“How to Talk to Dragons” Insights into the Praxis of an Inter-Cultural Shadow Puppet Theatre Play

“How to Talk to Dragons”

Insights into the Praxis of an Inter-Cultural Shadow Puppet

Theatre Play

by

Bjela Proßowsky

Communication for Development One-year master

15 credits Autum 2019

For PAPA

even though you wanted to be called Helmut until I was 25. From then on, you insisted on being called PAPA.

Helmut was also the official name of the high pressure area that took you away. A hot-air zone that made a vessel in your brain burst - all of a sudden and far too early.

How terribly ironic.

I'm sure you'd be proud (in secret, of course) that, despite all the difficulties, I'm finally handing in my master's thesis. Too bad you don't get to see that anymore. Therefore I

dedicate the following pages to you.

In the end, I am glad about our often tough arguments - they have stimulated my creativity and made me the stubborn one I am.

I miss you

Thanks my family for teaching me that life is unpredictable and that solutions do not necessarily need to be conventional.

Acknowledgments

Ernst Altmann, thank you for always challenging me with your non-conformist

personality. Your images and imagination are not only aesthetic, but never boring due to their complexity. I wish for you, that one fine day one of the mythical creatures will emerge from the background of one of your paintings, sneaking up to your laptop to do all the unpleasant things for you that give you a headache and pay your bills. Before returning into your picture, it should leave questions behind that you will post on Facebook. All of a sudden it should be that this platform makes sense because the questions are so clever that by searching for solutions we suddenly all grow into a post-capitalist paradise. Thanks for exploring the “Kingdom of Wonder” with me.

Thanks to Dorivan, Deth, Heng, Sokha, Samy, Channy, Tony and Run for shaping our project with loving engagement.

Thanks you Julia Kopa for your valuable support by reading, inspiring and encouraging all texts from the development of the idea of the project to writing this thesis.

Thank you Susan Fletcher-Haythorpe for engaging in the project from the first day in Cambodia up to now. You have been a great supporter and promoter. Thank you for your empathic engagement in the ongoing process to find my “English voice”. You encouraged me to improve and your involvement, comments and questions have been valuable beyond words.

Thank you Dr. Julia Verse for believing in me and introducing me to academic rules. Thanks to all the friends and supporters of the project.

Thanks to Johannes Kast for inspiring me to study ComDev.

Thanks to Tobias Denskus and Anders Høg-Hansen for your input, patience and encouragement.

Last but not least I am greatful for the experience of a warm and sweet embrace that Cambodian people – the ones who became my new brothers and sisters and those who remained strangers – have given me. “Kingdom of Wonder” is really the best country's slogan that meets the qualities of your country. Never again I have wondered so much about possibilities and impossibilities that happen in your every day life and have happened in your troubled past. Thank you all for teaching me to be generous with compliments and the words I love you.

Abstract

Cultural diversity in a global community demands our tolerant understanding of one another. Participatory art projects can be instrumental in facilitating equal-footing en-counters and creative communication between people from different cultures that transcend language barriers. Used as a methodology for synergistic exchange and exploration, they represent a useful tool for the study and advancement of alternative solutions to development-related themes, particularly where non-verbal communication is either essential or advantageous.

This report considers an independent arts-based project, “How to Talk to Dragons”, which was carried out in Phnom Penh, Cambodia by cultural workers from Berlin.The inter-cultural project chose the art form of shadow puppetry to explore the country’s culture and the experiences of its people, and to exchange ideas and perspectives in an engaging and socially just forum.

The question guiding this cultural voyage of discovery was how the symbolic dragon, a mythical creature with a global resonance but subject to different perceptions in Europe and Asia, might be used as an agent for opening the way to revealing insights into human nature.

The report also explores the links between How to Talk to Dragons and ComDev practices and, by incorporating an auto-ethnographic approach, considers how this method can serve to provide a better understanding of practice and add value to project analysis from a practitioner's perspective.

It finds that open concept projects offer an exceptional flexibility to adapt to local and cultural conditions and makes the case for the Cambodian shadow theatre known as Sbek Touch (literal meaning: small leather) as a valuable emancipatory tool for

promoting communication across social, economic and cultural borders. It recommends further studies into its potential for raising and identifying sometimes controversial issues in a humorous manner and for uncovering collective solutions, particularly among marginalized communities and classes.

Ultimately, the report points to Hooks’ “Practice of Love” as an overarching concept that can inform and transform activities designed to engage with and embrace diversity. Keywords:

participatory art projects, inter-cultural encounters, Sbek Touch, shadow puppetry, cultural diversity, non-verbal communication, alternative development, dragons, The Practice of Love

Preface

Rich people are rich because they prefer having over sharing.

“Please write that down in your thesis,” said my companions, a young Khmer history student and

a middle aged man, who worked in democratic development. We were sitting in a tiny Phnom

Penh cafe discussing the unfair distribution of money. I wanted to learn why the country that on

my first visit in 1994 had been economically poor yet rich in solidarity and generosity had

developed into a society with a small, wealthy class and a lot of poverty. How could this happen?

No matter how we twisted and turned the issue, there seemed to be no more plausible solution

than the one above. Money clings to the people who have it; if rich people were readily prepared

to share more of what they have, there would be no unequal spread of money. “Write that down,”

said the student, who bought me a coffee, “yes, you should,” added the democrat, and paid for

my soup.

This willing generosity, conviviality and hospitality I came upon time and time again in Cambodian

society; a society which, according to Nevermann (1956), has a section of its eight-storey hell,

called noruk, reserved for people who fail to make giving a part of their lives. Indeed, the notion of

giving, in a respectful way, is a key tenet of the Buddhism that most Cambodian people follow.

I am recording these observations, unlike others I took note of during the course of the project,

because in that cafe I had the opportunity to compare my ideas with those of Khmer people and

subsequently crystallise my thoughts. I very much hope I am writing in the spirit of the these

people, whose culture has become dear to my heart.

I stayed in the cafe for a while and thought about the many invitations to share meals, the

mangoes and other exotic fruits that I had already been given. I pictured the elderly, bow-legged

lady from a local stall running after the Tuk Tuk I caught to the airport, to give me a farewell gift;

an image burned into my memory. For weeks she had rewarded every bumbling attempt I made

to learn her language with a sweet treat. If only the German "Willkommenskultur1" was as

open-hearted! I believe there is a very simple tenet we can learn from Cambodia:

Sharing is a good way to give — and giving makes us very happy.

As I was about to leave, the owner of the cafe asked me to share her lunch. I hope this beautiful

aspect of the Khmer nature can survive all further development intervention.

