European Capitals of CultureΠοιειν Και Πραττειν - create and do

Navigation

• Home
• European Capitals of Culture
• Institution of European Capitals of Culture
  • The vision of Melina Mercouri
  • Debate about European Capitals of Culture
  • ECoC related networks
    • The art of networking
    • ECCM Network
    • Informal network - Ruhr 2010 and Liverpool '08
    • University Network of European Capitals of Culture
      • Second Annual Conference in Liverpool 16 - 17 Oct 2008
      • Inclusion through Education and Culture - Pecs Conference 14 - 15 Oct 2010
      • Crisis in Culture - Crisis in ECoC Antwerp conference 27 - 28 Oct 2011
      • Seventh Conference in Marseille 17 - 18 October 2013
        • Ulrich Fuchs
        • The missing European Dimension by Hatto Fischer
      • Eighth confernece: Culture and Growth in Umea Oct 2014
      • Eighth Conference on Culture and Growth - Umeå 2014
      • Ninth conference in Pilsen 2015
  • History
• ECoCs contributions to Europe connected through culture
• Europe under construction
• EU Commission
• Candidate cities
• Imprint

The missing European Dimension by Hatto Fischer

Abstract

The paper seeks to explore the question why the European dimension seems to be missing once cities have become European Capitals of Culture? Three thematic fields shall be covered: how cities interpret and use the title after having received the designation to be ECoC for one specific year; the involvement of universities and consultancies in the process of monitoring and evaluation; and what chances future selection processes have to influence the process of adaptation?

Introduction

Substantial steps taken by artists to advance culture do not really count in our global world based on breaking news. There is also something else. Pablo Neruda explained it as a world which forgets all too quickly the next day what happened the day before as if only the new counts. As a result people grow afraid of a world which seems to forget that they were bombed just yesterday or have been subjected to a drone attack or were imprisoned in a detention centre. That kind of news is generally suppressed by all institutions, ECoC cities included. They tend to use a language similar to advertisement and risk to gloss over these and other problems as if only success stories count and not learning out of mistakes. The latter counts much more for culture to be consistent.

Consequently no one seems to value working consistently through conflicts and contradictions to obtain a sense of continuity although a most basic need for people in their lives and throughout history. Instead everyone seems to chase the new technical gadgets but ends up reproducing much of the same. While the digital world and Internet seems to connect everyone in a virtual reality, it nurtures an illusion as if life is an eternal present and nothing matters more than having a play station for multiple games. A clear challenge stems from this task to digitalize cultural heritage as it means organizing memories for the future in a completely new way.

Acknowledgement of culture presupposes that the need to work out a continuity between past, present and future is fully recognized. As long as the ECCM network existed, it tried to link former, current and future ECoC cities. Since it broke up in 2010 and was replaced by a managerial thinking favouring informal networking, the European Capitals of Culture started to lack in continuity. Yet without learning out of a past experiences, European Capitals of Culture shall no longer know what contributions they make to sustaining cultural development in Europe.

One of the key recommendations by Bob Palmer has been if ECoC are to achieve a challenging cultural programme for one year, they need to create audiences. It is not enough to merely attract masses of visitors. There are special audiences needed to follow dance or poetry while those preferring musical performances or visit exhibitions is still another group. Even getting people to go to libraries as part of an effort to raise the level of literacy is not easy. Active audiences need further going investments in culture. This includes encouraging critics who can strengthen receptivity. All of this and more can add to experiences being made. For gaining cultural literacy, it matters to know when a poem is made or a theatrical play addresses crucial issues. In times of economic crisis, it is interesting to see how relevant is what Samuel Becket did with his 'Waiting for Godot'. For culture is after all a search for truth. It can make reflections more honest and thereby improve upon communication by not assuming everything to be self-understood. Only when experiences made during that one year are substantial enough, they shall be remembered. After all culture works only over time and therefore memory work is needed to bring continuity into a living process. Life is not an experiment or game, but can be experienced once free to let creative forces unfold.

