Back
Interview
with sebastián gerlic
Sebastián Gerlic
Sebastián, you have been directing the Brazil-based NGO THYDEWA since 2002, dedicated to strengthening indigenous communities in Latin America. Your work focuses on exchange between indigenous and non-indigenous communities through electronic art. 
Can you tell us more about?
 
Thydewa has its main roots in Brazil, especially in the provinces of the states of Bahia Pernambuco and Alagoas.  Our institution is mainly based on the wisdoms of the native peoples, the indigenous communities of those traditions that have their milleninal history of harmony with nature. We focus on the knowledge of indigenous science. Their way of living with art, an inspiration to at least break the paradigm of instruction that is taking account of the world. It will inspire us to go back or move forward or vote for this paradigm of life where we are all in one big network and interrelated. We can be relating to each other for the good of all adding up, promoting life. With these compositions mainly from Latin America and more from the peoples we are working with we try to somehow blow in the hearts of other indigenous people and not only from Brazil, Argentina, Bolivia but from further afield. We have had the opportunity to work on various projects in the five regions of this great continental country. For more than 10 years we have also made important relations with other countries. Mainly we had exchanges with Argentina, Colombia, France and the United Kingdom. Now especially with the AIRE project we are including relations with Germany and Portugal
To raise awareness of and learn from the wisdom of indigenous peoples who have always lived in interconnectedness and harmony with our ecosystem. How do you see the path in Latin America and Europe?
The air is in every country and the crisis is global. We understand that the planet is a unique living organism. We try to reach all places and of course, depending on the culture of a country, the culture of a people in a community, they are different. The way to reach and to relate, to dialogue is to understand. There are many places in the world where there are these ancient ancestral wisdoms of respect for life and understanding of the great network of life and there are places where unfortunately man has lost his relationship with nature, has understood himself as a different superior, separated from nature and has carried out a process of killing nature, of transforming nature into merchandise. A process of extermination. The globalised world is unfortunately quite caught up in some plans of death, plans contrary to life. We understand that the wisdom of the indigenous peoples is still very strong in many indigenous communities, wisdom that looks forward, for the future, for all wisdom to be shared, to inspire, to promote change. A change where we all meet to understand and live as brothers and sisters. Not only human beings, but everyone, plants, animals, all beings. Our work is to provoke reflection and after reflection with awareness to provoke changes in behaviour, to behave in favour of life.
AIRE is a sub-project of a larger project (AEI). Can you tell us more about it? 
In 2018 we started a project called AEI - Arte Electrónica con Indígenas and it consisted of facilitating residencies for artists who want to experiment in indigenous communities. Co-creation based on living for a few days or weeks with indigenous people, co-creating works. In 2018 we were able to do ten residencies and ten works. We continued with the project until the pandemic arrived, which distanced us, at least in the body, very strongly in many ways. Refusing this distancing, this isolation, we thought about how to continue with the artistic dialogues. It was when we found the Miller-Zillmer Foundation, a work that they were already doing with Home Residencies, and we thought why not take advantage of the fact that it was possible and do electronic residencies. So AIRE was born in a way, a new version of AEI. To continue looking to make residencies of co-creation between indigenous and non-indigenous people. To travel and communicate through technology. We met for 3 months 23 people. Meeting sometimes all of us, sometimes some of us, in big or small groups through digital platforms. Getting to know, sharing and sounding together the land where we want to live and build with art messages for the world in that sense, in crediting the power of humanity, in diversity and in art.   The project was an artistic co-creation between people living in Bolivia, Argentina, Chile, Brazil and Ecuador.In 2018 we started a project called AEI — Arte Electrónica con Indígenas and it consisted of facilitating residencies for artists who want to experiment in indigenous communities. Co-creation based on living for a few days or weeks with indigenous people, co-creating works. In 2018 we were able to do ten residencies and ten works. We continued with the project until the pandemic arrived, which distanced us, at least in the body, very strongly in many ways. Refusing this distancing, this isolation, we thought about how to continue with the artistic dialogues. It was when we found the Miller-Zillmer Foundation, a work that they were already doing with Home Residencies, and we thought why not take advantage of the fact that it was possible and do electronic residencies. So AIRE was born in a way, a new version of AEI. To continue looking to make residencies of co-creation between indigenous and non-indigenous people. To travel and communicate through technology. We met for 3 months 23 people. Meeting sometimes all of us, sometimes some of us, in big or small groups through digital platforms. Getting to know, sharing and sounding together the land where we want to live and build with art messages for the world in that sense, in crediting the power of humanity, in diversity and in art.   The project was an artistic co-creation between people living in Bolivia, Argentina, Chile, Brazil and Ecuador.
How is the process of cooperation between the different countries and cultures? What challenges 
do the differences briNg? 
