EPISODE 59: CRAFTING CHANGE: THE INTERSECTION OF ART, CULTURE AND JUSTICE
Mary Morten: Welcome back to “Gathering Ground.” I’m Mary Morten, your host and the president of Morten Group, LLC. We’re back from our summer hiatus and we’re excited to share today’s episode with you. We’re exploring a topic that resonates deeply with many of us: the transformative power of art and culture as catalyst for change.
Art has never been just an expression but a force, one that can challenge norms, inspire communities, and bridge divides. And yet, the journey of using art for social justice is often layered with complexities and triumphs, both personal and collective.
In this episode we’re joined by four remarkable leaders who have committed their careers to this work: Gabrielle Lyon, executive director of Illinois Humanities; Jane Saks, president of Project& and artistic director for Monuments to Movements; Daniel Ash, CEO of The Field Foundation of Illinois; and Michelle Boone, president and CEO of The Poetry Foundation. Each with their unique insights and passions, they remind us that the arts can be a reflection of society while being an integral part of reshaping it. As you listen I invite you to consider your own connections to art and culture. How do they shape your understanding of the world? And more importantly, how can we all become stewards of this transformative power to foster social justice in our communities?
So welcome to “Gathering Ground.” As you know, we’re going to be talking about art and all the incredible things that you all do around the arts and culture and how that’s connected to social change and social justice.
What we generally like to start with, however, on “Gathering Ground” – and this is – I just want to acknowledge, this is Michelle’s second time here. (Laughs.) We did a live, actually – we did a live podcast back in the early days of COVID with Claire and a number of folks around the arts and just what was going to happen while we were in – you know, during the time of COVID. So I’m excited to have you back again today, Michelle.
But I want to start with giving our listeners a little bit of a background on each of you and have you just talk about, how did you get to your role that you are in now? Just a little bit of context so people understand your connection to the arts and artmaking and that sort of thing.
So I’m going to start with you, Gabe.
Gabrielle Lyon: Thank you so much for having me, and it’s really exciting to be in this conversation with the other folks that you’ve invited.
So in some ways what I’m doing is what I’ve always done and always cared about. You know, I am an educator, I’m a historian, I’m a writer, but I’ve spent most of my life doing social change work, systems change work, so I worked in the small schools movement and looked at kind of whole-school change; I got very involved in science and technology education for historically underrepresented and really disenfranchised young people of color and women and girls, a lot of youth development, lot of planning. But, you know, the crux of the role at Illinois Humanities is – first and foremost, it’s still about access and equity and it’s still about putting people in their lives at kind of the center of design. So, you know, I feel like I’ve come home. I love the job. I love the footprint. But it really is kind of a continuation of the issues that I already was caring about and trying to work on.
Mary Morten: Wonderful. Thank you so much.
And well, you know, also just give us a little intro, a little bit more information on Illinois Humanities and what you do there.
Gabrielle Lyon: Sure. I mean, Illinois Humanities is a statewide nonprofit organization and we do three things: I mean, we are a grantmaker so we are a funder but we also do programs and the programs focus on two things: access to education, primarily for income-eligible adults, and, you know, our beating heart is public programs, free public programs that put the humanities at the center, to let people who otherwise might not come together come together, be in conversation, reflect on lives, be creative, connected, those kinds of things. So statewide we’re the state partner for The National Endowment for the Humanities and we’re really – you know, really looking at all residents having the opportunity that lets us, you know, strengthen our civic fabric.
Mary Morten: Wonderful. And you have an annual luncheon every year where you also acknowledge some very extraordinary folks and we’re happy to have one of them here today. Jane was the recipient of the Beacon Award this year. Correct?
So I’m going to come to you next, Jane. And tell us a little bit about how you arrived to where you are now, particularly your work with Project&.
Jane Saks: Thank you for putting me in this company today. I often say that words are defined by the company they keep and I think people are too. So I’m looking pretty good today.
I would say that I’ve never had a position that existed before I created it and took it, and that has been a real gift. Not many people get to really define and do the work they want to do in the world and we are all part of a very tiny, tiny group of people who get to. So I take it very seriously that I get to choose what I want to do. I take a lot of risks. I have really never chosen something because of the system or the support of it but more because of the ideas. I feel like I came to arts and culture and social change almost preordained when my parents, who really brought so many of those threads together – but I would say the ecology in which I work is different. I think of the work that I do in an ecology where every element is necessary but it’s not necessary at the same time or in the same way. So like a true equality, it’s equitable, not equal, and that’s really how I think about building the projects that I’m doing, building the institution or the organization, like Project&, building a team, building the work that I do. And I’ve done a lot.
Currently I run Project&, which is an organization that collaborates with artists and thinkers and activists to create new models of cultural participation and equity. And what that means is that the current models are not working, so why not try something else? And so the core of my work is about what question I start with, and so it’s usually not the question other people, other groups are. I currently teach at Harvard and I had run institution for the Study of Women and Gender in the Arts and Media. I also sit on a re-envisioning the police board. I really think that there are no unnatural partners and so that really is at the core of my work too.
