The Jesus of Rio Syndrome

This article first appeared in ‘The Adult Learner’ 2000 under the title "The Jesus of Rio Syndrome: Colonisation tendencies in community arts work, community development and in education



The last five years in Ireland [1995 - 2000] has seen a phenomenal growth in community arts practice and also in the number of adult and community educators working in the country. In addition, on any given week-end there will be at least two job vacancies for project leaders, project co-ordinators and community education or arts workers in the Sunday papers. It looks as if this area is the fastest growing sector in Irish industry, helped in no small way by the influx of European capital funding to the country, and especially to the regions, over the past six years.

Taken together with the facts that there are now in excess of thirty (mostly new) arts centres in the country, and that training programmes in facilitation, community work and community arts are more numerous, it all paints a picture of a vibrant, socially-conscious and dynamic network of community development. This implies that there is a growing, equally dynamic and socially-conscious network of animateurs and facilitators at work in the field. This there is. And it is now more relevant than ever to stop and ask ourselves what exactly we are doing.

In workshops given since the early nineties to trainers in the adult and community education field, and to trainers in the community arts sector, I have asked participants to describe how they see themselves at work and to move towards a depiction of their vision of their role. The depiction is done visually by sculpting another participant into an image representing how they see themselves. By far the most popular image sculpted is that of a person standing, feet firmly grounded, head held high, with warm smile and wide, outstretched, inviting arms. It is an image full of energy, depicting the animated joy of working in what is perceived to be a loving and giving capacity. It reminds one of the Jesus of Rio, high over the city, arms inviting the populace to come and to be saved.

That such striking similarities occur between an essentially secular image and an overtly religious one, I feel, is not a co-incidence. It points to perhaps the greatest danger facing community artists and educators in our sector. Underpinning the philosophy behind the religious image is the notion that an individual has to make the great leap of faith and trust, and thereby place his or her possibility of redemption in the hands of a greater force than themselves, specifically a divine one. In adult education and in community arts there is much the same notion abroad, though it is not often articulated in such clear-cut terms, nor is it indeed even consciously felt. The self-image most commonly expressed by trainers is one inherent in which is the idea that they can empower, offer a form of salvation, redeem, or even cure and solve. And this vision is not limited to trainers alone. Funding agencies, project evaluators and project commissioning boards regularly judge a person's suitability for community development work by the extent to which the artist/trainer has managed to solve or cure a problem, or by their track record of empowering others in the past. The project is most usually deemed successful if the aims and objectives of the project organisers have been met. And in most cases that usually means evidence that a group has moved from one way of looking at themselves (their own) to another way (the project organisers'). Rarely do we stop and ask such fundamental questions as:
· How can I empower anyone other than myself?
· What does it mean to usher in a new concept of living and of self evaluation to a group who have not used this way of seeing before?
· What am I doing in the name of personal development? Is there implicit in my practice of personal development the idea that the person needs to be fixed or cured and that they are stuck in a bad or wrong place to begin with?
· How much of my work is designed to encourage the person to adapt themselves to society? (Solution: closed / product focused).
· Should my work be designed to encourage the person to adapt society to themselves? (Revolution: open-ended / process centred).

There is a real danger in community arts and in adult and community education that we, the practitioners, will end up the agents of a subtle colonising regime, working with love and compassion to mould Irish society into one model of Irishness - a liberal, middle-class, well schooled, dependent culture with values drawn from the well of ownership and property, and norms based solely on the idea of progression and success. That we follow models of practice which give importance to one form of behaviour over another is evidence of this. Drug related crime is only drug related crime from one particular point of view. From another point of view it is generating income. Unemployment can be seen as simply another phrase for not paying taxes. It doesn't necessarily mean not working, paid or otherwise.

