The Role of Artists in the Concept of Progress: Perspective of a Namibian ArtistPOSTED ON: April 2, 2019 IN Joe Madisia, Opinion, Word View
by Joe Madisia
The past one and a half decade of Namibian post-independence has witnessed intense discussion, dissent, protests and changes in artistic and cultural industries across the country. The concept of progress in Namibian art and cultural development is needed to consider the background of past German and South African (apartheid’s regime) colonial affects and, only recently, independence. Namibia is currently experiencing a challenging process of nation-building that needs to be based on a cultural self-understanding of “unity in diversity.”
These challenges are actually based on the fact that the current multi-cultural society of Namibia had been artificially segregated during the colonial and apartheid eras. It is against such a background that artists – with their multi-cultural exchange, expression, experience and their conscious fermentation of cultural traditions blended with current lifestyles into future – can play a pivotal role in a sustainable and peaceful national development process for the country.
Being aware of their roles will also enable artists to gain self-reliance and deserve recognition. In many societies the world over, artists anticipate, strive to achieve and articulate new spaces of freedom, as freedom is the innermost essence of their mission. Artists do not only need freedom as a precondition for their own creative and innovative accomplishments, but also they expand horizons of freedom for everybody. Such ideals will democratise, decentralise and diversify the current art industry market economy (the monopoly of a few) and ultimately ensure real progress in national self-understanding of identity and unity in diversity for the wider Namibian arts and culture fraternity in all regions of the country.
The snail pace during the last fourteen years in the transformation of the arts made artists realise that coercive negotiation of cultural and artistic practice needs to be more sporadic and systematic in order to ensure the deconstruction of colonial aftereffects, as well as rising neo-colonialist/liberal and hegemonic tendencies. To achieve what has been said will require artistic and social commitment that balances artistic and cultural economics with commitment for cultural equity and empowerment through decentralisation among the diversity of the Namibian population.
Only then, in my view, can we talk about a true concept of progress that is nationally collective consciousness.
All these aspirations are currently interpreted by Namibian artists and society as hope for a better future, which makes one aware “to what degree hope is a permanent force” in every artist and human being, a driving power as long as s/he lives. We all must realise that such “hope is attached to a concept of progress toward a final stage of realisation” which will not materialise immediately or even never . Rather, it will be vested in the creation of what is possible and visible for us in each particular state of history over the next twenty five years, meeting the concept of progress which is in line with the VISION 2030 national ideals.
The Past Histories on Concepts of Progress
We are not the first people who are actually faced with concepts of progress, although we may often feel as if we are the only ones. The startling principal is that ideas and theories do not exist apart from historically existing people; the history of ideas is actually the history of mankind. Philosophies, legal theories, economics, science, technology, sociology, psychology, etc. are creative artistic works as “products of ideas.” They are historically conditioned forms of consciousness, adaptable, functional and inseparably interwoven with events characterising each given historical epoch.
There have been many desperate, confused epochs everywhere, especially if one focuses on our immediate pre-independence period. The reformers – who then, as freedom fighters – made the choice to start the armed liberation struggle, rewriting the political theories, needed a remarkable degree of courage to keep up with their concept of progress towards an independent Namibian State. Many people at the time may have seen such approaches as irrational, and such reformers may have been told by some that it would be a fatal hope. However, today, many of us are appreciative to realise that they were actually right in not giving up in their ideals of progress. “When others wavered,” the subtitle of Namibian President Sam Nujoma’s autobiography published recently, echoes such ideals.
The Change of Utilities
In common parlance, the term ‘progress’ is associated with technical and scientific advancement or anything which enhances the comforts of human life. “The idea of progress is that humanity is capable of improving its condition of existence – today can be better than yesterday and tomorrow even better than today.” 
Historically, our African Namibian traditionally applied crafts and arts of our culture were developed and refined by woodcarvers, potters, leather tanners, smelters, dancers and, above all, their own barter systems. Arts, science and technology were vested, then, in their contextualised, day to day material and spiritual culture, customs, knowledge and activities. Elders, in their times, produced a systematic account of techniques of all the skills, and it still serves today as a reliable and authoritative source of information in our museums and heritage institutions, as well as by way of oral history that has been handed to us over many generations.
Within such organising systems, the arts and craftsmen in guilds, promotion, patronage, protection and development of their skills was assured in their times by trade specialists in the courts of kingdoms. Of course, patronage changed gradually over the last centuries with the influx of missionaries, European tradesmen, colonialism, colonial resistance, independence and, today, democracy and smart partnership which mark world civilisations in the twenty first century.
