Jaynus O'Donnell: "Misplace" contains
aspects of exploration, discovery, data collection and
education. How do these parts of the project function
within your greater art practice?
Kirsten Forkert: My practice is quite broad;
I'm also an organizer, and a writer, and a teacher.
I feel there are aspects of my practice that cross over
into critical pedagogy, activism and certain forms of
research (like social geography).
I'm interested in looking at how we experience time
and place, and the city, etc. what we think of as a
direct perceptual sense, and then looking at how this
is affected by ideologies we've internalized. So that
means looking at how we experience space in the city,
what our habits are, etc. and how our behaviour is affected
by the design and planning of city spaces (for example,
we may never go to certain areas of the city even though
we might live there our entire lives) and in general
living in a capitalist society.
While there might be similarities with for example
anthropology, I don't claim to be objective or to prove
a theory. With Misplace, I became the guinea pig of
my own experiment.
But it also does come down to creating and facilitating
spaces for asking questions.
Jaynus O'Donnell: What mechanisms in urban and
suburban spaces lead to this insider/outsider dichotomy?
Are they different or similar in each space? Maybe you
can compare your experience of this in Vancouver versus
what you found in Oakville.
Kirsten Forkert: Cities historically have always
involved these dynamics: there are rich neighbourhoods
and poor neighbourhoods, neighbourhoods where ethnic
groups tend to be segregated. Urban design has also
historically played a role in managing public space
and populations. For example, there was a neighbourhood
in Strathcona called Hogan's
Alley, which was home to Vancouver's Black community.
The neighbourhood was torn down to build the Georgia
Viaduct. At the time (50's/60's) it common practice
to tear down neighbourhoods perceived as 'slums', often
for racist reasons. But I think that with suburbia,
what we have is a greater physical separation of social
classes. And car
culture plays a role in this: if you drive you can
pass through certain areas without stopping in them.
The logical conclusion of this is gated communities,
or condos with high security systems.
To compare Vancouver and Oakville: Oakville defines
itself in terms of its separation from Toronto.
This was the case from the beginning: it started off
as a place where Bay St. financiers could escape the
city, which at the time was perceived as polluted, stressful
and unhealthy (and I do think the subtext also was that
there were too many immigrants and poor people). Certainly
neighbourhoods were quite segregated: Kerr St. was considered
the 'bad neighbourhood', and was also the most culturally
diverse.
I don't see the same sort of separation of social classes
and ethnic groups in Vancouver during my day-to-day
life, but I do know it does exist. An obvious example
of this is some of the loft condos which have high security
systems, fences and even barbed wire around them. They
may not fit the stereotypical definition of 'gated
communities', but it could be argued that they function
in a similar way. For example, one that is presently
being built (can't remember the name) has a supermarket
attached to it. So if you want you never have to go
outside. When we see these sorts of buildings in the
Downtown
Eastside, they function as very graphic reminders
of income disparity, and all the tensions that result
from this.
Jaynus O'Donnell: Can you please further expand
on your concerns on the compartmentalization of society
through lifestyle demographics and explain how this
manifested itself in the community of Oakville.
Kirsten Forkert: This compartmentalization is
not necessarily specific to Oakville or to suburban
communities. In terms of the bigger picture, I think
that it's a consequence of capitalism in general (which
as we know very well is based around ideologies of individualism).
This has intensified in the present 'postmodern condition':
people leave rural communities for jobs, people leave
their countries because there are no opportunities for
them
and of course, it's an increasingly transient
and fragmented society we live in. And for the past
30-40 years, and especially after 1989, the Left has
focused on the small, the localized, the contingent
and the specific, in all those critiques of grand narratives
and political programs that you've probably read about
in class (in terms of theories of postmodernism).
In terms of the niche markets, it's to do with identities
being formed basically in consumer terms: we buy the
same products and so we share something. We listen to
the same music and so we share something. The example
I gave you over coffee is one I find particularly disturbing:
where voting patterns can be determined through your
shopping habits.
But my concern is to do with a common space, a space
of shared concern. And that when we're isolated and
fragmented as individuals we're left with a sense of
lacking this, and then this desire gets displaced onto
consumer culture, or, more disturbingly, nostalgic and
simplistic forms of nationalism or religious extremism.
And in terms of Oakville, as I've said before, social
classes are separated from each other so people don't
have to deal with others who might come from a radically
different point of view, who might come from different
cultural contexts, etc. So that desire for that shared
space was articulated around those myths of the small
town.
|