Contents

1. Introduction

1.2 Report Framework 12

2. Methodological Reflections

2.2 The Challenges of Using Auto-Ethnography 13

2.3 Why Auto-Ethnography is Particularly Suited to the Study of HTTTD 16

2.4 Arguments against this Method within this Paper 17

2.5 Secondary Method: “We”-Narration 17

2.6 Additional Method: Participatory Observation 17

2.7 Data Collection 18

2.8 Ethical considerations 18

2.9 Methods Used in the Thesis – an Overview 19

3. Consolidated Overview

3.2 Communication 22

3.3 The Dragon as a Unifying Theme and Means of Communication 23

3.4 HTTTD and the Meaning of “Culture 25

3.5 How Can HTTTD be Classified in the Field of ComDev? 27

3.5.2 HTTTD and Theatre for Development 27

3.6 HTTTD and the De-Colonising Approach 28

3.6.1 HTTTD and “The Practice of Love” 29

4. The Way of the Dragon: An Exercise in Auto-Ethnography

30

4.3 Back to Berlin 2013 32

4.4 Introducing the Naga 34

4.5 Our Hybrid Dragon 35

4.6 Setting the Stage for “How to Talk to Dragons” 36

4.7 Working as an Artist in Cambodia 39

4.8 A Journey into Non-Verbal Communication 40

4.9 English as Universal Language 45

4.10 A New Puppet 45

4.11 Performances 47

4.12 Discovering Sbek Touch 48

5. Findings

52

5.2 Concluding Thoughts 53

5.2.1 Contribution to ComDev knowledge 53

5.2.2 The Case for Auto-Ethnography 53

5.2.3 The Dragon as Cultural Conduit 55

5.2.4 Communication Across Boarders 56

5.2.5 The Potential of Sbek Touch 57

5.2.6 In the Name of Love: An Aspiration for the Future 58

Epilogue 59

Appendix

61

A 1.1 French Protectorate 61

A 1.2 Independence 62

A 1.3 Khmer Rouge 62

A 1.4 Small Fish 65

A2 History of Khmer Performance and its Ties to Political Power 66

References 68

1. Introduction

In this auto-ethnographic report will analyse the inter-cultural collaboration “How to Talk to Dragons” (HTTTD), which was realized 2014 in Phnom Penh Cambodia by myself2

and my artist partner, Ernst Altman3_.

At the time our project was underway, I had no knowledge of ComDev theories and practices. A ComDev student we met while working on HTTTD inspired me to study the subject and identified our project as fitting within its context. Attracted by the symmetry of returning to the point where my involvement in ComDev began, I decided to make HTTTD the subject of this paper, in order to apply the knowledge I now have to reflect on a project that I believe represents an interesting and perhaps unconventional approach to the study of another culture in a ComDev context.

This paper explores four key questions: The first two arose from studying ComDev and writing this thesis and the last two that arose during project planning and execution:

1. What are the links between HTTTD and ComDev and can the project contribute to ComDev knowledge?

2. How can auto-ethnography be used to shed intuitive light on the practitioner’s perspective in a way that adds value to project analysis? 3. To what extent is communication on a non-verbal level possible?

4. How can the dragon, as an internationally-recognized symbol, subject to differing perceptions in Europe and Asia, serve to generate valuable insights into and promote a better understanding of human nature within culturally diverse contexts?

2 Bjela Proßowsky. I am an editor working in a freelance capacity for TV stations including ARTE, ZDF, ARD and

Deutsche Welle, and on Independent TV productions, various socio-cultural and art projects. I am the director of Querspur e V. I have managed and documented award-winning social projects across Europe and am involved in projects that aim to create sustainable structures in society. My focus is on the dignity and autonomy of the people portrayed.

3 Ernst Altman is an artist from Berlin who studied painting under Gerhard Richter at the Kunstakademie Düsseldorf.

He has exhibited both nationally and internationally over the past 15 years and has taught at art institutions including Goldsmiths College, London.

1.1 How To Talk To Dragons: An Overview

“How to Talk to Dragons” was partly funded by the Goethe Institut and Querspur e. V.4

and realized in cooperation with the Meta House5_.

Ernst and I developed this open concept, participatory project in the form of a shadow puppet play, styled as a silent film to allow the equal footing involvement of non-English speakers. We chose to use the dragon as a unifying symbol that would enable us to explore similarities and differences between the two cultures.

The ancient art form of shadow puppetry is deeply rooted in Khmer cultural heritage, thus it served as an appropriate and effective tool for getting to know Khmer artists; encouraging collaborative efforts and synergies and exploring their culture.

Ernst frequently incorporates elements of mythology and fairytale within his art,

executed in a highly subjective and contemporary way, for their transmissive as well as decorative qualities. The stencil technique he used to create the characters facilitated their transformation into shadow puppets. We adapted the frame story from the fairy tale “Eleanor of Aquitaine and the Dragon Prince”, updating it to a 20th century fairground in Old Berlin.

4 Association that focusses on developing and documenting socio-cultural projects on video

5 German Cambodian Cultural Center, an independent non-profit arts and media centre with an educational focus and today co-operation partner of the Goethe-Zentrum

Dragon in our performance

We engaged with a range of participants6_{, mostly Khmer nationals, on a}

non-hierarchical basis, to develop our story further; create from scratch a puppet theatre; and subsequently perform the play together, as a collective artwork.

6

Jose Antonio Pineda(Frisco Tony): Salvadoran beat-poet, actor, singer and author. Currently active on all sorts of stages in Phnom Penh.

Chea Kor (Run): A former street kid, who contact us via the NGO Khaleb, which was helping him to find an opportunity to develop his artistic skills.

The Khmer performers are all part of the Department of Performing Arts of the Ministry of Culture and Fine Arts of Cambodia.

An Chea Heng: puppeteer and professor for Traditional Dance for the Ministry of Culture and Fine Arts

Keo Dorivan : musician and professor at the Royal University of Fine Arts

Meurn Channy: musician and student of the Faculty of Music at the Royal University of Fine Arts

Ouk Sokha: puppeteer, teacher in Drama at the Secondary School of Fine Arts

Pathsoly Deth: musician, studied Music and Theory at the University of Fine Arts, works as a teacher

Sin Samy: puppeteer, working as a Mahori singer and in the Pin Peat Orchestra. Upper row from left to right: Deth, Dorivan, Tony, Sokha, Heng Bottom row from left to right: Run, Channy, Ernst, Samy

I captured the collaborative process and resulting synergies on film, which I later edited to produce a 60 minute documentary7_{. We held an}

exhibition at Meta House that featured short clips from our rehearsals and performances along with an associated series of curated photos and artefacts that il-lustrated spiritual elements, linked to the dragon, of everyday life in Cambodia.