A society without memory will not have solutions at hand when faced by challenges. Instead it will be panic stricken. For it will merely uphold the myth of an identity not to be changed but by not admitting that mistakes have been made in the past, no learning shall take place. Of interest is that Valletta 2018 noted when preparing its bid for the ECoC title that the youth wants above all to be free from the pressure to succeed and be able to make mistakes. That enormous pressure is due to an economic system having become a coercive logic to perform according to unrealistic norms of expectations i.e. the need to succeed. No one seems to ask but what happens when in the absence of a culture people no longer understand what they are going through and what they face. The need to gain in 'digital literacy' indicates that they have to go through a different socialization in order to cope with the logic of the new system. It poses a dilemma since it is linked to consuming always the new even though nothing seems to change in politics. Here then a humane culture is needed. It can free the mind to imagine alternatives as to what reality offers and to face with confidence what awaits one in future. Moreover by staying in dialogue with the past and by working with memory, a sense of continuity can be gained out of this search for truth. If lost, then only probabilities will count and end in terrorism as predicted by Robert Musil in his novel 'Man without Attributes'.

Needless to say, the European Union is hardly about encouraging such a cultural development. Rather it is based on fear. As the European debate shows fear dictates reason and makes safeguarding the Euro into a higher priority than keeping people employed. The austerity measures which have struck down alone Greece since 2009, they test the solidarity between member states and even more so the democratic tradition in Europe. That certainly indicates one of the greatest failures of the European Union caused by a neglect of culture not being a mere commercial commodity, but what upholds the very values of democracy and therefore the true European dimension.

Fear leads to an acquiesce to power despite the fact that crude austerity measures applied to reduce state debts cause massive unemployment and leave an unjust redistribution of resources untouched. Instead of culture being the source of inspiration to change things, everything is done to neutralize culture and to use it for the sole purpose to give value to an economy striving to do without culture – a key contradiction. The latter is, however, not obvious to those who seek to promote Cultural and Creative Industries.

In this context, the European Capitals of Culture could play a crucial role in altering the European debate. But rarely do they see it as their task to mediate between what people imagine Europe could be and to where the European Union has led up to now. All the more is of importance to analyse why the European dimension is missing.

Part A: European and Mediterranean dimension

While evaluative methods focus on the legacy to see if a ECoC achieved some sustainability, the fact that many ECoC seem not to make any news may confirm what Bob Scott stressed constantly, namely the need to engage major media outlets like the BBC. This insight has led to EcoCs spending at least 20% of their budget on public relation exercises aiming to stay in the 'news'. It leads to reporting only things in such terms which the system understands as being a success. For instance, Liverpool '08 derived a special strategy to report numbers in context. The success in terms of number of visitors and profits made is linked all the more to visible results which has led to a change of the city's image i.e. no longer an ugly port city, but a dynamic conference and tourist attraction. Nothing else seems worthy to be reported about. Consequently cultural news in an effort to uphold a continuity of learning is left out. Instead other ECoC tend to imitate what is deemed as a successful model. In the end, more and more urban regeneration projects replace the much more needed work to fulfil the European dimension.

Method of assessment

Since the culture of every city differs, but not all European Capitals of Culture are inclined to be a 'capital', the method of assessment has to focus on specific reasons as to why the European dimension is missing. All too often the lack thereof is compensated by cities using the year to undertake some urban revival projects to gain in attractivity. This leads to curious claims and assumptions. For example, Wroclaw 2016 adopted a Darwin like theory with a touch of sexuality, and linked it to Richard Florida's thesis about the 'creative class', all in all a vague effort to become more attractive. In the end that risks forgetting culture is needed to uphold democratic values as basis for governance in Europe.

When appraising European Capitals of Culture, it helps to keep in mind the following: "This is a very ambitious project and I only know a few people able to govern and lead such a long-term path. It is no easy task, not now and certainly not in the future, but certainly a very challenging one for the intellect and to some extent - the soul. It needs to arise such a communication that can allow people to think further and be ahead: well, this is really what cultural cooperation with "European added value" is about, isn't it? This needs a very careful monitoring as well, as this idea could be parcelized, "verfremdet" and taken away. I imagine the task of acceptance, conviction still ahead." ¹ While the power of the European Commission and of the Jury are limited to ensure that cities fulfil the European dimension, still other than cultural views dominate the process.

