They coincide more or less in the diagnosis. There is a gulf between Basque art and culture. Barcenilla: “I’ve had the impression many times, but when I joined Jakin’s editorial group, I felt it very clear. There were journalists interested in literature, musicians interested in politics… However, they all felt art as something distant.” Irati Urrestarazu de Okela Sormen: “At present, both areas are completely separate. There are no symbiotic points.” Grumer: “Today almost all the artists from Euskal Herria who are around 40-50 years old are more known outside than here: Azucena Vieites, Asier Mendizabal... Many people would meet Itziar Okariz because he made the poster of the Durango Fair, that’s his contribution.”

Problem on both sides: protectionism and label allergy

The salvation of the language has appeared soon after the causes of Internet disconnection have been weighed. Ungulists mention: “Our sad fate is that our language is being lost and one day it will be lost, and we fight all the time against that loss.” The consequence, according to Urrestarazu: “In the Basque culture and in the Basque Country everything is done from the position of defence. Therefore, or you do an art like that of Oteiza, which is explicitly linked to the defense of the Basque Country and the language, or you have a party.” The hunger for approval is another issue addressed by Gantzarain: “Our artists and writers are interested in the extent to which they serve to say that we are equal to others. They are based on disability complexes. We don't see our artists in a broader context, and ultimately, what do we want them for? Neither to read nor to see their work, but to receive prizes, and to be representatives of the Basque Country at an international level”.

Artists tend to give up labels. Okelako Nora Aurrekoetxea: “The plastic arts have been closely linked to the social and political context of the moment, the 1960s is the most significant example. However, today, and it is also a feature of modernity, we live exactly the opposite: no one wants a label that can smell sparks.” Barcenilla agrees and mentions other reasons: “Art has been highly institutionalised and artists have, in general, managed to materialise their projects thanks to grants. I believe that there are artists who are afraid that, if they are in favour of something, they will be able to influence against others coming into power. It is sad, but political interference has been very clear in institutions related to art.”

Izaro González de Okela has also focused on the training of artists: “In the university itself you will study Fine Arts and you can do almost the entire course in Basque, in precarious conditions, but well. However, this is not contextualized. We make an art career in a minority language, with the history that we have and with a subaltern culture, but that's not working. It seems that we are at a university I don’t know where, but doing classes in Basque.”

Contemporary art is not understood…

How many times have we said a similar sentence before a work of art? Barcenilla believes that we are too committed to understanding this: “Starting with education, learning is related to rational learning, the base of the body or sensations is disregarded. We try to understand everything in a rational way and we should recognize that works of art do not have a single answer. When we are in front of a work of art, we should ask ourselves why we are excited or why we are not interested.” In addition, we often have too great expectations: “In the case of film, for example, we have assumed that all films will not like us. But in art we always seek a transformative experience.”

With regard to the alleged misunderstanding, Gantzarain has set an example: “The performance Mear in public and private spaces of Itziar Okariz dismantles several topics, among which art is always abstract and elitist. But it's another thing. Where can you see that work? It's not Obabakoak, you can't go to the library and read it." For ungulists, the art world has also nurtured the perspective of elitism: “I’ve also said it takes effort, and it’s true, but in part you have to deconstruct it: go to an exhibition and you can’t feel stupid and that’s why you don’t enjoy it. We have swallowed a lot of dangerous speeches.”

… if it is not prebuilt

The distance and the reduction of the uprooting can be found in the “Carriage” of Bilbao. There's a history of art that you need to know. Barcenilla: “With the Guggenheim, the paradigm has changed. It has done a great deal of damage to art, although it seems to have been very positive, especially in economic terms. The first art was not taken as something that had to be necessarily easy.” What Idurre Eskisabel has written about garbage and models of citizenship also applies to art: “The institutions drive the consumer model: without any effort, the client receives the pleasure that does not generate problems or doubts”. Grumer: “The audio guide is key. When they opened the Guggenheim they had to pay, but now they give it to you with the entrance and tell you in what order you have to see the works and what you have to find in each of them. They give you all facts and a history of determined art.” Machista and imperialist history, according to Barcenilla.

The case of Piccaso's most famous work is illuminating, according to Gantzarain: “A speech has set the importance of Guernica. Guernica is not the depiction of a bombing, there are no planes or bombs. But when you go, you'll see that, because you've been told that's what you have to see. Another question would be who has written that speech (MoMA, Spanish Transition…).”

Dialogue and communication as a means

But there are also more critical models like the Okelakoak Artists Meeting Point. Every three months a theme is chosen and four artists are invited to create and act around it. Predecessor: “We value not only the work of some artists, but also the thought of the artist. The lack of artistic education creates problems, and that's why it's important to sit down and talk about the theme or the proposal that comes up. Communication becomes a bridge, and debates arise about the social concerns that may occur in other contexts.”

Barcenilla agrees with the need for communication and proposes a series of steps: “To start with, more outreach would have to be done, as in science. Institutions should organize special, well-thought out programs for art to reach people, but not paternally, because it's not about bringing people like sheep. We've done mega-institutions, and it would be much smarter to do small, local and work with the right context. To start showing young artists, we would need a reference place; the Museum of Fine Arts is a missed opportunity, as it has an exhibition hall of medium size, ideal. Finally, we should start a dialogue between the art world and the creators of culture to share and understand ourselves.”