Rachida Dati defends the freedom of artistic creation in extremis

As the end of her mandate in Culture approaches, the minister announced a system to combat attacks on freedom of creation. Nothing revolutionary, but welcome measures in the face of increasing pressure on artists.

MWednesday, December 4, midday: while Michel Barnier's government is experiencing its last moments, a large clearance sale begins on rue de Valois, at the Ministry of Culture. Rachida Dati, whose future as minister is now numbered, hastily finalized her files. And to show that a few hours before probable political chaos its teams are busy, nothing like a shower of press releases announcing, pell-mell, the entry of a national treasure into the Louvre collections . The appointment of a new director at the head of the contemporary music scene in Avignon. Details of the cultural agreements signed during Emmanuel Macron's visit to Saudi Arabia. The inclusion of “fairground culture” on UNESCO’s list of intangible heritage. Followed, a few minutes later, by that of “the know-how of Parisian roofers and zinc workers and ornamentalists”.

In the midst of this avalanche, an announcement is particularly timely. That of a plan “in favor of freedom of artistic creation”. It became urgent for the minister to act on this burning issue, as the rise in pressure, threats and even cases of censorship of concerts or shows, most often under the influence of small far-right groups, has gradually become a subject major – even though freedom of creation and distribution has, since 2016, been guaranteed by the LCAP law. To the point that unions (the SMA for contemporary music, the Syndeac for subsidized theater employers, Ekhoscenes for private performing arts entrepreneurs, etc.) and associations like the Observatory of Freedom of Creation are regularly concerned about it. , including in a recent survey published by Telerama.

This fall, socialist senator Sylvie Robert, one of the initiators of the LCAP law (relating to freedom of creation, architecture and heritage), for her part led a mission to evaluate this law eight years after its adoption, by interviewing more than thirty elected officials and professionals in the sector. Its conclusions validate what everyone feels on the ground: “The questions of freedom of creation and distribution, censorship, self-censorship and even preventive censorship are a real subject today [de préoccupation]. »

The plan announced by Rachida Dati is not revolutionary. It comes down to a few pragmatic decisions which we can nevertheless hope will put the ministry in battle order on a frankly worrying subject. Firstly, it provides for three measures intended to better identify attacks on freedom of creation from 2025. Among them, the appointment of an official attached to the Ministry of Culture “responsible for supporting cultural actors facing difficulties and coordinating political actions in favor of freedom of creation and dissemination”. A mediator capable of working with the Drac (the ministry's services in the regions, good knowledge of the field) or the prefects, but whose press release does not specify by whom he will be appointed.

Training, monitoring and referents

The question is far from neutral at the dawn of an uncertain political period which could see the National Rally one day come to power. Another measure, the establishment of referents in the Drac capable of acting in the face of concrete cases. An idea of ​​common sense as the actors (artists, but also directors of cultural places) do not always know where to turn even though they are everywhere weakened, sometimes prevented from performing, or at the mercy of decisions taken by elected officials reluctant to host shows on ecology, migrants, religion, gender…

If the plan does not include a dissuasive component, it intends to strengthen “awareness” and “training” of all those who, one day, may be affected by censorship: artists in the first place, venue directors, elected officials. … A legal guide should be published by the ministry next spring, which will be added to that of the Observatory for Freedom of Creation and Dissemination, reinforced in its role of “watchdog”. There “establishment of monitoring of cases of infringement of creative freedom” is planned, in consultation with associations of elected officials and local authorities. It was essential, as it is difficult to document these obstacles or attempted obstacles and, even harder, to objectify the risk of self-censorship that results from them.

In a weakened economy, where creators have less and less the means to oppose the conditions of those who finance them, the clear support of the ministry was expected, necessary and therefore welcome. Because, when it comes to creative freedom, no one can predict the fate that the future has in store for artists.