Questions about the vision of Melina Mercouri

Her vision to initiate European Capitals of Culture was prompted by the question about the role of cultural policy within the European Union for until 1983-85 the economic factor dominated, as does still nowadays and even more so now that Europe and Greece in particular finds itself in a crisis since 2009:

“How is it possible for a Community which is deprived of its cultural dimension to grow?”

Insofar as Melina Mercouri introduces the 'growth' dimension, she is not as a politician really far off the mark. After all it is the consensus amongst all European politicians that the economies of the respective member states but also the single market of Europe can only prosper, if there is 'economic growth'. This relates directly to what has become a magic word or the key formula for guaranteeing success and justification of expenditure, namely 'European extra value'. If anything, this is the material component of the European dimension.

Still, it should not be forgotten that during the oil crisis, there became known the initiative of the Club of Rome which advocated 'zero growth'. That begs still the question whether or not an alternative to a constant economic crisis in the making can be found, for fettered economic growth threatens both the planet and society. There is on the one hand climate change along with all the environmental damages, and on the other there is the unresolved issue of unemployment. The latter is as much the result of not working together but within such structures that ensure paid work is as much a scarcity as is a political concept in need of if recognition is given to each and everyone when it comes to making contributions to the life in a community of men, women and children.

Translated into a search of human values allowing everyone to have access to the community, it would demand of European Capitals of Culture not to go down that same road as wished for by an economy only concerned about profits but not about the costs of having to clean up all the waste left behind by this highly destructive path. It would mean not to claim success as a European Capital of Culture, if only those stories are told in quantitative terms as if likewise a profit only making machine can be counted as being successful i.e. so many visitors, so many projects or actions have been undertaken to ensure for 1 Euro spend there is a return of at least 8 to 10 Euros.

Rather an alternative economy has to be found. Hence the entire city could become in the cultural fields an experiment to try out alternative ways of working and living together. Instead the many cities which have carried the ECoC title have merely reproduced in a more intensive fashion Consumerism. And it does not stop there. For with it goes a catering of interests linked to ever higher incomes indicated best by attracting the bigger spenders. But once yatchs anchor in the harbour and those with higher incomes arrive at the airport, the economy no longer is driven by the need to preserve an equality between all inhabitants. Consequently this economic turn transforms culture into a highly discriminatory tool and show cases the stark difference between those with money and those who cannot afford it. The latter are serviced by what are called staged events in newly created public spaces to ensure that the masses of people are passive and do not resist new mechanisms of discrimination being installed all in the name of public order. Needless to say this lets forget that culture is really there to give every individual tools and means to understand the situation being experienced at the beginning of the 21st century.

Naturally given the economic reality, the question surely posed is why be so dismissive of this notion of growth when applied to culture? And a second question could be in reference to the famous article of Maastricht Treaty which speaks about the wish to let all European cultures "flourish", if that is not an alternative to the simple notion of growth, even if in this biological and botanic term of flourish can mean a special kind of growth? The first question will require an elaborate answer linking culture to knowing goals of content rather than being a mere numerical output measured in terms of GNP and other related economic indicators. Also culture strives through artistic activities which do not really compare between what Van Gogh thought of when painting his famous chair and a sculpture creating out of clay a chair. Both are different expressions which are judged in aesthetical terms whether or not they touch the human fabric making up human self-understanding. As Dostoevsky put it, there is no progress in the arts; Sarraute claimed that Kafka would have written like Dostoevsky, if he had lived in the same time period. That seems to be lost in the minds of those who seek to make merely a functional use of culture to attract visitors to an iconic and symbolic building like the Guggenheim museum in Bilbao with the building itself saying it all, never mind the artistic content. In other words, the trivialization of the arts and therefore of culture is huge risk if European Capitals of Culture implement merely a programme designed to attract the highest number of visitors and does little else to give recognition to the hard work of culture to uphold a humane form of self understanding.

Important is that Melina Mercouri articulated a political responsibility for upholding the cultural diversity within Europe and therefore would stress the need to recognize differences and thus in need of institutionalizing 'dialogues between cultures':

“Our role as Ministers of Culture is clear. Our responsibility is a must. Culture is the soul of Society. Therefore, our foremost duty is to look at the foundations and nature of this Community. This does not mean that we should impose our ideas. On the contrary, we must recognize the diversities and the differences amongst the people of Europe.”

and in order to unify Europe through culture:

“the determining factor of a European identity lies precisely in respecting these diversities with the aim of creating a dialogue between the cultures of Europe. It is time for our voice to be heard as loud as that of the technocrats. Culture, art and creativity are not less important than technology, commerce and the economy.”

As to the path taken from this initial idea of Melina Mercouri to how the project of European Capitals of Culture has evolved, a lot can be said. The vision has been honored by the European Commission devising the Merlina Mercouri prize: a way to ensure that the gap between the original bid and the programme being finally implemented is not that far apart as is often the case when cities realize this is an opportunity to engage in self promotion. By now the idea has been reshaped over the years since 1985 by many different actors, cities and their citizens. It is an amazing story. Naturally in 1985 there existed quite another level as to what artists were thirsty for with regards to what should constitute culture in Europe. To Athens '85 came almost every well known actor in the culture fields. It included Peter Stein, Peter Brook and many other artists eager to link up with the idea. They did so out of a wish to give something they had thought about the arts and culture could do for European society. They did something together which had not been found till then as being possible within the new Europe. For culture is not merely a proclamation of success, otherwise the Greek hubris could not be reflected in Hamlet by Shakespeare. Rather it aims to show the difference between how humanity acts and what could be a true form of wisdom, peace and happiness. This longing needs to be expressed and recognized as a true need for otherwise no solution can be found and those proclaimed shall be highly dissatisfactory, if not outright lies.

Melina Mercouri's vision cannot be understood without reference to Ancient Greece. Within Europe based on the belief in democracy, that vision needs to be articulated in a way as to what can made a difference for the future. For the real challenge to all poets, philosophers, artists, politicians and citizens is whether or not they can bring about similar conditions which allow visions for the future to be articulated.

When the European Capital of Europe started in 1985, it was a contintent still hurting very much from the two World Wars. There were wounds in need to be healed.and culture to be engaged especially in redemption work. That process is still far from being complete as indicated alone by the huge gap between Germany and Greece with regards to coming to terms with their respective histories. Presumably culture can be the only cream to be put on those historical wounds, but as indicated by Ulrich Fuchs in Marseille, that does not mean necessarily an open debate about Algiers and France can be used to initiate a new dialogue between Europe and the Arab world.

Culture mean not to forget while able to look forward into the future in anticipation of things to come. It is a struggle to maintain and to articulate resistance against all kinds of negative presumptions about culture. This resistance has to be based on a kind of innocence children bring into this world and which they can lose very quickly as they grow up in a fast, equally indifferent world. Consequently there is a need to maintain a honest dialogue to face all problems free from resentment and from the urge to revenge, in order to uphold a balance in human practice.

Hatto Fischer

Athens 18.11.2013

^ Top

« Melina Mercouri Exhibition | Melina Mercouri's legacy »

European Capitals of CultureΠοιειν Και Πραττειν - create and do

Navigation

Questions about the vision of Melina Mercouri