Such development went hand in hand with introduction from precision and machine-made wares into today’s digital era. One can safely say that the twenty first century’s aesthetic, tectonic and digital values have historically shifted beneath humankind’s feet. Our own spiritual, textural and scientific values have, to some degrees, made way to our acceptance of new patrons, leading to a “decline of African aesthetics.”
These and other sea changes herald the beginning of a more complex equation of economic, technological, cultural and political balances of power as nations become increasingly interdependent, even to be felt in Africa, or Namibia for that matter.
Interdependence on Utilities and Resources
Politicians, business, scientists, philosophers and technologists, artists, poets, writers and actors predict that this will be a decade of cooperation and shared interest as new challenges – the greenhouse effects, population pressures, HIV-Aids epidemic, gender, poverty, the communication and media revolution, transfer of capital, goods, raw material and political hegemony – are all transcending national borders. “It enables African elites to consume products of western civilisation without having to go through the difficult and long-term process of building the productive base of their societies. It is far easier to shop in the global market than try to build industries yourself.” 
When considering the redistribution of current socio-economic conditions in Namibia, it will be useful to think of them as belonging to different layers on the economic structure. At the bottom are the majority of people who are poor; they are are too impoverished to participate fully in the economic, cultural and political life of their society. In the middle layer are people that vary in degrees of wealth who have access to local up-markets and the global economy. On top is the minority: public servants, executives, elites and globe trotters negotiating smart partnership deals.
Amidst cooperation and shared interest exists also a national interest, demanding one to focus on foreign policy implications of the explosion in science, technology and cultural innovation. Such a world situation may also affect how governments feed, care and create employment for their people.
The backbone of any synthesised conceptual frame for human equity in a plural and multi-cultural society needs to be conscious that the local peoples’ reality has to be the starting point, not the problem itself. It is, in such a situation, that those community of peoples’ authors – like musicians, artists, writers, filmmakers, actors and many indigenous cultural representatives – should play a meaningful role.
Namibia’s democracy movement has been influenced by foreign policy (and politics at large), as some ordinary citizens – as individuals in the country – have increased input on decisions to honour the individual’s rights. The result is that the quality and depth of our democracy is questioned, because we have an elite democracy with regular no-choice or limited-choice elections. In such a democratic situation, wherein social thinkers and artists must became aware of a new reality, that should spontaneously give way to ensure that a practical decision is also an ethical decision that derive[s] from a collective decision of multi–cultural participation.
Ethical, Practical and Collective
It is worth noting briefly where these ethical principles come from. Ethics can be defined as the product of morality. That is to say, morality supplies the profound base of ideas from which ethical standards can proceed. Morality comes from many sources, including utilitarianism, religion, humanism, language, art and design imperatives.
Namibia needs to deal with three moral foundations as representation for ethics: Western (as our National Official language, commodities and economic assistance), our own African traditional values (and sporadically eroding humanity), as well as the recent Asian influences (through trade and skills).
Therefore, it becomes important to ask: whose way of representing knowledge will be in control? A nation without their own indigenous representation system, in a worst case scenario, gets reduced to being intellectual consumers looking up to the dominant culture. In the best case, they could become producers, but only within the representation system and controlled by the dominant culture, as it happened also with some Namibian politicians who address large indigenous crowds in the official English language. The result is that African crowds no longer meet their politicians as equal partners, but rather as African politicians in Western straight-jackets through a Western language. Such meetings take place on a Western platform under conditions shaped by Western ethics and ideas of progress. That is why one notices that traditional leaders and some politicians prefer to address their audiences in an indigenous vernacular, whereafter it is translated by an interpreter into English.
“The reputation, name, and appearance, the usual measure and weight of a [imported] thing, what it counts for – originally almost always wrong and arbitrary – all this grows from generation unto generation, merely because people believe in it, until it gradually grows to be part of the thing and turns into its very body,” writes Friedrich Nietzsche. “What at first was appearance becomes in the end, almost invariably, the essence and is effective as such.”  Thus, all systems and sources (in this case, English) send out their ethical proportions of x-rays. These are often in heavy competition, not only within their own ethical systems, but also with the ethical systems sent forth by other moral foundations. This could lead to confusion, vandalism and alienation of the masses.
