of the Bogeyman within its world of dreaming. The problem lies in not recognising that this mythic dimension shapes our  emotions and perception. The problem lies in our denial of the existence of the Bogeyman and the terrifying and exciting interior of our dreamscapes. Trying to act grown-up, we split off the Bogeyman story and its rich emotional substance into a  notion of ‘child’s play’, out of conscious reach, while we replicate the myth in our relationships and social and political interactions.

As I open up the news, I see the current Bogeyman of choice in the media staring me in the face – in the form of an IS terrorist/fighter/militant (tick a box) taglined with a quote from the PM: ‘We must destroy this evil organisation’, and an image of an aerial strike on Syria on one of their bases that looks very much like a frame from one of those war strategy games ipad games I was talking about earlier. ..

Much more on this later.

I’m off to check the lighting of the Book of Debts, and that no objects from the installation have dropped to the ground – followed by a filmed interview with Alnoor, the director of the Trienniale, on the work, scribing the first stories into the book, sending the letter to print and an ATM artists  networking event in the evening. Phew.

 


0 Comments

 

It’s over a fortnight since we installed Child’s Play at Imperial War Museum North, and launched The Book of Debts VIII as part of the opening of the Asia Triennial. It was a very intense week but I began to really appreciate how much more support I have in making and installing – and showing – my work than I did five years ago, when I was crawling around the studio in the freezing winter of the Xmas holidays designing The Gifts and inexperienced in having ever suspended work before, not really knowing how it would all work. I still cycle through doubt, anxiety and stress but I think I have been conditioned to struggle on all levels in making work,  and in fact these days, at least on certain projects, there is a level of collaboration and hands-on support – normally voluntary – which can minimise this and  enables me to be working on more than one piece at once with much more ease. So its a question of allowing my own mindset of overwhelm to shift.

However, at ATM I have two works, and so the mental juggling between them was the challenge. This is as much to do with the themes I am working with  – debt, conflict, death etc…and the existential journeying through these as it is to do with being organised about what needs to be attended to next.

The War Museum and Asia Triennial teams were a real gift in terms of the amount of consideration, respect and attention given to getting the work into place, and also the sense of appreciation for what I am doing.

There was a bit of panic as Child’s Play went up, as groups of school children descended on it as if it were one of the many handling exhibits in the main space, and we had to quickly think of a subtle way to let visitors know this is an artwork not a bunch of nice feeling weapons to be handled…but then of course the allure of weapons, the magnetic pull of a kalashnikof in velvet and the question about whether this is real or a toy all came into play, so I am implicated in this too. Disturbing objects of desire, and the questioning of this are part of the work.

The opening night was held in the huge main exhibition hall at IWM and packed with people, around 500 I think…

I had met the Iranian musician Arian Sadr on my last visit and as he was playing at the opening it felt like a natural step to ask him to improvise during my provocation – watch the clip of our intro here. I have asked him to do something at the finale too, having just worked with a choir on the last Book in London, additional performative elements like this seem too good to miss and bring the text to life in a fresh way.

I think the single most stressful part of the week was the debates on going into Iraq that were happening in Parliament and the intensifying narrative of panic and fear in the media which all feel like the gulf war approach again except worse, because this time I have children. I don’t know how to explain to them, when they ask, why this is happening and who the ‘goodies and baddies’ are, but I want to find a way, a language to communicate the complexity of it in a simple, human  way without creating dread every time I open my mouth about it. I signed up for a non-violent communication course which I am doing next week. I figure as language is such a big part of my work, and I keep being drawn into project/venues where conflict is the core focus, that I must follow the clues and develop my learning in this area, and see where it takes me.

I got rather panicked this week when I was told that The Book of Debts VIII sitting at IWM is already half full ! After just two weeks, with 6 to go. I’m about to go through it and upload it online to see what the spread of contributions are and whether I need to prepare a second volume..

I was able to see some of the other works on display and in a few other venues, some of it is really stunning, and very, very diverse  and I highly recommend following the trail to see as much as possible if you are in Manchester before it ends on November 23rd. I will try and write more about some the other artists I met and didn’t meet next time.

www.asiatriennialmanchester.com


0 Comments