We performed four shows, at Meta House; Steung

Meanchey8_{; in front of the}

“White Building9_{” in Phnom}

Penh; and for the charity CHOICE in Kandal. All performances were well-attended, by audiences of 100 to 200, and equally well received by local people and expats alike.

The latter told us it offered a good opportunity to learn something about Khmer beliefs and culture, while Khmer people felt visible and well-represented in our exhibition. We also achieved positive local media coverage10_.

7 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-boLlSfa2c&t=662s furthermore I put short clips on our blog:

https://howtotalktodragons.wordpress.com/about/

8 on the site of the former rubbish dump, one of the poorest slums in Cambodia

9 The White Building was a large-scale housing complex with 468 residential units, built in the 1960s for people of middle and lower income. Once a gem of modernist architecture, it fell into disrepair and was made available to artists and socially disadvantaged workers in the early 1980s as cheap, city centre accommodation, developing to become a city in microcosm. The building was demolished in 2017. Though compensation payments were offered, many former residents were left without long-term, low-budget accommodation in Phnom Penh.

10 Here are two examples:

https://www.phnompenhpost.com/7days/7-questions-ernst-altmann-and-his-partner-bjela-prossowsky http://www.choicefamily.de/schattige-gestalten/

Tiger dance at the Dragon Temple. Chinese New Year 2014.

1.2 Report Framework

This paper is not intended to deliver an in-depth analysis. Auto-ethnography is

recognised to be a process-oriented method. It is employed in this report to present a series of insights into an exploratory journey of two artists within another culture and to illuminate first hand experiences of engagement with a range of collaborators.

The following pages describe the synergies that arose from communications which do not rely on a common language, and apply a holistic approach to argue the relevance of interdisciplinary considerations in the field of development in a globalised world.

I write from an insider’s perspective as a cultural worker, and that of an outsider with regard to development work; and reflect on the development of Cambodia, a country I first visited in 1994, subsequently in 2014 with HTTTD, then every following year so as to have spent, altogether, a total two years in the country.

Chapter 2 discusses auto-ethnography as an appropriate tool for analysing the project. Chapter 3 addresses the issues theory and practice, the communications challenges

that impacted on HTTTD and on my subsequent reflections on the project. It explains our working definition of the term “culture” and suggests an overarching concept that provides the most suitable academic lens through which to view our experiences.

Chapter 4 uses auto-ethnographical accounts to describe HTTTD in practice and my

experiences in Cambodia. It introduces Sbek Touch, the popular form of Khmer shadow puppetry we learned about during the course of our project, explains its communicative and emancipatory nature and argues the case for a further study of this art form.

Chapter 5 Analyses long term outcomes of HTTTD and offers concluding thoughts on

findings that relate to the four key questions.

The function of the images incorporated within this report11 _{is to enrich the text with a}

sensual experience that words are unable to convey.

2. Methodological Reflections

In this report I use a mixed method approach. The primary approach is

auto-ethnography. It is a disputed method under the critique that auto-ethnographers are

“…navel-gazers (MADISON, 2006), self-absorbed narcissists who don't fulfill scholarly obligations of hypothesizing, analyzing, and theorizing.” (Ellis & Bochner, 2010, p. 37). I chose to use HTTTD as the subject of this paper because my interest is stimulated more by work in practice than by purely theoretical considerations and I wanted to weigh the academic knowledge I have acquired against the direct experience I have gained. I offset my discomfort about writing in the first person, and any doubts that arose about reporting on a project that was carried out without a specific research brief by introducing additional methods of data collection.

The secondary methods are those of participatory observation and “we”-narration and I have applied data gathered from unstructured interviews and explored concepts of culture, communication and development using abductive reasoning.

2.1 Auto-ethnographic Approach as Primary Method

Ellis & Bochner (2010) define the constructivist approach to qualitative research as “research and writing that seeks to describe and systematically analyse (graphy) personal experience (auto) in order to understand cultural experience (ethno). (ELLIS, 2004; HOLMAN JONES, 2005) This approach challenges canonical ways of carrying out research and representing others (SPRY, 2001) and treats research as a political, socially-just and socially-conscious act. (ADAMS & HOLMAN JONES, 2008) A

researcher uses tenets of autobiography and ethnography to do and write auto-ethnography. Thus, as a method, auto-ethnography is both process and product” (pp. 345-357).

In line with this definition, I have set out my personal motivations and beliefs to give insights into my personal biases and reflect on inter-cultural experiences, non-verbal communication and development from a practitioner's viewpoint. The limitations of this paper restrict its focus to merely extracts of my experience. Since the auto-ethnogra-phic approach is essentially a process still in development, the output must itself be viewed as a work in progress.

2.2 The Challenges of Using Auto-ethnography

2.2.1 By promoting dialogue between theory and experience, auto-ethnography has a

The method has, however, been criticised for its failure to distance itself from its sub-ject matter and for the question it raises as to how the “self” can count as data. The fact that HTTTD took place six years ago allows me to examine the project from a perspect-ive of chronological distance, but the question remains of how to effectperspect-ively convey per-sonal experiences and reflections on a suitably academic level.

2.2.2 Chang (2008) has described the discourse about auto-ethnography as a “war

between objectivity and subjectivity”; should it be “emotionally engaged and biased or committed to theoretical analysis”? (pp 44-45). Wall (2008) writes that

“… a tendency toward a distanced observer role continues to exist within ethnographic work, presumably because ethnographers have a need to reassure themselves that they are behaving like “real” researchers (Wolcott, 1999).” (p. 42).

From my personal writing experience, the challenge of auto-ethnography lies in de-termining what topics and observations are not only important to me but which have a wider relevance; and in judging whether my personal reflections have the depth and clarity to be worthy of an academic paper. I believe this process requires more reflexivity than the act of merely gathering and quoting data and applying existing theories.

Auto-ethnography is a qualitative method that draws its value from the complexity of insider experience and, thus, its contribution to the pool of differentiated knowledge. However, as Kraus (2003) notes “reducing a person’s story to words on a page robs it of complexity” (p. 284).

To appreciate the limitations of a written text I turn to Bergman (2003) who writes: “Igor Stravinsky loved expressing himself and wrote a good deal on interpretation. As he bore a volcano within him, he urged restraint. Those without even the vestige of a volcano within them nodded in agreement, raised their baton, and observed restraint, while Stravinsky himself conducted his own Apollon Musagète as if it were

Tchaikovsky. We who had read him listened and were astonished.(“The Magic Lantern” by Ingmar Bergmann)”(justlikeeddie ca. 2017)12_.