There is no doubt, however, that there are marginalized communities and individuals in Irish society. There is no doubt that personal and community empowerment is a worthy ideal. It becomes a suspect and altogether different matter, however, when that empowerment is defined only in terms of removing the status of marginalisation by means of adapting to the wider community, and accepting the wider community's norms and values. I don't think there are many adult educators or community artists who would actually subscribe consciously to this philosophy. There are many though who unwittingly put it into practice. It becomes a problem when the educator/artist/ trainer imagines that they are 'empowering' when in fact they are not. And to be fair to ourselves, most of us do this in ignorance, operating with the best will and intentions in the world.

By giving so much of the self to work, by acting from what is thought to be love, the educator can become locked into the trap of creating a paralytic dependence in the heart of the learner, and so assist the forces, attitudes, systems and institutions which have already oppressed them. This is the least of the damage. It can be further compounded by the educator or artist forcibly leading the learner into a system which will instantly reject them once the educator/artist leaves and returns to 'save' another client. Such an instance occurred to me in my practice. I fuelled in unemployed adults the desire to go to college, filled out their forms, helped them through copious mock interviews, didn't listen and assured them they'd be fine when they said they wouldn't be. I even went so far as to promote a graduate lifestyle at the expense of other ones (explaining that doors would open, opportunities would flock, money could be made etc if you attained an academic qualification). The reason I did this was (a) it had happened to me, and (b) I thought I wanted for the best for them, and since this had been the best for me, it would surely benefit them. In other words, I became the Jesus of Rio, saying place your faith in me and the kingdom of third level shall be thine. They did. It wasn't. Most of them left after three months. Only those who could cope with the lifestyle and knew the language in which to operate came anywhere close to succeeding.

Reflecting upon this I realised I had encouraged enormous dependency amongst my students. By doing this I had neglected to stimulate independence. Encouraging independence can be frustrating for an artist/educator, especially if you come from a different background to the people with whom you work. They might want to remove you. Challenge you. Revolt against you and yours. It is almost always 'safer' to absorb them into your own world and let them make the best of it. And some of them will succeed brilliantly, thereby justifying your practice, methods, function and sense of self worth. Is it morally acceptable to use groups or individuals from backgrounds different to yours in order to make you feel good about yourself? Perhaps it is, if that's what your morality is. At the end of the day, one must always be honest.

The clearest example of empowerment gone wrong is often shown in the least remarkable acts and attitudes of group work. Take for example the various methods of introduction. Most projects start with the artist/educator arriving at the venue, hall or room in advance of the group. There they set it up according to what they think will best suit the particular activity planned. Most of us have long since moved away - in righteous horror - from the 'rows of desks and chairs pattern' of seating. We prefer today, in our enlightened ways, to form circles and remove barriers such as desks and tables. (I am regularly staggered by how Friere's complex notion of the culture circle has been sadly reduced to simply meaning the way one arranges one's chairs). We may even stimulate comfort by providing scented candles, cushions and background music. (If this sounds wildly exaggerated, I can vouch for the fact that not only have I experienced it but, sadly, I often used to practise it) All of this is an effort to make the group feel like they can relax and belong comfortably to this place, where in sessions from now they will begin to exercise their own empowerment. When the group arrives, they will almost always sit where seating is indicated and so, apparently, justify our arrangement.

However, in this activity, can be seen the actions of subtle and perhaps unintentional colonisation. We are arranging the geography of a place to suit our own vision and have not consulted firstly with those whom we seek to help. Often, a group arriving at a pre-ordered scene like this will move on automatic pilot into a role of subservient dependence. Implicit in the ordering of the place by the facilitator, no matter how enlightened, is the notion that they know best, thus reinforcing the Banking Model image of trainer/educator from which we are usually at pains to distance ourselves. It is better - and harder - by far, not to go near the room or venue and all arrive together. All enter together and all shape the environment together. If this means that the desks and chairs are aligned in force and that there is no sign at all of a circle well then so be it. This is the group's statement of where it sees itself. It can be challenged, of course. But it might remain.

