Executive Summary of Proceedings
Second Institute: October 10-17, 2004
Recasting Reconciliation through Culture and the Arts was the theme of the 3rd round of the Brandeis International Fellows Program 2003-04, sponsored by the Center. This in an executive summary of the report (download full report, PDF) which documents the second and final institute, held on October 10-17, 2004. It was attended by nine of the ten Fellows. To get more information on the fellowship program and a report documenting the first institute, please see Recasting Reconciliation.
Recasting Reconciliation through Culture and the Arts was designed to highlight and strengthen artistic and cultural approaches to reconciliation by engaging practitioners in documenting, reflecting upon, creating theory about, and sharing their work. During the second institute, the fellows shared portfolios that documented their work throughout the year, and offered each other appreciative, critical inquiry on working papers that discuss their work. They also continued to explore the meanings of reconciliation and questions surrounding the contributions of the arts and cultural work to the rebuilding of broken inter-communal relationships.
The institute was co-directed by Cynthia Cohen, director of Coexistence Research and International Collaborations at Brandeis University, and Jonathan Fox, founder of Playback Theatre and director of the School for Playback Theatre. The first day was held at Cohen's home in Barrington, New Hampshire, where the fellows reconnected after a year's separation through informal conversation, lawn games, a yoga class, canoe and kayak rides on the nearby lake, and shared meals.
October 10
Fellows began the challenging transition from being a collection of individuals to a group engaged in productive conversation about their work and the theme of the fellowship program. Each fellow was working in a two-person team exploring the contributions of a particular form of art or cultural work to reconciliation in a particular region.
The primary purpose for the second institute was to provide opportunities for Fellows to deepen reflections on their own practice, on the meanings of reconciliation, and on how the arts contribute. They were also able to collaborate, strengthening their working papers, and to support each other in their lives and work.
In an overview, the director outlined several emerging themes:
- The dangers of partial or shoddy reconciliation: when someone presents something as reconciliation when it is not, the consequences can be lethal
- Dilemmas when reconciliation is initiated from outside the community rather than from within the culture(s)
- The theories of change that underlie the work we do. How do we see the link between the small, personal, and interpersonal changes that our projects facilitate and larger social change?
October 11
The group gave feedback to each team and generated a list of themes for future discussions. These fell into the following general categories:
- The contributions of the arts
- Questions about reconciliation and issues of power
- Capacities and constraints of the artist/cultural worker/facilitator
- Capacities and limitations of people in the communities where we work
October 12 and 13
Fellows narrowed a virtually endless list it in an effort to begin articulating answers.
- What is reconciliation in different contexts?
- How do you do it and facilitate it?
- Questions of power
- Indigenous culture vs. outside cultures as tools
- Terms of expression from one culture to another
- Role of outsider/insider
- Taking a political stand (or not) or how
- Taking care of yourself
- Theories of change
For two days, the group continued the inquiry into shared understanding of some of these questions. The morning was devoted to small-group reflection on the following four topics, followed by debriefings for the whole group. For a complete summary of these discussions, please refer to the page indicated in the complete second institute report (PDF).
- Reconciliation: What is it? How do we facilitate it? (p. 6)
- Power: How do we address inequities? (p. 6)
- Change: What theories under gird our work? (p. 7)
- Arts: What are the unique contributions of the arts? Are particular art forms more effective than others? (p. 7)
The conversation continued with an exploration of power dynamics in processes of reconciliation. The questions were framed as, "How is the reconciliation process different for those on different sides of the power equation? What are the challenges for those on each side? What is the emotional work?" The following key statements and questions emerged:
- Personal characteristics are a factor in reconciliation. Specifically, "humility in the powerful and confidence and courage of all parties." However, the powerful may also become enmeshed in feelings of shame and guilt and become a victim. "They can become so careful about not creating more harm that they become immobilized and cannot act, and they also get caught in questioning if they are really willing to give up something."
- The form that oppression has taken has different consequences. "The divisions created by long-term economic exploitation may need to be addressed differently from the divisions created by war."