Murch (2004) reflects that people, whether consciously or unconsciously, strive for inner equilibrium. Thus, people with inner volcanoes tend to promote restraint and people of a glacial disposition strive towards a more passionate personality. He points out the danger that, after reading Stravinsky, someone already cool by nature might be inspired to practice even more restraint. For me this illustrates how, when context is lost or misunderstood, written text can become an untrustworthy medium.

12 Translated text found on: https://justlikeeddie.tumblr.com/post/159638056132/igor-stravinsky-loved-expressing-himself-and-wrote. I further refer to the German version of Murch's book, where I originally found the cite.

To preserve some of this complexity within a word limit takes effort, hence I cannot agree with Delamont's (2007) criticism that auto-ethnography is “essentially lazy” as, in her opinion the format excuses scientists from the need to gather additional data. As a practitioner I am more accustomed to face to face discussions that allow for ongoing explanation and elaboration as necessary. The process of reflection involves first setting out one’s thoughts and experiences at length. I have found there to be significantly more writing and research involved in the process of synthesising and distilling a large volume of personal experience and direct engagement into the language and format required of an academic paper than makes its way onto the final pages.

As Muncey (2005) says: “It would be untrue to suggest that the long haul up the aca-demic ladder has been a waste of time, because it allowed me to understand how knowledge is generated and the power structures that are in place to perpetuate cer-tain claims. Expert knowledge is socially sanctioned in a way that common sense knowledge is usually not, and in various practices is accorded higher or lower status dependent on how it has been produced and who is saying it. These practices have as their central theme the rules of science: that is, the desire for objectivity and the defin-ing challenges of reliability and validity. Within these tightly constrained parameters, a special language defines and delimits what is included and excluded. Therefore, at the same time as learning the rules of the research game, my own story became entwined with what I was reading and hearing, and I started to notice that the expert voices were not telling my story...” (p. 74).

The emancipatory effect that speaks from Muncey's words does not only apply to the field of social sciences. Similar misunderstandings can be found in the interpretation of art. Artists often work with their own inherent chains of association. Scholars operate with concepts and theories. Whether and to what extent they meet and make sense is a question of dialogue between them.

2.2.3 I also take issue with Delamont’s critique that sociologists are not sufficiently

interesting to write about. On the contrary, many auto-ethnographic works in this field deal with personal, traumatic experiences, exclusions or transformations. By sharing their own experiences, affected scientists enter the discourse on an equal level, an approach I find to be more rather than less interesting, because it is socially just, and allows a discourse on how applicable theories may actually be in practice.

2.2.4 But to throw one’s self and one’s experiences into the shark-infested waters of

the methodological discourse certainly requires courage. According to Wall (2008): “Ellis (1999) has acknowledged the vulnerability experienced by the auto-ethnographer in revealing him or herself, of not being able to take back what has been said, of not having control over how readers will interpret what is said, and of feeling that his or her whole life is being critiqued.” (p. 41).

As a video editor I focus on empathy with the people I portray. For me, auto-ethno-graphy is an opportunity to be free of projecting my own ethical boundaries (that despite careful considerations might differ from the ones of the portrayed) onto others. But I not only have experience of portraying others but also (after a particularly difficult episode in my life became the plot of a friend’s autobiographical novel) of what it is like to be the person portrayed. When my friend felt ethically obliged to advise me that certain details had been changed for dramatic effect, I realised it made no difference to me; the story, even though it was based on a shared experience, was not mine, but (referring back to Muncey in 2.2.2) that of the author. The context and significance of that experience in my life were very different to what appeared in the book.

Experiences, I would therefore suggest, are contextual and subjective. The written form can only ever convey them in extracts, which in turn depend on the way they are represented and subsequently interpreted by the reader. The field of human sciences is bound to subjective perceptions; “truth” is highly flexible concept.

2.2.5 Bochner (2000) writes that

“Postmodernists believe that the methods and procedures that are employed in research are ultimately and inextricably tied to the values and subjectivities of the researcher” (taken from Wall 2008, p. 42).

Accepting that biases also exist in other (allegedly objective) research methods, I believe that revealing the underlying biases from the vantage point of the “self” is a step further on the socially-just route.

2.2.6 I offer my response to critics of auto-ethnography by questioning how an

outsider-perspective “glimpse” can generate more reliable, and therefore “better” data than a long-term experience? The former can often lack depth of understanding and lead to faulty conclusions.

2.3 Why Auto-Ethnography is Particularly Suited to the Study of HTTTD

• It permits the writer-practitioner to pursue a more detailed understanding of themselves and others within inter-cultural contexts.

• As it does not claim to be objective, it can offer more intuitive insights into social relationships (linked to a post-modernist perspective).

• It supports a more socially-just approach by revealing the author’s biases. • It is a constructivist approach which, over decades of working as a

2.4 Arguments against this Method within this Paper

• As a method auto-ethnography is not sharply defined. Wall (2008) describes it as being rather a “philosophy than a well-defined method (Wall, 2006), so there remains considerable creative latitude in the production of an auto-ethno-graphic text (Ellis & Bochner, 2000).” (p. 39) and as Wall (2008) puts it “… somewhat lacking in concrete information about the method and how someone new to it might proceed.” (p.5). As a student without significant writing experi-ence, this lack of definition can make the method difficult to apply, particularly in terms of assessing how and to what extent one can use it to fulfil the criteria of a thesis.

• It is best suited to longer texts that give the writer full scope to describe insights in detail, carry out sufficient self-reflection and make full comparisons with other experiences.

2.5 Secondary Method: “We”-Narration

As I undertook HTTTD with my partner Ernst Altmann, I have used a “we”-narration when referring to joint actions and to situations where our discussions achieved consensus. This is the heterogeneous “we” proposed by Ang & Gatt (2018). Their concept arose from

“experimenting between theatre and anthropology in order to find the boundaries between the knowledge of an own and another and bond across those.” (p. 181). Furthermore this method helps to avoid claiming ownership of ideas that have arisen from collaborative work. A heterogeneous "we" can also be seen as a means to avoid smart alecks and as an exercise in the acceptance of the equivalence of perspectives. Ang & Gatt further state: “What is already emerging in our joint work is that despite imperfect understanding, collaboration affords mutual learning. However, for learning to become actually mutual and non-hierarchical, there is the need to challenge the conventional environments of legitimation and evaluation of anthropological

scholarship, and more broadly academic knowledge practices (see also Blaser 2010; Rodriguez 2015).” (p. 181)13_.

2.6 Additional Method: Participatory Observation

I would ideally have extended the “we”-narration to include the Khmer participants in the project, particularly to further the decolonising approach proposed by Ang & Gatt (2018, p. 181), but language barriers made this impossible.

