- Do we first need a stable Singapore's cultural identity before we can talk about the arts? What then, do we have to sing/write/paint/act about? The laudable successes of the artistic local film industry do give us hope, but in the other genres, the lack of a distinct national culture seems to impede artistic development somewhat. Do we need a Singaporean Sibelius to create something out of nothing first?
- What will our creative talents showcase? The virtuosic Singaporean pianist playing Chopin? A fresh interpretation of Don Giovanni by the SLO? We have the performers, but do we have a content and context that is truly ours?
- IMO, the masterplan have to start with a well-developed and thorough plan for arts education in school first. Without an appreciation of the arts and a recognition of its value (economical or otherwise), any plan will fall flat with a nation of philistines.
- Growing artists must have an avenue to pursue professional development here too. I am not sure, but I suspect that the majority of prominent artists in the various artistic genres here are educated overseas. It is probably a sign that local arts education institute falls short of international standards.
- What will turning Singapore 'into a wireless nation' do for the arts or for national creativity?
Just three hours after I wrote the above, I chanced upon a book review of 'Visual Shock: A History of Art Controversies in American Culture' at the Boston Globe, detailing the history of official resistance and censorship against modernist art. This quote from a judge involved in one of those legal battles to import modern art into the country: "conceptions of what is art and what is beautiful are not static. They change with time", is clearly relevant to Singapore. Progress cannot come without risks in adopting new ways of thinking. The country should be as daring in letting artistic endeavours break new grounds as it is willing to develop the
No comments:
Post a Comment