DEATH, FORGIVENESS AND NEVER LOOSING THE AIM OUTSIDE MYSELF
(Glitterbird festival Paris 12. October 2006)
I have been asked to talk some few minutes about a project we Norwegians have been working with in almost ten years now, art for the youngest children in the perspective of children’s culture. In one way I don’t feel after all this years, that I have so much more to say. In another way I could have talked for days. I have got ten minutes. Well, then I have to concentrate on the most important. The most important comes from our hearts. And I have to say something about death, forgiveness and never loosing the aim. And the aim is outside myself: the aim is the children and our work for quality in children’s lives in generally and in the art we offer them in specially.
Today I know that in some few other countries, for instant here in France, they have been working with art for the youngest children quite a longer time than us Norwegians, but we felt we in Norway were starting up something new in 1997. Being here today, enjoying this last and marvellous Glitterbird festival and on the same time on the national level knowing that the Norwegian state budget, which were presented some days ago, has reserved two million Norwegian crowns for producing art for the youngest children next year, makes me humble, proud and happy.
When we started to focus on art for this group of children, it was a very new way of thinking in Norway, it was a coincidence that it was me who took the initiative, but I do not think it was a coincidence that it was a man with my background who took the initiative. As a researcher I had been engaged in describing children’s own perspective, children’s culture and the way we look upon children and childhood in our Scandinavian societies. What I mean is that we had to prepare the ideological base for the project very thorough to convince people in general and the Art Council of Norway in special. The money given on the Norwegian state budget tells us that we have done our job in Norway.
It is not easy to talk about children’s perspective, and strictly speaking I do not think it is possible to describe children’s perspective as an adult. Perhaps we can describe some features, but as adults we are standing outside this culture. Also as a subjective adult child researcher, in principle I am only able to describe the child-culture-researchers perspective. I cannot free myself from all the ideologies I as a researcher are woven into, I cannot free myself from my personal impressions, all my need of forgiveness, all my need of closing my eyes, all my projections. I doubt it is possible to free ourselves, our friends of the same age and specially our children from the projective dance we read each other into. Specially when I think of our relations to the smallest children, I often wonder: Where do I end, and where do you start? Who are you? Do I only give my children what I want for my self? Am I able to act otherwise?
Death. For me personal, this crusade started with death. This time I do not think of the understanding of the child as a memento mori for me as an old man (which for that matter is an important understanding), but with the death of my own child. On the first seminar of the Norwegian artist almost ten years ago, I had to tell them about a postcard I received from our medical doctor in December 1980 when my son died. He was 8 months old. She wrote this un-understandable words: “Please remember that he lived a whole life, that his life was complete and of full worth.” It took me years to understand this shaking words, and I do not know if understand them yet. I am still working with this words, and I have still much to learn.
But directly from such a perspective, such a postcard, you can follow up with the little children’s right to a life here-and-know, in time and in space and independent of the fact that their ethnical parents has been living here for generations or not, their right to a much more rich life than instrumental learning only, their right to play and dance and to be loved and their right to quality. And our art movement, - Glitterbird - , are perhaps the most beautiful way of implementing this new dignity of small children.
We need forgiveness because we may never be free from ourselves. We shall always be suspicious in this world of projections, me, wounded by my loss and sorrow more than anybody: whose needs are we satisfying?
Evaluating our artistic works, I think this is the most important and perhaps the most difficult critic. It has to be done with the heart and with forgiveness. We are all imprisoned in ourselves. But we have to try look outside. We have to try to catch a glimpse of another person. The little children set free from my projections. Are you making this for the little child, or for yourself? If you are using the child inside you as a measure: are you critically to the messages the little child inside you gives to you? Are you seeking knowledge of the differences and the similarities between adults and toddlers and even small children? Who is governing your standards of quality: the children or the experts in art or in education?
On the other hand: you cannot do anything artistic without in at least one way doing it for your self. Perhaps are we all unable to do any quality work at all without at least in one way doing it for ourselves.
I know this is a silly speech. It doesn’t matter. This is the dilemma I have. I am evaluating your artistic work with my heart and with forgiveness, but I have the knowledge that small children may die, and they have a right of quality in life and in art presented for them and that gives strong demands of quality, knowledge and imagination in the perspective of small children.
I know this is almost a dream, but
“that is the dream we are having
that something wonderful shall happen –
that it must happen
that time shall open
that hearts shall open
that doors shall open
that the mountain shall open
that sources shall spring –
that the dream shall open
that we one early morning shall sail into a bay we didn’t know existed.”
(My own lousy translation of a Norwegian poem by Olav H. Hauge 1966)
And at last:
Joining the workshop today, it was very satisfying to experience the knowledge and the engagement of the artists. I am also satisfied seeiung that one of my theories was right: If we can get artists to work seriously in this field, the artist will have much to tell and many corrections to give the researchers in the field of early childhood. I have learned a lot today.
