Our Talk after Conversations with 15 International Partners

Jisun Park (“Jisun”) (producer of the Producer Group DOT)
Jin Yim (“Jin”) (independent producer)
Kyu Choi (“Kyu”) (producer of Asia NOW)

Research Project ‘NEW CONNECTIONS’
New Connections Discussing the Pandemic and Post-Pandemic Periods

The spread of Covid-19 during the first half of 2020 has sent the entire world into a lockdown, forcing people to rely on online spaces to share their lives. Social distancing has already become our everyday language. Covering half of our faces with masks, we enjoy sunlight as we walk down the street freed from fine dust. Such a scene feels so unreal. People don’t want to stay in a dark indoor space. Some of them are afraid of collective activities while others feel sorry and responsible for such gatherings. Such a reality, which is comparable to VR, is passing us by slowly but we ask ourselves these questions. Could we get back to our past daily lives before the pandemic? Could we return to the period prior to the pandemic? Could people throw off their fear, sorriness and sense of responsibility to gather together in theaters and festivals again? As everyone in the world is going through uncertainties, we decided to talk to each other. This series of conversations was intended for the following purposes. First, by discussing with our international partners, we wanted to share the current situation and valuable information, going beyond our social and physical distance. Second, we were also willing to ask ourselves what would be the challenges to be met by the arts, artists and producers during this post-pandemic period.

Planned by Jisun Park, Jin Yim and Kyu Choi
Run by the Producer Group DOT
Supported by Korea Arts Management Service ‘KAMS Connections’

Participants
Giovanni Trono and Anna Gesuldi / Alto Fest (Naples, Italy)
Cui Yin / Independent Producer (Singapore)
Yukio Nitta / Independent Producer (Tokyo, Japan)
Hiromi Maruoka / Tokyo Performing Arts Meeting in Yokohama (Tokyo, Japan)
Irene Segura / Xtrax (Manchester, United Kingdom)
Ng Chor Guan / Artist, Toccata Studio (Malaysia)
Madeleine Flynn / Artist, Madeleine and Tim (Melbourne, Australia)
Serge Rangoni / Théâtre de Liège (Liège, Belgium)
Marie le Sourd / On the Move (Paris, France)
Riitta Aittokallio / Dance Info Finland (Finland)
Mathias Priz / Machina eX (Germany)
Ian Leung / Hongkong Arts Center (Hongkong)
Pedro de Freitas / FarOFFa, Periplo Productions (Brazil)
Stéphane Lavoie / TOHU (Canada)

Go back to Part 1 [LINK]

For some time, there would be more short-distance exchanges than long-distance ones. Indeed, that is what Europe has been doing these days. Then what about Asia’s solidarity? All three of us are members of the Asian Producers’ Platform (APP) so let us start from APP to discuss how to engage in exchanges, cooperation and solidarity in Asia.

Kyu: APP has its own raison d’être and value but it needs a more profound change in its role. It could maintain its CAMP program but it also needs a meeting that would deal with more diverse themes and purposes. For example, those sharing similar themes and purposes could gather together. We once tried to connect three Asian cities (Seoul, Taipei and Hong Kong) to do something together, as suggested. It is now necessary to gather together people who have clear questions and common purposes to make the idea more concrete. There is one more thing: Travel Bubble solidarity program. We could probably run the program during the second half of next year. If countries including Taiwan, Australia, Korea and Japan join forces for politics, policies, economy and exchanges, they could also form solidarity in the arts field for a certain period of time.

Jin: Does the “Travel Bubble” consist in designating a safety zone?

Jisun: That’s right. But the Travel Bubble, which is about carrying out exchanges in a fixed safety zone, is linked to what is economic. In Asia, countries that could engage in such exchanges would be those equipped with infrastructure controlling and managing risk factors. Examples of such countries include Korea, Japan, Taiwan and Australia. These four countries also launched APP. When it comes to Asian solidarity, such an imbalance always happens. Southeast Asian countries are excluded too easily. If art has no choice but to follow such a tendency, the hierarchy mentioned earlier may be formed again, under economic criteria. There could be many layers in Asian solidarity. The “Travel Bubble” guarantees mobility within the extent of real and physical mobility. To put it another way, countries that are economically capable of purchasing and distributing vaccines will be given priority. For these countries, physical tours, artistic mobility and exchanges could be available, but others that don’t meet such criteria are excluded. APP pursues Asian countries’ horizontal exchanges in a broad sense. Here, “horizontal” refers not only to the members’ horizontal status but also to their horizontal exchange without any economic hierarchy. This raises another concern about how we could engage in exchanges. 