The role of the Jury in the process of cultural adaptation to having received the designation

When the jury delivered its pre-selection report to Valletta in Malta seeking the title of European Capital of Culture for 2018, the panel recommended that the European and Mediterranean dimensions needed to be developed further. In particular, it would like to see three things:

• “Concrete projects with a strong European dimension as parts of the programme – in particular co-productions, artistic linking and involvement of local and foreign artists.”

• “The problems and stakes Europe is currently facing could be taken into consideration in the designing of such projects.”

• “The Valletta 2018 Foundation showed Valletta as a place of exchange between Europe and North Africa but this aspect still needed to be brought out more concretely.“ ²

When the jury filed the final report of Valletta's bid, it was still not satisfied by what was proposed:

“The Selection panel highlights that the European dimension of the project requires much improvement, both through the themes put forward in the projects proposed, and through a committed and intensified co-operation with European artists and cultural operators, which should leave a lasting effect well beyond 2018. It also underlines the fact that the European dimension must not only incorporate the idea of making European citizens more aware of Malta, but also making Maltese citizens more aware of Europe, also by reflecting about the ways they view and are part of Europe, as well as how they wish to be perceived by the rest of Europe. European issues need to be made more evident, by exhibiting both cultural communality and diversity.” 3

Alone that seems to say a lot about the importance of the European dimension. Valletta 2019 received officially the designation of the ECoC title in May 2013 and marked this with a conference titled “small city – big dreams.” Since then its logo 'imagine 18' has become visible.

Given the crisis in Europe, the question is whether or not any ECoC can initiate another kind of European debate? The cultural gap means the philosophical underpinning of the European Union is at best a very weak one. Despite efforts by philosophers like Jürgen Habermas or as of late by Zygmunt Baumann, there is a loss of concepts by which rational politics could be made possible. Instead the rise of Populism, and in some member states like Greece a Neo-Fascism based on xenophobic forces, rational politics is given up for the sake of symbols and stereotypical images used to put blame on someone else. They are used to incite hatred as rallying force for those who feel increasingly insecure. It allows the playing of the victim while displaying wounded pride in terms of national identity instead of filling the European dimension with substantial life.

The role of the European Commission

First of all, Barrosso claims that “experience has confirmed the usefulness of the Commission role as an independent and objective referee.” ⁴ Yet EU policy as designed by the Commission amounts to various forms of propagation of measures as part of clearly designed funding programmes. They derive legitimacy primarily from the Treaties and from the fact that such matters as climate change cannot be dealt with by one member state alone. Yet the agenda of the Commission is clearly driven by technology linked to the digital economy. Here the philosopher Cornelius Castoriadis noted correctly that technology is no longer just a method but has replaced the 'theory of society'. Whatever is done, shall follow this new logic of organization. Yet there is a marked weakness here when the Commission applies this logic to ECoC.

Secondly, the Leipzig Charter states that “while the EU does not have any direct competence in urban affairs, its cohesion policies as well as sectoral policies in the areas of transport, environment and social affairs, for example, can have a significant impact on cities and on their capacity to deal with these challenges.” ⁵ Given the absence of a DG Commission for Cities and in addition the failure of the cohesion policy ⁶, it can be presumed that European Capitals of Culture are regarded more and more due to their complexities and need to accommodate different factors, that they have become a testing field for how the EU can facilitate an integrative urban policy approach.

Indicative of this trend is that the EU Commission no longer defines European Capitals of Culture as barometers of cultures in Europe, but as something else:

„The European Capital of Culture (ECoC) is an initiative promoted by the European Union. The nature of the project has evolved over the years. Initially it was an essentially celebrative event directed at European cities with strong cultural identities, designated directly by governments of member countries. In the course of time, the choice of candidates has become competitive, concentrating on urban and regional regeneration through culture. Chosen cities have therefore been increasingly characterised by complex economic and social problems. Thus the title ECoC is not so much in recognition of the quality and importance of artistic and cultural heritage handed down in time, but rather of potential for transformation, renewal and development expressed by an effective and innovative approach to culture. It is therefore a prize for the capacity to imagine the future, more than to represent the past.“ 7

It is to expected that since Athens was the first city to carry the ECoC title 1985 that a lot has changed. Primarily the biggest change was made by the European Commission itself. For once it was realized the selection of a city has to take place well ahead in time, so that the ECoC cities can prepare for that decisive year, the new selection process and preparatory process called for new expertise. Equally it proved to be no easy task to initiate a creative process by letting people participate actively at the level of the imagination and not be disappointed. Consequently a kind of management of expectations has become an inbuilt safety measure when cities set up their foundations. That has influenced in turn methods of organization and altered dispositions to interpret the title. In turn, it has curtailed increasingly so many aspirations and has left only few inspired by what is realized in that decisive year. Short comings are noticeable especially with regards to the European dimension.

