4 results
14 - Ethiopian stories in an English landscape
- from Part 3 - Solutions
-
- By Shawn Sobers, Associate Professor of Lens Based Media at the University of the West of England.
- Edited by Henriette Roued-Cunliffe, Andrea Copeland
-
- Book:
- Participatory Heritage
- Published by:
- Facet
- Published online:
- 08 June 2018
- Print publication:
- 31 January 2017, pp 143-152
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
New alternative narratives
WHEN MUSSOLINI INVADED Ethiopia's capital in May 1935, he forced its Emperor, Haile Selassie I, into exile. The Emperor arrived in the city of Bath, England, in October 1936, and lived in a property called Fairfield House with his family, government advisors and Orthodox priests. After returning to Ethiopia in 1941, the Emperor gave the house to the city of Bath as a gift to be used by aged citizens. This chapter explores the legacy of this period in Bath's history and what it means for the people living and visiting there today. I will discuss attempts to introduce this alternative historical narrative into the fabric of Bath's identity and beyond, discussing reflexively through my experiences of working in a voluntary capacity with Fairfield over a period of 17 years.
To understand the modern-day impact of this Ethiopian Emperor living in Bath, it is important to state that Haile Selassie I is viewed as a deity by members of the Rastafari faith. Whilst it is not only Rastafari that are interested in this history and recognize its importance (as will be discussed below), it is undoubtedly Rastafari that have most kept the name of Haile Selassie alive in public consciousness, especially through lyrics in reggae music and the use of the Emperor's face on items such as clothing, flags and other tributes. The complexity of feelings towards the legacy of this history is summed up by the Rastafari High Priest for the South West UK region, Honourable Ras Bandele Selassie:
It makes me feel sad, and it makes me glad, because the reason for His Majesty to be here is through the sadness of his heart. If the sadness never occurred, then the gladness of me being here today would not have occurred. The gladness of … the elderly being looked after here would not have occurred. The gladness of Rastafari having celebrations here would not have occurred. Many things that are happening in Bath now … the love that we feel would not have occurred. So for that, whilst I am sad I am glad.
This notion, that the memory that sites hold acts as a source of both pain and comfort, positions Fairfield as an embodiment of what historian Olivette Otele refers to as a ‘reluctant site of memory – a seen or unseen space that owes their very existence to brutal European colonial conquest’.
Five - Varieties of creative citizenship
- Edited by Ian Hargreaves, Cardiff University, John Hartley, Curtin University
-
- Book:
- The Creative Citizen Unbound
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 01 September 2022
- Print publication:
- 06 April 2016, pp 103-128
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
In this chapter we identify some varieties of creative citizenship, not with the expectation of achieving a comprehensive taxonomy, but in order to test the scope, robustness and potential value of creative citizenship, both as an idea and as a set of practices, with reference to the case studies undertaken in the Creative Citizen project.
Creative citizenship as a concept can help us consider how ‘everyday’ creative acts – such as cooking, dancing, knitting or debating – can generate community engagement. It gives us a way of rendering coherent an array of otherwise disparate phenomena: for example, when pictures and messages in social media from the streets of a turbulent neighbourhood become a catalyst for mobilising people around an issue or cause; or when cultural or artistic activities transform a planning consultation meeting into a creative experience, where urban issues are deliberated upon in a more collaborative and dynamic spirit. These are examples of creative citizenship in action.
‘Creative citizenship’ conceptualises the everyday creativity of ordinary people (that is, not just creative professionals) as a core civic resource, something that adds to the capacity of the community and which harnesses their combined energy for change. Such everyday creativity cannot be understood in isolation from the civic networks within which it is situated. Creative citizenship does not merely describe the acts of creative individuals. It depends upon and contributes to the civic networks where it occurs, especially now that the boundaries between producers and consumers are diminished by digital abundance. It is more about the creativity of groups than the creativity of individuals. This chapter explores a range of ways in which acts of creativity occur within a civic and communicative context.
We test our theoretical approach by applying it to case studies in the Creative Citizen project, including examples of activism, community journalism, hyperlocal publishing, insurgent and formal community-led planning practices, and to informal and formal creative practices developed around music and media production.
Rage, renewal and everyday acts: initiation and purpose
Acts of citizenship can be considered creative in various ways. They may be creative in the same way that Schumpeterian ‘creative destruction’ is, where innovation is disruptive or a threat in circumstances where renewal is needed.