Kyu: The idea of exchange among Asian cities was suggested in 2016. While doing research on cities, we first ran a program called “Connected Cities” as part of the UK/Korea 2017-18 project of the British Council. To begin with, we chose “speed” as the theme of our research on Asian cities because “speed” is something shared by all Asian countries. We then studied countries that had gone through a period of development to see what they had gained and lost through their cities’s speed. We explored this theme from the perspectives of art, architecture and technology. Numerous administrative and structural problems kept us from “connecting” the cities. Instead, we carried out the “Connected Cities” project in Seoul, in parallel with the Seoul Biennale of Architecture and Urbanism. We are still thinking about how to develop such a project. We have some ideas like conducting research through collaboration between Korean and Asian artists in frameworks like residency. Now, we need a multi-layered structure to make and distribute something together, instead of the previous structure of independently producing works and touring different countries. And as we live in an Asian city, we need to ask ourselves this question: “What is the relationship between a city and art in a rapidly changing society?” 

Jisun: It could be the relationship between art and a city but it could also be the way we understand ourselves. Most of us live in a city. European and Asian cities have very different historical backgrounds. From this perspective, we thought about how to view our cities and in this process, we came up with the keyword “speed.” Both Europeans and Asians have 24 hours a day but the density of the same 24 hours could be different depending on the two continents’ lifestyles. I’m not saying that “speed” is always something negative. It is true that Asia has many problems caused by speed but not everything should be regarded as negative. What is negative is actually something relative and it also has a positive aspect. Our purpose was to understand Asian cities from the perspective of “speed,” without bias. It is also linked to why contemporary contexts are important, a concern I mentioned earlier. For example, just as COVID-19 is a contemporary context shared by everyone right now, we could try to understand Asian countries and cities under the theme of “speed.” We thought that understanding them that way could enable us to discuss Asian cities’ numerous issues and stories. In Asia, solidarity and exchange aren’t just led by tours. International tours could take place in a safe bubble. Nevertheless, wouldn’t it be important to keep searching for “issues” that are faced by all Asian countries (like the issue of COVID-19) and that could be shared and discussed together? In the past, we weren’t really interested in such issues. There was a period during which we thought about what to discuss with Indoneseia or with Taiwan. We need to keep meeting up with Asian partners in order to have more themes in common and to find how to engage in exchange and solidarity. Right now, it is impossible to create works and distribute them beyond national borders. So what we need now is to find issues shared by all Asian countries and to think about how to develop them into artistic activities.  

Kyu: What could I do? I could do small but more profound things. The solidarity I could form right now is the one with those who share the same outlook and vision. This could lead to denser and deeper partnerships.

Jin: Asia doesn’t have any structure of solidarity like the EU. So Asian countries’ solidarity could have a meaningful start in the arts field by trying research-based cultural cooperation and solidarity. I’m probably going too far but Korean local governments could continue their sister city projects on the basis of more timely themes. In a more active way, they could look for cities that would be willing to participate in a specific research project and establish a partnership involving both private and public participants. They could also reflect things that are initiated and suggested by private partners to support them at the policy level. In this manner, they could seek cooperation between cities and solidarity between countries. The solidarity I’m imagining is the one that sensitively responds to this era’s changes and themes. A project based on such solidarity may be looser than that of sister cities but it would always have potential for change and transition. This approach could allow us to carry out residency and research projects focused on the themes we discussed before. We would need to find alternatives that would lead to concrete actions. Without any experiment or practice, our determination and declaration would soon evaporate. 

Jisun: I’ll talk about APP again. APP was launched in 2013 so it has been already eight years. I believe that APP is a great result of our efforts. We started running the platform in the private sector with our friends and colleagues and we are still running it. So far, many people have participated in the platform and we have secured huge assets. I’m convinced that these people’s voluntary participation has allowed the platform to serve as a good model. But we now need a new driving force. In order to move on to the next stage, we need to restructure and reorganize our current system comparable to a voluntary service. But a question arises. We made a flexible network because we didn’t like a well-structured organization. And is it right to give our organization a fixed structure? That is the question we are currently facing. We are currently discussing many things through numerous networks. But if we don’t take action, these discussions will soon go nowhere. Rather than making a huge network out of Asian solidarity, we would need to come up with new collaborations that may be small but concrete. Asia has recently launched a number of small networks: Asian Producers’ Platform (APP), Circus Asia Network (CAN), Asian Dramaturgs’ Network (ADN) and Asia Network for Dance (AND+). Even if these networks are formed and disappear, these small networks need to be made even more. For example, there could be a network for Asia’s young creators or for alternative spaces in Asia. In this way, Asia could add small networks. These networks won’t exist independently but they will probably have things in common, resulting in being connected to each other naturally. In order to prevent the networks from being absorbed into a huge network, it is important to make many small networks. I believe that small collaborations will lead to big solidarity. 