Part B: knowledge and culture

Something else is the growing influence of universities in giving shape to what a ECoC does during that year. It is the result of a long process. When Bob Palmer delivered his first report about ECoC cities to the European Commission in 2004, he recommended already more should be undertaken to monitor and evaluate the process since most cultural programmes lacked in sustainability.

About the influence of Universities upon the cultural program of any city, it should be said right away that poets or artists who have no academic posts retain a different cultural sensitivity. That needs to be observed when giving shape to a cultural program. The latter is about which voices are heard and what recognition is given to whom. Once a cultural program assumes a heavily academic orientation, then certain advantages may be gained in terms of legitimacy, but in reality several problems shall be incurred as a result. After all artistic work is not analytical but synthesizes human experiences. And artists know how to use space.

Karsten Xuereb, project manager of V18, has called creating a synthesis the real task of culture since that is what contributes to democracy. With such a synthesis, developments are determined in a new way while attaining a degree of complexity which does justice to the reality people live in today. Such a viewpoint can be easily fragmented if treated merely analytically and put into individual pieces like a doctor dissecting a human body so that the sickness can be easily categorized.

Interestingly enough the Jury in its Final Report of Valletta '18, after seeing how weak was the contemporary arts dimension, states that “it is not clear how the University and other educational bodies intend to contribute to supporting this dimension, or how programmes may provide a European dimension in this sector.” ⁸

A further indication of this heavy involvement of the university is what V18 initiated immediately after the designation of the title in May 2013, namely the cultural mapping exercise. ⁹

Since Greg Richards acts as editor advisor, it is of interest to see what research he would have conducted had the bid of Eindhoven|Brabant in Holland for 2018 been successful. He would have wanted to answer the question "to what extent did the programme of 2018Eindhoven|Brabant European Capital of Culture stimulate the intended economic, social, cultural and image effects and what contribution did the programme make to the development of the future (European) network city?" Such a monitoring process would include Appreciative Inquiry “that uses the values, aspirations, dreams and stories of people as a starting point for the creation of future perspectives...to ensure that the research programme ... will enable Eindhoven and its region to respond to ... trends in its programme and policy.” ¹⁰ In reference to 'infrastructure of knowledge' he may well have in mind something the Culturefighter in Košice has a curiosity for and which the former Documentation Centre in Athens had wanted to do for all ECoC cities. ¹¹

Given the fact that most of the evaluators are academically orientated, with little or no background in the arts, they are ever more keen to establish right from the outset measurable outcomes. It includes such terms as global impact. No wonder then that this instigates indirectly a by-passing of the European dimension. Naturally it reflects growing dependency of cities upon the economy going global while visitors come not only from European countries but from all over the world. That explains the growing importance given to cultural tourism with corresponding research methods used by persons like Greg Richards leading to a certain brand of advise when candidate cities consult them.

One common trend reinforced by the methodology used can be linked to cultural branding and image making of a city. Already Patras 2006 declared 'culture is all about images'. But just as states neglect public investments and do not recognize the value of culture independently from the economy, the European dimension is missed out once cultural content is defined independently from artistic work.

Moreover many ECoC adopt the usual pattern and restore cultural heritage as did Istanbul 2010 in the case of the Hagia Sofia. Other ECoC cities seek to convert former industrial sites into new creative hubs. This can lead to an entire renovation of the city as did Weimar 1999 or bring about new symbolic and iconic buildings such as Villa Mediterranea and the Museum of Civilization from Europe and the Mediterranean in the case of Marseille 2013. However, such highly visible results need such sponsorship which has the big money, but that favours a cultural concept which by-passes the real social and economic structure of the city.

One of the few exceptions was Antwerp 1993. By taking culture to mean 'doubt', its artistic director Eric Antonis commissioned 20 new operas of which 19 had their premier opening during that year. Likewise Cork 2005 developed a unique programme to further translation work of unknown poets. But noticeable in the debate about ECoC cities these qualitative achievements are hardly ever being referred to as examples of good practice.