Mary Morten: Wonderful.
Daniel, let’s go to you and tell us about your background and how you arrived at The Field Foundation.
Daniel Ash: First of all, thank you, Mary. It’s an honor to be with you all of you. It means a lot to me that you would invite me here.
So my background – my career has no rhyme or reason to it. I used to drive my late father crazy because he so wanted me to get a degree, go to law school, and be a lawyer. And I decided not to do that. And what I did do was follow my heart from opportunity to opportunity. So I’ve worked as a fundraiser. I’ve worked as a PR person. I’ve worked as a policy analyst. I’ve worked as an advocate, an organizer. So I’ve had all these jobs, from working in the HIV/AIDS movement to working on anti-poverty work to working for an organization focused on adolescent health. What I’m proud of is that each step of my career has been something that meant a lot to me and I was compelled to do the work. And I start there because my decision to join philanthropy was one that – was the first career choice I made because everybody told me, Daniel, you should go work in philanthropy. And I made the decision to join the Chicago Community Trust 12 years ago and my first few years in philanthropy were probably the loneliest years of my professional career because it was the one career step that wasn’t motivated by a deep desire to change something or impact something in my life. And so it took me a while to figure out how I could channel my passion, like, in philanthropy and – now what I do, my day job today, is I have the honor of leading The Field Foundation of Illinois and one reason why I was drawn to this position is because my predecessor, Angelique Power, who we all know and she’s absolutely wonderful at The Skillman Foundation in Detroit now – she had taken a legacy foundation in the city of Chicago that was for, all intents and purposes, a general foundation – we funded arts and culture broadly. Did good work but we did not have a focus on racial justice until Angelique created that focus. And so when I received an opportunity to come here, one of the first statements I made to the search consultant was, if you’re interested in a new strategy, if you’re interested in a new focus, something other than racial justice, I’m not the person for you. The good news is that the board remained committed to the work that Angelique had put in place and I have the opportunity to build on it.
Mary Morten: Thank you so much.
And Michelle, bring us on home. Tell us about your journey to The Poetry Foundation.
Michelle Boone: Well, it’s a long, jagged, zigzag journey, not a straight path. And I’ll offer my thanks to you for including me in this conversation. And yeah, thanks for making me follow all of these illustrious careers –
Mary Morten: (Laughs.)
Michelle Boone: – that people have shared. And thanks for inviting me back. It’s a pleasure to be back on the program with you, Mary, and in company with these dynamic folks today.
You know, for me, my career path was really more about a process of elimination. You know, when you’re in school and you’re young and people say, what do you want to be when you grow up, and for me it was kind of, as I said, a process of elimination. You know, my family didn’t have the resources to send me to medical school and I had no interest, quite frankly, in the sciences and so the thought of going to college plus more years of school that my parents couldn’t afford – so that knocked out, you know, the medical profession. And I knew when I went to school, like, I only have four years and I had to get what I needed to be able to go out and support myself. Like, it wasn’t an option about going back home or, you know, having the luxury to have a gap year and think about things. It was like, no, I’ve got to figure out and get a job and be able to support myself. And so, in thinking about that, you know, I thought at first, oh, well, maybe I’ll be a schoolteacher and my mom’s best friend was a schoolteacher who, when I said that, verbalized that out loud, she said, oh, honey, whatever you do don’t go into education. (Laughs.) So she was a burnt-out teacher. But one thing that I did know was, well, I didn’t think I had a lot of skills or, quite frankly, didn’t really know about a lot of options professionally. I was always inspired by being around creative people and I recognized I didn’t necessarily have the talent to build a career as a creative person, but I knew there were jobs out there to support those people. And so I wanted to be one of those people too. How can I position myself, find work that is elevating the gifts that people who have the talent and want to share with the world, how can I help make that more visible? And so I’ve been fortunate to spend the first part of my career working in entertainment and film, television, and the music industry, and then gradually finding my way into the nonprofit side of the creative world, working in nonprofit arts organizations and now in philanthropy. And so while I don’t have a background in poetry, I am not a poet – actually, that was the first line on my cover lever, “I am not a poet” – what I am is an experienced arts administrator and I really love going into organizations, kind of doing the hard work of rebuilding, restructuring, and connecting with people and helping to elevate that work to even higher heights. And so, for me, being at The Poetry Foundation is an opportunity and has been an opportunity to work with an art form that I really had not had much exposure to. The literary arts was the one area of my background where I really did not have an experience in so it was an opportunity for learning, quite frankly, for me, more about the art form, more about the people who make the work, and then also the ongoing challenges of managing institutions, organizations, and particularly during the troubling times of the pandemic. So I came into The Poetry Foundation right in the height of the pandemic, so that was another layer of learning opportunity for me as a leader, navigating all of those challenges during the time of crisis.
Mary Morten: Wonderful. Thank you so much. I love that background. I mean, again, I’ve known all of you through different, your different roles,nd gosh, I was just thinking as you were talking, Michelle, when did I meet you first? Maybe it was when you were at DCASE perhaps, maybe? I don’t know for sure but it’s been a while. (Laughs.) It’s been a while and I know I’ve worked with you at Navy Pier.
