Power of the arts toward social change

Click to view trailer

So we all know what a big fan I am of using creativity and the arts for social change efforts. Creative endeavors help people to think through ideas, be honest with themselves, grow, and open up to each other. And this isn't made-up malarkey.

On Wed. night, I was lucky enough to attend HBO's Latino Film Festival for the premiere of "Stages," a documentary about a theater program for senior citizens and at-risk youth. This amazing piece details the true story of how people of all ages and backgrounds are brought together and transformed through performing and speaking out.

Beautifully shot and beautifully told, the film was made by the Meerkat Media Arts Collective, a very talented group of artists who produce films collaboratively--and in this case, who meaningfully mirrored the collective theater process they were documenting.

In the film, the seniors and youth were equally surprised at how much the other group had to offer and how much they learned from each other, and together they created a community based on trust and discovery. Doesn't that sound like a great basis for the kind of thoughtful, peaceful, vibrant world we'd all like to live in?


Post Script: Just tonight, "Stages" took home the Audience Favorite and Best Documentary awards at the HBO Latino Film Festival awards ceremony! Hopefully this will just be the first stop as wider and wider audiences are moved and changed by "Stages."

My even greater hope is that our culture as a whole will value the power of the arts, and put more of our nation's wealth and respect into its support. The MetLife Foundation only gave money for one year of the Evolve Theater Project that "Stages" followed. What progress could be happening right now if they or someone else would renew this funding?

Well said

Katha Pollitt writes on the inaccuracies and "house-dividing" consequences of the feminist wave labels. Right on, well-said, thank you for putting it out there!

To society at large, feminist in-fighting and blaming only serves to highlight women's demands as disorganized at best and hysterical at worst. As a relative young'un who has instinctively resisted the wave label (yes, Katha, I *don't* think pole-dancing is "empowering"), I'm finding many young women who, like me, are turning to collaboration and understanding as the way to change.

While Tony Snow Fights Cancer, Dana Perino Takes Over the Press 'Gaggle' ...with her "Big Girl Panties" on?

According to the Washington Post, Dana Perino, deputy press secretary who's stepping in for Tony Snow, was told by Education Secretary Margaret Spellings to "Put your big-girl panties on." In the same 'tough panties' vein, PoliticsDaily has a sub-site called Woman Up. The motto: "Woman Up: Where Big-Girl Panties Are Always a Fit."

There's been some debate amongst feminist circles lately whether phrases like "woman up" and "put your big girl panties on" really do women any favors. I'm especially intrigued with the panty reference. Are we saying that being a larger, more mature woman is where the power is at? Or are we yet again just talking about something kind of petty and taboo (mature women's sexuality), and hindering women's real power?

I do like the "big girl panties" phrase because in it female power is cleaved from sex/beauty and put in a legitimate arena (i.e. gaining a political job takes qualifications and hard work, not thong underwear and blowjobs).

But, it bothers me that when a woman takes a powerful position, this news is often accompanied by media queries or jokes regarding if she's tough enough (the second sentence in the Washington Post article talks about Dana Perino sobbing), as well as references to her appearance and sexuality or asexuality that distract--and detract!--from her validity (the third sentence is, "Three hours later, her face freshly powdered and every strand of her neat bob in place, Perino crisply fielded questions at a televised briefing").

Hillary Clinton's media treatment during her presidential campaign was a case in point: She was picked on for showing weakness when she cried at the same time as she was put down for being too tough (the infamous "b*tch" label). Criticisms (and reactions to criticisms) of her "ugly" pantsuits and the size of her thighs garnered more attention than the content of her campaign speeches.

Repeatedly, women are depicted as emotional roller-coasters who vacillate between complete hysteria and total dictatorship, while the importance of their looks is played up. Doesn't all this negative and contradictory focus on gender maintain levels of sexism and prevent women from concentrating on the work they want to do? (Nobody was quoting cutesy lines in major newspaper articles--at least to my knowledge--about Obama putting his big boy undies on...) I'd say that in this climate, references to big-girl panties probably don't help to put the spotlight back on women's legitimacy and brilliance.