Dying for change: the art market in Zimbabwe by Barbara Murray In every country it is a small wealthy percentage of the population that buys art. In the West, with its concentrated populations and widespread affluence gained largely through colonial and capitalist exploitation, this percentage contains quite a large number of people. Art is bought by corporations, companies and banks, by art institutions such as national galleries and foundations, by city and municipal collections, and also by private collectors and individuals. Art is an integral part of the education and media environment of all citizens. The history of art, aesthetics and art criticism are professional fields. Artmaking is supported by publications and commercial products which bring advertising and publicity. Specific auction houses deal in the visual arts and, through the competition engendered, prices are pushed up. Art in the West is now seen as one facet of the profit-driven entertainment industry - a sort of hypermarket with consumers. In stark contrast, in Africa, the percentage of the population that can afford to buy art is miniscule. Art is rarely part of the education curriculum. The study of art history, aesthetics and criticism are sorely lacking. Art is not considered a consumer product. There is no secondary market of publications and by-products and therefore extremely little publicity. Widespread poverty means that any entertainment is usually homemade. Those few countries that have a reasonable economy such as Egypt, Nigeria and South Africa have larger numbers of people who can afford art and their art markets are more vibrant than the poorer countries. The Zimbabwean art market? How to describe and explain such a volatile and adhoc phenomenon to readers in Europe where the art market is long established, institutionalised and professional? The historical trajectory is an essential element. The impact of history When Britain colonised Zimbabwe in 1890, the local ways and philosophy of cultural production was decimated. The political and economic system that was imposed by the colonials and missionaries disrupted local patterns of life including the commissioning and distributing of cultural goods. An entirely different approach to art - with foreign values and uses in society - was enforced. Within the colonial regime, only forms familiar to the colonising power, such as paintings and marble statues, were con-sidered to be art, and the "proper" way of trading art was through exhibitions and sales for money within a competitive and hierarchical structure. Art was in reality a propaganda tool for colonisation. What little public art there was consisted of statues of military or political figures imported from the West and installed with imperial pomp. A colonial "art scene" - consisting mainly of private exhibitions in hotels and church or community halls - gradually established itself in the two larger cities: Harare (then called Salisbury) and Bulawayo. White artists produced watercolours and oil paintings that were bought by white patrons. Works produced by black pupils at mission schools were sometimes sold, but always to white buyers. It would have been impossible for a black Zimbabwean, under the colonial regime, to earn enough money to consider spending it on non-essential items such as artworks. Indigenous artforms and black Zimbabweans were therefore totally excluded from the local "art market". African aesthetics and cul-tural forms were ignored or denigrated. This situation continued for 67 years - long enough to completely undermine the indigenous cultures. When the National Gallery was opened in 1957, things began to change. Barbara Murray was born in Zimbabwe in 1949. She has worked as a critic, curator and promoter of contemporary art in Africa. She was the founding editor of Gallery, the art magazine from Gallery Delta, and founding secretary of the Zimbabwe Association of Art Critics. In October 2000, she relocated to London where she continues to work on projects relating to art in Africa barbara.murray@artlover.com