So let’s get into this conversation a bit, and Daniel, I want to start with you, with regard to some of the work you’re doing at The Field Foundation and knowing that The Field Foundation has this focus around racial justice. You’ve also started to really award grants in a very different way. There are a number of people that I know that receive grants who are emerging artists and, as you know, just a little bit of support goes a long way. So I’m curious what you think about the foundation’s work that you’re doing in the creative sector, how it contributes to the mission, and what impact do you hope to see overall with the direction of the work and how you’re making grants?
Daniel Ash: Let me start, Mary, by providing our audience with some context.
Mary Morten: OK.
Daniel Ash: The Field Foundation has a very, very, very simple north star. Our north star is to create the conditions for power building to occur in neighborhoods that have been historically harmed by systemic racism. We have a very specific geographical focus. We tend to bias our dollars toward communities on Chicago’s South Side, south suburbs, and Chicago’s West Side, neighborhoods that are predominantly Black and brown and where there’s high poverty, higher levels of violence, et cetera. The objective for Field is – it’s simple; it’s, like, to support the conditions for movements to unfold. And we see the four critical ingredients to movement infrastructure: it’s community organizing, leadership development, local news and civic storytelling, and the arts. And in philanthropy people like to talk about their thesis or their theories of change. I’m not an expert on all that, so I’m going to be very plainspoken. So, for us, it’s that we fund that infrastructure at the community level; the residents in those communities can come together and build a set of properties, an agenda, if you will, that they deem important. The art – the world of creative spaces, creative work – funding that is – for those who have studied social movements – is absolutely critical because it’s – the artists force us not only to think deeply, to be introspective, but artists actually call us to the public square, right? They actually move us from being very individual focused to collectively focused. And quite frankly, when something needs to happen or something is creating pain in the community, it’s usually the artists that are the first documenters of that. So, in addition to inspiring civic participation, they’re often those – they’re often the people who help us understand what’s going on, emotionally and intellectually. So our premise is that funding arts and, alongside that, funding organizing, and then from those communities supporting leaders who come from those communities and are leading community and then supporting an ecosystem where information and ideas can flow freely, our communities – particularly our communities on the Southwest Side – need that infrastructure to transform their block and their neighborhoods, their communities.
One thing that – you mentioned about – sort of our unique approach to grantmaking – and I don’t know if it’s that unique; I think we’re just – we’re trying to make things less complicated at The Field Foundation, right? We’re trying to actually say to ourselves, if we want to create the conditions for power building, if we want to create the conditions for change to come from that power, to be a result of that power, then we have to finance the work in a way that allows the artist, the organizer, the journalist, all of them should be able to have access to the capital they need to do their work. And as a small foundation, we want to model what it looks like to match your process and your decision making, the grant making with the ambition of your strategy. So we’re – instead of awarding lots of relatively small grants, we’re awarding multi-year grants that are higher-dollar value. And for us, we’re moving – our average grant size when I arrived was $22,000 for an annual grant. Again, we’re a small foundation; our endowment’s about $65 million on a good day and we’re moving our average grant size to $50,000 but we’re making multi-year commitments.
One last thing I will say: We also want to maintain our reputation for being that foundation that is early in money. Like friends and family, if you think about that investment model. A lot of artists, lot of organizers, a lot of folks who are deeply rooted in community and have the passion, desire to make something big happen, oftentimes philanthropy ignores them when they’re young, untested, you know, just full of ambition, and maybe don’t have the track record that you see some of the aging artists have. And we have a reputation for being that organization that funds organizations early, supports individuals early, and so we still want to maintain that, even with, as we move to higher-level amounts and multi-year grants.
I’ll stop there, Mary, but that’s my response to your prompt.
Mary Morten: No, that sounds great and I want to go to Michelle because you –
Michelle Boone: No, I was just listening to Daniel. I think he’s being extremely modest about the work at The Field Foundation. What they’re doing is really transformative and it’s an approach to philanthropy that isn’t one that is often adopted by the field, in that it’s not a top-down agenda but they really are investing in the ideas and the work of the community and the people it’s intended to serve. And so I didn’t want to let that go by without recognizing the courage and the tenacity of, you know, the small but mighty Field Foundation to really be at the forefront of – you know, people talk about trust-based philanthropy, but I think this is, like, what they’re doing – they’re doing it.
Mary Morten: Living it, yes.