“First and foremost, the arts and culture must be part of all levels of education, if we are not just to raise technocrats without values or ethics. Aesthetics cannot be confined to an elite unless we wish to create conditions for vandalism and other forces of alienation in our society.”  Such concerns expressed in the Draft Arts and Culture policy of Namibia raises serious worries. Since independence, there has been an ongoing debate, discussion and negotiation on the socio-economic and cultural wealth distribution of the country. Especially between the arts practitioners, state institutions and “Principal Government Art Role Players” (as decision makers in arts development)  over the relevance of representation of foreign ethics to develop a coordinated local Namibian arts and culture industry.
Appeal To Make Collective Decisions
This debate became increasingly lively during the mid-nineties and has been heightened by the current need to develop the Namibian Arts Industry. There are three groups of detractors: ones who argue that arts development needs to be institutionalised, decision makers who are caught in the middle, and the artists and art unionists who claim we are dealing with a three-dimensional ethical decision.
Upon analysis of what is really happening in the development of national Namibian arts and relations, it becomes self-evident that, if we focus on the acts, policies and principles, all the tools are already in place.  This makes us aware that national development pervades and permeates in all aspects of human activities such as arts, science and technology. None of the three are reducible to nothing. Realising this will motivate us to implement the state policy of decentralisation in order to rise above mundane demands in life, such as unemployment, poverty and loss of values. The National Development Plan states, “Decentralisation aims to ensure economic, cultural and social economy development; provide people at the grass-roots level the opportunity to participate in their own decision making and extending democracy to them as a right based on national ideals and values.” 
Such decisions need to be faced in terms of means, ends and consequences. The decision making activity need to be goal-orientated. Where choices are involved, values come into play. Arguments are not to be put forward in a formal progression, not revealing biasness or weighed on some scale. Therefore, the decision has an ethical content which is not practical. A good example is the separation of arts from culture – or, more clearly stated, separating the artist from society – thereby allowing technocrats to negotiate separately with artists for art’s sake and with society for people’s entertainment.
The attention of the Commission was on a number occasions drawn to anomalous situation in the Directorate of Arts and Culture. Two directors operate in this Directorate one being allocated responsibilities relating to ‘arts’ and the other to ‘cultural’. Nobody was convinced that such a division is functional. This arrangement instituted by the Ministry in 1997 stems from 1994 when the Ministry of Education and Culture was rationalised, leaving the Ministry with a surplus of directors. The present uncertainty leads to disputes and wasted energy. For instance both the College of the Arts and the Ministry Head Office are currently developing arts and culture programmes in parallel. The matter was reportedly referred by the Ministry to the Public Service Commission in July 1998, with result at the time of writing. 
One of the unfortunate effects of the “Own Interest” paradigm can be the separation of Spirit as Emotion, from Matter as Technology and Mind as Science which leaves a vacuum between ethics and practicality. When a vacuum exists between the two – where technology and science have to determine their own ethics and practical values – this is when a breakdown takes place. The vacuum allows for matter and mind to come up with their own practical solution for ethics. Such a situation presents us with an oxymoron, whereby the ethically-oriented analysis without spirit is seen throughout as a self-interest approach. Is the status or position of directorship more important than the ethical and practical values that will drive artistic and cultural progress?
Thus, the concept of progress is not only about progressive development frameworks and artistic industries, which are usually scientifically and technologically oriented. It is also important to consider the spiritual development of people in the process, to realise an equal balance between artistic and cultural through collective decision making in the Namibian arts and cultural development.
Three Dimensionality of Ethics
Ethics combine the arts as beauty with technology as utility and science as the application of ideas and decisions in human activity. That is what make ethics an important factor in personal, institutional and national decision making.
We are all the product of the accumulation of our decisions. If we aim for VISION 2030 as a national dream, then we need to consider collective decision making as the only way to come up with an ethical decision. It is often the best practical way forward. Government, the private sector, parastatals and the nation, in all its diversity, should be involved.
Batra Ravi states, “Human existence has three aspects: physical, intellectual and spiritual. Intellectuals today ignore the spiritual aspect of life in their hypothesis, but to Sarkar, spirituality is as much inherent in human nature as physical and intellectual traits” . To transform the arts and culture for sustainable development, these three values should be considered for employment creation and empowerment of the Namibian masses:
Beauty = a combination of qualities that give pleasure to the senses
Arts = the expression of human artistic talent or skill
Utility = the quality of being useful, to be functional
Matter = physical substance, material or things of a specific kind; something tangible, in contrast to spirit or mind
Understanding = knowledge of the meaning, importance or cause of something
Reason = the cause of something or somebody doing something; an act, situation, etc. that explains or justifies
This brings us closer to the utilitarian three-dimensional ethics approach that allows us to apply what we preach with Vision 2030. The ability to create an interaction among these three ingredients allows us discuss the creative process applied, to come up with a product design or concept wherein vacuum is filled with a mixture of the three aspects of human existence. All the appreciative, applicable and acknowledgeable values of our particular cultural context are considered in terms of their practicality to our activities as human beings.
