The first idea that really struck me in this writing was that of prostitution and the decision to help and protect the women in this situation instead of demonising them. This is a little bit of a different situation than what was talked about in Grant Kester’s text, but it is related and the idea of giving sex workers resources rather than incarcerating or punishing them is an idea I’ve been thinking about for a few years now. My family recently spent a couple of years living in Amsterdam where prostitution is legal. In fact, it has become somewhat of an art form; this is very true in the Red Light District in Amsterdam especially as there are prostitutes in windows who are reminiscent of statues or paintings and, after some time, you stop noticing them and they become like a picture that’s in your home or office. Sex workers in the Netherlands have insurance, are paid well, and have an incredible union. The problem is the Netherlands not only legalised prostitution, they basically legalised human trafficking so I’ve been very interested for some time in looking more into that and how to protect sex workers and stop human traffickers. Last year, one of my classmates did a piece that was based on an interview with a woman who was abducted and sold into a prostitution ring in Amsterdam and it was one of the most powerful pieces of theatre I have ever seen. I’m very intrigued by how the horror of being abused at your place of work or being a victim of human trafficking can be viscerally attacked through theatre and how the intimacy of theatre can bring crimes against sex workers into a more empathetic light. A question I have from this section in Kester’s work is how the people who set up these programs came to that conclusion and how they facilitated those conversations.
The second idea that jumped out at me was conversations between cops and disenfranchised youth. Especially now, it feels like tensions between cops and young people of colour are reaching a boiling point and it doesn’t really look like there’s a solution in sight. I’m amazed that something like that was able to happen. I’m very curious about how these conversations went and what was said during them; and if they incited any immediate change in this community.
The last thing that I really dwelled on after reading this piece was that these projects and artist actually managed to do things that made a difference and created conversations between people in positions of power that led to change. A lot of times, especially at CalArts, political art feels like “preaching to the choir” and the only people who go to see politically charged theatre are people who care strongly about that particular issue. So this concept of actually having the influence and reach to do something begs me to ask the question: how do we do that? How do we make sure our art is making its way to people who are actually going to be affected by it?
Comments
Post a Comment