Is artistic egocentrism hindering literary management in the Dominican Republic?

Following my previous article, “Can Dominican literature find its leadership?,” I received a range of feedback, from positive comments to critiques, regarding our inability to move towards more genuine leadership. This prompted a deeper reflection on two key points I had raised:

1. The pressing need for leaders to create “kingdoms” or exclusive spaces where others must belong, hindering their own ability to lead effectively.
2. Deep-rooted issues, akin to the Greek myth of Procrustes, where individuals try to force others to conform to predetermined standards.

This led me to a broader question: What prevents us from achieving the level of innovation and modernity that other industries have embraced so readily, while our literature seems to struggle?

Inspired by a question posed by my colleague, the editor, poet and writer Luis Reynaldo Pérez, I began to wonder: Is artistic egocentrism the primary culprit behind the slow pace of literary management in the Dominican Republic? A more intriguing question emerged: Can we foster effective teams within a field as ego-driven and hierarchical as art and literature? While this may seem commonplace in the arts, regardless of the discipline, I believe that we can strive for a more collaborative approach.

Without intending to point fingers, I argue that simply being an artist does not require a singular way of working. I firmly believe that this is not a fixed rule. The purpose of this article is to spark conversation and question why we cannot create better conditions for our literary landscape by drawing on knowledge and practices from other fields.

In 2018, during my master’s program in New York, I encountered a fascinating book titled The DNA of Innovators by Jeff Dyer, Hal Gregersen and Clayton M. Christensen. These American professors of strategy, leadership and business, respectively, propose that innovators who disrupt systems are not born but made.

Their research revealed two distinct professional profiles: Delivery and Discovery. Delivery professionals adhere to established methodologies and follow a structured approach to their work. Discovery professionals, on the other hand, challenge the status quo and seek out new ideas, embracing creativity and experimentation.

The authors also identified five key skills for innovation: questioning, observation, association, experimentation and networking. These skills have been honed by countless innovators throughout history.

When I read about “questioning” and the famous “what if,” I pondered: What if we approached cultural enterprises differently, adopting business models that provide tailored solutions to writers and the general public? What if we gathered regularly to discuss new ideas for advancing literature?

Another intriguing skill was “association,” which involves combining seemingly unrelated concepts to generate novel ideas.

The aim of this article is not to place blame but to encourage curiosity. Why do we remain so entrenched in our current ways of working? While artistic egocentrism may play a role, I believe our greatest challenge lies in our inability to dream differently, think collaboratively and build effective teams.

We possess the innate ability to innovate, and it’s time we harness this potential. By exploring new ways of working and fostering open dialogue, we can revolutionize the literary landscape in the Dominican Republic.

_____________
By Roxanna Marte
Writer and Cultural Promoter
@cuentard