However, the three-dimensionality currently applied is more tilted to progress (with a capital P) in the Western sense, a tendency that has destroyed the ideals in many African countries and the world at large. The current concept of progress leans more towards “Politics, Perks and Powers” for an elite indigenous few and leaves the masses of the country “Penniless, Poor, People” (the three big Ps).  This is a situation in which Politics is justified as democracy, Perks as advantages for politicians and Power as democratic elected rulers of the people. Thus, the Politics of Progress for the sake of Prosperity could be the new national (or even continental) order. Politics has determined its own ethics without making the full circle to obtain collective consensus.
“Having tasted life as consumers in the international market, African elites became ardent believers in the global economy.”  This new belief in the global economy makes it clear that progress – which only occurs in scientific and technological spheres with their own ethics – is doomed, because it was not conceptualised within the people’s spiritual arena. So, we should insist that any concept of progress for change to advance cultural democracy in Namibia should be spiritualised. That is to say, progress should be accompanied by peoples’ spiritual values simultaneously. This is even confirmed by the current concept of progress, where the emphasis is placed more on the advancement of science and technology and not art.
The Art of Designing Cultural Diversity
People always find it difficult to see the huge difference between analysis and design. This becomes difficult if one’s aim is to implement cultural diversity in Namibia within its different ethnic groups. With analysis, one first needs to recognise past and current cultural situations. Thus, in order to understand the Namibian Cultural situation (and to know what to do about it) is to reconstruct the past and reconsider the present in order to come up with a meaningful cultural coexistence.
Because of past German, British and South African colonisation – and the slow pace of cultural democracy during post-independence – Namibian communities experience a challenging process of nation-building based on a cultural understanding of unity and diversity.
Culture is an aspect of human life that cannot and should not be guided or developed in particular, not from any foreign situation or perspective. Such attempts were already experienced and proved to be a failure. The same sentiments were also stated in recent findings of a presidential commission on arts and culture report:
Consideration of culture is not a simple matter. Namibia has, for instance, recently had to grapple with cultural questions in relation to the proposed ‘Epupa’ hydroelectric project … The fact that such concerns are thorny does not mean that they should not be grasped, since one is often dealing with issues of human rights, and of heritage that is irreplaceable, as well as the pressing need to create employment and economic growth. Many projects simply failed as the designers did not consider the cultural context in which the project had to be realised. Inappropriate ideas and colonial attitudes about superiority of certain cultures, such as ‘modernisation,’ still pervades in many projects. 
Sociologists and anthropologists have long been interested in studying the dynamic within and between different cultures. Culture refers to specific ways of life in a particular community. Culture differs, on the first level, in beliefs, attitudes and practices. On the second level, the style of material culture in dress, architecture, leisure, patterns and art, including preferred foods and modes of preparation. Thirdly, culture differs symbolically through norms and values, including religion, ritual and political authority. These primary levels enable us to determine central belief systems in order to assess behaviours and attitudes of artists, actors and spokespeople within cultures, as well as to understand our social structures. Thus, for someone who derives from a monoculture, being unaware of the aforementioned statement in the Presidential Commission on Arts and Culture Report, the following may be valid:
If you are immersed in one culture, it is hard to imagine that there are other very different cultures. If you base thinking in one culture, it will be hard for you to imagine that there might be different cultures of thinking. At the simplest level, the ‘design’ of culture is very different. Judgement is about assessing ‘what is.’ Design is about producing possibilities of what can be. There are possibilities that can be judged, but judgement itself can never produce possibilities. It could be said that, if we had a rich possibility culture, then law courts would have a hard time because other ‘possible’ explanations might become so prevalent that conviction would be difficult. 
To be immersed only in one’s own culture – and being unaware of the intricacies of other cultures – cultural relativism becomes the diametric opposite, cultural stereotypes. Both are collective mental constructs (i.e., they do germinate in the minds of certain humans). But while the former leads to understanding, compassion and cooperation, the latter leads to misunderstanding, hatred and conflict.
