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
    • The idea of European Capital of Culture - Juergen Mittag (ed.)
    • Spyros Mercouris
    • Hatto Fischer
      • Cultural governance - the responsibilities of European Capitals of Culture Patras 2006
      • Perspektiven von Hatto Fischer Bochum 2009
      • Reflections about ECoC in 2010 - Hatto Fischer
      • Presentation of European Capitals of Culture - Hatto Fischer
      • An overview 25 years later in Brussels 2010 by Hatto Fischer
      • Poverty of Experience by Hatto Fischer
      • Crisis of Culture - Crisis of ECoC by Hatto Fischer
      • The missing European dimension by Hatto Fischer 2013
      • How Europe is connected through culture - a possible contribution of ECoCs to a cultural synthesis" Valletta 2014 by Hatto Fischer
  • ECoC related networks
  • History
• ECoCs contributions to Europe connected through culture
• Europe under construction
• EU Commission
• Candidate cities
• Imprint

Reflections about ECoC in 2010 - Hatto Fischer

 

 

In his speech held at the ECoC 25 year celebration in Brussels, Bob Palmer mentioned several reasons why things can go wrong:

1. While everyone speaks about 'creativity of city', it is not at all clear how this is to be organized and once a creative process has been started, how to continue it after the one year is over?
2. Governance of a city in cultural terms is not that easy nor self-understood. It requires something crucial, equal intangible, namely trust of people, while in relation to the program developed for the one year there is a need for much more clarification of the impact claimed or meant to have been achieved.
3. As anyone can imagine implementation is made most difficult because there is a need to deal with so many different 'egos', so how to deal with that?
4. Very often cities underestimate the required operational and organisational capacity needed to be in place well ahead of the special year. Usually only a very limited capacity is made available in real terms, while cities remain silent about the real gaps. This is because many cities are too protective about its own myth and reputation as the one capable of dealing with everything. Instead they should engage themselves with a willingness to learn in all preparatory measures and heed practical advice from the cities who have gone through this experience already.
5. When it comes to use of resources, there is a dangerous trend to increase levels of spending especially in larger cities to make possible all sorts of things during that one year but how to sustain that cultural capital when the year is over? Certainly the special circumstance when huge amounts of money are spent, it is certain that it will not last. Much more should be done to avoid right from the start 'inflationary spending'.
6. The European Commission should be careful about fostering a growing European Cultural Capital Industry for it will benefit the marketing and advertising industry, but not in substance the arts and artists and therefore also not conduicive of a cultural development Europe would be much more in need of.
7. A much more rigorous evaluation should be done of the Cultural Capital programs, that is what each city presents when making the bid and also in follow-up to that selection process, once having received the designation what shall be finally implemented. Critical are the following points when it comes to evaluate these programs:

• there is too much homogeneization of the programs
• programs entail too much 'cultural isomorphism' which works agains 'creative inventions'
• too little energy and attention is spend on creating spaces for cultural identity, equally community building processes

 

Examples of failures of European Capitals of Culture

Cultural policy as urban transformation? Critical reflections on Glasgow, European City of Culture 1990. In Local Economy 19(4): 327-340
Author(s): Gerry Mooney
Organisation(s):
Categories: Arts, culture and regeneration, Major cultural events

Objectives: To review criticisms made of Glasgow's use of cultural policy as a strategy for urban renewal.

Key Findings: Major cultural events such as European City/Capital of Culture have changed Glasgow's image only superficially and its economy both unequally and at the cost of developing significant dependence on a low-paid service sector. Substantial structural problems reflected in high levels of poverty, unemployment, low levels of life expectancy in certain parts of the city are sustained or worsened.

Link: http://www.open.ac.uk/icccr/mooney.htm

2005 London: Routledge

http://ccpr.designiscentral.net/record/311/

This paper revisits Glasgow, European City of Culture 1990, and considers the main criticisms made of Glasgow's cultural policy as urban renewal strategy. It argues that while many of the criticisms made by opposition groups such as Workers' City were valid, and largely supported by the economic and social problems that have faced the City since 1990, nonetheless it also suggests that this critical response itself needs to be subjected to more thorough scrutiny. The paper claims that flagship cultural events can do little but gloss over and divert attention away from the major structural problems which characterise many ex-industrial cities and concludes by arguing that the lessons of Glasgow's experience are also very relevant for other cities such as Liverpool that are also increasingly embracing cultural policy as a route to urban transformation.

The case of Patras 2006

Failures of Patras as European Capital of Culture in 2006 are numerous, the fact that very few people took even note that the city had this designation, underlines that political conflicts made cultural planning impossible. The organisation responsible for the one year program was over politicized. The managing director Roilos, an appointee by Nea Democratia Prime Minister Karamalis, at that time as well Minister of Culture, favoured a face saving strategy in the interest of utilizing the year to further a specific concept within the overall scope of cultural tourism, namely ‘conference tourism’.

The political interference, a provocation for the PASOK mayor, led to many inner conflicts within the Patras organisation. Mikroutsikos, the artistic director, resigned on the 3^rd of January 2006, that is exactly when the year was to start on an active and positive note. Some say this was not merely due to the political conflict, but that too many family members of Mikroutsikos were hired by the organisation as if conflict of interest would never hamper the efficient running of any organisation.

