Productivity of Culture

You are here: Program of ECCM Symposium in 2007 » Cultural Planning » "Cities and Artists: developing cultural projects together?" by Diane Dodd

"Cities and Artists: developing cultural projects together?" by Diane Dodd

Diane Dodd - University of Girona, European liaison and ConnectCP Co-ordinator for IFACCA

further contents - CV

Diane Dodd

Abstract

This paper starts from the observation that there is a rising interest from artists to support and engage in international cultural co-operation initiatives and, at the same time, there is a rising trend in city led initiatives to support and promote international cultural co-operation – something that was once the domain of state governments.

Combining desk research, a survey of cities and interviews with selected experts, the main motivations in a selected number of European cities of cultural importance, to work internationally in areas of culture, are established. Unsurprisingly social cohesion, cultural tourism and marketing the city are highest on the agenda.

After establishing the motivation of cities to engage in cultural co-operation with partners abroad, this research identified different possible tools or measures that could be adopted by city councils for engaging in international cultural co-operation – these included:

Using a randomly ordered questionnaire the current tools being used by seven cities to engage in cultural co-operation projects was analysed. The paper discusses how effectively the cities studied are engaging with local artists in the endeavour to promote international co-operation initiatives in the cultural field.

From the sample of cities investigated it seems that in-house operations are the favoured measures and unsurprisingly, transferring responsibility and subsidies to artists to carry out cultural co-operation projects is extremely marginal – even in cities well established as “cultural cities”.

So what stops our cities engaging artists at the forefront of international cultural co-operation?

The research finally reflects on what more could be done to engage cultural operators in international cultural co-operation initiatives. One of the main conclusions being that the current provision for the training and education of cultural operators and civil servants working in the cultural field is lacking. Further research is desirable in order to establish gaps and opportunities for new training and information initiatives that could meet the challenges of international cultural co-operation.

Cities and Artists: developing international cultural projects together?

“Meeting and collaboration of different initiatives, cultures and convictions are an inexhaustible source of creativity”  - City Mine(d)

This paper starts from the observation that there is a rising interest from artists to support and engage in international cultural co-operation initiatives and, at the same time, there is a rising trend in city led initiatives to support and promote international cultural co-operation.

From cities that have been European Capitals of Culture:

To cities that haven’t been but have undoubtedly a high cultural profile internationally:

To those that wanted to be European capitals of culture and now brand themselves as World cultural cities:

To those that want to be seen as cultural and international in the future:

All are investing large amounts of money and time into re-inventing their cultural and international image:

• Burgos 2016 Capital Europea de la Cultura equals an investment of 40-55 million €!

• Cultural programming will consume close to 70% of the total investment!

Combining desk research, a survey of cities and interviews with selected experts, the main motivations in a selected number of European cities of cultural importance, to work internationally in areas of culture, were established:

Why do cities want to be seen as cultural and international?

INTER-CULTURAL DIALOGUE

ECONOMIC

VISIBILITY – both internal and external

Unsurprisingly social cohesion, cultural tourism and marketing the city are highest on the agenda as motivations for cities to engage in cultural co-operation. This paper questions however, how far this desire to be cultural and international matches with the ides of ‘international cultural co-operation’.

A list was identified of different possible tools or measures that could be adopted by city councils for engaging in international cultural co-operation – these included:

Using a randomly ordered questionnaire the current tools being used by the same seven cities to engage in cultural co-operation projects was analysed.

From the sample of cities investigated it seems that in-house operations are the favoured measures and unsurprisingly, transferring responsibility and subsidies to artists to carry out cultural co-operation projects is extremely marginal – even in cities well established as “cultural cities”. The results suggest that cities are ineffectively engaging with local artists in the endeavour to promote international co-operation initiatives in the cultural field. The question remains; what stops our cities engaging artists at the forefront of international cultural cooperation?

Indeed, it seems that artists have a different set of agendas to artists when they engage in collaborations internationally.

Goals and motivations of artists and cultural operators when they start working in cultural cooperation, and start crossing borders…

They do it:

None of the artists interviewed considered that they had the status of cultural ambassadors (neither for their country or their city) many found the concept amusing. Some expressed worries about being used a political tool.

Looking at barriers to working internationally and artists’ experience of working with local authorities, the Fitzcarraldo website of case studies on cultural co-operation within the framework of the Labforculture portal was visited. The situation on the surface seems positive with over 50 cases of cultural co-operation initiatives between artists based in different cities.

A closer look though and one has to question the level of cultural co-operation initiatives in Europe. Of the 50 projects cited, many of them are only barely collaboration projects. A further study would be needed to look at the scale of interaction of these projects. Artists interviewed randomly pointed out problems to cultural co-operation that included:

In looking at the so-called cultural cities there is a real lack of inter-cultural engagement – working and building productions together with other cities and risk-taking exercises. Little support for process led artistic creations was identified, much less citizen engagement and artist engagement in international projects. This is disappointing given the increasing desire of artists and citizens to work and collaborate with their European counter-parts.

The paper finally reflects that the link between international creative initiatives and urban development needs further exploration. The research questions what more could be done to engage cultural operators in international cultural co-operation initiatives within the framework of city support.

The research highlighted the emergence of intermediary organisations to manage and support the translation of artistic objectives into public policy objectives. Good artistic practice was often led by production houses rather than individual artists. Research is needed to see what is behind the concept of emerging production houses and how far this model can be a bridge between artist and local authority?

The research also questions the training and education possibilities for cultural managers and cultural administrators. One of the main conclusions being that the current provision for the training and education of cultural operators and civil servants working in the cultural field is lacking. The Vania project will hopefully shed some light in this area.

However, further research is desirable in order to establish gaps and opportunities for new training, models of working and information initiatives that could meet the challenges of city-led international cultural co-operation.

Follow-up:

What about the chances of artists reclaiming the city?

Key words: urban dissent, urban screens, advertisement, subtisement

Motive: through use of urban screens allow for artistic interventions in the communication process any city undergoes every day. Due to the new technologies - digital culture - a much more defined way to deliver the message prevails. Language of advertisement seems to dominate everywhere.

Time line: given the general impatience with not reaching results quickly enough, the machinery perfects the squeezing of oranges (Bart Verschaffel)

Problem: there is no infinite space available for endless, equally restless travels who either take high speed trains or else make quick downloads as if only the passing of images gives them a sense of life while the real deprivation makes itself felt in a new 'poverty of experience'.

Concept for further research: new social protest movements linked to urban dissent against advertisement with the aim to rebuild public spaces for real debates in order to appreciate the complexities of identity building processes over time e.g. a child growing up.

Cities and artists usually don't work well together, so what solution and therefore cultural planning strategy could be proposed in answer to such urban dissent?

^ Top

« "Public Spaces for Children in Cities" by Deniz Hasirci | Cultural Capitals of Europe (Athens, Glasgow, Lisbon, Thessaloniki)" by Anastasia Paparis »