Christos Kranakis
“Dgiving time to the voices to express themselves the vibration ultimately produced is one, powerful and unified!”
Winning or not. The artistic movement of the last few months has left its mark in a period in which, for the most part, political lull and subsidence of the political movement, especially that of the new generation, dominates.
Although in the middle of the pre-election period, where strong sections of the “radical” Left have left on the “edge” their theoretical elaborations on the movement and have focused on how they will sit in the seats of the Parliament next to progressive technocrats. PRIN chooses to give “space” to the young fighters, who spearheaded not the government experiments of yesterday but the militant, extra-parliamentary struggles of today, in a grand showdown against an intransigent government, a striking trade union bureaucracy and a system universally hostile to the world of art and culture.
The experiences and opinion of the people who fought – and to a huge extent – succeeded in putting a sector with few cinematic relics, like that of art, on a trajectory of social vanguardism, undoubtedly, they are an integral part of the necessary processing that must be done in the context of assessing contemporary struggles and simultaneously outlining future ones.
The legacy and the future of the artistic movement
On Thursday, April 6, police forces evacuate the “Olympia” theater, which was occupied by workers and dance students, marking the opening of all the occupations that had taken place in the previous three months in the context of the artistic movement. Perhaps with a first, superficial reading, the fact that – at least in the first phase – the movement did not manage to obtain material conquests, such as the withdrawal of the DP or the signing of the SSE, is troubling and disappointing. Nevertheless, before we rush to “write off” a movement, we must first evaluate it soberly and not, exclusively, from the (temporary) result.
On the contrary, a series of critical criteria, such as in which socio-political period it operated, which is the historical composition of the body of which it is composed and which legacies (even partial or incomplete) it left behind, play a decisive role in the process of deriving political conclusions. In this direction, PRIN got in touch with workers and students who took the lead in the cinematic processes of the previous months, so that they could narrate their own political experiences. As both of them emphasize, the artistic movement is neither over nor should it end. On the contrary, although it may not yet have won material victories from the state and capital, it incorporated a series of political, physiognomic and organizational characteristics that should only be recorded as a positive legacy.
Against a system that targets Art and Education
First, a common point of reference among the people who spoke to PRIN was the belief that the movement did not simply oppose a DP, but a significant part within it sought to aim its “arrows” at a wider patchwork of commoditized values and anti-work. politicians who systematically and methodically pollute (and) the area of the Arts. As they explain, the attempted restructuring of art schools and the chronic degradation of artists’ labor rights are aspects of the overall direction of the centralization of education and the (further) commercialization of culture served by the state and capital.
First, regarding the background of the changes to the educational rights of graduates, the P.D. 85 is used as a lever of pressure for the downgrading of public and (mainly) small private schools – where most of the students are – and the progressive transfer of them to private colleges, which by law are the only ones that can to provide an Arts degree recognized by universities abroad.
At the same time, a parallel goal is the worsening of the already perpetuated exploitative working conditions in culture. The relevant MLA, published some time ago, does not even constitute “aspirin”, as it does not change anything essential and simply provides for the financial gain on the T.E scale. when and if they open positions for artistic work in public institutions, a provision that concerns an extremely thin minority. In continuation of the above comprehensive government attack, the discussion is opened by the big producers about signing a degraded SSE.
Add to the equation this year’s inconceivable reduction in state funding to theaters and the general downgrading of “small” and independent art, and it becomes clear that the overall reshaping of the cultural landscape is aimed at handing over “land and water” to employers and big producers. of the entertainment industry.
Labor interests ahead!
It is often assumed that artists do not have a working and political status and that their only form of protest is artistic expression. This distorted view, in recent months, received a strong “slap”. As they themselves proved, people of culture are workers! They have bills to pay, people of their own to take care of and needs to meet… They have a right, or rather an obligation, to strike, to protest, and to join unions. In this context, despite the intense fragmentation of the industry (actors, dancers, stage designers, directors, technicians, etc.), the process of outlining a “skeleton”, economic and political, of demands that proceeded both in the occupations and in the assemblies unions, was a huge step forward. From the creation of a public University of the Performing Arts -with the simultaneous recognition of graduates of private schools-, to the abolition of colleges and from the upgrading of labor rights to the signing of a decent collective bargaining agreement, the discussion between cultural workers and their demands will not they are never the same again.
Political movement on the side of society
Naturally, a sectoral movement of students / workers, with minimal kinetic roots, would face narrow internal political boundaries. After the tragedy of Tempe, the artistic movement was called to renegotiate (mainly with itself) its place in the new cinematic and political setting. It may be that the final step of the unification of the various social bodies in a revolutionary direction was not completed, due to the political boundaries of the movement as a whole and not only of the artists, but some snapshots are worth inscribing in the collective memory. Already before Tempi, but especially after, an important part of the artists’ movement – with REX as a dominant point of reference – sought, and to a certain extent succeeded, to emerge as a unifying link of broader social resistances. Therefore, the joint coordination of occupations with the participation of workers and students, the joint actions – although anemic – with student associations, the participation of artistic blocs in the marches of health workers and teachers and finally, the feedback of the REX occupations must be positively evaluated with the theater workers.
The process of outlining a ‘skeleton’ of economic and political demands was a huge step ‘forward’
“The political legacy of the movement is strong”
“Nothing is over!”, they describe in BEFORE female workers and students. This phrase, as they put it, does not constitute a “blessing” but instead steps on a material basis.
The fight that took place proved once and for all to the workers of the sector the real role of SEH’s management, says Marina-Natalia Grigoriadis. Everyone now realizes the hypocritical attitude of SEH’s leadership towards both the students and the members of the union. Especially the last meetings of the union, as he describes, were particularly indicative. The SEH administration not only decided on the highly undemocratic measure, according to which the Board of Directors will be called (without holding a new assembly) to decide if and when to go on strike, but he even went so far as to reformulate the non-disruptive arguments of the (employer) union of producers! Despite this, however, in direct confrontation with the SEH leadership, a broad force attempted and succeeded in acting outside and against the trade union bureaucracy, even succeeding in collectively upgrading its political content “from below”, points out Rosy Monaki. It is possible that the massiveness of the kinematic structures, as is reasonable, went through several ups and downs and to a certain extent was affected by the treacherous attitude of the SEH administration, but events such as the successful occupation of REX for 54 consecutive days by working actors and students / three directions and the refusal of the squatters (students and workers of the dance) of Olympia to leave, are huge setbacks for the political and organizational path that the future games can follow.
A similar situation for students. As Artemis Zarokosta explains, the student assemblies continue, while the formation of student clubs in art schools is now well and truly on the plan!
“Art as a political act”
Breaking the historical perpetuation of problematic ideologies that wanted artists out of political life and uninvolved in traditional political and cinematic processes, the movement from the beginning of its formation proved that the concept of art is inherent to that of politics, emphasizes Dimitra Tarousi . The movement of the last months fought for another art… “An art that ignites the connection of the scenes with the street! The road of struggles and resistance against moderation and the darkness of the times. An art that speaks of collective life and awakens the collective imagination as the only way to survive”, as she said. That is why it is important to point out the artistic and political activities that took place in the context of the movement. In addition to concerts and action days, REX also hosted a meeting with the family of the murdered Nikos Sampanis, an event on mental health, art festivals and Slam Poetry and Fem Rap evenings. As he meaningfully put it, the “national” theater became truly NATIONAL and opened to all.
Regarding the future, Odysseas Ioannou-Kostantinou emphasizes that what took place at REX in the previous period should become the “example of a bright indicator that by giving time to the voices to express themselves, to work and to be heard, the vibration that is finally produced is one , strong and united!”.
As mentioned above, the optimism of the people who took part in the movement and the pride in what they achieved runs on real watertights. This was also seen on April 2, the day of “exit” from REX. There, 200 to 300 people attended the last show of the occupation, during which the participants proceeded to rename the “Elene Papadakis” stage of REX to “Olympia Papadoukas”, a fighter of the resistance. EXIT ended with a march of about 500 people ending at Korai Square where it joined the gathering for the threatened Astor and Ideal cinemas.