In examples like this it is clear that colonisation is hardly ever obvious. If it were it would be easier to react to. Kevin Collins, in his remarkable analysis of cultural colonisation (The Cultural Conquest of Ireland) identifies five stages of colonisation. It is helpful to briefly describe them, because they become hugely pertinent when applied to education and community arts work. In talking about nations, Collins identifies the five stages as follows:

1. Physical Conquest: where the colonising nation subdues the native in a short and forceful campaign;
2. Inhibition: where the coloniser prohibits the native from expressing her/himself via their own customs, language and laws;
3. Dualism: where there is eventually a two tier society composed of a superior class (the coloniser) and an inferior class (the native);
4. Mimicry: where the native realises that the only way to survive in the new order is to adapt to it and so begins to mimic the codes and conventions of the coloniser, and
5. Alienation: where the native has become so far removed from his/her own culture and at the same time is never fully accepted into the coloniser's one that he/she is in a state of alienation.

I have found it useful to add another stage to this called Revival, where the native tries (at first in vain) to revive her own culture. They have usually come so far away from it that initial attempts are false and meaningless, being almost always defined in negative terms against the coloniser (e.g., not English). It is only when they incorporate their own present culture with that of the coloniser's that they can hope for some form of meaningful identity. It is tempting to view Ireland in the 1990's as arriving at a strong post colonial identity - whether this is the case or not remains to be seen.

The model outlined above is a very convenient framework for discussing any form of oppression. It can include material ranging from the concerns of feminism, to something as intimate as our own personal relationships - we have all been 'swept off our feet', have 'fallen' in love with someone forceful and vibrant. And we have all adapted ourselves, at some stage, to become more like the person who 'swept us off our feet'.

In an educational environment, the model draws attention to the ways in which we can colonise our students, groups, participants.

1. Physical Conquest: We might sail into a community or group full of enthusiasm and energy, brooking no objections to the difficulty of the project ahead, and effectively overpower the learner or group with our energy.

2. Inhibition: We could then inhibit the learner's expression by putting down their methods of seeing themselves and their ways of regulating their lives. Nothing, for instance, colonises quite as effectively as grammar, accent and speech. Rules and regulations regarding correct group procedure can often be used to inhibit. Favouring one person's ability, articulation etc over another's is also an effective method of inhibiting (in this case the person not being favoured).

3. Dualism: By promoting the lifestyle we lead, the attitude and moral values we hold, at the expense of those of the group we are putting into place a dualistic system. We often do this unconsciously. Working with offenders, people with addictions, the unemployed, etc. can place us into temptingly self righteous roles where we implicitly indicate that our value system and codes of behaviour are model ones and have kept us out of the kind of trouble they've found themselves in. This is particularly tempting for artists and educators who have never been offenders, addicts and unemployed (in the usual sense of the terms). Again, this kind of thinking is rooted in the philosophy that the people with whom we work have a problem which needs to be cured or fixed. If that is where we are coming from as educators, then naturally we will want to offer solutions.

4. Mimicry: Rewarding those who respond to our methods and promoting them as examples of model behaviour can often serve to instil mimicry.


5. Alienation: Leaving the learner/participant to cope on their own, in an area which we have assured them is safe to do so (but which isn't) can result in the learner feeling abandoned, and lost between two barely recognisable systems. A good example of this from the theatre is Willy Russell's play Educating Rita where Rita is not fully accepted into academia because she's the wrong age and at the same time she is viewed as a freak in the world she came from.

In arts work as in education, a long project can provide the moratorium for the participant to undergo enormous change. It is fairly critical that we facilitate independence of thought and action here so that the change, if it arises, is managed and developed within boundaries which the participant has established for themselves, and not ones which we have led them to believe are there. Most of us will not be around when the project is over and there is no use planning to be. This serves only to further encourage dependence.