- If part of reconciliation is to empower the oppressed, then effort must be expended in giving the oppressed the tools they need to assume the power
- Being less powerful does not mean being powerless, but it is more difficult to imagine sharing power if you feel that you have none
- Art may assume a role in building empathy, or it may serve "as a polemic in the direction of justice"
- The objective of the reconciliation is central
- Consciousness raising and opening spaces that happen through art may lead to political action and destabilization
October 13 and 14
The Fellows joined the Brandeis community and local guests for the symposium Re-Imagining Self and Other: Creativity and Ethical Action in the Aftermath of Violence. The symposium provided an opportunity for the group to learn from and engage with some key individuals who are doing the work of reconciliation in different places in the world, both as artists and as peacebuilding practitioners. Below is a list of featured presenters. For more information on the presenters and the symposium, please see Presenters' Biographies and Related Readings and the Schedule of Events.
Featured presenters
- Barbara Sonneborn, director of the award-winning film, Regret to Inform, which depicts widows' stories of loss incurred by the Vietnam War.
- Professor Hizkias Assefa, founder and co-coordinator of the African Peacebuilding and Reconciliation Network in Nairobi, Kenya. He has been engaged in second-track diplomacy and grassroots peacebuilding processes in Rwanda, Sierra Leone, southern Sudan, Afghanistan, Guatemala, Colombia, and in many other regions.
- Jane Sapp, cultural worker who engages with disenfranchised urban and rural communities in the United States. Her music reflects the blues and gospel sounds of her Georgia youth and is deeply rooted in the spiritual, religious, and historical experiences of the African-American world.
- Olivier Urbain, associate professor of art and peace studies, English, and French at Soka University, in Hachioji, Japan. A blues pianist and a Nichiren Buddhist, he founded the Transcend: Art and Peace Network (TAP) in 2000, a virtual network designed to strengthen the contributions of artists to peace.
- Goenawan Mohamad, an Indonesian writer, editor, activist, and poet. In 1971, he founded Tempo magazine, which quickly turned out to be the mouthpiece of the opposition.
October 15
The fellows continued the conversations started at the symposium and in the first days of the institute with the visiting scholars. Brandeis International Fellow Bev Hosking welcomed the symposium presenters as guests into the community, and Iffat Fatima opened the day with a poem. A Playback Theater presentation, conducted by Jonathan Fox and acted by several of the fellows, allowed us to share our reflections on the symposium and our expectations for the day ahead.
The group began by breaking into two sections. One group worked with Jane Sapp to compose a song. The second, larger group addressed the question: what is art? Later in the morning, the group followed up on questions that had been raised prior to and during the symposium, about the challenges of facilitating reconciliation in contexts of unequal power and disagreements about the meaning of justice. Hizkias Assefa responded to the fellows' questions. He clarified the distinction between reconciliation and pacification, indicating that true reconciliation is a revolutionary and transformative process.
October 16
Fellows considered questions that were specific to their own work.
How are you coming to understand the meaning of reconciliation in your work?
Fellows noted that the essential part of their work is in the building of relationships, both the relationships that they themselves build with others and the opportunities they create for others to grow relationships. The arts are still seen as valuable media with which to build relationships. Building relationships is central to work of reconciliation. "… there are a lot of people that are working on reconciliation but they don't call it that…. Building relationships and maintaining relationships… it is very broad and lots of people are doing it. They need to be encouraged."
Building the capacity in people that enables them to imagine a different future through both meaningful work and the development of skills is another key element in the way fellows view their work. "In one way there are the networks and links that we are building up, but on the other there are the islands of change that may bring about peace in the larger scale."
What do you appreciate about your own work and how it contributes to reconciliation?
Fellows appreciated the steps that each is taking are being taken with integrity and sincere intent to break down barriers to real relationships. There was agreement that there is much to do and multiple ways to do it. "Seeing reconciliation not as a category…there is an element of wanting to communicate something that might lead to some sort of change. I want to experiment with different kinds of dialogue."
Next Steps
During the final day of the institute, the group was divided into three subgroups to discuss the report, future visions, and policy recommendations. Refer to the complete second institute report for a complete summary of the proceedings.