Description
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, while most capitals were celebrating the restoration of local cultures and identities, in Chisinau many were rejecting the existence of a separate Moldovan nation. Moldovan nationalism produced an independent state, but not an independent nation (King, 2000, p. 3). Different countries started to contribute to Moldova’s national identity formation. The literature on outside influences in Moldova is extensive. This literature focuses on nation-building, contested identities and foreign policy (King, 1994; Kaufman, 1996; King, 2003; Fawn, 2004; Lavenex, 2008; Kennedy, 2013). The literature on these influences in the Transnistrian frozen conflict is even wider (Kolto, 1998; Neukirch, 2001; Popescu, 2005; Dura, 2011). However, the literature examining the role of external actors in the artistic production in Moldova is somewhat limited. This paper aims to assess to what extent these outside influences contribute to the development of artists’ political engagement and shape national identity discourses. The first section provides a brief critique of methodological nationalism in the study of artists and politically engaged art, notably by describing the mobility of artists and the transnational nature of artistic funding and ideas. The second section explores how governmental and non-governmental officials from Turkey, Russia, Germany, Romania, and the European Union support artists’ political engagement in different artistic fields, such as theatre, performance and cinema. The last section explains how some artists, working on commission, produce artworks whose message often seems the one the funders try to promote.
