Dear Editor,
Man has often succeeded in establishing cities and factories, and engaging in activities aimed at establishing a progressive society, but in order for man to build a fruitful and well-rounded society he should be prudent and not exclude anything which holds the interest of some sectors of the society he is attempting to build, especially things to do with art. The artist today in Guyana is defined by his antecedents, those of a period long past when the country was governed by foreigners. No consideration is directed towards the present day practitioners. Are the art forms of painting and sculpture no longer an asset in the cultural arena? I have been in the country for a little over a year, and the complaints I have constantly heard relate to the lack of encouragement and shunning of local talent. What then is the purpose of the Burrowes School of Art if there are no avenues for the graduates to sustain themselves?
The country often boasts of its National Stadium, the Olympic size swimming pool, a karate abode, a cinder track and everything else to do with sport. But when is Guyana to get a national gallery of which we can be proud?
The visitors coming into the country have no interest in seeing the gloves of ‘Six-head’ Lewis, or the track upon which a prospective Olympian trains, or a pool built maybe to allow for practice. Those visitors certainly will want to enquire about and participate in cultural activity, for those are the things by which a nation is better known.
In the year I have been here I have noticed a marked decline in the promotion of things artistic; many prominent and gifted practitioners have turned their attention towards other means of making a living. Talent should not be stifled. It is a sin to waste a good mind. What appears to get attention today are performances of African dances, never mind the fact that this is Guyana.
There are comedy skits – lots of them. Maybe someone has the feeling we should laugh at all the blatant denials of things truly cultural.
Last year I brought in an art exhibition from the United States of America at great expense, and it was mounted at the National Gallery. The timing was specifically chosen, as it marked the 44th anniversary of Guyana’s attainment of independence from Britain. The exhibition also had a historic significance because it displayed scenes of Sophia’s sugarcane and rice fields, before the area gave way to redevelopment. The government acquired nothing. In fact, though invited, no one from the government including the Department of Culture came to the opening. Can society do without artists?
No! An artist records time for all others to look upon and remember the things that used to be. A sporting event is entertainment that cannot be enhanced aesthetically.
You witness it, and though you may remember the details, the passion is gone with yesterday’s involvement. It is one-sided excitement that has not the power of regeneration. You see it once and the excitement fades.
The work of an artist has the passion of nature – its idyllic beauty, and the power of creation the artist experienced. All these aspects are transferred to the onlooker, and each onlooker feels the power in his own way. This is an illustration of the fact that the nuances of expression can only be communicated infinitely by the artist. It is the same with a cerebral puzzle, which, every time you view it you see something new if you are aware of how to look. A painting communicates with you differently every time you place the finished work before you.
My purpose in writing is to ask for something of a near renaissance in the interest shown by the country’s leaders, who I am not implying are without an equally impassioned interest in the arts as they have in sport. But let us fertilize our imaginations and allow our minds to open doors to everything Guyanese. Looking back, we can now write about Burrowes because 50 years ago he had the incentive to work. Who in the field is left for us to write about 50 years from today? Who is now practising the art forms as during the era of Burrowes? Those customs seem all but dead because of the lack of support. I for one am indeed glad I met the man and did work under his watchful eye when a youngster. I would say that the leaders must supply encouragement to artistic expression in the same way as the British did for Burrowes, and restore to the nation a consciousness of the old cultural traditions which we once lived with and which gave us guidance and encouragement.
We sometimes tend to see through a glass darkly and whenever this is so, we have to find other ways of seeing so the light can better lay out our agenda.
This of course is another reason the artist is needed to broaden our ability to see. For life becomes richer and fuller the more we can see everything which is about us. So society must never think the artist is a thing of the past who is no longer needed. We should get a safer and more impressive national art gallery. Maybe then people will again think of art as a worthwhile and informative asset.
Yours faithfully,
Jorge Bowenforbes
