Re-Thinking Festivals a Comparative Study of the Integration/Marginalization of Art Festivals in the Urban Regimes Of
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Re-thinking festivals A comparative study of the integration/marginalization of art festivals in the urban regimes of Manchester, Copenhagen and Vienna UNICA EUROMASTER IN URBAN STUDIES 4CITIES SUMMER SEMESTER 2011 CECILIE SACHS OLSEN SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2011 SUPERVISOR: MATHIEU VAN CRIEKINGEN 2ND READER: WALTER MATZNETTER 1 Acknowledgements Special thanks to my super visor Prof. dr Mathieu van Criekingen for helpful feedbacks and constructive critiques that helped clarify my thoughts and structure my research. Thanks also to the festival leaders Drew Hemment, Ula Schneider and Trevor Davies for giving me useful insights into their festivals, and the rest of the interviewees for providing me with practical perspectives on the topic. A final thanks to Thomas, Christine, Ingrid and Karoline for moral support, proof-reading and lay out. 1 Abstract Arts festivals have been on the ascendant since the 1980ies. However, while arts festivals are proliferating, it remains unclear as to whether they are also flourishing. The present narrow construction of festivals for marketing purposes and as economic generators tends to disregard the festivals’ social and cultural potential, for example in terms of their function as urban laboratories where new and alternative urban and cultural strategies can be tested and developed. In order to address these current imbalanced conceptualizations of arts festivals within urban policy frameworks, the present thesis is based on a comparative case study of three festivals that try to function as urban laboratories: FutureEverything (Manchester), Metropolis (Copenhagen) and SOHO (Vienna). By examining how these festivals are integrated in or marginalized by the urban regime, and what effects this has got on their operational conditions and actual impact on urban development, the research elucidates the need to create new and more holistic policy frameworks to chart an equitable path for the future development of urban arts festivals. 2 CONTENTS 1. Introduction (page 4-6) 4. PART I: Integration or marginalization? (page 20-36) 1.1. Hypothesis (p. 5) 1.2. Research question (p. 5) 4.1. National contexts of cultural policy (p. 20) 1.3. Aim (p. 5) 4.1.1. Traditional cultural policy (p. 22) 1.4. Empirical focus (p. 5) 4.1.2. Shift in political environment and cultural 1.5 Structure (p. 6) policy (p. 22) 4.1.3. Present state-culture relations (p. 23) 2. Empirical and theoretical framework (page 7-16) 4.2. Festivals and the urban regime (p.23) 4.2.1. Manchester and FutureEverything 2.1. Categorization of festivals (p. 7) (p.24) 2.1.1. Instrumentalized festivals (p. 7) 4.2.2. Copenhagen and Metropolis (p. 27) 2.1.2. Heterotopic festivals (p.8) 4.2.3. Vienna and SOHO (p.31) 2.2. Selection of case studies (p. 9) 4.3. Results and discussions PART I (p. 35) 2.2.1. FutureEverything (p. 9) 2.2.2. Metropolis (p. 10) 5. PART II: Festivals-as-labs (page 37-47) 2.2.3. SOHO (p.11) 2.2.4. Level of integration (p. 12) 5.1. Festival as lab (p. 37) 2.3. Concepts and theories (p. 12) 5.1.1 FutureEverything-as-lab (p.38) 2.3.1. Urban regime (p. 12) 5.1.2 Metropolis-as-lab (p. 40) 2.3.2. Art and culture (p. 12) 5.1.3 SOHO-as-lab (p. 41) 2.4. Cultural policy framework (p. 13) 5.2 Political impacts (p. 41) 2.4.1. Rationales (p. 13) 5.2.1 Open data cities (p. 42) 2.4.2. State/culture relations (p. 14) 5.2.2 LysLyd (p. 43) 2.4.3. Framework model (p. 16) 5.2.3 Kunst macht Stadt?! (p. 44) 5.3. Legitimacy of artists in urban development 3. Methodology (page 17-19) debates (p. 44) 5.3.1 Access to (and) experimenting with 3.1. Research design and –methods (p. 17) public space (p. 45) 3.2. Data collection (p. 17) 5.3.2 Networks and acknowledgements (p.45) 3.2.1. Qualitative/semi-structured interviews 5.4 Results and discussion PART II (p.46) ( p.17) 3.3. Data analysis (p.18) 6. Conclusion (page 48-51) 6.1 Final conclusion (p.48) 6.2 Further development (p.49) 3 1. INTRODUCTION Criticisms of this instrumental approach to festivals are well If our urban world has been imagined and made rehearsed in literature. These point at the tendency of designing then it can be re-imagined and re-made. urban fragments rather than urban planning, image rather than David Harvey (2003:941) substance, consumption rather than production, and culture as a pattern of non-place globalised events. Thus, instead Since the late 1980ies arts festivals have been on the ascendant of mobilising the city’s own resources, the city tends to copy and are now a mainstay for urban tourism and urban policy models which have been developed elsewhere leading to making (Gotham 2005, Prentice & Andersen 2003, Quinn 2010, a serial production where similar shows can be