Exercises in Soft Power and Cultural Diplomacy: the Cultural Programming of the Los Angeles and London Olympic Games

Home , 2012 Cultural Olympiad, Cultural diplomacy, Joseph Nye, London Olympics, Olympics (1984 painting), Statue of Amy Winehouse

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

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

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.

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.

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

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

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 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 impact of the Olympics is usually

1 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. By reviewing literature on mega-events, urban development, the

Olympics, and cultural diplomacy, I frame and identify possible cultural outcomes of these experiences, which includes the sharing of values, changes in international perception, collaboration between arts institutions, increased cultural tourism in the host city, and relations between nations.

Research Questions

The following questions will be examined in this study:

1. Do the cultural aspects of the Olympics function as an exercise in soft power

and/or cultural diplomacy based on the definitions within the current literature?

a. If yes, then how do the cultural aspects of the Olympics function as an

exercise in soft power and/or cultural diplomacy?

2. What are the cultural impacts of the cultural aspects of the Olympics?

3. How do the outcomes of the cultural aspects of the Olympics relate to public

value?

a. Which factors may constitute an effective framework for the evaluation of

long-term impact and public value?

Scope and Limitations of Study

A review of literature on topics such as the arts, the history of the Olympics, mega- events, urban development, and cultural diplomacy define soft power and identify possible changes that have occurred to the host city and the host city’s cultural community both nationally and internationally due to the influence of the cultural aspects of the Olympics. Drawing from professional sources and data, I highlight the cultural aspects of the modern Olympics and focus on Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012. The

1984 Los Angeles Olympics were the first profitable Games due to the creation of a private local organizing committee, marketing, and corporate sponsorship, which became a model for future Olympics. London 2012, being the most recent Summer Games, provides a distinct perspective because it is the only city to host the Olympics three times and serves as an illustration for how soft power and cultural diplomacy have developed over time. Los Angeles and London are comparable because they are both global cities, cultural centers, and contain large-scale institutions. Furthermore, during the Games, both

Arts Festivals relied heavily on the works of William Shakespeare. By investigating these two Olympics and highlighting the potential long-term outcomes, from an era when the opening ceremonies became more spectacular until the most recent Olympics, I will show how the Games can have cultural diplomacy goals.

I have chosen to focus on the Summer Olympics for several reasons, including the larger number of events, competitors, and increased media coverage as compared to the Winter

Games. For instance, there are over 35 summer events and only 15 winter events. In addition, there were approximately 10,500 athletes that competed in the 2012 London

Summer Games and only 2,566 that competed in the 2010 Vancouver Winter Games.

There are also significant differences in the amount of media coverage for the Summer versus Winter Olympics. London 2012 had over 21,000 accredited media correspondents present, while Vancouver 2010 had only 10,000 ("Olympic.org," 2013). It is because of the larger number of events, competitors, and media coverage that I chose to focus on the

Summer Olympic Games. Although many scholars have explored the economic, social, and environmental outcomes of the Games, this dissertation will focus specifically on the cultural outcomes (Friedman, Powell, Hutwagner, Graham, & Teague, 2001; Streets et al., 2007).

Literature Review

In the following literature review I will present relevant literature on the cultural programming of the 1984 Los Angeles and 2012 London Olympics as exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy and potential cultural outcomes that frame this investigation. Significant works by scholars like David Inglis (2008) and John MacAloon

(1984) ground the Los Angeles and London Games in a historical and theoretical context.

In addition, Joseph Nye’s (2008, p. 94) discussion of soft power and Milton Cummings’s

(2003) definition of cultural diplomacy construct the conceptual framework for this inquiry with regard to influence through attraction and fostering mutual understanding.

Furthermore, scholarship on mega-events and urban planning explores cultural outcomes and exposes potential cultural outcomes for soft power and cultural diplomacy with regard to the cultural programming of the Olympics and it is legitimized through the link

4 between cultural outcomes and public value. Ultimately, this literature review serves as the basis for this inquiry and informs its findings.

The historical and theoretical discussion of the Olympic Games is informed by the work of MacAloon (1984), Preuss (2004), and Moragas (1995). The historical background of the Games highlights the development of the cultural programming from an Arts

Competition to a Cultural Olympiad with regard to amateur competitions and city development and an analysis of the previous purposes of the Games provides context for the Los Angeles and London Olympics. Finally, a review of the history, current perspectives, and purposes of the cultural programming provide a foundation for an in- depth examination of exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy.

