Contemporary Ethiopian Art for the Nation The quest of Western training animates much of the movement of 20th-century Ethiopian art and directs the course of its future considerably. This modern Ethiopian art flourished in the absence of the Western art world and its institutions. The network of collectors, critics, dealers, scholars, galleries, patrons, art press, open art markets, museums, auction houses, galleries, and art schools so prevalent in the West did not exist in Ethiopia. Actually, the tradition of exhibiting art and collecting it as we do now started in the 1950s. Later, exhibitions gained in popularity with the annual exhibition of the Addis Ababa School of Fine Arts and exhibitions held by school staff members and students. The idea of displaying and collecting artworks at the national museum was more in the interests of patriotism or nationalism. The museum had been founded not on the belief that modern art could be made transparent to the public and it was not meant to provide a milieu specifically for collecting and displaying artwork of significance. When the new tradition of individuals patronizing art became commonplace, art exhibitions and collecting became the accepted norm. In this environment, where art began to be judged, appropriated, collected, and disseminated for its excellence, the function of the museum became nonessential. Currently, high-quality modern Ethiopian art is in the hands of private collectors. Any knowledge the public gets of modern Ethiopian artists and their artwork comes not from the works displayed in the museum or those studied and interpreted by the nation’s scholars, but from occasional art exhibitions and national press sources, which never fail to mention any art exhibition. The fact is that during the past half century the public has not gone to see works of art in museums as often as it has attended art exhibitions. Around the late 1970s, and for almost a quarter of a century afterwards, individual attempts to patronize art, and the new tradition of staging art exhibitions in hotels, restaurants, schools, cultural centers, community centers, and private galleries, including the souvenir art market, were hit hard. The revolutionary government took it upon itself to collect and patronize works of art, and its role in this regard became ideological, rather than artistic. The absence of a local art market and individual patronage, and the defeat of a small but dedicated art community disrupted the Ethiopian art world. Despite this shortcoming, the country’s modern national pursuit of aesthetic unity, the central issue of artistic identity and uniformity, has been conscientiously achieved. Not only the new generation of artists but also the popular artists, applied and commercial artists, and the nation as a whole became the content beneficiaries and practitioners of modern Ethiopian art. By the 2000s, the visions, concerns, and values of those artistically and commercially successful artists and their supporters became one of the modern cultures of the nation. Individual art exhibitions, patronizing, and the phenomenon of sponsorship became the only effective, convenient, and preferred means for the public to have accesses to contemporary art. Although the myth of equating career success only with exhibiting is gathering strength among many, self-validation, a great power for the serious artist, is not totally absent. Regardless, this generation of artists has come closer toward finding dealers who will take care of all the business aspects of selling. Given the artistic culture, practice, public interest, and the state of the national and international art situation, there are several reasons that favor maintaining and promoting this 50-year-old tradition of exhibiting, promoting, patronizing, and marketing artwork. The lingering need to, or want of, adapting the old tradition of the industrial society system of displaying and publicizing visual art in museums is great, but it is, and will be, far from feasible. The reason for this simply is because the kind of public and the infrastructure doesn’t exist or is different from that in Ethiopia. Government-subsidized art museums and galleries in advanced countries generally generate a large part of their income from the public and through their activities. Corporate sponsorships and individual contributions, as well, probably exceed government donations. It is not an exaggeration to say that the history of the creation and dissemination of advanced society’s art is the history of individual and corporate philanthropy. The purpose of an art museum of any kind that runs as a corporation is not necessarily artistic; it is also ideological. As much as it sounds attractive to see a permanent collection of contemporary art attractively displayed in one place, and to think of this collection as an exhibition of knowledge and enjoyment, the new social realities of Ethiopia do not allow this comfort. In addition, contemporary Ethiopian art does not have a mission, the kind of evangelical fervor or role in which traditional museums defend and protect. If a museum is going to be a learning center, going to the museum will not just be limited to an intellectual; it will also to a political act. An artwork can evoke emotion and memories, and the focus, as usual, will end up being more ideological than artistic, more exclusive than inclusive. In an age where technological products are the best means of education, information, and entertainment in every home, to imagine