Review of Forum on Community Arts: Time for Open Call

The following review and recommendations are based on my overall experiences at 3 of the 4 conferences since 2014. The forum has played an invaluable role over the years by building a community of practitioners and providing a language for discussing this work.

After these several years, I like to give some recommendations aimed at making the conference more relevant to local practitioners in the practice of community art and socially-engaged art. And this is my main point:

HK Practitioners are ready for an open call!

I went to one of the session at the Forum on Community Arts 2018: Community Arts Keywords today. The session theme was “Community”, the two presenters were MAD’s project at the Tin Sau Bazaar (天秀墟) and To Kwa Wan and the Blue House Cluster operated by St. James’ Settlement. These are pretty good projects, and in the case of Blue House, it is no less than a community development scheme that received a UNESCO award.

The projects are good, but it was not a satisfying talk. These two projects have had much exposure in other conferences and media that not much was new at the talk.

Overall the atmosphere felt more like a showcase/update of successful projects than a conference. Both presenters played PR-worthy video at the end of their talk that did not add much to the details they already gave. There were definitely issues related to community, but the respondent took a macro approach that could have been raised without listening to the talk.

After the session, I reflected on my other conferences experience and found that some things were missing after these 4 forums on community art:

Recommendation 1: Open call for presentation

Famous speakers and projects will always be the staples that draw the crowds, but a lot of learning comes from listening and exchanging with unfamiliar projects and practitioners. Over the 4 conferences, the Forum has invited roughly 18 HK organizations/projects/practitioners, many of them recognized projects that already receive exposure.

Having only a small pool of presenters neglects the whole picture and experiences different from established knowledge. One of the excitements of attending conferences is to search for unfamiliar artist/organizations/projects, and be blown away by a presenter just when your eyelids have given up.

Conference presentations demand focus and organization of experience. An open call pushes many practitioners to go through this process. The call itself already advances the practice. The presentations will bring in new blood (attendee numbers) and experience.

[Declaration of interest: I have not presented in any of the Forum] It just feels more real and exciting to submit a proposal and get accepted (or rejected), and to present alongside someone you have never heard of. That way, I leave a conference with my eyes opened.

…be blown away by a presenter just when your eyelids have given up.

Recommendation 2: Academic/critical/intellectual guidance

Even though this conference is positioned to be practical instead of academic, the university setting provides a good opportunity to advance the critical and intellectual skills of the practitioners.

Many practitioners have no training or experience in critical dialogue (discussing systematically and deeply to test validity) about their work. In any conference, presentations sometimes feel like project report glossed over for funders and sponsors. If organizers can provide some kind of demonstration, written guidance or even coaching for first time presenters, the presentations and Q & A can become a learning experience for everyone including the presenters themselves. At the very least, session host can focus the Q & A session toward specific points in a presentation (which the host did today).

Looking forward to the next forum. What are your expectations for the next Forum on Community Arts?