|
A memo sent to correspondents, friends and
acquaintances of the Budapest Observatory (BO) in June 2007
The
pursuit for a European cultural policy has dominated this past month, too.
Culture powered Europe
In
Berlin, BO attended the closing hours of the season's most important meeting on
cultural policy in Europe. It was well prepared and well attended, both in
workshops and in the main auditorium.
A
remarkable hour took place with Frits Bolkenstein
and Wolfgang Thierse. The former's name
became a symbol of trade liberalisation, the latter had had a variety of
cultural jobs before he became vice-president of the German Bundestag. It
appeared basically as a duel between bad guy and good guy, both parties
speaking for the masses - and rightly so. Laissez-faire and no
pasarán cultural policies can both collect popular sympathies.
Nina - Marcello - Amanda
Participants
attended to the third cultural
policy research award ceremony. Amanda will study the opportunities that
creative industries offer to ethnic minorities.
The first winner was
present, too, and asked the culture minister of Portugal how the planned cultural forum will follow up
the communication
of the European Commission during their presidency
(which we did not really learn).
Déja vu
BO was
taken by one Central Asian visitor's wry remark that the conference vaguely
reminded her of the quest for sovietskiy chelovek in
another age.
Christopher and Theodoor
For BO
the best yield of the Berlin meeting was the short input
paper on the EU and cultural policy, which presents the issue in all its
complexity and ambivalences. The merits of a few (in the Commission and the
Parliament) cannot offset the defaults of most "stakeholders" (ministers above
all, and presidencies, but also the professional sector and its stars). Our
region is not spared: "former socialist member states which have an
opportunistic approach to picking up any funding for culture".
Unless
government politicians forsake the fundamentally 19th century
mindset and the customary ‘national identity' reasoning, no progress will be
achieved - argue the authors. (And not before Article 151
reads as The Community shall contribute to the flowering of culture in
Europe, instead of flowering of cultures in the Member States - adds BO). Even
the ‘creative industries' hype is further consolidating competitive national
policy lines of demarcation.
Capitals of culture are popular
BO
disagrees at one point with the paper, and agrees instead with the Europa website claiming that the European capital of culture series "has become ever more popular with the citizens of Europe". I
think it has, although its critics
were right to point at their insufficiencies in promoting European cultural
co-operation, and at the weakness of the European dimension in general.
The
Commission tries to correct these shortcomings. This time they have had good
allies in the selection panel for 2011. Their report
contains helpful criticism, aimed especially at the proposal of Tallinn. The
main points are familiar: excessive emphasis on construction investment as well
as on identity building through traditions, while vague in terms of
contemporary societal and artistic challenges.
Capitals of culture in the making
This
prompted BO to survey capitals
in the making.
The 100-page monthly programme of Luxembourg overwhelms you; Sibiu has a special chapter entitled European dimension; Liverpool
offers "once-in-a-lifetime festival" with highlights that deserve the name; a
strong point of Stavanger
is its artists in residency programme; Linz progresses step by step; the
Vilnius web site
displays the same light transparency as the Lithuanian pavilion at the 2002
Frankfurt Book Fair; Essen
prefers to be called Ruhr2010 and reveals little more of its programme than Pécs does; while Istanbul seems to be more determined -
announcing a forum also for next Wednesday; Tallinn is
fairy-designed and the people of Turku appear to „have the
will, courage and power to make their town an unforgettable European Capital of
Culture 2011".
Cities in odd years show more signs of
cross referring and co-operating than those in even 2008 and 2010. The closer
one gets to actual realisation, overarching and underlying concepts give way to
festival-like eclecticism, the European dimension largely reduced to the
omnipresence of the flag and logo. All right: at the end of the day this is but
a successful PR action of the Union.
Stage on stage
BO shared
efforts to find "happy examples of effective and fruitful government policies"
for the performing arts. The search
took place in Utrecht and we shall come back on it when the findings are put in
shape.
Spiritual property
In June
the vodka
war continued, not indifferent to our region. If taken broadly enough, the
proper way to produce this drink is culture, too.
Accordingly,
related issues are treated in the Union under the heading of intellectual
property. In June, the Commission issued a new handbook
on geographical indications. The protection of
geographical indications for wines and other alcoholic drinks was historically
the first to be developed at both national and Community level. East Europe is strong on the
list of vodkas
and, oh yes, the bitter tasting category. And lamentably underrepresented in
the fields of food
and agricultural products, fully dominated by the mediterranean countries.
Against 44 protected kinds of French cheese and
38 Italian
olive oils we can enrol three Czech beers and
the formidable Štramberské
uši.
And what
do you say to Barroso's
honey?
Festivals and public authorities
BO has had a modest role in the preparation of a
round table conference on festival policies of public authorities, to be
organised in Barcelona on 19-20 October by Interarts
for Circle (Cultural Information
and Research Centres Liaison in Europe) as part of the European Festival
Research Project (EFRP).
About conditions to attend, write to
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
for information.
|