Such a situation results in the exciting times in which artists live today. But it is also a dangerous time. Today, many human conflicts arise from a failure to recognise cultural complexities or from perceived threats to cultural values. The road to security and prosperity – for artists, politicians, technocrats, decision makers of cultural policies and social structures – requires that we celebrate and encourage our cultural difference instead of negating one another.
Cultural stereotypes also lead to formula bound thinking that imprisons the imagination and leads to tokenism. It stops us from using what we know to be the great asset of our species: human versatility. Especially if one considers such a small population in a large country with more than thirteen different indigenous language groups. Even the textural value of its flora and fauna are diverse, from agricultural, to marine/fisheries, to mining, to tourism, etc. Thus, if we are to free ourselves from such formulas, our imagination needs many sorts of nourishment and stimuli. Among them, it certainly needs arts.
Truth is not absolute. Through other cultures, we return with new insights onto our own particular society. Art helps demonstrate that we are different, yet one. 
Value is to Design …………AS…………. Truth is to Analysis
With analysis, we put past and present events together in order to create and deliver value. The design is not there until we make it and put it there. Thus, we need to take note of the differences in our artistic and cultural practices – as well as the symbols of Namibian people that make us one – in order to comprehend the diversity and unity in the country.
Truth Is in the Hands of Artists
Education has always been obsessed with truth and analysis. Design has been almost completely neglected and has been relegated more to graphic design, dress design and architecture. It is considered that design is not fully a part of everyday thinking. That is a real disaster which has continued for centuries. That is why politicians were so embarrassed by their intelligence and political advisors on the Iraqi conflict. Look at the problems created by Bush and Blair. Judgment and justification only made conflicts matters worst. There is a need to design a way forward. It should not be left in the hands of a few clever government principal art role players (or technocrats) appointed by the system alone. The truth is also in the hands of artists and grassroots people.
It is said that clever people are good at solving difficult problems. They can cope with a degree of difficulty that confuses the less clever person. But they are not good at solving easy problems. They tend to give a superficial answers. The ability to tackle easy problems with great fluency and depth seems to be quite separate from the ability to tackle difficult problems.
Qualities such as breadth, perspective, balance, assessment of priorities, realism and ‘actuality’ are rather different from those that go to make up academic cleverness. A brilliant mind often uses its thinking to construct an ingenious logical argument based on premises so narrow that the outcome is confusing and useless to ordinary people. Being able to spot the rare implication that no else can spot is not the same as being able to allot priorities in an effective manner.
Analytical thinking is not the same as constructive Thinking.
Talkers and doers do not use the same mental abilities
A talker is forever classifying, relating and distinguishing.
A doer is forever simplifying, assessing importance, looking at consequences.
Value is to Design ……AS…… Truth is to Analysis
Thus, the task to add value to life is in the hands of the artists. Only by improving the life of the marginalised artists may we have a chance to improve the life of others. Artists are not above the ordinary, neither below nor on the sides. Artists are an integral part their communities. That’s why they are the first to feel and mirror the joys and sorrows of their people in their artworks.
Artists must continue to enrich us by delving deep into the soul of society. Art should show both what we want and what we do not want to know of ourselves. 
No artists can claim to have access to truth – or even any real version of a happening – but one may agree that artists do have a slight advantage, because what artists do with their talents and creative abilities is lend passion, sensuality and emotion. Art productions lend a kind of spiritual element to reality that enhances the truth to inspire change.
Artist in Society
Artists are a separately identifiable group of workers. Society takes note of their role without having a clear idea of what it is they do. This results in questions like: who needs the artist and his/her art? What does s/he give? To whom does s/he give? From whom does s/he take? Whom does s/he serve? Should s/he serve? Is s/he free in a society of marketing, freedom of speech and media?
There are many kinds of artists from different backgrounds in Namibia. Some really do not have a social conscious; they do not see the connection between art and life. Others are very conscious about the human situation around them and use their art to improve the situation.
Art can be transforming and educational, or even entertaining (with a bit of comedy), but it can be also revolutionary. There exists huge misfortunes like HIV/Aids, crime, rape, gender abuse, corruption, ethnicity and nepotism in Namibia. That’s when one needs the artists who are conscious of such social misery to use their art in such a way that it transforms society.
For most artists, the world has a moral dimension, meaning there are overriding issues of integrity, dignity and responsibility; they describe values for human survival and peace. This is true for many of us, but the artists have the ability to express these issues so powerfully that they can influence a very wide audience. 