Kyu: At this year’s PAMS, I suggested a meeting for the new solidarity of Asian networks including APP, ADAM, AND+, APAM, BIPAM and TPAM. Of course, APP, in which we participate, didn’t raise any issue regarding such a meeting but the other networks had many questions about such an additional meeting, like, why we would have such a meeting, what we would do during the meeting and why PAMS is suggesting that idea abruptly. There may be a couple of reasons for these questions. First, PAMS has focused on helping the Korean performing arts make inroads into the global market so it has somewhat neglected solidarity in Asia. Second, Asia’s numerous networks have carried out excessively independent activities; they have been too busy to look around themselves.

I believe that it is also important to ensure the concrete actions and sustainable solidarity of networking platforms. In that sense, the Festival Academy serves as a good example. This academy is successfully striking a balance between informal, individual solidarity and the organization’s structural response. Since the onset of the pandemic, I have participated in some of the academy’s programs. The academy’s members choose major themes and come up with programs for each month to run them individually. Meanwhile, the academy also prepares its own programs dealing with themes that are important for the organization, like the “Program for Solidarity with the Lebanese Arts Scene” in jeopardy. In short, individuals’ loose solidarity and the organization’s systematic programs coexist in a harmonious and efficient way. 

We have all carried out international exchange projects in a sustainable manner. We wouldn’t be able to predict the future. So rather than suggesting an outlook for the future, could we discuss our future direction, starting from the project carried out by each of us? 

Jin: We discussed and thought a lot and we got new ideas and discovered new things. Now, my question is what action to take to continue this research. We often mentioned “possibility of connection” and “art in a new form.” We wouldn’t be able to find one right answer to these questions right now. It would be impossible to find the right answer that would satisfy us. And what we should do now is to continue research. When it comes to street arts, “street arts” as a new art form started by trying to go beyond the extent of the existing arts. But these days, street arts have also had a certain form and they have tended to be like a separate genre. So I wonder if street arts have also set a certain extent which isn’t very different from a theater space and if they have repeated similar patterns. The pandemic has kept us from doing things we had been used to. This occasion has led me to consider and face new styles. And I came to think, “This could also be art. This place could also be a place of art. That person could also watch a performance.” In short, the pandemic made me expand my view of art. That is, I came to think again about what is meaningful. I think I said this during an interview but when an ecosystem embraces different values and exists in different ways, it will finally be able to survive for an extended period of time. Coming back to street arts, the pandemic is likely to allow us to come up with new styles viewing the street. And above all, I’m aware that we don’t have the right answer anymore. International exchange may not be necessary for everyone. But everyone needs to think about why it is necessary in their own art projects, considering what is happening right now.

Kyu: You already mentioned this to a certain point but the first thing I need to do is to clarify what stories I want to tell in the future. And I need to think deeply about that. Since last year, I have worked on three themes: “Arts and Cities,” “Diversity, Inclusivity and Accessibility of the Arts” and “Arts and Technology.” But I think that it would be better to choose one of the themes to raise the density of my work. Second, I have kept thinking about a story of Asian cities and a project connecting them. I have been interested in these themes for quite a long time. A colleague working as a planner once said, “Aren’t planners producing too many works?” I agree. So I also think about how to produce. Rather than pursuing individual works, it would be better to continue one work through certain solidarity. In short, I believe that it is important to clarify what I must do and what I can do and to seek solidarity that would be available. It is also necessary not to do what I must not do and what I must stop. That may be my duty I need to fulfill in order to serve as a role model for younger people in the arts scene. 

Jin: I thought about making a “not-to-do list” to make sure I don’t do such things. I don’t know if this is also what Kyu thinks but the first priority should be to know what not to do, even though I couldn’t change anything completely. 