Nine - Civic cultures and modalities of place-making
- Edited by Ian Hargreaves, Cardiff University, John Hartley, Curtin University
-
- Book:
- The Creative Citizen Unbound
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 01 September 2022
- Print publication:
- 06 April 2016, pp 205-230
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
Acts of creative citizenship require places, where challenges and tensions generate energy, inviting resolution through creative collaboration. In this chapter we aim to shed light on processes of place-making, whether they occur in physical, digital or hybrid spaces. We adopt a broad definition of place to explore what place and making mean within three urban settings of our action research. In all three of these locations, we encounter groups that share an interest in the relationship between artistic imagination and its political expression in projects of urban renewal. We pay particular attention to the ways in which communicative infrastructures may contribute to the construction of social relationships and civic agency, leading to dividends in the form of enhanced networks of affinity, trust and resilience.
Place and media making in a digital world
The emergence of web-based community news sites has provoked much discussion about the citizen voice in localities (Radcliffe, 2012; Goggin et al, 2015). Hyperlocal news services are usually discussed in relation to their value as a potential solution to the problem of news plurality in localities. However, hyperlocal news can also play a crucial role in place-making. Kirsty Hess (2012) has argued that the emergence of the term hyperlocal is evidence of ‘a reinvigorated interest in geography, as media industry and entrepreneurs experiment with new business models in the changing technological landscape’ (Hess, 2012: 53). Borrowing from Manuel Castells, she argues that small local newspapers act as nodes, holding ‘a degree of symbolic power in constructing the idea of community and the local’ (Hess, 2012: 56). In a digitally networked world, geography is ‘local and global at the same time’ (Castells, 2012: 222).
The perspective of place is also fundamental within the broader landscape of participatory media/arts and community media. Goldfarb (2002) shows how participatory creative networks generate communities of interest, fostering civic engagement through their media making. As Couldry et al (2014: 1) write: ‘digital media and digital infrastructures provide the means to recognise people in new ways as active narrators of their individual lives and the issues they share with others’. These affordances are said to be particularly important for young people, who through creative media acts acquire agency in civic debates (Günnel, 2006), offering a ‘voice to the voiceless’ (Lewis P., 2006).
Seven - Conversations about co-production
- Edited by Ian Hargreaves, Cardiff University, John Hartley, Curtin University
-
- Book:
- The Creative Citizen Unbound
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 01 September 2022
- Print publication:
- 06 April 2016, pp 153-180
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
When we first gathered as a team to construct the Creative Citizen project proposal, the terms co-production, co-creation and co-design were new to several round the table. The team's designers, for whom this was a well-understood way of working in partnership with individuals and communities to design a new building, service or product, initially brought these concepts forward. Other team members were familiar with the approach from working on community arts and media projects. But for some the approach was new and while it raised questions about objectivity in research, along with some ethical issues, we agreed that co-production would be fundamental to the team's work.
An approach based upon co-production felt right because creative citizenship involves shared goals and collaborative methods. We wanted to understand the different forms, meanings and value of civic creativity, but we also wanted to test ways of growing the potential of creative citizens. Co-production allowed us to work in partnership with communities on creative projects useful to them, whilst also contributing to the research team's insights gained through other methods, including interviews, observation, textual analysis and surveys. This range of methods also had the merit of drawing upon the research traditions of a multidisciplinary group. By focusing on the mutual benefits of co-production, we were responding to ‘a criticism that research conducted in communities often fails to meaningfully include communities in its design and undertaking’ (Durose et al, 2007).
The literature in design has much to say about co-production, co-design and co-creation, but surprisingly little to say about the perspectives of participants and the communities themselves (Durham Community Research Team, 2011). In light of this, we present here a series of informal conversations, articulating the views of our community partners or ‘creative citizens’ in their role as co-producers of the project. These conversations highlight various methodological and practical factors that helped or hindered them through the creative process and point to ways in which academic researchers might better support their community partners in future.
Terms of engagement
During the research we used the terms co-creation, co-design and co-production interchangeably. In the literature, co-creation usually refers to collective creativity in general, co-design to collective creativity as applied to the design process (Sanders and Stappers, 2008) and co-production to citizens playing an active role in producing goods and services of consequence to them (Ostrom, 1996).