To Recolonise or Decolonise That Is The Question

The following piece was written by Bruce Davies, Curator and Chair of BasementArtsProject. It has been written as something of an analysis of the events surrounding the Black Lives Matter demonstrations this year. It is the 3rd of 3 pieces that has tried to chart the progress of events and make sense of them from what is a white and middle-aged, working class perspective. If in reading this you find any factual errors or misinterpretations please feel free to contact me and let me know. Also if anyone wishes to start a dialogue over any elements within this, or the other two texts, again feel free to contact me. I am happy to both converse and learn from the different perspectives that other people can bring to this subject.

My initial response to the guerrilla tactic of Marc Quinn and Jen Reid after the tearing down of Colston’s statue was to applaud it. My response to the nature of that statue’s disposal remains the same; I am glad that it was used to draw so much attention to that which has gone unremarked upon in wider society for far too long. With regards to how I feel about the Marc Quinn piece, the winds of cognitive dissonance quickly blew my initial feelings of elation away as I realised just how nuanced the debate is. Not that I ever doubted that the subject of race was a difficult one, fraught with misinterpretation at every level, but this particular incident drove home just how big the iceberg is beneath the surface.

Despite having grown up in a very white working/middle class environment I have over the course of my life, almost half a century to this point, witnessed the kind of opinions that fester in areas where other cultures are not present. Despite rarely seeing a non-white face on the Wirral during the 1980’s / 90’s, although I am sure they were there, you could still find racist graffiti daubed on walls and underpasses around the housing estates. In actual fact you rarely ever heard an accent that was not local either, indicating that the problem extended to white Europeans and even people from other areas of the UK. Regardless of this insular background the moment I went to art college, still on the Wirral, in 1989 I was awakened to different ways of thinking and my interest in the Civil Rights movement took off. At school I had always enjoyed black music as much as anything else in the form of artists such as Prince and Janet Jackson. By the time I reached art college this had extended to Jazz through Miles Davis and John Coltrane, Hip-hop through Public Enemy, Ice T, N.W.A et al and soul through the likes of Curtis Mayfield and Isaac Hayes. I had always loved Disco. Through my listening habits I became interested in the writings and speeches of Martin Luther King, Malcom X, Angela Davis, Iceberg Slim and the films of Spike Lee. Much later on James Baldwin became my favourite writer, speaker.

I talk about the circumstances around my growing up at this point, not to score woke points but to make a point that my interest and support for anti-racist movements, along with many other, what would these days be considered left wing, interests have always been there regardless of what was happening around me.

Through the 1990’s I saw tension rise and L.A go up in flames. Through the beating of Rodney King and other such notorious events on the other side of the Atlantic my interest went deeper, despite the fact that none of these things, including musical tastes, found much sympathy in the area in which I lived, save for the friends I had at art college. Of course it was not just the other side of the Atlantic that dominated in terms of race fuelled hatred, as it was the death of Stephen Lawrence that piqued the national interest in this country. The case of Stephen Lawrence was not the first event of its kind in this country in modern times, far from it, but it was certainly a turning point at which the media attention made people sit up and take note.

Since then it is hard to know how far we have come as a country. To be honest it feels like a case of one step forward, two steps back. The UK often tries to justify itself as being ‘less racist than the US’ but that argument frankly, ‘doth butter no parsnips’. I do not believe for a moment that one country can be more racist than another. If there is an undercurrent of apologists making excuses for a system that disadvantages people over the colour of their skin within any country, then that country is racist - no less and no more than any other. In the UK the protests that have sprung up since the murder of George Floyd have taken a much more English turn in terms of how the battle against racism is expressed, but the basic tenet of the argument -Britain is a racist country- is no less evident.