The use of participatory observation instead helped to equip me with the need to consider the way I represented their perspectives and prevented me from being too focussed on my own view-point. A reliance on non-verbal communications meant we were, in fact, observing each other, which helped to take on the observation

perspective.

2.7 Data Collection

“We know that memory is fallible, that it is impossible to recall or report on events in language that exactly represents how those events were lived and felt; and we

recognize that people who have experienced the 'same' event often tell different stories about what happened (TULLIS OWEN et al., 2009). Consequently, when terms such as reliability, validity, and generalizability are applied to auto-ethnography, the context, meaning and utility of these terms are altered.” (Ellis & Bochner 2010, p. 32).

To support my recollections I have referred to notes, memos, photos, recorded material (sound and video) conversations with Ernst and some participants in the project.

Out of uncertainty as to whether this data would be sufficient in scientific terms, and also because I was keen to dig deeper into the topic of Sbek Touch as a

communications tool (there is hardly any literature in this field), I conducted additional, unstructured interviews with the directors and players of two Cambodian puppet theatres.

However the quality of “self” as data is characterised by the complexity of the

knowledge involved and its intrinsic link to context. Abstract data or that generated by distanced observations can be distorted when it is removed from its context or when that context is unknown. The very fact that auto-ethnographic knowledge is anchored within its specific context makes it suited to the investigation and analysing of

experiences and inter-personal communication.

2.8 Ethical Considerations

I have confirmed with Ernst that he agrees with the perspective represented in the “we”-narration. My interpretation of the interviews I conducted follows rapport with the interviewees.

2.9 Methods Used in the Thesis – an Overview

Agents / Stakeholders

Method Threads and events covered

Reason for choosing this method

Data

• Bjela Proßowsky (author, project designer, singer and film-maker) Auto-ethnography as the primary method • Overall storyline • Personal experiences • Cultural experiences

A good tool for providing insight into cultural experiences and one’s own biases

Memory, notes, from the project planning, video and audio recordings, photos, pictures, press articles • Ernst Altmann

• Bjela Proßowsky (project planners and managers)

“We” narration • Describing processes and concepts developed together as a heterogeneous “we” • Insights we shared Helps to avoid claiming ownership of ideas resulting from joint work

Notes from the project planning Informal conversations with Ernst Rapport Participants:

• Chea Kor (Run) (assistant) Puppeteers: • An Chea Heng • Ouk Sokha • Sin Samy • Ernst Altmann Musicians: • Keo Dorivan • Meurn Channy • Pathsoly Deth • Tony Pineda Participatory observation • Communication • Creative process • Synergies • Cultural differences • Audience reaction Unable to include in “we”-narration because language barriers prevent rapport Memory

Video and audio recordings, informal Conversations on later visits • Phoeng Kompeak • Mann Kosal Unstructured interviews (formal request for permission to use data but informal talks) What is Sbek Touch? Personal experiences of directors and puppeteers with Sbek Touch Interviews at times turned into open conversations to overcome language barriers

Audio recordings Rappor

3. Consolidated Overview

3.1.1 HTTTD emerged out of deliberations on the interplay between theory and

practice and sought unconventional solutions to that dichotomy. This report includes reflections on concepts as they arise in practice and aims to overcome some of the frictions associated with the theory versus practice argument.

3.1.2 Theories are characterized by their general applicability. Practice, when based on

theoretical knowledge, relies on interpretation of that knowledge. Theory is concerned with the analysis and categorisation of problems in order to produce theoretical

concepts. During practice, problems usually need to be solved immediately and in situ. As Clammer (2013) notes

“Knowledge in fact is praxis, not simply cognition, and as such has social roots. The objective then becomes not simply to discover those roots and document them, but to nurture actively the forms of social experiment in which they grow and can positively influence the future.” (p. 255).

Hooks (2013), meanwhile, presents feminism as an example of how theory can have a liberating and beneficial effect. She states that: “Theory was far more progressive and inclusive in its vision than our everyday life practice.” (p. 37-38).

3.1.3 Other cases reverse the relationship with theoretical ideas arising from reflections

on practice. Equally, approaches towards finding solutions can present themselves during practice without having been theorised in advance. Theoretical concepts can become unviable in practice, fail to fit within a new stage of development or risk being misinterpreted and becoming mere buzzwords.

Feek (2007) is allergic to the buzzword of "best practice", stating:

“Theory depends on it’s implementation and interpretation and then comes alive through practice. Practice is not meant to be replicable in all sorts of environments. But how do you decide what is ‘best’ when all practice – all development action, including communication interventions, addressing priority development issues – takes place in different contexts, with different purposes, different population groups, and significantly different opportunities, involving challenges within widely varying cultural, political, and resource environments. Compounding this problem is the implication of judging

something the ‘best’: that we all need to think about also doing what that practice is doing because it is the best.” (p. 231).

Having designed and implemented programmes that were rated “best practice” and which did not involve any advance theorising, I agree with Feek's criticism. Every

project needs to investigate and/or adapt to local circumstances, for example the cultural and social characteristics of the people involved, the cultural and natural environments, the dynamics within a group and the potential for creativity and education.

Reports on practice can inspire generalisation but are not, themselves, overall

generalisable. Theory is not an essential precursor to practice. Pieterse’s (2010) view is that::

“Each development theory can be read on multiple levels and in terms of the ongoing and shifting relations among the following components: practice→ research→ policy→ ideology→ image→ theory→ ideology→ policy→ practice→ theory→ ideology→ image→ policy …” (p. 8).

3.1.4 By applying theory in conjunction with practice we can improve opportunities to

adapt development to real life situations and conditions.

While theories serve to categorize and contextualize phenomenons within the academic field, a scholar well-versed in theory does not necessarily make a good practitioner and vice versa. By engaging in practice, one can learn — and keep on learning — valuable soft skills, especially in relation to marginalized groups who do not engage in theory.

3.1.5 My practitioner’s perspective acknowledges the importance of a differentiated

view of the world; I believe that the process of identifying and describing differences and alternative viewpoints can help to define terms that allow us to better communicate a problem or understand a phenomenon.

