When does someone become an active part of the creative and cultural industries in the UAE, and when do they become an outsider? As a freelancer who is (at best) a passive participant at art events, and feels continually disillusioned and distanced from the local artscape — am I still welcome?

Too often, I have conversations with artists in the UAE who share a similar detachment or disillusionment, a lingering exhaustion due to expectations, lack of support, or disappointment at the perceived hypocrisy in the art world. ‘This could have been something better, but they chose to do this instead’. — a feeling of missed opportunities.

I must admit my own guilt in this matter as well; often dejected and unsure of whether I would be a welcome presence in most art circles. Am I the right nationality? Can I offer anything if I’m not a visual artist? Can I compensate for not being Western-educated? Are they looking for South Asians, or maybe women? These thoughts have led me to withdraw from participating in the conventional sense, oscillating between the need to network and the need to prioritise my mental health.

Is this a consequence of institutional shortcomings or simply my own individual struggles? My internal critic would say ‘Forget what people think, you should carve out your own space! Get out of your own way and just start talking to people! It’ll work out.’

Sure.

When the people who create ‘spaces’ and ‘platforms’ for creatives base their critical thinking in unfamiliar ideals (Western or otherwise), they create a narrative of criticism lacking in cultural context. In the absence of a dominant local narrative, the gaps are often filled with colonial or colonial-derived implementations that make it exceedingly difficult for creatives to be recognised and valued outside these predefined moulds. It is an arduous position place to find oneself in, and a challenging mould to conform to (Read Bhoomika Ghaghada’s excellent piece here).

No one specific institution is to be blamed for this (although neither is anyone blameless). The absence of critique, limited public engagement, and concentrated funding (held by institutions) — all make it very difficult to discern whom institutions truly welcome and where one’s position lies on the ladder. When only a select few understand how the system operates, the ones who don’t are left feeling like imposters and unwelcome tradesmen, timidly showing their work in the hope that the right individual (with financial resources) will bestow their work a status of appreciation.

This problem is further compounded for people who grew up in families and/or cultures that did not consider being an artist a viable career choice, making it even harder for them to make a name for themselves. The wider public is still not engaged enough by art institutions, so parents are more inclined to focus on STEM subjects being the only worthy pursuit, which in turn steers the efforts of schools and ministries towards them.

But how can institutions be more open? One would think that free, public spaces, which are brimming with art and design for all to see, would be teeming with people of all classes and nationalities. Unfortunately, they are not. Whether this is a deliberate decision or a consequence of the inherent elitism, it is difficult to ignore the growing elephant in the room. If left unaddressed, we are at risk of becoming complacent and growing comfortable with the status quo.

I do not raise these points to undermine or dismiss the efforts that have already been made towards accessibility. There have been several initiatives over the years that have been steps in the right direction, such as staff training in sign language, translations in languages beyond Arabic and English, and exhibition guides for children. But to effect significant change, we need to have open conversations about our collective direction and aspirations as a creative community. Do we really want to adopt the same elitist models and gatekeeping attitudes that exist elsewhere, or could we be better?

If institutions want to create a vibrant and supportive industry, they must regularly self-reflect and assess whether their approach meets their goals.

Transparency and an open dialogue with creatives can go a long way to improving accessibility and inclusivity, with criticism playing a vital role. Expanding engagement beyond the narrow circle of artists and enthusiasts is crucial, especially for people of determination and the non-English speaking population. Fostering an actual interest in art, grounded in cultural context and embracing approaches that go beyond mere mimicry of Western standards, would help bridge the gap between the public and the art world. And perhaps most importantly, institutions must nurture a culture of critique and critical thought, not only towards artists’ works but also towards the institutions themselves, to allow for nuance and perspectives as diverse as the population of the country.