Generative, reductive or exploitative? How change in policy, funding and production practice impacts disciplinary and transdisciplinary practice in disability arts in Australia

In this article, I draw on a developing body of archival research into disability arts in Australia to consider how changes in training, production and presentation, accessibility, funding, politics, aesthetics and audience engagement practices have influenced the development of disciplinary and transdisciplinary work in the field. Disability arts in Australia is recognized globally for its innovation and impact. Efforts to document this legacy as part of the Australian Research Council funded The Evolution of Disability Arts in Australia project have highlighted the challenge of tracing the history of historically marginalized artists who have not always had the time, space, platforms and support to create work or hold collections recording the creation of that work in formats, modes and media meaningful to the creators. These challenges notwithstanding, records of companies and recollections of practitioners collected during this project are providing insight into when, where and how artists have produced work. More critically, they are showing how changes in policy, funding, training, development and creative development opportunities, and platforms for disabled artists to take a leadership role have served as a generative, reductive or exploitative force shaping the evolution of performing and visual arts work. This includes differences in the development of performing and visual arts practices. In this article, I consider how reflecting on this history, and the way it has produced a range of a practices – disciplinary and transdisciplinary, personal, social and political, ensemble and individual, in a range of relationships to mainstream theatres, galleries and museums – can assist in understanding how the celebrated body of work for which Australian disabled artists have become known has evolved, and how policy-makers can support these artists to continue to innovate in future.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Arts & Communities
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1386/jaac_00059_1
Primary Topic
Disability Rights and Representation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Generative, reductive or exploitative? How change in policy, funding and production practice impacts disciplinary and transdisciplinary practice in disability arts in Australia

Bree Hadley
Journal of Arts & Communities
Disability Rights and Representation
article

Generative, reductive or exploitative? How change in policy, funding and production practice impacts disciplinary and transdisciplinary practice in disability arts in Australia

Bree Hadley
article en

Abstract

In this article, I draw on a developing body of archival research into disability arts in Australia to consider how changes in training, production and presentation, accessibility, funding, politics, aesthetics and audience engagement practices have influenced the development of disciplinary and transdisciplinary work in the field. Disability arts in Australia is recognized globally for its innovation and impact. Efforts to document this legacy as part of the Australian Research Council funded The Evolution of Disability Arts in Australia project have highlighted the challenge of tracing the history of historically marginalized artists who have not always had the time, space, platforms and support to create work or hold collections recording the creation of that work in formats, modes and media meaningful to the creators. These challenges notwithstanding, records of companies and recollections of practitioners collected during this project are providing insight into when, where and how artists have produced work. More critically, they are showing how changes in policy, funding, training, development and creative development opportunities, and platforms for disabled artists to take a leadership role have served as a generative, reductive or exploitative force shaping the evolution of performing and visual arts work. This includes differences in the development of performing and visual arts practices. In this article, I consider how reflecting on this history, and the way it has produced a range of a practices – disciplinary and transdisciplinary, personal, social and political, ensemble and individual, in a range of relationships to mainstream theatres, galleries and museums – can assist in understanding how the celebrated body of work for which Australian disabled artists have become known has evolved, and how policy-makers can support these artists to continue to innovate in future.

Journal of Arts & CommunitiesVol. 15(2)
Queensland University of Technology (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
Disability Rights and Representation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Generative, reductive or exploitative? How change in policy, funding and production practice impacts disciplinary and transdisciplinary practice in disability arts in Australia — Bree Hadley · Journal of Arts & Communities (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS