No description available.

published_or_final_version / Urban Planning / Master / Master of Science in Urban Planning

M.A. / The purpose of this study is to analyse the nature of the relationship between politics and art in South Africa during the period 1960 to 1996. The discussion is limited to the performing arts, which includes music, theatre, musicals and dance. The relationship between art and politics in South Africa manifested in two ways. Firstly, art was used to convey a specific political message and secondly, it served as an external political instrument with which the international community forced South Africa to put an end to apartheid. The latter was achieved by enforcing sanctions which included the cultural boycott. This study states clearly that art cannot be separated from society and constitutes that art is an important element sociologically speaking. It can thus be influenced by society and it can influence society in many ways. The artist, as a member of society, produce his/her art in accordance to his/her experience of a certain society. The artwork is therefore an "image" of society, because it reflects the artists' perspective of society. There is a relationship between art and politics in South Africa, because both the white and the black South Africans used art to create their own identity. Through art they could form a solidarity, and in the long run they could either sustain or gain political power. The whites wanted to sustain their power and therefore used the arts and art structures as a vehicle to maintain their Western(white) values. The blacks wanted to gain political power and, through the black consciousness movement and their anti-apartheid campaigns, they strove to gain political power. Art was therefore not only used by the blacks as a political weapon against the white apartheid regime, but also by the international community as a means to punish South Africa for the violation of human rights.

This research considers the performance of situated subjectivity where the state and the individual vie for dominion over the drives that construct the body as what one has (the body as object), as what one is (the body as subject), and as what one becomes (the absent body). To turn power into pain, the State prospects the body of the subject to anchor its power through abjection. In so doing, it compels that body to channel the abject as a power to be wielded as a weapon of the weak, thus forcing into view the true interior of the State. Sections I and II position a discourse of trauma in Singapore using a parenthetical framework that is constructed by and mediated through the criminalized and punishable bodies of two young Asian males. The first discusses the carefully constructed ob-scene (off-stage) nature of the obscene (abhorrent) execution of convicted drug trafficker Van Nguyen in 2005 (the body as object); the second examines its inverse – the public spectacle of creative ‘death’ imposed upon artist Josef Ng (the body as subject) through government condemnation and expulsion for an alleged obscene (immoral) performance at 5th Passage in 1994. To do this, the thesis engages with the enforced interchangeable processes of disembodiment (for the display of symbolic violence) and embodiment (for the exertion of physical violence). Comparisons are also made of the way the State demonstrates its preparedness to turn the display of power into a process of exacting the ultimate pain from the punishable body. This is perpetrated on the one hand via a spectacle of invisibility that keeps the mandatory death penalty a secretive process, and on the other, its inverse, the publicly staged media spectacle of persecuting performance artist/s and 5th Passage. The events that follow led to the defacto banning of performance art and 5th Passage’s demise in 1994, ending my role as its artistic director. By relocating the performance of death from the high courts and offices of Singapore’s Home Affairs Ministry (the site of symbolic violence) and Changi Prison (site of physical violence) into plain sight in the Australian media, the press is discussed as an instrumental force in deploying a penal counter-aesthetic to pierce through Singapore’s veil of secrecy surrounding its executions. The thesis demonstrates how this engendered a ‘seeing through’ that galvanized acts of intersubjectivity and the performance of social witnessing in Australia as an attempt to save Van Nguyen from the gallows. The institutional censorship of an artwork about the execution in 2005 is discussed to show how signifying practices such as visual art continued to agitate the state’s performance to construct itself as a “global city for arts and culture” on one hand while crushing artistic subjectivity when it is perceived as dissent on the other. This glimpse into the fragility of the Singapore nation’s divergent desires, where one performance portrays the disintegration of another, recalled the originary cultural rupture at 5th Passage in 1994 when artists engaged in performance were sensationalized in the Singapore media as social deviants. As an extension of state apparatus, the media is shown to repress artistic subjectivity through its creation of a controversy that led to the illegitimization of scriptless performance art, thus producing a distinctively Singaporean cultural artefact – the absent body. Out of the personal and social trauma framed by this confrontation with the state, Section III presents a body of visual work that I have since produced in the period marked by these two events (between 1994 to 2008) as a reply to the state. From this place of banishment, the thesis traces its evolvement into the body machine (Rich Manoeuvre series) as part of a practice that sees it for what it is within the paternal order, to locate the points where fragility occur. / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