Daniel Ash: Hey, Michelle, I really appreciate you saying that and it means a lot coming from you and knowing who you are. I actually want to just reflect, like, an example of what Michelle described. We have a partnership with The MacArthur Foundation where we support arts organizations on the South and West Side and, as part of that effort, we have a community panel that meets three to four times to review all of the proposals and they make all their decisions. This is my second year sort of being connected to that panel, but I don’t sit in on the meetings but I joined the first one for about 10 minutes and I say unequivocally to them that my promise is to respect the wisdom of that group. And that group includes artists, creators. And the only reason they’re in that room applying for a grant is because they work for organizations that are too big for the program we have in partnership with MacArthur. And the first time I did that I think a number of the artists looked at me with skepticism, right, because it’s easy for somebody to say that. But they experienced – they’ve shared this – they experienced times when – you know, there’s always that one organization that the CEO is going to nudge and say, you know, I know you guys are going to make all the decisions but, you know, here, fund that organization – (laughs) – make sure they’re on the list. And I don’t do that. I refuse to do that because, to Michelle’s point, I truly want the community to decide who receives the funding, who the community is deeming as important and worthy of funding. And then the trust is this, is not choosing these organizations and then walking away and letting them do just whatever. Of course we’re going to let them do what they want to do, but it’s also saying as a foundation, we are going to be in service to you, so if you have an issue, you know, if your cash flow is screwed up this month, we want to be the foundation you call and then I want to be the foundation leader that will call other foundation leaders and call my board and figure out how we can help you do either a crisis or, quite frankly, leverage an opportunity.
Jane Saks: I was just going to say, Daniel, I mean you are doing extraordinary work and I’m really glad that, Michelle, you stopped the train because I think one of the things you’re saying – as a grantee that never fits into any food group of any foundation – (laughs) – it’s a real reciprocal relationship, right, and so I’m not saying we don’t live in a capitalist world and you have the money but you also recognize that you can’t do your work without those kind of partners. And often it happens like, OK, we have the money but you don’t have anything else, right, and then we come with the kind of work you want to do and it’s not a partnership, right? And so I think what you’re describing is really about a reciprocal relationship and not just like when you call foundations’ partners but the idea that you might also say, hey, I saw this in another group and, you know, does this work for you, does it not, or having people bring things that they’re learning, grantees, to you and really thinking about how community isn’t just the place where the grant is going, right, but there’s an opportunity for community in every step of the work that we all do.
Mary Morten: Gabe, what would you like to add?
Gabrielle Lyon: Well, I guess I just kind of want to pick up the thread Daniel spoke so beautifully about, the invitation that artists, you know, make, you know, maybe first to capture that pulse and give us the opportunity to be in conversation with one another. You know, a big part of Illinois Humanities is, like, making protecting space to have conversations about the arts. And, you know, Mary, I guess the thing that I kind of wanted to put on the table was this kind of tension between the role of kind of the arts, the most famous of the humanities, right, the arts and our understanding of the role that arts and culture played during COVID, right? We shine this light on the fact that – at Illinois Humanities we primarily – we’re itty-bitty, so we’re like super itty-bitty. I think, you know, in the biggest year we gave away a million dollars and that was a very exciting thing. We give away – we have maybe 300-plus grantee partners so we’re talking about small dollars but we’re learning a lot. And one of the things that I think is really critical in this moment of talking about the role of arts and culture and social change in our political moment in Chicago and Illinois is this tension between a growing understanding – like, undeniable understanding that in times of crisis, like the recent pandemic or like, you know, gun violence, right, people in communities go to arts and culture places and spaces because they feel connected, it’s a way to not feel isolated, it’s a way to make sure they’re in community, right? These are the – we’re talking about trust – trusted places and spaces. And yet, we’re also looking at increasingly difficult – it’s increasingly difficult to have these community-based organizations and their leaders be central to economic development plans. We’re seeing that – you know, a lot of investment that was episodic around racial equity made space for artists and culture makers and organizations, and as our kind of racial equity priority moves away from kind of front-burner – for some places; I don’t think this particular community of folks talking today – but as that moves away it’s also winnowing the windows of opportunity for folks who do arts and culture as their lifeblood, to have opportunities for funding. Funding is also not the only way that arts and culture happen or the only way that’s important, but it’s just an interesting moment that we’re in where I think there is – like, the picture that, Daniel, you paint of a kind of aligned, a through line around economic development, leadership but also community well-being. You know, we’re looking at that at the state level, but the space to make and protect investment in arts and culture is actually, I think, winnowing for things that have nothing to do with our increasingly understood value of them.
Jane Saks: And I guess I would like to add just something, like, from what you’re both saying but in a more kind of philosophical way, is like, you know, what art and culture and social justice does is it creates a reality before it’s a reality. You know, I’m a social justice worker because I haven’t seen that, right? So we are engaged in a process to create something that doesn’t really exist yet and it’s really the center of both social justice and, you know, issues of equity and creative endeavors. And I think what it does is art articulates what doesn’t exist and what can and can’t be imagined. You know, it’s freedom, it’s full expression, it’s movement, it’s another time, another way, another place. It’s also what questions we ask.
And that’s also a major part of what you’re talking about, Daniel, is, you know, if we enter through a different question, we really come up with a whole different process and a whole different way of not answering that question but engaging in the process.