Altogether ECoC cities are at risk to be pushed by all kinds of consultancy into a direction of a concept of culture as favoured by the European Commission but the sole promotion of the 'Cultural and Creative Industries' does not suffice to be called a cultural programme. Notably KEA announced in a press declaration that Mons 2015 had selected it to assess the economic, social and and cultural impacts of being European Capital of Culture. Hence with the city planning to invest € 75 million to celebrate artistic excellence and creativity, KEA plans to apply its innovative evaluation model which “relies on the theory of the spillover or “indirect” effects of the cultural and creative industries.” ¹²

This trend to favour Creative and Cultural Industries was taken up by Liverpool '08. Ruhr 2010 made it an essential part of the official cultural programme. Since then Liverpool '08 has established the Institute for Cultural Capitals to promote the kind of impact studies which favour urban regeneration and change of image of the city. Considered as a successful model, a start in this direction was made by Glasgow 1990 , namely to use culture to revamp the city. As of late, Valletta 2018 wishes to create its own film industry thought elsewhere to be the main creative hub in cities like SoHo in London. Research findings become thereby guidelines which push the cultural programme into that direction. Despite reducing culture to what has value for the economy, the EU Commission reinforces this trend with its 2020 vision emphasizing the 'experience economy'. Most likely it will reduce culture even more to be mere info-tainment.

Part C: Selection of future ECoC cities - until 2021

Practically the European dimension is missed out by a selection process which confines ECoC cities to the national and local fold. When chairman of the Jury, Bob Scott was strictly against any border city in the belief a city having the ECoC title should be the national representative.

At the public consultation meeting in Brussels 2011 the future selection process after 2019 was discussed. ¹³ Of interest were following aspects: the criteria should not be too concrete, so that cities are freer to make creative proposals; a city, and not a region should be involved; care should be taken of those who got hurt in the process i.e. sudden rejection of the artistic director; urban culture as place of innovation and creativity should be be taken as the real European dimension; and something should be done about the growing risk of corruption since ECoC cities handle by now huge budgets ranging from 60 to 80 million or more for the five years.

Surprisingly when the Jury issued the pre-selection report about Valletta's sole bid for Malta to be ECoC in 2018, it did point out that „the title can be held by one city only and in no case by the islands as a whole.“ ¹⁴ Yet in the Final Report the Jury acknowledged the involvement of the entire island but insisted on citizens be treated not as passive spectators but as active recipients best done by ensuring they have access to cultural events. ¹⁵

Usually candidate cities go through quite a competition. In Italy, there were 21 cities competing for the title to be designated for 2019, among them Ravenna, Palermo, Sienna etc. ¹⁶ Of interest is, for instance, what the candidate city Siena 2019 believes the jury is looking for, namely not something of the past, but what goes ahead into the future and therefore has less to do with artistic or cultural projects. It indicates how far down the road has come the original idea of a city being European Capital of Culture. ¹⁷

In Bulgaria, besides Sofia, there is Varna competing for the title and argues like Siena that the European dimension does not mean so much artistic activities but innovation linked to urban projects.

“The determining factor of European identity is the possibility of establishing an intercultural dialogue between diverse cultures of Europe, but their creativity needs to be found not only on arts, but also on innovation projects and ideas for sustainable local/regional development.” ¹⁸

The question does not seem to occur that a European Capital of Culture can also be evaluated in terms what contribution it makes to a culture of sustainability. However, their approach may have been guided by their research findings about the European dimension:

1. “The respondents accept the candidature of Varna as an opportunity to:

- promote the Bulgarian culture and art at European level (93%);

- enrich the cultural life of Varna with European artists (91%).

2. ATTENTION: 8 % of the surveyed cannot rate how far the candidature of the city would contribute to the European integration of the country and 11% think that Varna is not a part of the European cultural life.“ ¹⁹

3. Greece needs to select a city for 2021. Till now just one city was appointed in a top-down process. It shall be interesting to see if the Commission can insist this time that guidelines are kept and a competition between different candidate cities is realized. Care would have to be taken that recommendations by an independent jury shall be followed through. Already given the relative weakness of the jury to influence things in a positive way, the selection process can be undermined still further by political expediency with crisis a good way to evade transparency and accountability. If not handled well, the selection of the city will be once again a top down decision. It shall leave out the cultural sector and ignore the real need for citizens to participate.