This thesis examines how cultural heritage policies are developed in New Zealand. Cultural heritage symbolises the development of a society, illustrating past events and changing customs and values. Because of its significance, the government has accepted responsibility for protecting cultural heritage, and has developed a number of institutions and a variety of policies to address this responsibility. It is important to understand how the goverment uses these mechanisms to protect cultural heritage, and the subsequent relationships that have developed between actors in the cultural heritage area. These will have an impact on the effectiveness of the policy which is developed. Cultural heritage is treasured by society for a number of reasons, but as social attitudes change, so does the treatment of cultural heritage. It is re-defined, re-interpreted and used to promote a sense of pride in the commmunity. This manipulation extends to policy making. Since the 1980s, the government has influenced, and been influenced by, two major social changes. There has been an introduction of free market principles such as rationalisation, competition and fiscal responsibility into the New Zealand economy and political structure. These principles have been applied to cultural heritage and consequently cultural heritage is treated as a commodity. As the result of changing attitudes towards the treatment of the Maori and Maori resources, there has been a movement towards implementing biculturalism. This has meant a re-evaluation of how Maori taonga is treated, particularly of the ways Maori cultural heritage has been used to promote a sense of New Zealandness. There are several major actors involved in cultural heritage policy making - government, policy units, cultural heritage organisations and local authorities. Central government is the dominant force in the political process, with control over the distribution of resources and the responsibilities assigned to other actors. Because the use of market principles and movement towards biculturalism have been embraced at the central government level, other actors in the policy making process are also expected to adopt them. Policy units develop options to fit with the government�s general economic and political agenda. The structures adopted for the public service are designed to encompass market principles, particularly the efficient use of resources and competitiveness. While cultural heritage organisations may influence the government�s agenda through lobbying and information-sharing, they are limited by issues such as funding and statutory requirements. Government has shifted many responsibilities to the regions, but while territorial authorities are influenced by the concerns of their communities, they are also subject to directions from the government. The process and structures which have been outlined do not contribute to an effective policy making system. The use of market principles to direct cultural heritage protection tends to encourage uneven and inconsistent policies, both at national and local levels. The range of cultural heritage definitions used by government agencies also promotes inconsistency. Cultural heritage is encompassed in a large number of government departments and ministries, which makes the co-ordination funding by meeting required �outputs� and the government�s requirement of fiscal responsibility. This is not appropriate language for cultural heritage, which should not have to be rationalised as an economic good. Although the government has devolved a number of responsibilities and territorial authorities have a variety of mechanisms available to protect cultural heritage, there is no nation-wide criteria for territorial involvement. Because of regional differences there is an uneven treatment of cultural heritage. Those policies developed by territorial authorities will also be influenced by the government�s economic direction. Organisations supported by the Dunedin City Council, for example, must also provide budgets and strategic plans which fit with Council�s fiscal objectives.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2006. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 570-592).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of California, San Diego, 2009. / Title from first page of PDF file (viewed January 19, 2010). Available via ProQuest Digital Dissertations. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 243-258).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Oklahoma, 1993. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 220-242).

No description available.

This thesis examines how cultural heritage policies are developed in New Zealand. Cultural heritage symbolises the development of a society, illustrating past events and changing customs and values. Because of its significance, the government has accepted responsibility for protecting cultural heritage, and has developed a number of institutions and a variety of policies to address this responsibility. It is important to understand how the goverment uses these mechanisms to protect cultural heritage, and the subsequent relationships that have developed between actors in the cultural heritage area. These will have an impact on the effectiveness of the policy which is developed. Cultural heritage is treasured by society for a number of reasons, but as social attitudes change, so does the treatment of cultural heritage. It is re-defined, re-interpreted and used to promote a sense of pride in the commmunity. This manipulation extends to policy making. Since the 1980s, the government has influenced, and been influenced by, two major social changes. There has been an introduction of free market principles such as rationalisation, competition and fiscal responsibility into the New Zealand economy and political structure. These principles have been applied to cultural heritage and consequently cultural heritage is treated as a commodity. As the result of changing attitudes towards the treatment of the Maori and Maori resources, there has been a movement towards implementing biculturalism. This has meant a re-evaluation of how Maori taonga is treated, particularly of the ways Maori cultural heritage has been used to promote a sense of New Zealandness. There are several major actors involved in cultural heritage policy making - government, policy units, cultural heritage organisations and local authorities. Central government is the dominant force in the political process, with control over the distribution of resources and the responsibilities assigned to other actors. Because the use of market principles and movement towards biculturalism have been embraced at the central government level, other actors in the policy making process are also expected to adopt them. Policy units develop options to fit with the government�s general economic and political agenda. The structures adopted for the public service are designed to encompass market principles, particularly the efficient use of resources and competitiveness. While cultural heritage organisations may influence the government�s agenda through lobbying and information-sharing, they are limited by issues such as funding and statutory requirements. Government has shifted many responsibilities to the regions, but while territorial authorities are influenced by the concerns of their communities, they are also subject to directions from the government. The process and structures which have been outlined do not contribute to an effective policy making system. The use of market principles to direct cultural heritage protection tends to encourage uneven and inconsistent policies, both at national and local levels. The range of cultural heritage definitions used by government agencies also promotes inconsistency. Cultural heritage is encompassed in a large number of government departments and ministries, which makes the co-ordination funding by meeting required �outputs� and the government�s requirement of fiscal responsibility. This is not appropriate language for cultural heritage, which should not have to be rationalised as an economic good. Although the government has devolved a number of responsibilities and territorial authorities have a variety of mechanisms available to protect cultural heritage, there is no nation-wide criteria for territorial involvement. Because of regional differences there is an uneven treatment of cultural heritage. Those policies developed by territorial authorities will also be influenced by the government�s economic direction. Organisations supported by the Dunedin City Council, for example, must also provide budgets and strategic plans which fit with Council�s fiscal objectives.