I sit on a police board of a law school that is about, you know, re-analyzing the police, right, not fund or defund. But at the first meeting, you know, the chair said to me, you know, Jane, you’re the only one who didn’t answer the question if we should fund or defund, and I was like, you know, yeah, because that’s not my question; I don’t even know how to answer that question; it’s not my question. So he basically was like yeah, OK, so what’s question? And I was like, well, who do we aspire to be, and how do we want to self-regulate, right? And this, what we have now is clearly not working but how can we think about those things if we’re only given the same questions and the same elements? And I think that’s also what art and creativity does is it says, well, everybody’s been looking at it like this, you know, everybody’s been asking this question, everyone says how many inches in my way to that or, you know, but it doesn’t exist yet, right, and some of those processes and really, like, creative practice in any field, right, is about asking a question of something that’s not even there yet.
Michelle Boone: And I would just say, like, of course art and social justice are connected because, you know, artists are citizens too and they have the skills and the talent, right, to interpret what’s happening in the world, what’s happening around them, through their creative expression, right, and make it visible to all the rest of us. So the artists are best able to articulate, whether it’s through music, a visual medium, writing a poem, like they can see what’s happening to them, to their families, to their communities, to their neighborhoods, and make it visible to the rest of the world through art. And so it’s not surprising, right, that there would be this connection at the storytelling. The call and response of what’s happening in the world gets made visible and seen because of the way artists interpret that.
Mary Morten: How do you see the work you’re doing at The Poetry Foundation really leaning into that and expanding, if you will, the influence and the transformative nature of words and how they’re used?
Michelle Boone: Well, I mean, we’re seeing it, like, in real time right now with what’s happening in Israel and Gaza with poets, you know, so eloquently who are most impacted, on both sides, by what’s happening, sharing the real-time experiences through poetry. You know, for me as a child of the ’70s, you know, that whole Black Arts Movement, you know, was those poets who were really capturing the intensity of injustice of what was happening to Black people and sharing that through poetry. Like, I see it and witness it on a daily basis from the young poets that we engage with that are fighting for trans rights, LGBTQ rights, the racial dynamics, the global dynamics, how women – women’s rights. So they are seeing what’s happening around the world, what’s happening to them personally, internalizing that and then sharing it back out into something really beautiful, sometimes actually really harsh but in poetic form.
Mary Morten: And Gabe, what were you going to add?
Gabrielle Lyon: I mean, I think – this is a very stimulating conversation so I have a lot of energy. I’m just going to offer the following: Daniel earlier used the phrase public square and, you know, I think a lot about well, what does it mean to ignite imagination? What does it mean to be a public? And one of the things that, again, I travel around to communities that have less people in them than my daughter’s high school. (Laughs.) You know, these are small places that don’t have newspapers per se; the news media that they get is national. All of these kinds of things feed on each other. But I’m very struck by this relationship between arts, humanities, and public. You know, privatization really fuels polarization. It keeps us apart, it keeps us from having the sense that we can be together. You know, those narratives about that we are polarized, that we are different, that we hate each other, that urban and rural have nothing in common – all of these things are so trite and banal and uncomplicated and it’s enabled by privatization. So this idea that an art work, a performance gives us an excuse to be a public, to form a public together is very powerful. You know, it takes intentionality, it takes an art to gather around those things and to do it well and it takes craft and all that, but at the end of the day, I think this question of, like, well, where is the public square, how does it happen, you know, there’s been a real erosion of that in arts and humanities, heritage, culture, history. Those are the champions, the beacons, as Jane Saks manifests – you know, the beacons of the things that help us turn statements into questions, take something that’s black and white and makes it a rainbow. But I just am really struck by the intentionality required to ensure that we are making those spaces for the public experience, or for people just to experience, like, what is a public? You’ve got your private pool, you don’t go to the public pool. (Laughs.) You know, those kinds of real basic things.
Mary Morten: Thank you, Gabe. We’re going to take a quick break. You’re listening to “Gathering Ground” and we’re back in a moment.
Hi, everyone; thanks so much for joining me on “Gathering Ground.” We want to hear from you. If you have any questions about your work in nonprofits or any of the topics that we've covered here on “Gathering Ground,” send them on in; send them to mary@gatheringgroundpodcast.com. That's mary @ gatheringgroundpodcast – all one word – dot com. We look forward to hearing from you.
So welcome back, everyone. You’re listening to “Gathering Ground” and we’re talking about arts and culture and social justice and all kinds of things today with our guests, Daniel Ash and Michelle Boone and Gabrielle Lyon and Jane Saks.
And so I want to come back to you, Jane, for a little bit and talk to you about the artistic director role you’re playing around movements and monuments. Talk a little bit about that and how that’s connected to, you know, things that I know are important to you around, you know, radical feminism and things of that nature. And before you respond to that, I do want to add that certainly, you know, we’ve had a lot of contact through the Chicago Foundation for Women and that is where I really understood, when we’re thinking about this foundation work and philanthropy, why the small amounts of money early on – you know, Gabe, to your point – really matter because the foundation often is the first one to fund a project when no one else will touch it. That has been my experience as somebody who spent a lot of time with the Chicago Foundation for Women and that is something that women’s funds overall have done for many years. And so it’s wonderful to see that really moving beyond women’s funds and just really lifting up these organizations that need support because they’re doing critical, critical work. So I just wanted to add that in.
