Civic Humanities/Javier Suarez I would like to divide my commentary in two different but connected issues regarding cultural agency:

gestin cultural (cultural management) and art as irruption. 1. I read the article of Mockus, and I find it really skillful to use the meaning of one word in his own language to make himself better understood; I am talking about the word convivencia that does not have the connotations that is has in English and French. I would like to do something similar with a phenomenon that is really starting to develop in Peruvian cultural-politics; I am talking about gestin cultural. If I try to find the translation of gestin, I find management. However, this translation does not grasp the connotation of process that gestin has, and instead it emphasizes the administrative or executive sense of the activity1. One thing I would like to express and debate is the awareness we need to have of who we receive money/funding from when we are involved in gestin cultural. This is a thorny issue because in Latin American countries, many times, independent cultural projects do not count with money or funding to develop their projects. This reminds me of Kesters article about liberal philanthropy, that is, the wealthy foundations that sometimes help people just to feel better with themselves or because they have political and economic interests involved. This is an issue that always worries me; I have been involved in the development of projects of gestin cultural, and who we should call to help us is a question that is always open to debate and political struggle. 2. The other question has to do with the understanding of artwork that Kesters express in his article. I just would like to comment about his suspicion about the art as a shocking experience (Walter Benjamin). I consider that there is a misunderstanding in his way of dealing with the Avant-garde art. Surely, some of this art has the qualities he ascribes to it (an art not concerned about the spectator, seeing itself as the voice of the others, anti-discursive, etc.); however, many of the Avant-garde art has always been preoccupied with the peoples experience and with the claims of justice and happiness. To be shocking, is not being anti-discursive. I think that art is always an irruption necessary inside-and-beyond discourse, and this quality of being inside discourse but beyond it is what gives it its emancipatory power. I think that Littoral art is one alternative among many; we should hear further to see new alternatives beyond discourse, yes; and maybe because of that, inside it, part of it.

In fact, if we compare the English and Spanish definitions, we find that the former is focused in the executive ability to do something skillfully and successfully; the latter, on the contrary, is focused on the process (dilgencias) and the complexity and hardworking involved (it is interesting that gestin is related to the word gesta that means memorable deed, hazaa). In fact, in the Peruvian gestin cultural, when one is successful with a project that involves funding, one is told: es una hazaa lo que has hecho.