2021 in Review – Part 2: Institutions in impasse

The National Gallery of Jamaica was, until recently, closed to the public because of the COVID-19 Pandemic. The extended closure resulted in many staff members working from home, but that was no excuse for the lack of activity, especially since other museums in the Caribbean distinguished themselves with inspired and innovative online and in-person programmes. The partial reopening is limited to a traveling exhibition – the Jamaica, Jamaica exhibition on Jamaican music culture opened in February 2020 and already seen by many. There has been no programming to reanimate public interest in that exhibition. The new opening hours, with one hour closure “for sanitation” at lunch time, are, furthermore, quite uninviting.

The situation at the National Gallery needs to be addressed at the level of governance, supported by a new, re-energized, and well-informed vision for the museum’s mission and programmes. I hope that the “powers that be” will listen carefully to the mounting criticisms and make a sober and unsparing assessment of what they have and have not achieved, and why. This includes learning how to deal productively with criticism, in a manner which is consistent with a firm commitment to public accountability and without the sort of hostile palisading that has, at times, been evident. The National Gallery is a public-funded cultural institution which belongs to all of us, as, and needs to perform in the service of all with active, high-quality and inclusive programmes that are commensurate with its mandate.

Hopefully, the new public sector board regulations that will come into effect soon will create the opportunity for the underlying governance issues to be addressed. The repeatedly postponed Kingston Biennial, now announced for June 2022, may be a moment where the Gallery can re-establish its relevance and role in the local and international art ecologies and re-engage its audiences and stakeholders. This is not going to happen, however, if this exhibition and the programming that surrounds it are framed in defensive, self-vindicating terms. A measure of humility and willingness to take responsibility will be needed to rise above the current impasse.

While the School of Visual Art at the Edna Manley College has continued to produce outstanding graduates, who are already making their mark in local exhibitions, the College has experienced its own challenges. The fire that devastated the main painting studio at the start of the current academic year was a major blow, especially to those students who lost work, equipment, and personal items. Students are severely challenged to finance their studies and must contend with low-contact, partially online teaching that is unsuitable for studio courses. It takes great commitment and resilience to complete one’s course of studies under the present circumstances.

Questions of governance, however, also arise at the College as the situation with the principal, who was placed on leave under controversial circumstances in 2019, remains unresolved. There is also a lack of public clarity on the outcome of the sexual harassment allegations against a male lecturer that helped to trigger the present impasse. This lingering, very messy situation has left a leadership gap and opened the door for greater Board interference than is advisable for a tertiary academic institution.

Eyebrows were raised, recently, when the Ministry of Education suddenly announced the secondment of its Deputy Chief Education Officer, Dorrett Campbell, as interim principal. Ms Campbell is an accomplished and respected educator, who has signalled that she is committed to consultation and dialogue. She is, however, also the first principal not to have a professional background in the visual or performing arts, specialist qualifications which are, arguably, essential to leading the College. The secondment may be a turning point, however, and hopefully Ms Campbell will be able to restore balance and stability to the College leadership and pave the way for stable and appropriately qualified and visioned leadership, greater budgetary and other funding support, and the academic and artistic autonomy the College needs to function properly.

The announcement of this secondment was accompanied by vague statements about bringing the College in line with “national objectives.” In the absence of an up-to-date, consensus-based, and published cultural policy to replace the 2003 version, the question arises what those objectives might be, and who is determining them, as the views and needs of the artistic community no longer appear to be taken into consideration in such matters. There is routine talk about the economic potential of the creative industries, typically uttered in political speeches, but very little about how this is supposed to be supported at the level of artistic creation, which is, after all, the foundational “research and development” department of the cultural sector.

There is also a lamentable disregard for the artistic and general cultural heritage of this country. This was illustrated by the recent demolition of the historic Burnett Webster house, a key site in the history of architecture, design, and art in Jamaica. It seems safe to say that there is no cultural policy of any relevance, cohesion, or efficacy in Jamaica at the present time, to the detriment of the country’s cultural sector.

Something needs to be done about the prohibitive duties and frustrating bureaucracy that surrounds the importation of art and art materials into this country. They inhibit artistic production and artists consistently encounter major problems to bring their work back into the country after overseas exhibitions or for temporary local exhibition purposes. The perception is that art is associated with big money and needs to be taxed accordingly, which is a an ill-informed vision of art which does not apply to most artists, who are often financially vulnerable, and that the art world does not warrant the sort of accommodations that are readily made to sports or the music industry.

Tax and duty exemptions on art are the norm in many parts of the world where the creative industries benefit from these exemptions, ultimately yielding more substantial public revenues along with the general cultural and economic benefits. For all the misery that the current Customs regime inflicts on artists and exhibition organizers in Jamaica, I doubt that it generates any significant net revenue for the Jamaican State, as such imports are few and the implementation cost to Customs obviously quite high. When the bigger picture is considered, more is obviously lost than gained.

Part 3 of this Year in Review will comment on the Between Islands exhibition of British-Caribbean at the Tate Britain Gallery, the inclusion of artists of Caribbean descent in the national pavilions of the USA, the UK and Scotland, and other developments on the international front.

Dr Veerle Poupeye is an art historian specialized in art from the Caribbean. She lectures at the Edna Manley College of the Visual and Performing Arts in Kingston, Jamaica, and works as an independent curator, writer, researcher, and cultural consultant. Her personal blog can be found at veerlepoupeye.com.