On the other hand, too much differentiation can create divergences that become an obstacle to communication and disable the possibility of action. This hinders social change, which calls for a unified force in order to address and challenge injustice. My conviction is that the most effective communication between people relies on finding a common ground on which to build, and about which to exchange ideas. In carrying out HTTTD we were often forced to rely on non-verbal communication, a process that does not allow for a detailed differentiation but is limited to action and strives to find a

3.2 Communication

3.2.1 During the HTTTD planning process, Ernst expressed concerns about the limited

possibilities of communication, as theorised by Luhmann (1973), whose systems theory suggests that effective communication can only take place within a culturally-limited social system. Every system is separated from its outside environment and controls the extent and nature of the information allowed to enter it, as a form of complexity

reduction. Thus, in practical terms, the extent of any knowledge or understanding gained from cultural interpretation is limited by the established perceptions of the recipient within an established system. This theory rather deals with the impossibility of communication and denominators that facilitate a limitation of the impossibility to communicate.14

3.2.2 I contrasted this approach with my early experiences in Cambodia, during which I

had often been forced to rely entirely on non-verbal communication, leaving me confident that communication is far more inclusive if viewed as a sensory experience with a wide range of expressive possibilities.

The act of “making sense” extends beyond its literal meaning to encompass a complex process linked to sensory perception. Scholars of non-verbal communication such as Burgoon (2016), Sapier (1949), and Matsumoto (2013) have agreed there is a set of non-verbal signals that can be universally understood and used to communicate on a basic level without a spoken system. The authenticity and content of spoken language is, as communication researchers have found out, primarily interpreted through voice, gestures and facial expressions (see 4.8). Written texts, meanwhile, without recourse to such sensual perceptions, require clearly defined words.

3.2.3 Luhmann’s theorising is based on Cassirer's (1946) reflections on language and

his "Philosophy of Symbolic Forms“ which views myths, religion, art, science etc. as symbolic forms that exist a priori, their meaning connected to a sensory perception (Ebert, 2019). Schwemmer (1997) describes Cassirer's symbolic forms result from the connection between sense and sensuality. For Cassirer the spirit does not have the ability to grasp itself, but is dependent on mediation via a sensual content. For Cassirer, mythical thinking and perception is the basic symbolic form from which all

14Summarized from Wikipedia (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemtheorie_(Luhmann),

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_J-8lrTW9Fc and an interview with Boehm https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=QjhEvEEjFJI

others have emerged and are connected (Ebert, 2019). The mythical perception of the world is coloured above all by affects and emotions, and is thus sensual (n.d.).

3.2.4 Taking the above considerations into account, we determined to experiment with

the possibilities of non-verbal cooperation, in the conviction that a collaborative creation through the medium of art had the potential to develop its own common language based on sensory perception.

3.3 The Dragon as a Unifying Theme and Means of Communication

We would need a common theme that would help us to make initial contact and to assist our subsequent conversations. Our research led us to the dragon which has a global resonance, though its appearance, nature and symbolism vary markedly around the world and have undergone a wide variety of regional and historical changes.

Dragons exist in an imaginary realm between man and nature; they are alter egos on whom we project our fears, desires and dreams. They can resemble lizards or snakes; they may have more than one head, possess the ability to swim, fly and breathe fire.

In the west, the dragon is frequently used as a heraldic symbol. As described by Biedermann (2008) "dragons are mostly violent primeval beings, which must be overcome by the gods” (p. 97). The role of the gods is later assumed by heroes who kill the dragon to obtain a treasure or save an innocent victim. Thus the unrestrained force of nature is overcome by the spiritually superior human being.

In the Christian interpretation, the dragon represents the devil; Satan defeated by the archangel Michael and plunged into Hell, hence the creature’s reputation for breathing fire. The dragon is a prehistoric being, living outside civilization. Only through higher spiritual development was man able to tame the beast.

Jung (1968) describes the maturing process of an adolescent as a process of growing, through intellectual development, beyond the archetypal state represented by the dragon. He transfers this idea to the sciences when he writes

“(...) the scientific intellect is always inclined to put on airs of enlightenment in the hope of banishing the spectre once and for all. Whether its endeavours were called

euhemerism, or Christian apologetics, or Enlightenment in the narrow sense, or Positivism, there was always a myth hiding behind it, in new and disconcerting garb, which then, following the ancient and venerable pattern, gave itself out as ultimate truth. In reality we can never legitimately cut loose from our archetypal foundations unless we are prepared to pay the price of a neurosis (...)” (p. 154)

As scientific concepts develop to increasingly distance the human race from its wild, or natural state, our rapidly evolving living environment sees us move further and further away from our authentic form of communication and sensual perception.

The idea that it is necessary to combat undesirable aspects of personality or society it-self is unfortunately endemic in western civilization, and in its perception of develop-ment. Ernst and I were agreed that this is not a concept we wished to promote; we would search for a more tolerant dragon with a more human image15

_.

In Asia, the dragon is a powerful creature that commands respect. Its image appears everywhere; its status goes way beyond the dichotomy of good and evil, and often symbolises good fortune. It is inclusive. Far from being a primal creature to be overcome, the Asian dragon is a creature one should communicate with as it can be both helpful and destructive; from this insight our project name "How to Talk to Dragons" emerged.

One of the core questions of the project was whether it is possible to find

alternatives to an increasingly alienating, all-knowing but sensually diminished society, by comparing differing relationships to the symbolic dragon.

15 The interpretation of the dragon in today's gaming and fantasy world is a complex field of its own, outside the reference of this project and report.

Dragon Temple at Chinese New Year 2014

3.4 HTTTD and the Meaning of “Culture”

3.4.1 It is important to clarify which concept of culture we have applied to HTTTD in

relation to development. Pieterse (2010) states

“Conventionally development has been a monocultural project. Modernization and

Westernization were virtually synonyms. (…) In the context of decolonization struggles this began to change: along with the indigenization of politics and administration, indigenous culture and knowledge became an additional topos. Thus, culture was incorporated into development studies but in a subsidiary way ('add culture and stir'). ”

(p.16).

The cultural dominance of the West has a long history. Eliot (1948) has defined the term culture as being inseparable from religion and dependent on a social class system:

“What I try to say is this: here are what I believe to be essential conditions for the growth and for the survival of culture. If they conflict with any passionate faith of the reader—if, for instance, he finds it shocking that culture and equalitarianism should conflict, if it seems monstrous to him that anyone should have ‘advantages of birth’—I do not ask him to change his faith, I merely ask him to stop paying lip-service to culture.”(p. 16)

Huntington and Landes (2000), both adherents of the neo-liberal development

paradigm, represent a consumerist concept of culture, which connects with Eliot's ideas in the broadest sense by linking culture to religion, and classify their own cultural sphere as superior.

3.4.2 It remains anchored in the common sense that we, as Westerners, are further

developed than other cultures. Ernst and I disagree with this perception and looked for a way to create encounters on a culturally equal footing, beyond consumerist culture that according to Roy (2001)

“... means a ceaseless search for novelty and is equated with entertainment rather than enlightenment. That is to say, culture has, for all practical purposes, lost its intellectual, chiefly educational, vaguely perfective, and, above all, the evaluative significance.” (p.144. Taken from Clammer 2013, p. 260).