But Jane, talk to us a little bit about your work.
Jane Saks: I think that one thing that really – like, I can’t really talk about my work without talking about creating queer space and I think when I talk about asking different questions, coming at things in different ways, it’s at the core of my work. And I think that, you know, queer space is a kind of space that appropriates certain aspects of the material and social world in which we all live and then composes them into counter-constructions and really freer spaces of expression and resistance and really space to be the other and to be ourselves on our own terms, and it’s less defined and less regulated. And I think some of the queerest space of all is the void, you know, the emptiness, the absence, the possibilities, the magic, the, you know, yet-to-be-defined loss, and it really is something that really guides my work because it’s more ambivalent and more porous and it really kind of feeds our imagination in a way that our kind of space and beings that we negotiate every day don’t always. And so we really think a lot about the idea of queer space and creating it. So I’m president and artistic director of Project& and I said we collaborate with artists to create new models and then we do these very large-scale projects, sometimes multi-year, sometimes – they all take different shapes.
Mary Morten: Give us an example.
Jane Saks: It really –
Mary Morten: Yeah, give us an example.
Jane Saks: So Monuments to Movements is one and then, like, things like Working in America, which was this large-scale, multimedia exhibition that traveled to public spaces. The idea was nobody has to pay to think and talk about work; I didn’t want them to spend working money. Things like “Pan,” which was a participatory opera that was highly professional and people committed to building the opera together. We premiered it on the West Side of Chicago in Garfield, the gold dome, not the conservatory, and now it’s traveled to communities all over the country and fancy places like London and Paris and San Francisco orchestra, and then we sold out Carnegie Hall, which was pretty great. But you don’t need them at that point. Do you know what I mean? It’s like you’re creating these other spaces and these other ways of being. And there are youth as well as adults. Like, we had – in New York we had, at the Kitchen, we had an 85-year-old all the way to 7-year-old Syrian refugees. And this idea that what does it mean to create something together, what does it mean not to just share space but create that space and redefine it? So Monuments to Movements is one of our large-scale initiatives and what it was, when people were calling me up asking me to sit on committees as heads were rolling and some, you know, in, like, Bristol and then across the U.S., and they’re like, will you sit on the committee and help us analyze what we should do with these sculptures and I was like, you know, that’s not my work; that’s not my question. You know, we loved Columbus yesterday but now that we beheaded him we don’t? We’re still those people from yesterday. You know, it was like, people – you know, you rip up pictures of bad hair days; you’re like, it still existed. You still walked around in public, you know. (Laughs.) And so then, you know, one guy was basically like, OK, smartass, like, what’s your question and I was like, hey, you know, give me some money and I’ll tell you what it is. Of course, it was during COVID so I could get people from across the world in workshops, you know, for like four and five hours and it was really talking about what should be monumentalized. What do we value about who we are? And I really thought what we value is our collective action. What we value are movements. That’s where our real achievements come in. Sure, there’s somebody who is a leader but real movements exist in multiple places, they are not controlled by one person, and you can engage in them. And so the idea was that we should really have monuments to movements and we should be celebrating collective action, but not just like yesterday’s collection active but in all tenses of the verb: yesterday – like, we’re still fighting, you know, for voting rights, so it’s also tomorrow’s. And so what does it mean as a group of people to really look wide-eyed at the present, to really look truthfully at the past, and then together to make a commitment to how we could build a future? So part of it is really supporting movement makers, right, and helping generations really get involved in what it means to create a movement and be part of that.
So we have focused on a couple different ideas and topics. One is evolving democracy; another is a monument to trans and queer narratives; another is about climate justice; another is sovereign rights of land. And all of these are monuments that are made with and from and including all different medium, so they don’t have to be permanent. We’re doing one that’s like a musical event across the country. And what I’m about to announce, in September, are four fellows who are evolving democracy fellows and they’re all working in different mediums but they’re working on things that are like history in an opera, actual monuments and what they really say about current and modern times, not so much about why they’re there but how they’ve actually been taken on and really animated in different ways. Another is – well, I can’t tell you about that, but another, like climate justice, is really about how the boundaries and the borders of the world were really undermined and undermined really growth patterns and really things that could be tools to not just combat climate, you know, damage but would have actually led us maybe to different places, provided more food. And most of these were run by women. And so there are many different ways to participate and all of them are about really shifting the canon of what we think about monuments, about movements, and how we can be part of them.
Mary Morten: All right. Well, I think that, of course, is tied into all the things that we’re talking about today. And what I want to ask all of you, really, is, with the exception of you, Jane, everyone has come into an organization that’s already existed and you’ve, in some cases, continued or expanded the work, you’ve changed it in some ways. I’m curious about how you have – you’ve honored tradition but you’ve also pushed toward progressive, sometimes challenging ideas.
And I guess I want to start with you, Gabe, with that question. How have you done that?