Each of the indigenous community where we work has its own peculiar, its own identity. The differences between indigenous communities can be quite a lot, but they are always smaller than in the non-indigenous world, the so-called First World, the developed, globalised, materialistic, capitalistic world. There are fundamental, foundational, structuring principles that are very similar in all indigenous communities. For example, respect for life is a fundamental law. Absolute respect for all beings is part of fundamental education. The material resources will never be as significant as it is in the so-called developed countries. Violence, I cannot say that it does not exist within the indigenous community, but it never compares with the violence of the big capitals. So we could think from any point of view. Prostitution or abandoned orphaned children is a very rare thing in indigenous communities. All people have their place, their roles, all are respected, contributing, collaborating, their mission functioning organically in the whole within the community.  The internal policies of indigenous communities are born from the community, from the collective, from the real heart of the people. Whenever possible listen to the territory. Everything that is alive within a community. Listening to the river, the stones, the mountains... Incorporating all beings into the construction of what would be the political system of an indigenous community. The social responsibility (?) of some countries, although they call themselves democracies, seems to be a word that is sometimes empty and in practice fails to take into consideration the common good, the collective. To listen to each and every being. In general, it seems that politics is a politics of exclusion, domination, oppression. Economic plans, egocentrism, extermination, massacre, violence. The vision of politics within a community must always be for the good of all and never infringe on the pain of others.
The different indigenous communities from various Latin American countries each with its own political regime. What, if any, differences are there between those regimes in the way they interface and treat those communities? 
Political relations between countries and indigenous communities are unfortunately often not good. It seems that indigenous history in a generalised way is divided into two main moments: Before the invasion of 1492 for America or 1500 for example for Brazil and after. So yes, there were attrits, conflicts, internal tensions before the arrival of the Europeans. They were attrits, conflicts, even minor wars. I would say with a certain ethics, a certain morality, from the invasion, the massacre, the genocide, the ethnocide, there was a perversity of violence, a shocking inhumanity. So often the politics of nation-states in the service of capital accumulation, in the service of the few, have led to atrocities. At times in some Latin American countries they were more progressive with a better performance in human rights, a little more understandable and more dialogued. But they have been small exceptions in time and unfortunately the history of politics in the last 500 and 50 years has been quite sad.  In general it is important to keep the power of resilience and to find one's own way to happiness even if the context is sad. Now in Brazil the current politics is terrible, it is anti-indigenous and anti-life, against people of colour, against women, against the poor, against homosexuals, against life. In some ways it is the same in Columbia and Chile. Several countries are suffering dramatic sad moments where it seems that life is not worth anything. There is a saying here: "the life of a cow is worth more than the life of an indigenous person". We don't mean to say that a cow's life is worthless. The problem is that many indigenous people are killed to steal their land to raise cattle, to make soya or cattle for export. Many territories were expropriated from the indigenous people at the cost of blood. These goods that are exported from countries like Brazil to Europe, when the Europeans chew them well, they can feel the blood of the murdered people in their bananas. It is a sad reality today where in your countries, in the global balance, which are considered poor, there is a very large number of slaves where life is worth absolutely nothing. We are at the service of an inhuman production. Political relations between countries and indigenous communities are unfortunately often not good. It seems that indigenous history in a generalised way is divided into two main moments: Before the invasion of 1492 for America or 1500 for example for Brazil and after. So yes, there were attrits, conflicts, internal tensions before the arrival of the Europeans. They were attrits, conflicts, even minor wars. I would say with a certain ethics, a certain morality, from the invasion, the massacre, the genocide, the ethnocide, there was a perversity of violence, a shocking inhumanity. So often the politics of nation-states in the service of capital accumulation, in the service of the few, have led to atrocities. At times in some Latin American countries they were more progressive with a better performance in human rights, a little more understandable and more dialogued. But they have been small exceptions in time and unfortunately the history of politics in the last 500 and 50 years has been quite sad.  In general it is important to keep the power of resilience and to find one's own way to happiness even if the context is sad. Now in Brazil the current politics is terrible, it is anti-indigenous and anti-life, against people of colour, against women, against the poor, against homosexuals, against life. In some ways it is the same in Columbia and Chile. Several countries are suffering dramatic sad moments where it seems that life is not worth anything. There is a saying here: "the life of a cow is worth more than the life of an indigenous person". We don't mean to say that a cow's life is worthless. The problem is that many indigenous people are killed to steal their land to raise cattle, to make soya or cattle for export. Many territories were expropriated from the indigenous people at the cost of blood. These goods that are exported from countries like Brazil to Europe, when the Europeans chew them well, they can feel the blood of the murdered people in their bananas. It is a sad reality today where in your countries, in the global balance, which are considered poor, there is a very large number of slaves where life is worth absolutely nothing. We are at the service of an inhuman production.