 

It shall be argued that planning for a future European Capital of Culture in Greece, if done well, would provide a chance to mediate between different cultural concepts of the economy and equally give Greece the chance to look back 200 years come 2021. One thematic link could be learning out of past mistakes lessons ever since independence was gained in 1821. Since then many breaks and set-backs were incurred due to wars, civil wars, military dictatorship, etc. And entry into the EU has given Greece hardly a chance to get out of the post colonial syndrome i.e. an educated elite making mistakes by merely imitating successful models but never really believing in them and therefore unable to use live through experiences being to validate a cultural orientation which entails a theoretical capacity to reflect upon itself as being a part of Europe.

If Greeks are to relate to Europe not as a mere financial scam but as outcome of a cultural process of adaptation to changing conditions, then something needs be worked out on the basis of practical wisdom and continuity. Getting out of the crisis would contribute to what does hold Europe together. Here the future European Capital of Culture in 2021 could play a major role. That is, however, only possible if culture is used to activate memory work and breaks in history are not glossed over by referring to cultural heritage and a cultural identity as if existing 'now as then'. That would be nothing short of a fake claim of continuity while the continual survival of people is really at stake. After five years of recession and austerity measures, Greek people would need a respite best done by discovering another culture with a new vision and offering such solutions which does link Greece to Europe. The European dimension has to be more than being identical with what has been projected so far back to the past – to Ancient Greece. ²⁰

Conclusion

ECoC cities need to engage themselves far more in making the creative process happen. The problems of a cultural 'poverty of experience' cannot to be answered by smart growth and an 'economy of experience' as declared by the EU 2020 vision. However, the experience made by all European Capitals of Culture is that the title can set free energies provided the imagination is used to fulfil the European dimension. In that sense, the ECoC can become a crucial pivot point for a new EU cultural policy. However, it has to based on a deeper understanding as to what allows people to stay through dialogue in touch with reality and with each other.

Hatto Fischer

Athens, Greece

 

Note: Such an archive of ECoC cities can be found on the website of Poiein kai Prattein at http://ecoc.poieinkaiprattein.org/european-capital-of-culture/

while a full account of this article can be found at

http://ecoc.poieinkaiprattein.org/european-capital-of-culture/ECoC-and-networks/university-network-of-european-capitals-of-culture/seventh-conference-in-marseille-17-18-october-2013/the-missing-european-dimension-by-hatto-fischer/

 

References:

• Dimitrova, Vesselina and Stanislava Genkova. (2013) „From local to European identity- case study of Varna, city candidate for ECoC in 2019” ppt – UNEECCuneecc.org/.../V_UNeECC_Dimitrova_Genkova_pr‎

• Povoledo, Elisabetta „Italian Cities Vie for Culture Capital Status New York Times, November 14, 2013

  http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/15/arts/international/Italian-Cities-Vie-for-Culture-Capital-Status.html?hpw&rref=&_r=0

• Schon, Donald A. (1963) Displacement of Concepts. London: Tavistock publications

• German Presidency (2007) (press release): Informal EU Council of Ministers for Urban Development and Territorial Cohesion adopts “Leipzig Charter” [FR] [DE] (24 May 2007) )

• Nomination of the European Capital of Culture 2018 in Malta Selection Panel PRE-SELECTION REPORT Valletta 17-18 January 2012 http://ec.europa.eu/culture/our-programmes-and-actions/doc/ecoc/preselection-report-malta.pdf

• Selection of the European Capital of Culture for 2018 Malta Selection Panel Final Selection Report, Valletta 11 Nov. 2012http://ec.europa.eu/culture/our-programmes-and-actions/doc/ecoc/malta-2018-final-report_en.pdf

• Valletta 2018 launches Cultural Mapping Exercise, 3.10.2013 http://www.valletta2018.org/about/v18-news-overview/v18-news/V-18-launches-Cultural-Mapping-Project

Footnotes

^ Top

« Ulrich Fuchs | Eighth conference: Culture and Growth in Umea Oct 2014 »

---