Gabrielle Lyon: Here’s a short affirmation of Jane Saks in which – Jane, I want to say to you that simply inviting people to have the power and privilege to respond to the question, what would you build a monument to, is extraordinarily liberating because it’s exactly the kind of thing that most of us are born and we grow up and everything around us tells us, that’s not for you; that’s not for you to say, you’re not the kind of person who gets to shape those things. And so, one, I want to thank you for that work. And two, I want to affirm that I’ve seen that magic in motion.
And, three, Mary, to answer your question of, you know, what did I try to do when I got to Illinois Humanities? Number one, be ourselves; just center our work around the public humanities. And two, the second thing I tried to do, which is radically progressive, given where I sit right now in the Loop, is actually be about the state, you know, to really say, what does it mean to be statewide and to say that our communities in southern Illinois, in western Illinois, in Forgottonia have just as much to contribute to the conversation we are having right now as any of us potentially on this call. And I would say that’s in some ways probably one of the most radical acts, ironically, but, you know, the most important thing is to do the best I can do as the executive director on behalf of the staff to be a place where they can be creative, connected, and in community, and make good on our little, itty-bitty resources.
Mary Morten: Absolutely. Absolutely.
Daniel, what would you say to that question in terms of honoring traditions but also pushing the envelope. You already stated that you absolutely wanted to continue the work that had been started by your predecessor. How have you managed that piece?
Daniel Ash: So my challenge has been to do the work of social justice, racial justice, but do it in a way in which everyone associated with The Field Foundation could find their on-ramp to the work. When I arrived at Field, while a lot of good work had been done, the work itself had polarized our community, our Field Foundation community in the way that you see our country polarized. You know, you either retreat far left, retreat far right. And I didn’t use this phrase, Jane, but I loved how you use it. When I came here I started to ask, like, a different question and it was – well, I was being positioned or forced to choose, am I going to continue to move our organization left and then create a community that is very like-minded, kind of create an echo chamber that was very validating, or was I going to do the tougher work and create space where I have, you know, corporate leaders and legacy Field family members, (my intellects ?) who studies social justice, racial justice – can we create a space where we’re all doing this work together? I chose the latter. I chose the latter when it probably would have been easier – (laughs) – to do the former, but I was motivated, Mary, by the big idea that if we’re going to see the change that we dream about, like, I’m going to need tables where Marshall Field V can sit shoulder to shoulder with Cathy Cohen, the great professor at the University of Chicago who created the Black Youth Project and so many other things there – they need to be in conversation with one another. And I made that choice, I think to the dismay of some of my staff members, because it was like, we’re going to keep moving the progressive agenda and if they’re not on board with it, so what. And I actually think movement work is ultimately – when I think about movement work, it has to be done in a way where you – at some point you’re committed to enrolling as many as you can in the movement. Now, that doesn’t mean you compromise your core values. There are some people who aren’t going to sign on. But if you as a person who’s part of the movement, you know, create barriers for enrollment, for creating conditions for people to say, “You know what, I get it, I want to be in partnership with you,” if you don’t do that, then I don’t think you see the success that ultimately movements want to see, regardless of what the movement is about.
Mary Morten: All right. I hear that. And that actually makes a lot of sense in terms of pulling folks together. To your point, you just said either you’re in or, to some degree, not you’re out but we’re moving forward, right? We’re going to keep moving in this direction.
Daniel Ash: We’re going to keep moving in this direction but I want to do it in a way where I’m bringing – I’m inviting others who may not necessarily understand the importance of the work, principles that drive and guide the work. I want to create space to connect, bond, and eventually bring those individuals into the movement. I mean, a more simple example, Mary, it just makes sense, is like, one of my longest-standing board members is the vice chairman of Northern Trust Bank and I strongly feel that we can either ignore corporate leaders or we can engage them, and when it comes to racial justice work, I’m doing everything possible to engage corporate leaders like that in the work. So it’s about creating the invitations to do the work, the bridges for people to do the work, and that takes a lot of time. But I think the role the arts play is actually critical in actually socializing ideas, creating the conditions where people can imagine together or reimagine together. All of those things play a role in expanding sort of the reach of the movement.
Mary Morten: And Michelle? What would you add to this in terms of coming into The Poetry Foundation and honoring tradition yet also pushing forward with some progressive, challenging ideas? What would add to this?
