Can art change the world?

The Southbank Centre’s “Festival of the World” says yes.

There were all sorts of flags flying from the paramount of the Southbank this weekend. Jubilee bunting along the waterfront promenade, specially commissioned Festival Flags that blend the banners of myriad countries together in one “world community” standard; even a choreographed dance of red and yellow semaphores to send a message to the maritime-savvy royal flotilla: Happy Diamond Jubilee Queen Elizabeth, We Heart You.  

But more than just the usual fanfare regalia, from 1 June the Southbank Centre has flying another, more symbolic kind of flag. Let’s call it the Flag for Art. And it won’t be just polite, gallery-bound art. Think bold declarations and noisy celebrations: music, sculpture, cabaret, food, installations, blossoming gardens and over 4,000 artists, poets, writers, and performers from 195 countries coming together to stage three month's worth of performances. It’s The Festival of the World, an out-and-out global flavoured fete.

“Can Art Change the World?” is the gallant tagline of the festival. Idealistic as it may sound, if any institution is positioned to prove it right, it would be the Southbank. As Europe’s largest arts centre and a staple London attraction, the festival is well placed to receive, and engage, millions of visitors this summer. Last year’s Festival of Britain had 11 million bypasses. Nearly 3 million paused to actively participate. 

As the Southbank's artistic director Jude Kelly put it at the launch, the Southbank Centre is an “iconic” space of “continual transformation”.

“Our festival champions the idea that art holds the key to unlocking the collective imagination,” she beamed.

Kelly also points towards the institution's longstanding core ideals of engaging society through art. “One of the most important things we have inherited is the idealism founded by the [first] Festival of Britain.” First staged 1951, the festival marked the inception of the Southbank Centre; a “tonic for the nation” that brought frivolity back to a post-war England, reinvigorating sentiments of optimism and progress through art. In this century London is an infinitely more diverse place, though perhaps no less in need of a rejuvenating kick. Will Festival of the World do the trick?

With the 4,000-plus artists due to add their voice to the festival’s programme, the roster of events is simultaneously overwhelming and exhilarating. An interactive outdoor landscape chock-a-block with installations makes up the heart of the festival. The projects are numerate and a touch disparate. There’s sculptural columns built by Korean artist Choi Jeong Hwa - from florid green household baskets, large scale figures made of reconstituted woods scraps scaling the Hayward Gallery - a sound installation broadcasting poems from around the world read in their native language, a fifteen foot Baobab tree built from “global” fabrics, a luminous landscape of plastic milk bottles and much more. But assortment is well held together by the connective tissue of cultural celebration, internationalism and creativity innovation.

Several large-scale events are slated to headline the festival. Poetry Parnassus (26 June – 1 July) is a “world record breaking” gathering of poets from across the globe, while Africa Utopia (3 – 28 July) sees an extraordinary breadth of African music, dance, literature and debates take centre stage. The Hayward Galley will be transformed into Wide Open School, a visual arts summer school “devised and fuelled by the imaginations of leading artist from around the world”. The London Wonderground features top calibre comedy and cabaret in the sprawling Spiegeltent, one of only two dozen-odd mirrored circus tabernacles left over from the 1920s vaudevillian heyday. 

Perhaps the sturdiest pillar in the Southbank’s agenda to “champion the idea that art…can be a powerful agent for social change” is their continual highlighting of international project that shape lives through art. Dotted throughout the site are information placards drawing attention to programs such as Shelanu - a Birmingham based craft enterprise assisting refugee women - or AfroReggae, a dance-based social mobility scheme in Rio di Janiero. The Royal Festival Hall is also home to the Festival of the World Museum, a series of interactive environments honouring an ethos of “art as change”. One commemorates arts education visionaries such as Maria Montessori and Rudolf Steiner, another captures the transformative power of music, a third allows visitors to apply to become “citizens of the world” (blue passport with your own photo included).

If there’s one thing that binds the projects in this festival together, it’s their collective multiculturalism.  “This summer, as London welcomes the world,” Jude Kelly says. “Festival of the World asks a timely and crucial question: How can we understand each other’s cultures better and help make the world a better place?”

The festival’s feel is rightfully democratic; its installations accessible to all and encouraging interaction. It’s sure to be a soiree of mass appeal – adults, children, gallery gurus and art rookies alike won’t feel out of place. So hit the newly opened roof garden atop the Queen Elizabeth Hall, sip a gin fizz, and take a moment to contemplate all that art can accomplish. Can it change the world? “Well possibly,” Jude Kelley admits. “We have to give it a go.”

