spatial dynamics of cultural organizations: clusters…interarts.net/descargas/interarts713.pdf ·...

Interarts · Mallorca 272, 9ª planta · 08037 Barcelona · Tel. 34 934 877 022 · Fax 34 934 872 644 · [email protected] · www.interarts.net

SPATIAL DYNAMICS OF CULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS: CLUSTERS, HUBS & CORRIDORS Lecture by Dr. Dragan Klaić

November 2009

SPATIAL DYNAMICS OF CULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS: CLUSTERS, HUBS & CORRIDORS

Dragan Klaić’s lecture Novembre 2009

2/7


Dragan Klaić’s lecture Dr. Dragan Klaić, Visiting Fellow at Interarts, gave a public lecture on November 20th 2009 on the theme of spatial dynamics of cultural organizations with a special feature on the challenges that these face in terms of sustainability and governance.

A summary by Carina Lopes November 2009



3/7

INTRODUCTION: THE SPACE OF CULTURE Urban space is nowadays under various challenges, caused by deindustrialization, migration, and digitalization. How can the existent cultural infrastructure be reshaped to respond to these challenges is then one of the key questions facing European cities. Capitalism, with its preponderance of economic interest, and globalization, with a tendency to standardize and uniform cultural production for the sake of profitability, add more levels of complexity to the functioning of public cultural organizations. Cultural organizations in European cities are marked by pressures on a dynamic and inclusive public space by the corporate encroachment and private usurpation. The inherited typology of public cultural organizations is often inadequate and needs a reformulation, concentration (in order to increase density of resources) and clustering of similar or complimentary resources for an amplified impact. The benefits of proximity through concentration and clustering are various: competition, mutual learning, cooperation, efficiency, synergy, visibility, increased appeal. These benefits are being explored and tried out in cultural quarters, predominantly of cultural heritage facilities; creative milieus & hubs; cultural routes and creative corridors. 1. CLUSTERING: STRENGTHENING THE PUBLIC CULTURE Various cultural organizations under one roof might, at times, be a recipe for disaster, as these tend to feel vulnerable and even insecure due to the various constraints they face in terms of funding, competition and territory. Nevertheless, clustering might be the solution to strengthen the public culture. With various functions under one roof and diverse targeted audiences, such spaces can integrate consumption, entertainment, cultural enrichment and learning while they cater to a public of different age and educational level, for to the locals and the tourists. However, it is important to recognize that such diversity might lead to tensions due to unclear objectives: Who is it for? For the locals or the tourists? Or for both? This better be made clear. The development of new sustainable cultural clusters has to consider how to combine mainstream and alternative culture, cultural production and cultural presentation, and profit and non-profit activities. In Europe, it is possible to find various governance models for synergy re-enforcement, such as the governance model used in the Cable Factory’ in Helsinki, whose management acts as a facilities manager only: manages rent collection, the function of the IT, lighting, heating and lifts, in order to make the normal run of the building possible, and not much more. MQ in Vienna or La Villette in Paris have a more centralized and more output controlling management and governance. In other contexts, it is possible to find ‘ready-made’ clusters. These are compact historic cities such as Brugge, Dubrovnik and San Marino; historically HD (high definition) cities, such as university cities (Leiden, Heidelberg, Lund, Cambridge...); or even large, historically formed cultural heritage complexes such as Topkapi, Istanbul; Vatican and other large pilgrimage destinations; Colosseum, Forum, Capitol and Terme di Caracala in Rome; Kremlin, Moscow; Buda Castle, Budapest. These ‘ready-made’ clusters are all similar in their strong tourist orientation but how they chose to serve the tourist varies considerably: Kremlin in Moscow remains user unfriendly, while the Buda Castle in Budapest has opted for low-quality events for the tourists, therefore devaluing a top notch cultural heritage location.



