Is a National Strategy the way forward?

Recently I attended the Museums and Galleries Scotland National Strategy consultation in Edinburgh. Here are some reflections on the afternoon…

On entering the old gym hall at the National Galleries of Scotland for the consultation I wasn’t quite sure what to expect.I knew that Edinburgh being Edinburgh, I might see a few folk I recognised and would definitely meet plenty more who I did not, seeing as though only two consultations for the whole of Scotland had been planned – one in Edinburgh  on the 14th October and one coming up in Glasgow on the 2nd November 2011. However, of the 30-odd people who attended (and many had journeyed quite some distance), I didn’t recognise anyone. Then it hit me – of course I didn’t know anyone, my background is in working for contemporary arts institutions, and correct me if I’m wrong, but I didn’t see many gallery representatives there (except for one representative of the National Galleries of Scotland). Now, perhaps other factors were at play here – again, there was only one consultation session for Edinburgh, noteably the majority of Scotland’s contemporary art organisations are in Glasgow (and hey, who knows, maybe all the Edinburgh professionals were planning on car pooling?), maybe it came down to advertising of the event, and let’s face it, it was held on a Friday afternoon.

It started with a rather dry introduction from BOP Consulting to the background of the consultation and how the process would be implemented, which MGS sees as a building on the current strategy “to help take it to the next level”. The basic jist of it seemed to be about providing the Scottish government with justification of why we should keep continuing to get paid for doing the things we already do.

We had all been given draft copies of the National Strategy, considered the “collective efforts of the steering group” (steering group details are here) and were soon sorted into break out groups so we could tackle 3 main questions MGS had in store, which were something like: overall, are these the right strategy objectives? how will you be able to contribute to delivering the objectives? what support would you need to help realise these ideas?

The conversations that followed were filled with attacks on what seemed a directionless document for stating the obvious, using excessive jargon and repeating itself. There was a consensus that the 12 objectives divided under the subheadings “understanding our past”, “shaping our future”, “connecting people and places” and “sharing our culture with the world”, should be narrowed down to 3-4. Additionally, participants felt that it would be extremely difficult to contribute to the delivery of the objectives in their current state and it was even harder to comment on what support would be needed to realise the overarching ideas with little to no information given about the proposed new National Development Body. Many felt that perhaps that should have been on the agenda for consultation also.

Several themes seemed to emerge when the breakout workshops came together at the end of the day to share and discuss their conversations. Firstly most participants agreed that there should be some kind of public consultation as the strategy seemed to come from the position of the producer, rather than the user or visitor. There needed to be more clarity in the language used, phrases such as “to foster a culture of learning” were too vague and the strategy ran the risk of becoming meaningless rather than serving as a tool that could potentially help museums or galleries re-write or develop new policies. And lastly, it was felt that the strategy didn’t recognise the current climate and issues the sector operates within, including significant changes that technology, for example, has brought about.

But returning to my original query about the attendance of contemporary arts professionals, it does beg the question: do contemporary arts galleries and museums see themselves represented by Museums and Galleries Scotland in the first place? And if not, then why? And in either case, would it not seem fitting to attend a National Strategy consultation to help shape the remit of the new National Development Body to include advocacy and representation of Scottish contemporary art galleries and museums? Or are they represented enough by other bodies such as VAGA and Creative Scotland?

I’ve always considered Scotland to be a country that identified as a place that both contributes significantly  to contemporary art whilst embracing and celebrating its  heritage. I think the National Strategy is a real opportunity for contemporary arts professionals, both emerging and established, to have their voices heard within a larger cultural sector. Curators in particular should be informed and enthusiastic about opportunities to improve the organisations we work with (many emerging curators work in non-curatorial positions in a variety of cultural institutions) and should also use this as an opportunity to work in different ways – National Strategies, whether successful or not, can prove valuable for reflecting on current practices (whether within or outwith an institution) and for thinking about contemporary art outside a vacuum of contemporary art.

More information on the strategy can be found here.