Festival of the World is on at the Southbank Centre, SE1: 1 June – 9 September.

(Festival of the World Illustration: created by Antoine Corbineau. Linda Nylind/Southbank Centre)

 

(Under the Baobab: created by Pirate Technics. Photo: Linda Nylind/Southbank Centre)

 

(Everything is beautiful when you don't look down: created by Robots>>>>. Linda Nylind/Southbank Centre)

 

(Wastescape: created by Gayle Chong Kwan. Linda Nylind/Southbank Centre)

"Perspectives", a canopy of oversized children's blocks that reveals hidden messages, is one of many installations at Festival of the World (Photo: Linda Nylind/Southbank Centre)

Charlotte Simmonds is a writer and blogger living in London. She was formerly an editorial assistant at the New Statesman. You can follow her on Twitter @thesmallgalleon.

Getty
Show Hide image

Why we'll all have to stomach the high-tech future of food

Lab-grown meat and veg may be unappetising, but our planet's survial may depend on it.

Imagine: you’re out shopping with a friend and you decide to stop and get some lunch. Just off the high street, you spot a restaurant advertising a burger deal and decide to go in. On the menu, however, you see something strange: all the items are apparently made with “future food”. Some sort of hipster gimmick?

You order your burger, and the waitress brings it over. It looks like all the other burgers you’ve eaten in your life, but as the waitress talks you through your meal, you realise that this restaurant is unusual.

The meat, she tells you, is made from lab-grown beef. The vegetables that sit on top of it have been produced in a temperature-controlled lab, under LED lights. “Five times faster than outdoors!” your waitress beams. Oh, and the chips are made from irradiated potatoes – but that’s nothing new: it’s been legal to sell irradiated food in the UK since 2009. “It stops the potatoes sprouting,” she explains.

If suddenly you feel like you don’t fancy the burger much, you’re not alone. Even the most forward-thinking consumer can find that the idea of lab-produced meals sticks in the throat – even if we understand, logically, that food technology can be a good thing.

According to a recent government study, only half of us believe we “will have to make more use of technology in food production”.

The process of growing meat provokes particularly strong reactions. It involves taking a small quantity of muscle cells from a living animal, which are then cultured in a mixture designed to support their growth. Done right, one muscle cell can turn into one trillion strands of muscle tissue.

Yet we may not have time to be squeamish. Studies suggest that a high proportion of greenhouse gases – anywhere between 20 and 50 per cent, depending on the research – is produced by the meat industry.

“This is really something that needs to be done in the next decade,” Shaked Regev, of the Modern Agriculture Foundation (MAF), tells me. “This is a critical point for humanity.” The MAF is a start-up developing what it calls “clean meat”. Regev, the foundation’s director, became involved in this area of research partly because he believes we urgently need to create new food technologies.

“This and other green initiatives are imperative. Some people say it’s for our grandkids – I say: I’m 27, and I’m going to see significant damage from climate change in my lifetime.”

Researchers in the field are confident that the public can overcome its distaste for lab-grown meat. “It will eventually be cheaper than the kind of chicken meat currently for sale, and consumers will flock to it,” says Gary Comstock, a professor of philosophy working on food ethics at North Carolina State University. “They flocked to milk made with bovine growth hormone [bGH], even though they reported being opposed to genetically modified foods, once they saw that the bGH milk was cheaper,” he says.

Yet even if people are happy to try new food technologies, does the best solution to the problems lie in our food culture? Studies show that fewer of us are cooking at home than ever before; young people in particular are becoming less familiar with the range of ingredients and where they come from. A 2012 poll by the charity Linking Environment and Farming found that 33 per cent of 16-to-23-year-olds were unable to identify hens as the source of eggs.

Comstock rejects the argument that developing food technologies will further obscure the origins of our food. “We are already as alienated as we can be from the sources of our food,” he says. “Most of us have no idea about the conditions in which birds are grown and slaughtered.”

For Regev, young people are less of a problem and could even be a big part of the solution. Because their food habits are less entrenched, he says, young people will be more willing to try something new. “The younger you are, the more likely you are to accept this new technology, or new technologies in general.”

He reminds me, “We really don’t have time for a hundred-year social progress movement.” Better get biting that burger, then.

Stephanie Boland is digital assistant at the New Statesman. She tweets at @stephanieboland

This article first appeared in the 25 May 2017 issue of the New Statesman, Why Islamic State targets Britain

0800 7318496