In the US the struggle is a continuous cycle of violence, driven no doubt by the personal ownership of guns within society. The danger to life is immediate. This is then backed up by a rigid network of police and military powers for whom there seems to be no consequences for their actions, and also a plethora of shadowy non-state actors who turn up to disrupt the actions of protestors before slinking back into the darkness. Paranoia? I don’t think so, proof has been found in many circumstances, but typically the naysayers stick their fingers in their ears and raise their voices to drown out any opposition.

Similarly in the UK, protests have been met with the voices of the right shouting their objections at every available opportunity, but with a number of significant differences. Here the focus has turned not to recent history but to the last 400 years of history and an analysis of monumental sculpture. In doing so, this has been picked up on by the far-right as a way of suggesting that the ‘radical left’ are attempting to “erase history” in their suggestions that many recipients of monumental statuary were not actually deserving of their status. Of course the statuary in question is itself responsible for the erasure of history, an inconvenient truth that no right wing voice will ever accept as part of the argument. Whoever saw a monument to a wealthy landowner that talked about his philanthropic donations, and then went on to tell how he did that through the abuse and eventual deaths of thousands of slaves. The answer of course is never, who wants their thunderous glory stolen by the ill gotten gains of countless deaths, the destruction of families and centuries of untold misery.

The analysis of statuary is of course present in the US, with many statues toppled and defaced in mass protest, whilst the numerous victims of US state violence and oppression also have a significant voice in the UK protests. Despite the shifting focus, it is these two pinnacles of white oppression that are the glue binding together the potentially disparate actions of a group of people dispersed geographically and politically. This is the nature of the diaspora.

Recently I responded to a post on Twitter in which someone commented

“17% of our population live in social housing. Diversity is often spoken about in terms of race, how about trying it terms of housing? Does the House of Commons or even the Lords have 17% of people from social housing? Discuss…"

In my response I suggested that

“The comparison here is not really about race diversity vs class diversity. Really it is about race, class, disability, sexuality & gender diversity vs an elite selection system. Making distinction between under represented groups just assists government w/ their divisive agenda”.

The conversation continued with the respondent suggesting that they were

“Interesting points, I feel that its [sic] mainly people from poorer backgrounds that aren’t represented in politics, whatever their race, sexuality etc is.”

Me: “Exactly, which is why I think it is important to consider class as an overarching factor in all of the other considerations. We must look for white working-class, Black working-class, LGBTQI+ working-class. We need to get behind all of these people”. ETC . . . . Of course this is a conversation between two white, working class, middle-aged males, the point being though, one to do with class solidarity and how we perceive that concept.

The idea that the white working classes have more in common with the likes of our current, or any government past, present or future, is a case of wishful thinking on their part, yet at the last election -Dec 2019- many people in this bracket voted for a government that would hang them out to dry at the first available opportunity. The emergence of Covid-19 in early 2020, although many knew about its presence in Nov/Dec 2019, proved this to be the truth of the matter. All of those people who had ‘lent them (The Conservatives) their vote’ and brought down what was referred to as the red wall in areas of the north found out to their detriment what that would actually mean.

And yet still we see it on both sides of the Atlantic, the scenario in which, despite being kicked from pillar to post like an abused animal, people cling to their tribes and vote the abusers in as leaders, misplaced one- way solidarity between the working poor and the establishment because of skin colour, rather than with the working class of other cultures and backgrounds. Always come the excuses that ‘we are not sheeple like the soft liberal left’ and that they do not want scroungers on benefits or migrants over-running the country. The belief amongst the working and middle classes that Britain is somehow a meritocracy; one that will some day sort the wheat from the chaff, the workers from the shirkers, comes from the lie that is continually sold to us that with hard work you can achieve all the success that you could ever want. This of course ignores that fact that that we do not all start from the same point. An oft used analogy is that of a race being run where several people are sent out first and given a significant head start on everyone else. This of course gives them a lead that can never be closed. Hard work leads to only one thing, more hard work. Of course hard work is no bad thing, and many people working in the arts have no objections to hard work, to be paid properly for it, or at all, would be preferable; but from the people that I have worked with here at BasementArtsProject I can say that the economics of the situation has never put anyone off from doing the things that they want to achieve. In this sense the notion of achievement overrides the financial implications. The overarching style of leadership across the world is based on the principle of divide and conquer.