The project AIRE. Can you tell us something about the process and various outcomes? 
As nurtured, inspired by indigenous worldviews and with the hope to work for change in our flag, our daily life and commitment, we co-create heart-to-heart plays, full of emotion and feelings to sensitise people who are still a bit numb and unaware of the global problem worldwide. Although we are all in the global world, there are alternative islands and exemplary successful communities. Many indigenous communities are a nursery where seedlings, inspiration is always coming out to plant good ideas, feelings in other places. AIRE did this. It nurtured the thoughts, ideas, experiences of harmony between indigenous people and nature. It amplified them, distributed them, carried them, shared them with the rest of the world through art. To bring the provocations from the good heart of the indigenous world to the whole world.  We made nine works, nine expressions made in different groups in which all 23 artists and even more people participated. They are very different works. Some are video-based, others are more powerful in the visual plastic, others have their main voice in music, others are combinations of clips, mixtures, poetry. Through the digital meetings we got to know each other, exchanging bits of images, of ideas until we were creating together works. Some are images from the South of Brazil and the audio made in Ecuador. Some of the main ideas came out of a talk between Bolivia and Chile, but we set the music in the Amazonia and so we mix, learn and play, crossing borders. In three months we made a kind of intercultural and interethnic community. We were interacting, connecting, tuned in and oriented by common noble motives with urgent objectives of radical emergency such as taking care of the planet. Sensitising people to understand themselves as part of an interconnected network where everything makes life, where everything plays a role in life. The greatest commitment to life. This is how we did the works.
Have any new ways and connections, ideas and/or concepts with lasting impact come out of the project?
Talking a bit more about the AIRE results. There are some layers, dimensions that are a little bit more difficult to understand, to transmit. But the fact that we were together for three months, such a diverse group of people understanding and creating together gave each of us a broad vision, a calmness even though the world is in crisis. Especially in Latin America the pandemic is at a terrible peak and the violence of the government, of the state, the injustices are terrible. But we found serenity, calm and hope. We have strengthened each other. We want our works also to be ways of bringing to other people these commitments and visions, this love for life. Many of the works are open. For example the „Ceremonia do los cuatro vientos" is not just one play, it now has four versions - two for adults, two for children, in Portuguese and in Spanish. If, for example, a school teacher wants to approach the subject, she can do it through this work with its structure and its very pedagogical form. She can do a reading, take the narratives to her reality, to her local culture. The same is applicable to several works. The music that we did in Spanish, we are working on a version in Portuguese, in Italian. The project is much more than its final works. The works are open and continuous - as if they have legs and continue walking. We did many meetings for example with a university in Colombia, with an indigenous group, a group of professors from Argentina, several universities in Brazil. Several dialogues, we placed the works and our intercultural experience and artistic co-creation. The project is much more than nine works, it is the whole process: the previous one, the co-creation and the dialogues with the public. The interactions and inspirations, its ways of capturing and learning and teaching its social movement. We are still working, interacting, connecting, even planning other kinds of projects. There is still a strong bond, a union, and it doesn't matter that we speak different languages or that we are miles apart. We have common feelings and commitments to life. That is much more important than any small differences at a distance. It is a deeply experienced apprenticeship that has become very powerful. 
Can you imagine further cooperation with the Miller-Zillmer Foundation in the future? And if so, in which ways?
The idea of electronic residencies was born out of the necessity of the pandemic.  Overcoming the barriers of languages and distance allows us to think that AIRE can go further, we can extend it to the programme. We could think of a new phase of co-creations also with people from Germany or other European countries, from anywhere in the world. The decentralised, collective electronic residencies can be a mechanism to get to know each other better, to understand and grow together. Sharing experiences of living in the same moment of humanitarian and planetary challenges. This way we have more chances to find solutions: the more diverse our group is, our outlook, our way of looking at things. This pilot project can allow us to replicate in the same or new ways. For example a new group where half of the people can be European or opening up to other continents, putting some common theme.  AIRE, each letter has a meaning - Arts with Indigenas in Electronic Residencies - In this sense these letters can continue to have meaning, but we can make a water theme or an earth theme or another theme. Since we are connected and found another way to make a new encounter, new experience, new co-creation and especially a new way of conversing with the audience. So we conversed with the audience sometimes academically but usually we made the exchange heart to heart - emotional. This kind of deep, true, sincere relationship of connection that allows us to understand that we are all together and we need to not abandon anyone, not only humans, but all beings and all forms, everything that exists for a reason. We need to learn to look, understand and act with this in a different way. We understand that the indigenous people are still in many ways great and important masters. I say still because I dream that tomorrow, all of us can somehow go up a few steps to increase our consciousness in another dimension where we include respect for all life unconditionally as a law of origin that it is.    


26.05.2021