4/7

2. CITIES AS CULTURAL BATTLEFIELDS In many cities the destruction of urban patterns In the name of progress is quite noticeable. Demolition, erasure, oblivion, and resurrection take place while at the opposite extreme, in Amsterdam and elsewhere, cultural heritage protection escalates sometimes to preservation fundamentalism, oblivious to the contemporary needs and desired patterns of usage. Consequently, the inner-city canals zone in Amsterdam risks becoming a Golden Age Disneyland, for the very rich residents and roaming tourists. Often, the public and the private interests also clash: real estate speculation and corporate encroachment destabilize the public space. The challenges imposed today by the demographic and digital development, the massive tourist onslaught and enmeshed education, entertainment and consumption habits cannot be settled by a quick fix. Themes parks are also a growing throughout Europe. They are a corporate formula for the marketing of nostalgia, micro-geographic interventions with a strong systematization, consumption opportunities and large turnover of visitors. 3. MUSEUMS FACING CHANGES The position of the museums within the cultural field has also been undergoing complex changes, related mostly to the necessity to adapt to economic expectations, generation of own income and processing of an increased number of visitors. In order to secure own survival, museums are forced to produce blockbuster exhibits that can attract a sponsor. Museums of spectacular new architecture, with fancy cafes and design boutiques, and growing merchandizing offer are the consequence of economic pressures and reduced public subsidies. Museums can nowadays be spaces to learn about arts and science, have fun and do some shopping and socializing. The visitors have also higher expectations of fun, comfort, consumption. In a way, the users are becoming more demanding and for the museums it is not easy to adapt, especially since their representational authority has been weakened. As parts of public cultural infrastructure, their mix of functions can lead to a very confusing message. A positive trend in Europe is the increase in number and a great public success of ‘complex narrative’ museums which use digital media as a resourceful tool to create immersible and successful narrative contexts. On the other extreme, struggling to survive, are the small, very specific and physically isolated niche museums, especially monographic museums (residences or native houses of famous authors or artists). 4. WHAT CAN CLUSTERING ACCOMPLISH? What cooperative possibilities are available to cultural organizations in proximity, forming all together a cultural quarter? a) Shared signposting, joint publicity instruments, marketing strategies and campaigns. b) Combined tickets, adjusted schedules of working hours and synchronized program schedules to avoid having high and low season (too much or too little on offer). c) Shared and jointly developed programs, such as interconnected exhibits or joined events and festivals and also common educational and outreach activities, such as the one going on at the moment in Barcelona, on Cage and Cunningham cooperation, encompassing several museums and venues. d) Joint engagement around some practical common concerns, regarding the surrounding infrastructure: public lighting and security, adequate public transportation, parking opportunities and prices, access to handicapped people...



5/7

e) Shared internal resources and shared expertise (collection preservation regime, shared warehouses, technical workshops, ICT). f) Shared catering infrastructure and merchandising developed collaboratively. g) Shared digitalization process, systems and costs: 24/ access, interactivity and even, new partnerships with specialized firms, hired for digitalization application. Creation, development and implementation of joint events allows quite simple changes to have an interesting outcome to the users and also to the staff of the organizations involved. It is possible to implement together open monument days, museum nights or European cultural heritage days but not always self-evident how to go further. Small initiatives can then open space for more complex collaboration, such as the creation of large template programming, packages or series; the overlapping of spatial and temporal density; and the establishment of temporary communities of interest as opposed to an army of confused and isolated consumers who have trouble figuring out their own preferences in an overwhelming variety of offer. 5. TYPOLOGY The future of cultural organizations depends on their ability to work on two issues: clustering and cooperation in proximity. There are ways to combine various functions in successful spaces of culture, such as learning and sociability, as opposed to shopping centers as spaces of lonely consumption. Mixed models could combine a theater venue, museum, convention hall, exhibit space hotel, eateries, wellness and sport. In Turin, Rome and Bologna, for example, there is the ‘Eataly’ chain, which is a private initiative in the form of a cafe that also sells well selected gastronomic articles, but also books and CDs and DVDs, contains a gastro restaurant and an osteria with cheese and ham degustations, all of top quality and with modest prices. Book promotions, public interviews and small concerts are held in these places. In Budapest, there is a chain of wine and book stores. Such models are a positive example that could be applied to public facilities. 6. URBAN ROUTES & CULTURAL HERITAGE CORRIDORS Certain cities have developed urban routes with outdoor programs which highlight their heritage and local history. They can apply memory signposting, of more general or specific information, having in some cases even support resources and merchandising available at several points. Or create and develop cultural bike routes, museum boat routes as in Amsterdam, off-on bus routes as in several cities, or design thematic walks such as the London Walks (a private initiative) or the Routes of Modernism in Barcelona. Cultural heritage corridors include pilgrimage routes, such as those leading to Santiago de Compostela, the historic Bordeaux’s vineyards or Scottish castles. Such spatial projects need to develop a collective trade mark to assert and keep excellence and set a firm standard for all who want to join them. 7. CULTURAL HUBS Cultural hubs work well as they emerge from the grass root initiatives but benefit from the support of local authorities. If they concentrate significant innovative energies of the city, they usually need at some point to articulate a suitable governance model in order to guarantee synergies, solidarity and smooth cohabitation, rather than to have the governance model and functions imposed from the outside, by the local authorities. It is also important to assure a steady rotation of tenants and also to have well-defined and realistic test when a tenant has reached a non-profit stability or a for-