A Namibian artist is no different from other artists in the world or on the continent. We have seen the kindheartedness of artists who donate their art works for fundraising to aid the poor, HIV/Aids victims and many other worthy social causes in the country. We have also witnessed to courageous side of artists who organised the Oruuano Artists Union and mobilised a protest march to the Namibian Presidential Residence.  During July 2004, artists once more exhibited their freedom of speech by having a meeting with the Namibian Parliament Selected Standing Committee to query their frustration with Arts and Culture technocrats in the government system. All these are manifestations of Namibian artists’ willingness to stand firm for their own rights and also that of the diverse social fabric of which they are an integral part. 
The concerns of artists in the African sub-Saharan region does not differ widely. All comes down to a matter of hegemony, felt too in South Africa about six years after majority rule. They also had to confront the new constraints that stood in the way of the artists’ mission, duties and status.
[A] number of exiting discussions [are] about of being “black” in South Africa; the implication of racial stereotyping; the reasons for the lack of access for black artists to the programme of the mainstream, often white dominated, cultural institutions; and the notion of standards used by gatekeepers in such institutions. 
But, a very important African writer warns also that, if the artist thinks of searching for his/her African personality as a battle cry, it’s bound to throw the artist into a stance, an attitude, that will result into suffering of his/her art. Which imply that the artist should always stay true to him/herself in order to gain respect and authority from society, institutions and the system.
An important part of the required cultural work is to keep on reinforcing an approach of cultural diversity that falls on the shoulders of artists, intellectuals, writers, poets and politicians, to build bridges between different peoples and cultures in Namibia. By encouraging and enhancing dialogue between our diverse communities, thinkers, economists and policy makers (including artists) will enable Namibians. A vital ingredient for both individual and societal fulfilment – as well as the sustainability of our bio-diversity – is to foster artistic and cultural experience so as to create a rich united and diverse culture.
Lastly, it is hoped that this kind of discussion will become more and more an integral component of Namibian ethical and social existence. The role of artists is to serve the cause of peace, coexistence, compassion, cooperation, generosity, reciprocity, solidarity and mutual understanding, to throw artistic light with spiritual response to the crises sparked by ongoing economic, technological and scientific upheaval in contemporary Namibia, it’s neighbours, the continent and the world at large.
 Paul Tillich, Theology of Peace, edited by Ronald H. Stone (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1990).
 Tunde Obadina, “The Myth of Neo-Colonialism,” Africa Economic Analysis (February 2004).
 Obadina, “The Myth of Neo-Colonialism.”
 Friedrich Nietzsche quoted in Rajiv Malhotra, “Axis of Neo-Colonialism,” World Affairs 11, no. 3 (Autumn 2007): 37.
 “Unity, Identity and Creativity for Prosperity: Policy on Arts and Culture of the Republic of Namibia” (Windhoek: Ministry of Basic Education, Sport and Culture, 2001), 12. Available here.
 “Frustrated Artists Take Their Fight to Parliament,” New Era, July 16–18, 2004, 24-26.
 As informed by the UNESCO Declaration of the Status of the Artist, “Unity, Identity and Creativity for Prosperity,” 2.
 “A decentralisation policy for the Republic of Namibia: Decentralisation, Development and Democracy” (Windhoek: Ministry of Regional, Local Government and Housing, 1997), 39. Available here.
 Presidential Commission on Arts and Culture Report: Outstanding Matters.
 Ravi Batra, “A New Concept of Progress,” Rennaissance Universal. Available here.
 A recent work of art by Joe Madisia, titled Politics, Perks and Powers. Available here.
 Tunde Obadina, “The Myth of Neo-Colonialism.”
 Presidential Commission on Arts and Culture Report: Outstanding Matters.
 Edward de Bono, email correspondence, July 10, 2004
 Catherine Thick, Right To Hope: Global Problems, Global Visions (London: Taylor & Francis, 1995), xiv.
 Phillip Segola quoted by Tomeletso Sereetsi, “Segola Calls on Artists to Work Hard,” Mmegi, July 21, 2004. Available here.
 Thick, Right to Hope, xi.
 “Nujoma asked to rescue the arts,” The Namibian, April 7, 2000, 3.
 “Frustrated Artists Take Their Fight to Parliament,” New Era, 24-26.
 “Talk is Therapy For Black Artists,” The Namibian, April 7, 2000, 4.