This is a difficult question to address for two reasons.
The long term effects of the pandemic on the culture sector are still very much in play. While the consequences of lockdown on galleries, theatres, film and TV production has been more or less even, the attempted adjustments to become both viable and communicate effectively again should be easier for the visual compared to the performing arts.
The other factor is personal isolation which has touched everyone in the cultural sector. The lockdown didn’t just mean the cancellation of events, but a physical and mental retreat into the domestic or private sphere leading to less interaction or dialogue which is the oxygen of the arts – the critical discourse must have suffered.
However as I have said before we will adapt, Art will be different and new ideas and platforms will emerge. Will society look to Artists to interpret this new zeitgeist and offer up visions of how we might now relate collectively ? Or will this opportunity be stifled as governments and local authorities deem Art funding an unnecessary luxury in hard times ?
In a democratic society all these voices will be heard and contested. The emerging picture will be patchy, the arts are not universally valued and I expect there will be closures and cutbacks. On the flip side the super rich have apparently not been too badly affected by the pandemic and some stocks are rising. Does this mean we can soon expect to see the auction houses and art fairs bounce back to their full pomp and splendour while grassroots, while socially engaged projects which rely on public money start to disappear.
This would be bad as this is where in recent years most the critical discourse and innovation in the arts has stemmed from. Art at its best can articulate and define a collective identity this will be an important role in the coming months and years – hopefully our politicians will support us to do this important work.