Failure reproduces itself in a lack of quality since too much influence was exerted on artistic performances. As Bob Palmer remarked after having done a very negative evaluation of the prospects of Patras already three years before the cultural year started, no way there can be any kind of quality theatre if there is the demand that the wife of a leading politician in the city has a role in the cast. The story ended as predicted.

The organisational concept was so weak in terms of culture that Patras 2006 failed to convince local inhabitants to participate. More so the cultural concept of Patras was curtailed by cynical judgments which then misled cultural planning. The outcome was a lack of substance. For instance, it was thought people would be served well by bringing to the city some famous Italian singer as if presenting well known stars is what culture is all about. Rather such recklessness marked the failure to link cultural planning to wise cultural investments.

Interestingly enough the new artistic director Alatsis tried to salvage what he could and equated Patras to the whole of Europe as a mere construction site. [15] He used that metaphor without referring to the experience of Thessaloniki when it was the European Capital of Culture that most of the infrastructural projects were only completed well after the one year was over and people there said they would like to have another chance all over again in order to avoid the mistakes made. The mistake is to underestimate the kind of investments needed for bringing together people in a substantial manner so that culture is made possible by debates and actions which do have meanings for people even many years later.

Vilnius in Lithuania

Failure can also be reflected in terms of all the praise given to certain ECoCs for having achieved a measurable success, but then it means literally speaking culture was used for specific promotion purposes as reflected in changing property values. As this reminds of something poet Brendan Kennelly advised, namely "to learn to use but not abuse culture", once things are measured only in terms of commercial success and altered real estate prizes, then the city will also confront gentrification and weaken its very creative base once artists no longer can afford the spaces now more expensive since those with a high income start to move into the area and transform the entire city. As this is a common trend, and affects as well places like Berlin, New York, London or Paris with living expenses making it hard to survive, cities can deprive themselves if not careful of the creative spiriti brought about by artists being attracted to the city in the first place. What name and reputation a city has, here sometimes it is quite telling what artists reflect in terms of their needs for atelier space and galleries willing to risk by showing works of some artist still not known to the overall art market and what sets the trend in reflections of collectors and other powerful financial forces influencing how things will work out in the end.

For example, Vilnius in Lithuania has been praised! Nubricks, an overseas property blog, reflects upon this success. It is guised as small talk on the internet, but reflects how property values in Europe have been altered due to Vilnius having been European Capital of Culture (18 March 2009):

"No matter how you look at it, Lithuania is a success story. GDP growth between 2003 and 2007 averaged 8.4% a year and the 3.1% increase in 2008 was among the highest in the EU27. The housing market has also grown considerably and property investment in this Baltic State has provided promising returns. In addition, this year sees a first for a new EU member state – Lithuania’s capital, Vilnius, is this year’s European Capital of Culture.

Having emerged from Soviet occupation in 1990, Lithuania, the largest and most populated Baltic State, is now a fully-fledged member of NATO and the EU. Its status as an established member of Europe is confirmed by Vilnius as European Capital of Culture. The capital’s old quarter, a treasure trove of Baroque architecture, is widely acclaimed as the greenest and most elegant of the three Baltic capitals. Not for nothing is Vilnius a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

As European Capital of Culture, Vilnius offers an impressive calendar of events –experimental theatre, opera, multimedia events, classical music concerts, ballet and films – which promise to attract numerous tourists to this Baltic capital. Highlights in the year’s many events include the Opera Festival, ‘Let There be Night’ on Midsummer’s Eve and European Jazz.

In common with many other EU countries, Lithuania’s outlook for 2009 is not quite so bright. Eurostat forecasts 0% GDP growth for this year, although this is considerably better than many of the EU’s larger and more developed states, and only fractionally below the growth forecast for the EU27 as a whole (0.2%). The prediction keeps Lithuania in the enviable position of being outside the recession zone.

Property prices have also seen a dip – the Knight Frank Global House Price Index for Q4 2008 reported a year-on-year fall of 1% on the previous quarter (again, significantly below the drop seen in other countries). However, a downturn in the property market often signifies opportunities for investment. “The fact that Vilnius will constantly be in the cultural spotlight this year will undoubtedly boost tourism and enhance the capital’s status as a popular weekend-break destination,” says James Gonzalez, Market Analyst at Obelisk Investment Property. “This year could well be the one when it’s worth looking into the Lithuanian market with opportunistic buying in mind.” (Source:http://www.nubricks.com/archives/1864/lithuania-a-capital-attraction/)

 

References:

Cultural governance - the responsibilities of ECoC cities. Presentation at the ECCM General Assembly in Patras 2006

Perspektiven fuer eine Zusammenarbeit der ECoC Staedten / perspectives for ECoC cities working together. Presentation in Bochum May 2009

Authentic Cultural Development - Sonderborg 2010 - 2017. Presented in Sonderborg 14 Dec. 2010

^ Top

« Perspektiven von Hatto Fischer Bochum 2009 | Presentation of European Capitals of Culture - Hatto Fischer »

---