I have had many conversations over the years about the origins of some of South Leeds’ more ingrained issues and their seemingly intractable nature. These conversations have been with people living at the heart of it alongside myself, as well as those on the outside looking in. I speak on a regular basis with members of the local council and those living at the sharp end of the wedge, as you might expect the reasoning varies wildly depending on the outlook.
What is not under dispute is the fact that South Leeds does have many serious issues to deal with, what is debatable though, is to what degree it is better or worse than other areas of Leeds or the UK and how do we then discuss this and express such issues to the outside world.
‘The daily newspapers talk of everything except the daily’
Georges Perec; The Infra-Ordinary
It was good to see Cllr’s Carlisle and Wray both taking umbrage at what Cllr Wray characterised as clickbait, an expected ‘hatchet job’ by the Leeds Live news outlet in their recent article on life in South Leeds. Whilst the issue points out many of the serious problems faced by those of us who live here it also does a great dis-service to the area, and serves to further entrench the views of those from outside of the area who have an unrealistic idea of what South Leeds is, or crucially could be like. Whilst it is important to acknowledge the rum goings on in the darker corners, it is more important to present to the world the possibilities of the future rather than dwelling upon the past. But how do we do this?
The ability of people to gather and acknowledge common interests is key to creating a community. This happens in a limited way with things such as sporting events but such events could be seen as a model for how things could work at a more local level when removed from the constraints of commerce.
Since the advent of social media the atomisation of society has been rapidly accelerated. Don’t get me wrong, the nature of people to want to inhabit their own space without interference has always been there, and being able to do so is an important necessity, but how do we ensure that it does not tip over into being a society that is incapable of meaningful communication. So who are the real enemies? I would suggest that it is those who would make hay from the misfortune of others, all the while perpetuating the stereotypes that prevent improvement of those that they critique. We must ensure that this feeling of the battle being lost from the start is not passed on to us so that we become our own worst enemies. One has to be able to imagine a future in order to start planning for it.
In taking back control we must not only control the narrative but also the environment. It is essential that we create an environment in which people can meet and feel safe doing so. We must find our common ground and ways in which to gather around these things. If we view society as the body and people as the individual limbs and organs that allow the body to move and survive, we must see a lack of social interaction as atrophy, the body rejecting its constituent parts until they whither and die. But life should not just be about surviving, in order to improve we must be able to thrive. To protect the body from atrophy we must use every part of it in service of our community and ourselves. It is about finding ways in which we can collectively create coping mechanisms that allow us to move forward, out of the stage in which we merely survive into that in which we are able to thrive.
Over the years, we at BasementArtsProject have staged a number of exhibitions relating to societal issues, at a local and national level. It is always a risk producing art that addresses contentious issues, but it is the ideal medium for presenting people with concepts without the need to take a position on any given subject. This is not a cowardly fence-sitting exercise, but a way of persuading people to come up with their own ideas and opinions. In this way art becomes a vehicle for debate rather than a grenade of opinions thrown into a crowded room by the media who then leave, closing the door behind them. When I look back on those exhibitions, at the people in the room viewing the work and the conversations that I have had with them, it was a very different scenario than that which was happening about those said same subjects online and in the media. The heat and anger was diffused by the face-to-face interactions. That is not to say there was no tension, but the debate was productive and allowed for an atmosphere of contemplation in relation to the issues at hand. And this is where we need to be; in a position where we can defend ourselves against the slings and arrows of those that would seek to create division, or look down upon others. This naturally involves bringing back the means of face-to-face interaction, looking outward at the landscape with its population and running towards it with outstretched arms and open minds.
See you on the outside…