Jisun: While thinking about the arts and practice, I consider it very important to work with partners beyond national borders. For example, I meet Asian partners through the annual APP CAMP. Every year, I get new energy from them. When I see partners from all around Asia after busy days in a fixed environment in Korea, I realize that we all have different conditions and the same concerns. Such a meeting enables me to share knowledge and ideas with them and keeps me from settling for the present. Such energy I exchange with them is my power to move forward. The same would be true not only for planners but also for artists. New energy influences not only their new art projects but also their audience. As the director of the Théâtre de Liège mentioned, “exchange” gives a new view to something I have been convinced of, thus stimulating my thoughts ceaselessly. In such a process, diversity can exist. 

Instead of organizing tours of performances, I would like to look for ways to find and discuss shared issues and to carry out relevant artistic activities. The climate residency, which was launched this year, has involved only Korean artists. With them, we had not only an offline residency but also an online one which took place every other week. As the pandemic is likely to continue for some time, we could try such an online residency beyond national borders. Although we live in different settings, we are all facing the climate crisis. So we could share how we need to respond to climate change in a specific setting in everyone’s own community. We could choose themes and start our exchange through a digital residency. The theme could be “Asian Cities,” which was mentioned earlier. I keep thinking about making such connections. 

Kyu: In that sense, one of the things to be thankful about amid the pandemic would be the “role and use of digital online platforms.” I believe that we will have many online international exchange projects including residencies, early development of creative works through international collaboration and research labs. 

It was really challenging to organize this year’s PAMS on a digital online platform. This experience gave me a big lesson. As digital online platforms are likely to play an important role in ensuring the sustainability of international exchange and mobility, it is necessary to study the diverse uses of the existing media and technologies (e.g. websites, social networking services, Zoom, Google Meet and Airmeet). If we are to make a new digital platform, it is important to develop proper technology tools. But what should be done before that is an in-depth discussion on the philosophy, strategy or role of the platform. And it is essential to start planning in collaboration with technology experts at the early stage of technological development.

At the end of 2020, we had an occasion to consider questions of the year. Amid the pandemic, the interviewees have rediscovered their neighbors, their cities and Earth. And they asked questions about how they could rediscover the performing arts. Now, we have more questions than before. These are the questions we used for the conversations. 

Questions We Shared during the Conversations

Our Current State after the Onset of COVID-19 

Q. How has COVID-19 influenced your life?
Q. How was your experience of quarantines and lockdowns?
Q. What are the most important issues for you these days, as producers and artists?
Q. Was there any change in the social role you had set?
Q. Could you tell us about your organization’s change and response amid the pandemic?
Q. What should we do to ensure a collective recovery and sustainability?
Q. What did you gain from the crisis?
Q. Is there any value you discovered these days?
Q. What could we do concretely for change?

Changes in the Arts Scene and New Topics

Q. How have the private and public sectors responded since the onset of the pandemic? 
Q. How have arts and culture policies changed since the onset of the pandemic?
Q. How is the performing arts scene applying new safety regulations?
Q. How has people’s changed perception of public places and spaces influenced the performing arts?
Q. How have changes in politics and society influenced the arts?
Q. What could be public theaters’ roles and responsibilities during the pandemic?
Q. How are networks and platforms changing during the pandemic?
Q. How are audiences’ attitude and perception changing?
Q. What should we do to meet audiences physically again?
Q. What role are partners’ solidarity and cooperation playing in overcoming the crisis?
Q. What are the new stories that are developed these days? How is your perspective of work changing?
Q. How would the performing arts change in the future? What could be our future challenges?
Q. Is there any new art form or anything you have discovered since the onset of the pandemic?
Q. What would be the potential of research and investment combining the arts and technology and that of digitization?
Q. Have you seen the strengthening of cooperation, investment and support combining the arts and technology? Do we need a new support system?
Q. What do you think of the arts in digital and online settings?
Q. What could be the limitations and potential of the arts in digital and online settings?
Q. What would be the role of the contemporary arts and artists after the onset of the crisis?
Q. What should do to ensure a sustainable arts ecosystem?

New Reasons and Styles of International Mobility 

Q. What were the limitations and problems of the existing international exchange?
Q. What could be a new methodology for international exchange?
Q. What should we do to maintain the network of international cooperation and solidarity?
Q. What changes are needed for international exchange to ensure symbiotic solidarity?
Q. What would be the potential and limitations of international exchanges on online platforms?
Q. Why do we still need to engage in exchanges and collaborations?
Q. What would be “connection” and “solidarity” as a collective response to the crisis?
Q. What would be “connection” and “solidarity” pursuing the discovery of new art forms?
Q. What should we do to ensure sustainable connection and solidarity?
Q. How could Asia form solidarity?