If we take for instance our current leadership, we can see how the class divide is responsible for the starting advantage in the race that takes us from birth through to death, and how those that would cite hard work as the key to success have no idea what hard work is. Their soft, white putty faces mumble incoherent diatribes against the working classes, people of colour and anyone else that they cannot identify with, whilst their smooth callous-free hands sign the papers that send dying and disabled people back to jobs as a form of respite care. Whilst it is an extreme connection to make I am going to do it anyway and point out the sign above the gates of Auschwitz-Birkenau proclaimed ‘Arbeit Macht Frei’ - Work Makes You Free. The most cynical lie ever told, emblazoned above the gates of an evil place, which for millions who entered was a one way trip.

So we must be careful when it comes to class identification and solidarity, and understand that our class solidarity, as white working class, really should be with the migrants, the people of other colours, the poor, the disabled. They are the people who, when we are at our lowest will be the most willing to pick us up, to show support and understanding. The ruling classes are not interested in working class acts of solidarity, they will borrow our vote and leave, shutting the door firmly behind them and making sure that we cannot follow where they go.

And so to return to my initial thoughts around Marc Quinn and Jen Reid, sorry about the class detour but I feel it was relevant, and where my thoughts were led in the weeks directly after that incident.

Despite the fact that Colston’s statue had been a contentious issue for many years, certainly amongst the citizens of Bristol, the decision to remove Quinn’s statue of Reid was made as quickly as it had been put up - overnight. The town council removed it the next day. Watching various news reports and reading the commentary on social media platforms the response seemed overwhelmingly positive; locals saying how much they liked it, many thought it was a powerful image, iconic even; although the Leader of Bristol City Council Marvin Rees, himself the first person of black African heritage to be elected to such a position in a major European city, was not in favour.

Then came the inevitable backlash, but not from the far-right. The debate moved on to the idea of colonisation and the white, male, blue-chip gallery artist moving in on a media worthy moment and co-opting the situation for their own end. My initial love of this moment was immediately brought into question and the internal conflict began; I didn’t want to see this as cynical because it seemed so positive, yet had I been played? Had my willingness to engage with this subject allowed me to have my eye wiped. Was being white and male a part of that? I hoped not. I have myself quoted James Baldwin in previous writings on this subject when he says “the colonizers bring to the colonized a new culture to replace the old one, a culture not being something given to a people, but, on the contrary and by definition, something that they make themselves.” Had I fallen into a trap?

One question raised in my mind was that of the position of the establishment artist in relation to social action. Once you are part of the establishment can you then do things that are anti-establishment without it seeming fraudulent, disingenuous, calculated and cynical? I guess it is here where I retain my original viewpoint and say yes they can. Publicity is a byproduct of any activity that a well established figure engages with. I think it would be unfortunate if we then had to discount any social actions that they undertook because they can only be seen as cynical marketing ploys. The act of creating this monument however temporary is actually less cynical than charity pop singles such as ‘Do They Know It’s Christmas’ (for example). Whilst the audience that buys music by the artists that feature in such travesties as the Band Aid project are asked to put their hands in their pockets to fund the charity, here Quinn, Reid and the artists gallery funded the activity, not requiring anything from the audience other than engagement with an idea.

