Creativity and culture are two concepts that are constantly linked. While creativity is often an expression of our cultural beliefs, it also pushes boundaries that shape culture. On the opposite end, culture shapes the lens within which we view our creativity, and often, the more creativity aligns with our unique culture, the more authentic it is. So the often accepted form is that culture leads while creativity follows, even though the latter helps shape the former.
One of the clearest examples of this is southern African music. In long-gone times, music was revered as a ceremonial tool, and to serve its purpose, instrumentation that spoke to spirituality was created: the djembe drums, the mbira, the marimba, the hosho, the chipendani, and others.
A percussive sound that spoke to the music’s purpose emerged, and when colonisation arrived with the introduction of guitars, saxophones, and electronic drum machines, these traditional sounds were simply transferred onto new mediums. Culture held the hand of creativity; well, at least for a time.
As times have changed, so has this relationship, and what was once driven by cultural purpose now too often bends to the whims of economic demands. What creatives create has become less inspired and more a question of “What can earn me the largest reward?” From the public, from the grant economy, and from benefactors local and abroad. Those with the funds have become, more and more, the drivers of our arts. The creative economy has seemingly lost its balance.
This is one of the key conversations that have been brought to the surface by Arterial Network’s workshop on CCIs (Cultural & Creative Industries) Policy Implementation. And such a discourse is worthy of unpacking.
It would be wrong to paint the country’s entire arts industry with one brushstroke, even with the economy in such a parlous state. Creating from a place of poverty can be just as much a pursuit of financial gain as it is a purely inspired pursuit.
Moffat Takadiwa has repurposed the plastic waste around him into unique works that adorn globally renowned galleries. NoViolet Bulawayo has channelled experience into writing that made her the first black African author to be shortlisted for the Booker Prize twice. Yet as a whole, Zimbabwe is still not telling its story as best it can.
The resources given to the arts by individual organisations and private players pull the industry in the direction desired by each. This is especially clear at a time like this. The country has been labelled the World’s No.1 Tourist Destination by Forbes, yet on the back of that there hasn’t been an elevation in the showcase of our culture and its products (our creativity) — the objects most tied to tourism. Instead, we have the same old statement: “We have the Victoria Falls!”
In a world dominated by capitalism and all its attendant forces, policy is the wall that protects heritage and ultimately our creativity and our culture. The National CCIs Policy 2020–2030 is currently guiding the government’s approach to the arts industry. Yet the suitability of it for the purpose, and the success of its implementation, are areas that have not been assessed since it was put in place. This raises the question of how we can know if we’re making true progress.
The policy was created by a guiding framework and research that dates back to 2001 — a time before AI, the smartphone, mobile internet in Zimbabwe, or even YouTube or streaming services. The consultative process had only 200 participants, and although it can’t include every stakeholder, there’s always a question on the quality of contributions.
When engaging with local councils or government departments, creatives are the ones that have the onus of communicating national policy to those that formulate — making it a two-way process. Which makes us ask: what purpose does policy serve if we still have to advocate for it to its creators? Is implementation a reality or an illusion? Who will bridge the gap between culture and creativity if the arts sector is simply left to its own devices?
While Arterial Network’s workshop is a conversation starter, the discussion needs to go beyond its 100 or so attendants. Creativity and culture are key constituents of our heritage, and if we let them wash away, it’s not only a loss for practitioners of the arts but for us as a whole. Especially when the arts sector has seemingly found its legs again after the Covid pandemic.
We have to ask, is the arts policy serving its purpose?
Going forward, the sector needs a structured, measurable, and transparent process to ensure the policy does more than exist on paper.
This should include an independent review of the National CCIs Policy, an update that reflects technological and economic shifts, and a dedicated implementation committee that includes creatives, policymakers, researchers, and local councils.
Clear data tracking — from funding flows to creative output, cultural export performance, and provincial arts infrastructure — must guide decisions rather than assumptions.
Only with such mechanisms can Zimbabwe meaningfully bridge the gap between culture and creativity, and ensure the arts ecosystem grows with intention rather than inertia.