that displaying contemporary Ethiopian artists’ work in traditional museums will help promote and attract the public is far from reality. Obviously, a public museum can perform several functions. As it is meant to showcase civic pride and prestige, it would be better off if it just functioned like a national park or a national monument, with its historical objects. Museums might be good places to educate the public about Ethiopia’s famous and infamous history - contemporary or otherwise. They can also house works that need protection of any kind, and any works of art that belong to a public collection which has a nationalist component or evokes patriotic sentiments. We have reached an age where alternative forms of entertainment, leisure, and education are rampant; where art is no more considered a luxury but an essential part of modern life and modern culture. Art dissemination and promotion, even in advanced societies, is not limited to traditional museums and galleries any more. Gambling places, hotels, restaurants, department stores, and malls are replacing traditional museums and galleries, and displaying masterpieces of contemporary art. Museums are also undergoing a total transformation, imitating the entertainment playing field; their mission has become just like that of the fashionable private galleries, with works of art that traditional museums would not even have considered. What need to be initiated are homegrown alternative methods and a theory based on the country’s conditions and its modern artistic need and traditions. In other fields, it might be essential, logical, and practical for the nation to adapt international rules and standards. In promoting art, there is nothing as empowering and uplifting as that which is born and flourishes locally. If the nation ever decides to adapt or apply a homegrown theory of disseminating and promoting its contemporary art, nothing will ever go wrong that will undermine society's creativity or disrupt its livelihood. At present, there is no other logical option than to permanently display the nation’s contemporary art in its hundreds of schools, colleges, universities, libraries, city halls and other public, private, or government offices and community buildings. This is probably the only way that makes original works of art accessible to many people who would otherwise never have the opportunity to visit not only museums and galleries but also art exhibitions. These promotional places will bring contemporary art unforgettably closer to the public. By owning a piece or pieces of modern art, every community, every city, every town would encourage a great sense of caring for works of art, modern or traditional, creating at the same time its own canon with regards to local conditions. A community or institution that believes it has a moral obligation to future generations will not stop at owning and protecting one artwork; this responsibility will extend to several artworks. This is simply because artworks have so much to contribute to wider social issues and they reap important dividends in the end, in more serious matters such as creating community cohesion, community identity and shared values. Once artworks are considered as the property or the collection of a community, they will create a life of their own and will acquire cultural status. They will also help communities and individuals who desperately need modern identifications or modern symbols of their own. There is no denying that art, particularly modern art, can make sense, and can be respected and valued by people who are taught how to look at it. Visual literacy, or an understanding and appreciation of artworks, has always been an important factor, not only for art to flourish, but also for art to function effectively. The public will become part of the modern culture and modern art, and grow to appreciate artworks only by getting involved in the new tradition of art exhibitions, art commission, art collecting, and organizing art fairs. For a public not exposed to ancient or any modern form of national art, whatever is in its present collection is by far the only spiritual and material culture that is close to its sensibility and understanding. Contemporary art might be hard to identify with immediately, but as an indispensable modern symbol, everybody will eventually benefit from it one way or another. If the government aspires to providing contemporary art to all its citizens, as well as collecting contemporary Ethiopian art and distributing it nationwide, it is wise, for in the final analysis it pays to give incentives of all kinds, including tax breaks, to individuals, communities and private galleries who are active patronizing, sponsoring, and collecting. The important effect of such an attitude would also mean that art would no longer be limited only to those who could afford it, but would be available to all, just like education, health etc. If access to art remains an exclusive matter, restricted to the privileged section of society, the public will be totally indifferent toward art, and artists will be indifferent toward the public. If, to date, there has been a discussion by, or even criticism from, academics and others regarding the purpose of contemporary art, the public will soon react. Not to think seriously about the significance of contemporary art and the money invested in it, and not to promote it widely within the nation is a negation of everything that has been achieved so far. By: Esseye Medhin, September 24, 2006