6/7

profit prospects and should therefore move out, liberating the space for new emerging initiatives. To concentrate cultural R+D (research and development) initiatives can provoke competition, networking, shared learning, resource pooling and increased visibility among young artists, designers, researchers and entrepreneurs. A trend that can be found in various cities across Europe is the creation of cultural hubs in poor neighborhoods. This leads usually to some economic revival and social upgrading but too much buzz raises the real estate prices quickly and forces the cultural trend setters to move away from an area that has become too expensive for them. In Moscow, cultural hubs have been used as an alibi to obtain from the authorities some chunk of tax free land, a real threat on an exorbitantly expensive real estate market, supposedly for a cultural function. In practice, only 5-10% of the edifice has a cultural function, the rest is commercially exploited. Cultural hubs in Europe can be found either in the form of incubators or as more established facilities, in recycled former industrial buildings, such as the Rote Fabrik, Zurich; La Friche la Belle de Mai, Marseille. Other new cultural quarters have been arising: MQ, Vienna (former imperial stables); The Cable Factory, Helsinki; Sentral, Istanbul (former electricity plant); and Southbank, London, built in 1970s and now extensively renovated. New initiatives are visible across Central and Eastern Europe: Millenaris, Budapest (HU); Metelkova, Ljubljana (SO); Badel, Cultural Capital 3000, Zagreb (CR); Karosta, Lepaja (LT); and Mala stanica, Zilina (SL). 8. DEVELOPMENT TENDENCIES a) Autonomous structures after a while make a claim for public funding and receive it ultimately, sometimes in recognition of their success, or to help them manage a heavy and expensive structure. b) Spontaneously created hubs tend in due time to recognize some need of professional management and structure instead of improvisation. c) Temporary initiatives develop into permanent structures. Short festivals turn into all-year- around producing and programming venues. d) Illegal operations, emerging from squatting, are in due time legalized, recognized as tenants in their objects by the authorities and even offered some public support, especially with the basic infrastructure (electricity, water, heating). e) Low cost operations could become more expensive as their output grows. f) Non-commercial initiatives turn commercial: commercial interests, included in the non-profit core activities for the sake of sustainability, become more important and dominant, they revise and determine the course and the key functions of the object. For-profit activities gain an upper hand over the non-profit activities and marginalize them. Public purpose is defeated by private interests. g) R+D facilities turn increasingly to the public in order to legitimize themselves with more visibility, engage in presentation and in consumption and end up competing with all programming venues and cultural centers. h) New syncretic typology of cultural organizations emerges from experimentation, leaving beyond the established typology of specialized cultural organizations, developed in the last 50-200 years. 9. CONCLUSION Cultural policy and planning for a creative city cannot rely on some 'correct’ criteria because they do not exist. However, there is a need for a new typology of cultural infrastructure that can fuse functions, collaborate with a wide range of partners, enter alliances and develop a live and virtual/digital output.



7/7

Failure could come for a variety of reasons. Often, troubles start with the design of the structure itself – and throughout Europe it is possible to see huge failures of new performing arts venues where neither artists nor users were consulted on their needs and expectations. Size also matters. Large projects have a higher failure rate than the small, modest objects that are easier to improve, debug and upgrade. Cultural organizations can offer productive and effective cultural spaces if a broad, transversal notion of culture and cultural diversity are invoked as the key defining notions. The mentioned models and structures are even more relevant for small and midsize cities, where resources are more limited and where there is an urgent need to slow down the departure of the younger, more educated population, and attract the creative class. Cultural policy and planning for a creative city require a broad notion of culture and the provision of space for the critical culture, space for experimentation, joy and innovation, also comparative analysis and shared learning. The dialectic of the local and global demands an inclusive pluralist public space: physical and virtual zones of interaction and cooperation against spatial and social segregation. Successful projects are those that develop an inside/outside dynamic – with contemporary architecture and building materials and those large digital screens the interior of the cultural facility with its multiple processes could become transparent to those outside - it is possible to demystify culture, open-up cultural buildings to the gaze from the outside and show the work in progress inside to the passers-by outside, thus encouraging them to get in at some point. www.draganklaic.eu www.interarts.net

spatial dynamics of cultural organizations: clusters…interarts.net/descargas/interarts713.pdf ·...

Documents