Reclaiming the civic imagination: Why democracy needs art and design

The relationship between civil society, the state, and the creative arts has reached a critical juncture. At a time when democratic discourse is increasingly filtered through surveillance, market-driven logic, and shrinking public spaces, the ability to "see" and "listen" differently has become a radical act. In the latest episode of the UnMute podcast, hosts Gagan Sethi and Minar Pimple joined forces with interdisciplinary practitioner Avni Sethi and design educator Dr. Vijayendra (Vijay) Singh Sekhon to explore a provocative question: can art, design, and education cultivate the human capacities required to sustain a healthy democracy?  

For the hosts, the impetus for this conversation was a recognition of a historical failure. "Civil society has always been dabbling with art but never actually caught it properly," Gagan Sethi observed, noting that while early social movements relied on creative mediums like jatas, songs, and writing, the sector has since lost its way. As the market and civic society began to impinge on each other, the understanding of art and design as tools for societal transformation was sidelined, with practitioners often relegated to "little niches" rather than being central to the democratic project.  

​Beyond the Metrics of Impact

​One of the most pressing themes of the discussion was a scathing critique of the obsession with "impact" metrics—a framework that both guests argued has been unhelpfully inherited from the development sector. Avni Sethi, the founder of the Conflictorium (India’s first Museum of Conflict) and Mehnat Manzil (a Museum of Work), warned against the instrumentalization of human experience.  

​"There is a danger of artists instrumentalizing people’s lived experience," she explained. "Is it like, 'Oh, I research an idea and then I make some work out of it and then I gather personal currency'?". Sethi emphasized that her curatorial work is not about creating a singular, quantifiable impact, but about building institutions that facilitate difficult dialogues without centering on one individual’s ego. She argued that the desire for immediate, measurable change often ignores the reality that the "arch" of societal transformation is incredibly long.  

​Dr. Vijayendra Singh Sekhon, who leads the interaction design program at Anant National University, echoed this sentiment. He described the process of teaching and creating as a "10-year life sculpture project" rather than a short-term intervention. "The process of making art is a transformative process in itself," he noted, suggesting that we should steer clear of linking art practice too tightly to immediate, changed actions. For Sekhon, the success of his work isn't found in a spreadsheet of outcomes, but in the "humanizing" messages he receives from former students years later—reminders that they were taught to be explorers rather than just employees.  

​The Classroom as a Site of Ideological Warfare

​The conversation turned to the role of education in an era of technological saturation and political polarization. Both guests acknowledged the difficulty of maintaining a human-centric pedagogy within institutions that are increasingly pressured to produce "market-ready" talent.  

​"Design education can be a life-changing experience," Avni Sethi noted, reflecting on her own shift from dance to design. However, she warned that schools are now "standing on ideological warfare" where educators must navigate students who arrive "fully circuited" by the influences of social media and algorithmic bias.  

​Dr. Sekhon added that while design schools have proliferated—he cited that there are now roughly 1,000 design schools in the country—the focus has shifted dangerously toward technical training that can be "applied anywhere," from making chai to selling underwear. To counter this, he encourages a "fresh eye"—the ability to uncondition oneself and see the world without bias. "Education is supposed to humanize people," he insisted, arguing that the true goal of a design educator is to provide students with the ability to "figure out how to learn" rather than just mastering a software suite.  

​The Complexity of "Middle of the Fence"

​A recurring motif throughout the episode was the concept of being "middle of the fence." Both guests, having faced censorship and the pressures of working within state and corporate frameworks, spoke to the difficulty of navigating these polarized times.

​"The most troubled times probably create opportunities for the most interesting work," Sekhon remarked, drawing on the concept of "antifragility"—the idea of becoming stronger under pressure rather than simply breaking. However, they were both clear-eyed about the limitations of this position. When discussing the "safe city" initiatives that prioritize CCTV and surveillance technology over actual community safety, the guests expressed deep frustration. "I do not know how to handle it, honestly," Sekhon admitted, noting the immense difficulty of working within systems designed for control rather than liberation.  

​Despite these hurdles, the guests argued that art provides a necessary language for navigating these complexities. Because art requires honesty—it cannot be "faked"—it serves as a mechanism to help people process difficult truths that standard political discourse has rendered splintered and divisive.  

​A Commitment to Hope

​The podcast concluded on a note of defiant optimism. When asked about the future and his personal dreams, Dr. Sekhon refused to entertain the idea of a utopian escape, choosing instead to focus on the "carpet" currently being woven. "I am actually where I am," he stated, emphasizing the importance of understanding the dynamicity of the present moment over futuristic speculation.  

​Avni Sethi underscored the necessity of this perspective, particularly regarding the concept of hope. "You have to have a lot of privilege to give up hope," she said, rejecting the narrative that democracy is a fixed outcome rather than a continuous, messy process of relearning.  

​The takeaway from this dialogue is a challenge to both the civic sector and the arts community: to stop prioritizing doing over being. As Gagan Sethi reflected at the close of the session, the arts offer a "deeply reflective practice" that the development sector has largely missed by focusing too heavily on execution. By embracing a practice that is rooted in "listening and lived experiences," and by consistently questioning oneself before questioning the world, art and design can serve as the vital, breathing heart of a democratic society—a necessary, if difficult, architecture for the future.