Soft Power

In order to effectively address the issues surrounding the cultural programming of the

Olympics, an exploration of Joseph Nye’s (2008) discussion of soft power is imperative.

Reviewing the historical underpinning of Nye’s works, analyzing his current perspectives, and critiques provide the necessary perspective to explore the cultural programming of the London and Los Angeles Games. Nye’s exploration into how to attract others to affect change lends itself to the spectacular nature of both the opening ceremonies and the relationship-building elements of the Arts Festivals.

This investigation relies heavily on the resources of soft power, which include the culture, values, and policies prevalent during cultural programming. By using soft power as a conceptual framework for this investigation, the resources provide an in-depth

5 examination of the cultural programming as exercises in soft power or cultural diplomacy. Cultural diplomacy is, furthermore, a form of soft power relevant to the discussion of the cultural programming of London 2012 and Los Angeles 1984.

Specifically, the opportunities for exchange to foster mutual understanding serve as the foundation for this investigation. The Los Angeles and London arts festivals, with a focus on Shakespearean performances and programs, provide occasions for collaboration and partnership. Each of these occasions has the capacity to offer exchanges between nations and people in order to foster mutual understanding.

Outcomes

Literature on mega-events, Olympics, soft power, and urban development reflect the diversity of perspectives that embody this study. As shown in the literature review, a variety of research areas can be utilized to explain or categorize cultural aspects of the

Olympics and potential outcomes. However, it is soft power that frames these cultural aspects, which is reflected in the political intention of long-term programming that is also mutually beneficial. Furthermore, recent research also highlights a variety of potential outcomes with common themes like image projection and tourism. For instance, urban development and soft power both identify outcomes that are related to cultural infrastructure, which provide the foundation for an analytical framework that reviews these potential outcomes using specific indicators (i.e., tourism, changes perception due to image projection, etc.). Once these outcomes have been identified, their value is explored to validate the existence of the cultural aspects of the Olympics.

Public Value

The outcomes of arts experiences like the cultural components of the Olympics can reveal pubic value through social, educational, cultural, and economic benefits and possible intended or unintended purposes. The definitions of public value provided by

Mark H. Moore and Gaylen Williams Moore (2005) and Beck Jørgensen and Barry

Bozeman (Jorgensen & Bozeman, 2007) not only serve as a guide in what follows, but are essential to the application of the analytical framework utilized in the current study.

Theoretical and Analytical Framework

This dissertation springs from several theoretical and conceptual foundations that include international relations theory, diplomacy, and arts policy. Scholarship by Joseph Nye

(2008, p. 94) and Robert Cox (Cox, 1983) has shaped soft power as a concept. Soft power serves as the foundation for this study of the cultural programming of the Olympics due to potential influence through the opening ceremony and arts festival. Soft power fits within realist, liberal, and constructivist perspectives based in international relations theory.

The analytical framework loosely builds on a logic model, which is routinely used in program evaluation, by identifying outputs and outcomes of cultural programming.

Although this is not an evaluative inquiry, the evaluative framework lends itself to exploring the effects of cultural programming for nonprofits and cultural organizations, which are the primary entities that participate in the cultural programming of the

Olympics. Relevant literature on the Olympics and cultural diplomacy characterizes indicators for potential effects of Olympic cultural programming with regard to the analytical framework and highlight its outcomes. By identifying these effects, I relate them to larger initiatives like cultural infrastructure, social capital, and legacy as potential long-term impacts of cultural diplomacy or soft power.

Methodology

In this dissertation, I use case study methodology as a means of investigating whether the cultural programming of the Olympics is an exercise in soft power and cultural diplomacy. The perspectives of Robert K. Yin (2009), John Creswell (2007), and Robert

E. Stake (1995) serve as guidance. According to Cresswell (2007), “Case study research is a qualitative approach in which the investigator explores a bounded system (a case) or multiple bounded systems (cases) over time, through detailed, in depth data collection involving multiple sources of information (e.g., observations, interviews, audiovisual material, and documents and reports), and reports a case description and case-based themes (Creswell, 2007, p. 74). For this investigation, case study is categorized as a methodology because it as a research strategy that can include guidelines and procedures that fit this inquiry. The inclusive nature of case studies allows for the possibility of mixing methods, which for this investigation includes some quantitative evidence using descriptive statistics. A diversity of resources is necessary in order to provide a comprehensive perspective for this inquiry because the elements and results of the cultural programming of the Olympics have been documented in a variety of ways (i.e.,

8 video recording, programs, academic literature). For instance, existing physical structures and partnerships between organizations are reviewed to provide insights into cultural outcomes and interview participants, local artists, and government officials will be utilized to determine the impact of these experiences. In the present study, I identified participants through professional resources and by implementing a snowball technique.

