Exercises in Soft Power and Cultural Diplomacy: the Cultural Programming of the Los Angeles and London Olympic Games
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Exercises in Soft Power and Cultural Diplomacy: The Cultural Programming of the Los Angeles and London Olympic Games DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Tiffany Lewis Graduate Program in Arts Administration, Education and Policy The Ohio State University 2015 Dissertation Committee: Professor Margaret J. Wyszomirski, Advisor Professor Wayne Lawson Professor Candace Stout Copyright by Tiffany Lewis 2015 Abstract This dissertation argues that the opening ceremonies and arts festivals of the Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 Olympics are exercises in soft power or cultural diplomacy and identifies cultural outcomes that relate to public value. According to Joseph Nye (2008), “Soft power is the ability to affect others to obtain the outcomes one wants through attraction rather than coercion or payment. A country’s soft power rests on it resources of culture, values, and policies” (Joseph Nye, 2008, p. 94). Milton Cummings (2003), on the other hand, surveys major cultural policy initiatives and cultural relations trends in the United States and describes cultural diplomacy as “the exchange of ideas, information, art and other aspects of culture among nations and their peoples in order to foster mutual understanding” (Cummings, 2003, p. 1). For the purposes of this inquiry, cultural programming of the Olympics is defined as the Opening Ceremony and the Olympic Arts Festival. The form and scale of these cultural experiences vary with each Games, but they allow arts organizations to partner, present, and collaborate on an international level. Unfortunately, long-term examination of the outcomes of the cultural programming of the Olympics has been limited. It is important to determine if the host cities have achieved their stated goals set by entities like the Local Organizing Committee for the Olympic Games or the International Olympic Committee in order to validate the cultural aspects of the Olympics and the funds used to support them. The ii impact of the Olympics is usually defined in terms of economic improvement and infrastructure development, but the effects of cultural programming are frequently ignored. It is for these reasons that I will focus in the current study on the cultural programming of the Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 Olympics. I frame and identify cultural outcomes of these experiences, which includes the sharing of values, changes in international perception, collaboration between arts institutions, and increased cultural tourism in the host city. iii Acknowledgments This dissertation would not have been possible without the support of many individuals and programs. The following pages by no means reflect the prayers, time, effort, and finances that have been invested into my success. Although it will not be adequate, I attempt to recognize those whose support has allowed this dissertation to be written. First, I would like to honor and thank God because with Him all things are possible. Next, the support of my family has been instrumental throughout this process. My fiancé, Desmond Bourgeios, has offered encouragement and understanding since the day we met. My parents, Bennie and Jayne Lewis, thank you for making me believe that I could do or be whatever I wanted. Amy Lewis, I appreciate your consistent reminders that I was going to be Dr. Lewis one day. I would like to acknowledge my colleagues Delia Fernandez and Yalidy Matos. My chapter reviewers, cheerleaders, and friends. iv Thank you Drs. Wyszomirksi, Lawson, and Stout who have helped shape and develop my project from an idea to completion. My research and scholarly growth is due to your guidance and support. To Dr. Wyszomirski, my advisor, I am grateful for your commitment to my work and dedication as a mentor that has shaped my experience at The Ohio State University and prepared me as a professional in our field. I’m indebted to the McNair Scholars program at DePaul University because mentors like Yared Tamene, Luciano Berardi and Doreen Pierce explained the benefits of graduate school and taught me how to be a successful student. Thank you to Cindy Freeman, you showed me that The Ohio State University would be the best fit for my graduate career and supported my graduate pursuits. Also, many thanks to Kirsten Thomas, your patience and direction ensured I fulfilled every requirement. v Vita 2010................................................................B.F.A Theatre Studies, DePaul University 2012................................................................M.A. Arts Administration and Policy, Ohio State University 2011 to 2014 .................................................Graduate Teaching Associate, Arts Administration Education and Policy Department, Ohio State University Fields of Study Major Field: Graduate Program in Arts Administration, Education and Policy vi Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgments.............................................................................................................. iv Table of Contents .............................................................................................................. vii List of Figures .................................................................................................................. viii List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... ix Chapter 1: Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2: Literature Review ............................................................................................ 11 Chapter 3: Theoretical and Analytical Framework ........................................................... 78 Chapter 4. Methodology ................................................................................................. 101 Chapter 5: Los Angeles 1984 .......................................................................................... 117 Chapter 6: London 2012 ................................................................................................. 149 Chapter 7: Comparing Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 ......................................... 180 Chapter 8: Conclusion..................................................................................................... 208 References ....................................................................................................................... 217 Appendix: Data Collection Materials ............................................................................. 226 vii List of Figures Figure 1. Based on the work of Beatriz Garcia ................................................................. 15 Figure 2. Framework for Understanding the Benefits of the Arts .................................... 69 Figure 3. Five Clusters ...................................................................................................... 75 Figure 4. Analytical Framework ..................................................................................... 100 Figure 5. Los Angeles Opening Ceremony..................................................................... 137 Figure 6. Olympic Gateway ............................................................................................ 143 Figure 7. Going to the Olympics..................................................................................... 145 Figure 8. Galileo, Jupiter, Apollo ................................................................................... 147 Figure 9. Final Report of the IOC ................................................................................... 157 viii List of Tables Table 1. Paradox of Power ................................................................................................ 26 Table 2. Cultural Diplomacy Continued ........................................................................... 52 ix Chapter 1: Introduction This dissertation argues that the opening ceremonies and arts festivals of the Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 Olympics are exercises in soft power or cultural diplomacy and identifies cultural outcomes that relate to public value. According to Joseph Nye (2008), “Soft power is the ability to affect others to obtain the outcomes one wants through attraction rather than coercion or payment. A country’s soft power rests on it resources of culture, values, and policies” (Joseph Nye, 2008, p. 94). Milton Cummings (2003), on the other hand, surveys major cultural policy initiatives and cultural relations trends in the United States and describes cultural diplomacy as “the exchange of ideas, information, art and other aspects of culture among nations and their peoples in order to foster mutual understanding” (Cummings, 2003, p. 1). For the purposes of this inquiry, cultural programming of the Olympics is defined as the Opening Ceremony and the Olympic Arts Festival. The form and scale of these cultural experiences vary with each Games, but they allow arts organizations to partner, present, and collaborate on an international level. Unfortunately, long-term examination of the outcomes of the cultural programming of the Olympics has been limited. It is important to determine if the host cities have achieved their stated goals set