Our challenge was to find a means of shaping cultural work in an emerging or

developing country in such a way that it counters the neo-liberal perception of culture and avoids becoming little more than an exploitation of folk traditions for tourist consumption or a catalyst for gentrification.

3.4.3 In planning the project, we looked to our shared cultural heritage. We chose to

model the heroes of our story on two influential musicians we admired from the Berlin punk scene, Nina Hagen and Blixa Bargeld. Our chosen art forms were non-elitist.

Punk is a sub-culture synonymous with working class rebellion. Folk art is made of, by, and for the people, inclusive of class, status, culture, community, ethnicity, gender, and religion; it tends to reflect shared cultural aesthetic and social issues and has a lot to say about human nature.

We also linked the project to ancient mythology, via the story we chose to tell. Though ancient fairy tales and myths are often tied to religion, at the heart of many popular stories lies a very simple, almost universal morality, characterized by a desire for justice on a very basic level. Using the dragon as a symbol we raised the question of universal values that go back to a time pre-global development. Like Western contemporary art, Sbek Touch — which could itself be described as folk art — can accommodate a mix of different styles. Shadow play occupies a realm between reality and fantasy; it recalls a simpler, pre-digital age that distances it from today’s consumer culture. The low-tech nature of the project seemed appropriate and meant it could be carried out without much financial outlay.

3.4.4 Overall, our chosen medium is in keeping with Clammer's reinterpretation of

culture and development:

“the key nexus is that between culture and creativity: an alternative model in which

imagination is present in both and in which the emancipatory project is not only the achievement of external freedom but also liberation from the internal boundaries that trap and mischannel the creative impulse. Culture is a collective project, as are social movements, and, while the directions that imagination might take cannot be predicted, better conditions for its flourishing can indeed be socially and politically achieved. And this is perhaps a good definition of development.” (p. 250-260).

Referencing Pieterse (3.4.1) we proposed to add culture to culture and stir up a fairer approach. Our leitmotif would be:

“In a time where everything has its price but less and less is valued, we are searching for values that are beyond price.”

3.5 How Can HTTTD be Classified in the Field of ComDev?

Our interpretation of the concept of culture in relation to development and within the context of power structures aligns with that of Hall (1989), who defines it as a

“... form of a general social process: the giving and taking of meanings, and the slow development of ’common’ meanings a common culture: ’culture’, in this special sense, ’is ordinary’…” (p. 59)

It is also in line with Tufte’s (2017) views when he writes that ComDev has links to European Cultural Studies and

“It is also tied to critical studies of globalization, which question the notion of

development and argue for stronger post-colonial notions of development.” (p. 13-14). 3.5.2 HTTTD and Theatre for Development

HTTTD might, with superficial understanding, appear to sit within the field of Theatre for Development (TFD) with its liberating pedagogy, however the following points tend to refute that association:

• Neither Ernst nor I have any background in theatre

• We worked alongside artists from the same urban class but from another culture, whereas they were the theatre professionals and we the amateurs. • It has turned out to be an art project aiming for performances and an exhibition

without the involvement of laymen (except Run).

•

TFD methods and concepts are designed to educate and emancipate marginalized communities via participation, and thus facilitate social change or as Epskamp (2006) states to self-develop marginalized communities.

HTTTD departs, at points, from these concepts. The empowerment we wanted to achieve lies in respecting another culture, which, in a TFD environment, would require an absence of language barriers. It was important to us that all participants were able to express themselves on an equal footing, thus HTTTD can be seen as an endeavour in non-verbal C4D.

Cambodia has one of the highest densities of international aid organisations. NGO-facilitated TFD projects in Asia that work with shadow puppetry are mostly aimed at strategic communication to promote behaviour change (see Astles, 2012, p. 67 and Simon, 2015) and use the medium to teach specific development-relevant content. Others promote the manufacture of puppets as tourist merchandise to establish an income base for poor communities (see Lim, 2013). This is another point where our

Development-relevant interventions that use TFD methods need a profound knowledge of national and regional culture, language and environment. Traditionally, however, this practice has developed within one culture as an emancipatory concept to put power structures across classes on trial. It is possible to view HTTTD as a pioneer project to discover TFD methods that are relevant to and workable within Khmer culture,

however, as our aim was to avoid any pedagogical approach because we were not, ourselves, part of the cultural heritage. I believe TFD would be the wrong academic lens through which to observe HTTTD.

3.6 HTTTD and the De-Colonising Approach Enghel (2013) writes that

“Communication for Development and Social Change refers to intentional and strategically organized processes of face-to-face and/or mediated communication aimed at promoting dialogue and action to address inequality, injustice, and insecurity for the common good”.

The strategic process that applies to HTTTD is an open concept in which a cultural encounter can take place on an equal level, with exchange and dialogue that does not depend on language skills, and without aiming for a specific outcome. I see injustice in the constant effort to bring about change from outside (that is, from a mostly Western perspective); in contrast, the HTTTD approach was acting from a post-colonial perspective.

Ernst and I were uncomfortable with the power relations frequently associated with projects in post-colonial countries that are financed and motivated by the west. Uneasy with the idea of being ‘teachers’, we decided to be ‘learners’ instead. Ernst's stencils were suited to the creation of shadow puppets; by giving Khmer artists the chance to bring their mastery of shadow puppetry into play we achieved a reversal of power relations. Hooks (2013) writes:

“Everyone could move away from the us/them dichotomies which promote blame and prevent us all from assuming accountability for challenging and changing white supremacy. Unless we make a conscious effort to change thought and action by honestly naming all the myriad ways white supremacy impinges on daily life then we cannot shift from a politics of hate and create a new foundation based on a revolution of love.” (p. 12).

Following this concept, the emancipatory effect of HTTTD could be interpreted as a de-colonizing practice, i.e. as a project that rejects “book knowledge” in favour of exploring our own alternatives to our own development.

Gatt (2015) notes “Decoloniality especially, harks to the warnings of post-colonial theorists such as Spivak (1988) and Sharp (2008), who have long called for the other not to be seen as victim; to have their own agency acknowledged, all the while recognising colonial and neo-colonial power relations. Escobar (2008: 167) defines decoloniality as an awareness of the various alternatives to development and to modernity that exist in other ways of life, and the need to include these in scholarly discussions of development.”(p. 343).