seen all over Sassatelli 2008). There is a well-established and substantial the world. This may result in increasing homogeneity and literature attesting to the significant impacts and benefits generated declining creativity within arts festival activity. In this approach, by these festivals across economic, political and socio-cultural then, opportunities for genuine engagement with the culture domains (Quinn 2010). Researchers have frequently argued and realities of the place remain sidelined, and thus it yields that festivals offer possibilities for crystallizing, galvanizing and quick though ephemeral fixes to urban problems (Evans 2001, articulating local identities and have historically represented Fainstein & Judd 1999, Finkel 2009, Harvey 1989, Pratt 2008, opportunities for local agents to act and influence their localised Quinn 2010, Quinn 2005, Richards & Wilson 2006, Zukin 1991). arenas (Bakhtin 1984, Durkheim 1912, Eigtved 2003, Quinn However, there is a paucity of empirical research to support 2010, Turner 1982, Waade 2002, Waterman 1998). Today and illustrate the validity of these arguments in a cultural context festivals continue to be supported for their identity-enhancing (Richards 2007). roles albeit increasingly as a tool for place marketing and urban In order to address the validity of these criticisms I will in the revitalization. In the increased territorial competition between present research focus upon case studies of arts festivals cities and regions they have increasingly become a focus of that try to counter these criticisms by actively engaging in the investment as a sort of “urban entrepreneurial display”1 (Quinn present development of their localities in order to function as 2005:927). The term “festivalization” has become common and urban laboratories where new and alternative urban and cultural implies the instrumental process by which festivals and public strategies can be tested and developed. For analytical purposes celebrations are used as sites for spectacle to attract visitors and I have chosen to categorize the case studies as heterotopic2 locals into city spaces and to “brand” a city. festivals. This categorization is done in order to position these The question that remains to be asked is how arts festivals festivals as alternatives to the instrumentalized festivals as the prosper under these prevailing and powerful neo-liberal aim of the former is not to function merely as urban spectacles, agendas, and whether urban regimes have even begun to exploit but rather “acting as testbeds of change” (Shane 2005:9). It is the potential of arts festivals. The use of culture only for marketing important to note that the dichotomy between instrumentalized purposes is limiting and the broad-ranging conceptualizations festivals and heterotopic festivals does not represent a clear of festivity evident in the literature contrasts sharply with the picture of reality as festivals are diverse and often situated in the tangible but narrow construction of festivals merely as economic cross field between the two. generators. Thus while arts festivals are proliferating, it remains I want to specify that my research object is limited to arts unclear as to whether they are also flourishing. festivals. The foregrounding principle of any festival is the wide 1 In one sense the place-marketing role played by festivals is nothing new, festivals like Salzburger festspiele (first founded in 1877) was for example re-born as a symbol of Austrian culture to help Austria re-enter the international stage both politically and culturally post World War I (Waterman 1998), but as Quinn (2010) notes “the fervour with which public agencies now invest in arts events to celebrate historical milestones and subvent festivals through tourism funding channels is unprecedented” (Quinn 2010:270). 2 For further elaboration on the notion of ”Heterotopia” and heterotopic festivals see theoretical framework. 4 1. INTRODUCTION range of aesthetic, artistic and cultural possibilities it offers. 1.2 Research question They have got certain distinctions in common, that differ them from cultural institutions: they are temporarily limited and, often, In order to address these current imbalanced conceptualizations repetitive events, they need to rebuild their infrastructure every of arts festivals within urban policy frameworks, and detect the year and they are usually located in public space. These operational conditions of heterotopic festivals, my research will characteristics, however, also cover a broader field of cultural be based on the following research question: events such as Gay Prides, Olympic Games, Formel 1s etc. These cultural events are more concerned with culture as a To what degree are heterotopic festivals integrated in or “whole way of life”, while arts festivals are confined to culture marginalized by the urban