Michelle Boone: Yeah, I think it was really interesting, just in terms of our origin story, you know, we started out as a scrappy, small literary arts organization publishing a small poetry monthly journal, right, and then along came this massive gift which allowed the establishment of the foundation, which has only been around for 20 years; the magazine has been published for about 112 years, in comparison. And so it really was about not just a shift in the work but in the mentality. I think the weight of a gift of that size onto a small organization, the reaction was one of kind of hoarding, like, oh, my god, we got this tremendous gift; we have to hold onto it. And even though they established the Foundation, they established an operating foundation which meant they weren’t necessarily required to make grants and they didn’t, for a long time. And so my question and push to the board was, well, why are we a foundation – like, we could be anything – if we’re not going to share the resources in the way that people imagine a foundation operates. And so how do we shift from, you know, wanting to protect and preserve and, quite frankly, hoard, to a spirit and a place of generosity? And philanthropy is about using your resources and sharing your resources for the greater good. We have to do a better job of that and stop spending the money on ourselves and not be fearful that that means we’re going to run out of money and do it at the peril of our own organization. But you can be generous. You can have an impact. You can make a difference. And so for the first time in its history, you know, we launched a legitimate grantmaking program. And much in the same way that Daniel talked earlier about, you know, trying to find ways to be more impactful with the resources that you distribute, bigger grants, multi-year – we’re not quite there yet with multi-year, but we’re giving away general operating grants and trusting that organizations know best how to use those resources for their own sustainability to advance their work.
So really proud of the shift in the mindset of the foundation. I think also, you know, it was a big shift for the staff. A lot of the staff were attracted to come to The Poetry Foundation because they love poetry, they love the legacy of the magazine, but we are not a literary organization; you know, we’re a philanthropic organization. And just saying that out loud was like a big, you know, clutch the pearls moment for some of the staff and it’s like, like, no, small literary arts organizations are not our peers. We work in philanthropy. Philanthropy was based off of a bunch of robber barons who pimped labor, amassed a lot of wealth and didn’t want to pay taxes. That’s who we are, right? (Laughter.) But we still can do really wonderful things with that ill-gotten gain of wealth. And let’s embrace that. So it’s understanding the space that we’re in, understanding the obligation and the responsibility of what it means to have access to resources that others don’t, and then being mindful of how to distribute that wealth, those resources in a way that’s as equitable as you can be with the parameters of your mission and grounded by your values.
Mary Morten: Well, I think that is a great place to leave this conversation. I’m going to just ask you all for just – (laughs) – just a sentence around if you could say to a group of interested colleagues, community members, what is the call to action?
Daniel, why don’t you go?
Daniel Ash: My call to funders is to don’t make it complicated, get out of the way, and think big.
Mary Morten: Wonderful.
Michelle?
Michelle Boone: I think Daniel summed it up nicely. My call to action would be trust the artist, support the artist, and encourage the development of the work. If you’re really about community, if you’re community building, if you are about social justice, no one is going to do a better job of conveying those messages, providing the vision for you, than an artist.
Mary Morten: All right.
And Jane, what would you add? Your call to action.
Jane Saks: My call, if I’m saying it to funders, is, like, they’ve got to take a risk on us and, you know, some of the projects are startups, but I’m not, right? (Laughs.) And so it’s like, hey, we’re really – we are creating these models, they really are having an impact, but we have a hard time having someone just take a risk.
I’d say one other thing is that, you know, art is essential. We wouldn’t have democracies and certain systems and it delivers on the democratic promise of equitable participation. And the relationship between art and justice is human dignity. That’s what they have in common.
Mary Morten: Wonderful. I love that.
Michelle Boone: OK, I want to change mine.
Mary Morten: OK – (laughs). No, we’re going on to Gabe.
Michelle Boone: No, no, real quick.
Mary Morten: You really do want to say something?
Michelle Boone: I do. I do. I want to shift it. I mean, you can decide if you want to use the other one or not, but I think one message I would leave or call to action would be empower the people with decision making that you say you intend to serve.
Mary Morten: OK. All right.
Jane Saks: That’s great.
Mary Morten: Gabe?
Gabrielle Lyon: All right. So here’s my calls to action, plural.
Mary Morten: OK.
Gabrielle Lyon: You know, firstly, to funders, we live in a finite world so there’s a place called Illinois; yes, it was made up, but a little bit goes a long way as soon as you cross I-80. So, one, really think about what it is you care about and the interconnectedness of the residents of our state. State’s finite, imagination’s infinite. But I think the other thing is, to the point about being more comfortable with ambiguity and being more comfortable with the things that are unfamiliar, that’s really what’s going to allow us to say, hey, when you set the table have an artist, have a humanist at the table because really what we need, if we care about a state that is creative and connected and just is not just someone, you know, being brought along but centerstage – artists and humanists center stage.
Mary Morten: Excellent. Thank you so much.
OK, one quick note, Jane?
Jane Saks: I just wanted to add that, you know, art by and for and with the public has been at the center of all human evolution, revolutions throughout history and so it has proved itself to be not just a tool but an essential element in our evolution and our growth.
Mary Morten: A heartfelt thank you to Michelle Boone, Gabrielle Lyon, Jane Saks, and Daniel Ash for their thoughtful insights on the power of arts and culture in fostering social change. Their work reminds us that art is more than a sculpture in a park, a lyrical poem, or a night out at the ballet. It’s a vehicle for connection, community building, and transformation.
As we close this episode, consider how you can support the artists and cultural leaders in your community. Whether it’s trusting their vision, advocating for equitable funding, or simply attending a local performance, your involvement makes a difference. Keep doing what you can to foster creativity, and remember, we can only shape a more just and equitable world if we do it together. I’m Mary Morten, until next time.