3.6.1 HTTTD and “The Practice of Love”

The desire to “embrace diversity” and thus end domination, as determined by hooks (2013), was a driving force behind our project. In her opinion,

“The radical nature of love is that it is profoundly democratic. Irrespective of our status and station in life we can choose love; we can choose to leave dominator thinking behind. Love moves us beyond categories and therein lies its power to liberate. Free to love, we are free to be our authentic selves. We are free to take the path that leads us away from domination toward new lives of optimal well-being.” (p. 199).

Perhaps hooks’ concept of "The practice of Love" provides the most appropriate lens through which to observe HTTTD.

Firstly, because of our fundamental criticism of power structures. Secondly, because Ernst and I were a couple at the time of the project; without love, we would not have been able to marry our differing approaches and considerations. Lastly, HTTTD allowed us to get to know and love another country and its culture.

This universal concept not only forms a bridge between theory and practice, but also provides a link to the ethnographic segments of this report. For me, the auto-ethnographical approach allows a freer, more authentic kind of expression that is in line with hooks' concept of love, and with the qualities we determined to bring to our

project: an open mindedness and lack of judgement, the desire to learn without prejudice and to promote participation on an equal, socially just footing.

4. The Way of the Dragon:

An Exercise in Auto-Ethnography

4.1 Developing the Project

HTTTD was born out of lengthy, intense discussions between myself and Ernst at our kitchen table in Berlin during 2013. Ernst enjoys the quiet, solitary activities of painting, reading and engaging with theories. In contrast, my career makes me a team worker, accustomed to discussing ideas and putting them into practice with other people.

A gifted artist, Ernst was experiencing a creative crisis in a gentrified Berlin,

overpopulated with fellow artists. My greatest personal developments have occurred when new cultural environments have led me to challenge my existing perspectives, thus I proposed we travel to the country that had captured my heart two decades earlier – Cambodia.

4.2 Cambodia 1994

I used to be very shy — a quality that had taken on phobic traits —yet at the same time dreamed of being free and courageous and of travelling alone around the world. In a bid to overcome this inner dichotomy, and inspired by a book about people who took up meaningful activities to support their travels, I booked a trip to Asis and Australia, with enough money in my pocket to survive the first quarter of my trip. I planned to get involved with locals, learn about their cultures and challenge my own perceptions.

A few hours before I left, I met my friend, Markus, who raved about his recent trip to Cambodia. The Khmer dance to punk rock and any Westerners there, he said, were either writers like himself or English teachers. I should go, I would love it. In his intense enthusiasm he only briefly mentioned a civil war. So I flew from Bangkok to Phnom Penh with a few addresses in my notebook and the advice to learn everything I needed to know from the daily papers.

On the plane there was only one other Westerner — with English grammar books on his lap. I arrived at Ponchentong Airport on a Friday with traveller's checks I was unable to cash until the following Monday. The hotel owner weighed me up and

evidently judged me creditworthy. “I trust you,” he said, and announced I could eat and drink as much as I wanted and pay whenever I was able. At the time locals spoke barely a word of either French or English but were still keen to communicate, and in the weeks that followed I was invited into many homes. We resorted to gestures, mime and

simple bilingual dialogue with accompanying sign language to make ourselves mutually understood. Almost instantly, I took Khmer people, with their charm, dry humour and trusting natures, to my heart.

Besides the astonishing reliefs of the temples of Angkor Thom I was very impressed by the music and by the enamelled advertising signs with their naive paintings. I grew used to the presence of guns, easy to buy on the market. In the absence of telephones there was an agreed number of shots to, for example, summon the fire brigade.

Siem Reap, 31 October 1994 It was King Sihanouk's birthday. In the distance I heard fireworks. When the display was over, the booming sounds continued. I asked the guesthouse owner what was going on. “Khmer Rouge.” He replied, “in the daytime they are supposed to stay away, but at night they come and hunt dogs to eat. But today it's the King’s birthday – maybe trouble.” He pulled out a videotape and showed me the film “The Killing Fields”.

I left the next morning. The big boat would not cross the Tonle Sap lake — too dangerous, because of the Khmer Rouge — so we took a small boat. Several big bangs sounded and the face of my fellow travellers, all Khmer but for one Frenchman, froze with utter fear. The boat was filling with water so two men grabbed buckets and began bailing out as we sped hurriedly across the huge lake. We jumped out and straight into pick ups that drove at top speed to Phnom Penh, bouncing over pot holes in the mine-damaged roads. Only when we arrived in Phnom Penh did the faces around me start to relax. Days later I was to see those same expressions again; in the Genocide museum where the faces of those about to die in the notorious prison were captured in row upon grim row of black and white photos at the former Toul Sleng prison.

In my school history lessons I was taught, that after World War II the UN and other international institutions had insisted that atrocities such as those carried out under Hitler regime would never happen again. This belief was severely challenged in Cambodia - especially when I heard that UN soldiers were urinating on people forced to sleep in Phnom Penh's streets at night. These friendly people who were trying to rebuild their destroyed lives, doing all they could to achieve a better future. It made me terribly sad. This was my introduction to Cambodia’s history.

The impression of Khmer people as a nation of skilled artists stayed with me for for 20 years and fuelled my desire to see for myself how the country had developed. Also lodged in my memory was their openness, generosity, humour and hospitality and the stories they performed rather than told; the proud and beautiful tales about their achievements, but also the incredibly sad stories of war and loss of loved ones, which they possibly told me in the hope I could somehow change things. The latter left me perplexed; what could I have done? And the more I delved into the recent history of the country (see A1) and the shameful role the West had played in it, the less I felt able to answer that question. All I had to offer was compassion and my admiration for the courage and resilience that allowed them to move on with their lives.

Despite this sadness, my experience left me convinced – just like Markus had been on his return – that Ernst could be inspired to go there and that he would love it too.

4.3 Back to Berlin 2013

But first came those discussions. My

inclination to challenge existing ideas and concepts in a

different cultural environment met Ernst’s intellectual resistance, bordering on scepticism. In an accelerated, predominantly neo-liberal, globalised world, it has become difficult to take action. As citizens of the information and knowledge society, we are only too aware that every action has a consequence that attracts criticism from scholars and activists. The result can be paralysing. In our case, it led to the aforementioned

discussions. The challenging process of creating a concept for our project led us to address considerations that included:

• tourism in the age of globalization.

• the role of the West and power structures in post-colonial countries. • appropriate conduct in view of the role of the West in Cambodia's history. • our critical attitude towards neoliberalism and the role of culture within this

paradigm.

• the role of artists in gentrification processes.

• how can we communicate across language barriers? • environmental concerns regarding long-haul flights.

“Hey let's go to Cambodia!”

“No way! Tourism sucks and anyway, we as Westerners should stay at home. Accor-ding to the dependency theory....”