Many arts workers and educators are well aware of the dangers outlined above. They have several years of practice where they learned the hard way to work from the bottom up, putting Friere's ideals into motion in a variety of astonishing work. One of the most interesting methods of combating the potential pitfalls of the Jesus of Rio Syndrome is the personalised learning systems, developed in France and being piloted in Ireland. Under the banner of Leonardo, the EU fund for training and development, the department of Education liased with Kildare VEC to pilot the personalised learning system in two Irish VTOS programmes. It is called the Made to Measure project and briefly, it focuses on (a) Finding Work in the Theatre: a personalised guide (Newbridge) and (b) Becoming Computer Literate and IT Fluent (Abbeyleix). Its partners are located in Finland, France and Italy.

A Personalised Learning System is one which provides materials for the students use in such a way that the learner can choose the method of learning best suited to their needs and advance at their own pace and their own level through it. Crucially, the tutor / community artist here is seen as another resource, albeit the most important resource (among others such as information technology, manuals, databases, other learners, etc). The educator's role is not a leading one, in the sense as depicted above. They are available to the learner as a resource when the learner feels that they need the tutor, and not the other way around. This does not imply that the educator / artist is as the learner's beck and call, however. In much the same way that many resources are not immediately available (the library may be closed, another user may be on the computer with the internet, etc) so neither is the tutor always immediately available. He or she works to a given timetable and is available during those period for consultation whenever the need arises. Artists and workers in less structured environments have being doing this for years, moving, for example, from painter to painter when the need arises. So too, after a fashion, have Montessori teachers and community development workers. There is a certain amount of intervention required, especially when the educator or artist senses a learner is having difficulty attending programmes, workshops or projects. In these cases the question asked by the personalised learning system is 'How can we change the programme or project to personalise it to your needs?' rather than 'why can't you try a little harder to be active on this programme?'.

The programme of work is agreed with the learner before the project commences and reviewed periodically by both. The system is used in education to encourage the development of equality of relationship between all those involved and to encourage independence at all stages of the work. The greatest difficulty facing the artist or educator is accepting the fact that they will not be needed in the same capacity as they are needed in other systems. And ultimately, realising that they have succeeded when they are not needed at all. It is a form of educational anarchy (the system which teaches best is the system which teaches least).

If we are to deal adequately with the challenges facing us in the growth of the community arts, community development and adult education sectors today, we have to begin to put into place systems of learning and of working which are focused not on solving problems but on assisting revolution. Realising that we can not empower others, whether we are using arts or training, is critical to our development of the sector. For years, the community arts movement has been stating the primacy of process over product, and emphasising the importance of individual growth according to individual's own yard-stick. Getting in the way of this is the promotion of the model that we are here primarily to redress societal ills, shorten the dole queues, rehabilitate offenders and addicts, and make our society a better place in which to live by the fixing the wrong-doers. Personalised Learning Systems ask us to focus instead on changing the system and leaving the learner alone, pretty much as they are, to learn, within the new system.

However, assisting revolution is always difficult. The place where it will get the least amount of support is from the State. Experience the way state funding is divided between community arts practice and professional arts practice in Ireland to see how strongly the balance is weighed against revolution. It is refreshing therefore to see state support for Personalised Learning systems such as the Made to Measure project. Jesus of Rio is, for a change, taking a leap of faith into the arms of the people.




Peter Hussey is Artistic Director of Crooked House Theatre Company. He is also an adult and community educator, working with NUI Maynooth, Kildare VEC and freelance around the country. He specialises in community theatre and creative methods of facilitation.


Reading

Collins, Kevin: The Cultural Conquest of Ireland Mercier Press: Cork: 1990

Boal, Augusto: Games for Actors and Non-actors Routldge: London: 1992

Brook, Peter: There Are No Secrets: thoughts on acting and theatre Methuen: London; 1993

Cairns, David and Richards, Shaun: Writing Ireland: colonialism, nationalism and
culture
Manchester University Press: 1988

An Chomhairle Ealaíon Views of Theatre in Ireland 1995: report of the Arts Council Theatre Review

CAFÉ 'Café News' Vol ii No 7: December 1998