In the case of ‘A Surge of Power (Jen Reid)’ we must take the artist at face value and accept his stated intent for the work. It is important that he is given that much credit at least, even if we wish to then argue over the merits of its execution. Taking into account Baldwin’s opinions on erasing culture by replacing it, and how Quinn’s statue takes one form of colonisation and replaces it with a new form of colonisation, the question becomes more vexed. Yes, this is another form of colonisation by white, male orientated, establishment figures replacing the one that had gone before, albeit with the involvement of a significant figure from the movement - Jen Reid. Reid was no pawn in a manipulative game of art though, she stood her ground and worked with someone to achieve something that others with lesser means could not do. Independent wealth through the gallery system allowed Quinn to produce something that, in the end, sparked many different conversations, heated debates and full on arguments. Some which centred around him, but the majority around the much broader subject of decolonisation. A significant moment in an ever growing debate was capitalised upon in a way that the independent sector could probably not do due to a lack of resources.

The artist Thomas J Price would beg to differ on this viewpoint as he has been very vocal in his criticism of Quinn’s actions saying “Marc Quinn’s sculpture was a con. A PR stunt and a con. This game, the art world, is rigged. It’s incredibly elitist and to find awareness of one’s own work you have to be incredibly careful navigating it [. . .] He arrogantly seems to think that this debate wasn’t already going on without him, but it was. I’ll leave this question open: after Quinn's stunt are there more or are there less opportunities for black artists?” Price is himself an artist of the Windrush Generation who has on past occasions shared a platform with Quinn yet he is of the opinion that “Perhaps the statue of Jen Reid, along with the Colston statue, covered in graffiti and pulled out of the river, should go in a museum. A museum to ensure we remember and hold it up for the horrendous hijacking it signifies.” This opinion is definitely a big part of the narrative around de-colonisation and I can’t help but think that Price is absolutely right, but I also think that the event that sparked his ire has led to a spotlight being shone onto yet another area that some people, probably white people on the whole, may never have thought about without this particular chain of events.

As I was writing this piece, which has taken me months of thinking about before I actually committed to writing it, I came across a news article under the #MuseumHour on Twitter which fed directly into my thoughts. An article on artnet.com stated that “The UK government has told museums and galleries, including the British Museum and Tate Gallery, not to remove statues or other objects of contested cultural heritage from display—or risk losing their public funding.” -before going on to say that organisations must “act impartially, in line with your publicly funded status, and not in a way that brings this into question.” This got me to thinking about how this relates to the activities of those who use their positions to bring awareness of such issues. This statement suggests a system that, again refuses on the most basic level to accept systemic racism and thereby insists that in order to gain funding, and we must not forget that this is public funding, paid for in taxes by you and I, that we must support racism whilst also being against it. A position that is quite obviously just not possible. As Dr Ibram X Kendi points out in a TED Lecture it is not enough to be “not racist” we must be “anti-racist”. This is a notion that Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden seems unable to grasp when he speaks from both sides of his mouth about impartiality and the need for people to learn about their history from these ‘artefacts of historical deception’ - my description not his.

Personally, I feel that Dowden does have one good point, and that is that they should not be taken away from display entirely. In fact I think that they should be placed in museums that deal with slavery in the manner that Price talks about. The nature of display should subvert their prominence prominence and place those who were enslaved by them above them. A true history of these characters should be contextualised and placed beside them so that we can see, without any shadow of a doubt, that their philanthropic behaviour was only possible through the enslavement and misery of black people. Their monuments should certainly not be monuments, on display in public places where they can still be perceived by the majority of people as benevolent overseers who worked hard to help the poor, rather the shameful, embarrassing and painful reminders of what happens when we attempt to dehumanise others.

Full GQ interview with Thomas J Price

ArtNet: The UK Government Has Warned Publicly Funded Museums to Stop Removing Controversial Statues From View

Thomas J Price website

Marc Quinn website

https://artuk.org/discover/stories/marc-quinn-public-sculpture-and-controversial-debate

Why I Had To Turn Down Band Aid: Fuse ODG - The Guardian

Live Aid: The Terrible Truth - Spin Magazine

Band Aid: In Defence of It’s Legacy - The Guardian

Further references:

Check out

Wurd Radio

Why I Am No Longer Talking To White People About Race by Reni Eddo-Lodge