The use of photos, interviews, surveys, reports, video, global opinion surveys, and other documents are utilized to address how those responsible for organizing the Los Angeles and London Olympics state their goals, how they are measured, and their long-term impact. The analyses of these resources are archival and historical in nature. In addition to these archival and historical sources, I also analyze video and other materials to identify the purpose and intended messages of the cultural programming using the E.

McClung Fleming approach, which focuses on an artifact’s history, material, construction, design, and function.

Broader Significance

This investigation addresses the lack of explicit discussion of the cultural aspects of the

Olympics being exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy. Most literature does not relate cultural diplomacy and soft power to the cultural programming of the Olympics, but focuses on the economic or infrastructure impacts of the Games. I fill this gap with this inquiry by framing the cultural programming as cultural diplomacy and soft power and identifying potential cultural outcomes. This investigation raises awareness about the

9 impacts of cultural diplomacy and soft power using Arts Festivals and opening ceremonies as case studies.

In addition to the above, the current study also contributes to current literature on the significance of soft power and cultural diplomacy outcomes by establishing a relationship between these outcomes and public value, which can serve to legitimize the cultural programming of the Olympics. This research, furthermore, could be utilized to inform arts institutions and professionals about both the problems and successes within soft power and cultural diplomacy. This awareness of the influence of the cultural aspects of the Olympics can affect national politics, arts organizations, artists, and local communities.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

This review examines relevant literature on cultural programming of the Los Angeles and

London Olympics as exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy and potential cultural outcomes to frame this investigation. Firstly, reviewing works by scholars like David

Inglis and John MacAloon provides a historical and theoretical perspective of the

Olympic Games, which positions the Los Angeles and London Games in context. In addition, Joseph Nye’s discussion of soft power and Milton Cummings definition of cultural diplomacy construct the conceptual framework for this inquiry with regard to influence through attraction and fostering mutual understanding. Exploring cultural outcomes from different fields like mega-events and urban development exposes potential cultural outcomes for the cultural programming of the Olympics, which this research requires. Lastly, the relationship between cultural outcomes and public value justifies the production and execution of the cultural programming. Ultimately, this literature review serves as the basis for this dissertation and informs its findings.

Background of Olympic Games The investigation of cultural programming during modern Olympic Games epitomizes the historic marriage of sport and arts and supports the examination of exercises in cultural diplomacy, soft power and cultural outcomes. The historical background of the

Games highlight the evolution from an Arts Competition to a Cultural Olympiad due to

association between the cultural programming and cultural development plan of the host city which could be international in nature. Works by MacAloon, Preuss, and Moragas reflect current perspectives by framing and highlighting the benefits of the cultural programming. While an analysis of previous purposes of the Games provides context for the Los Angeles and London Games. A review of the history, current perspectives, and purposes related to the cultural programming of the Olympics provide a foundation for in-depth examination of exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy

History of the Cultural Programming Understanding the historical background of the Olympics provides a foundation for the modern day Olympics and potential elements of cultural diplomacy through the competitions between nations. The structure of the Olympics has evolved tremendously since the times of Ancient Greece. Currently, it encompasses athletic competitions and cultural programs between nations. This brief historical background grounds the Olympic

Games and alludes to the purposes of the cultural aspects which can highlight potential impacts. The Olympic Games include separate cultural and athletic competitive and programmatic elements. David Inglis highlights this evolution in Culture agonistes: social differentiation, cultural policy and Cultural Olympiads:

“… in ancient Greece, the birthplace of the original Olympics, where a strong

distinction was not made between ‘aesthetic’ and ‘sportive’ matters (because arts

and sports did not occupy distinct, isolated social spheres), by the mid-nineteenth

century a firm conceptual divide had been opened up between ‘arts’ (and ‘culture’

in the sense of ‘high culture’) and ‘sports’, and this distinction was both produced,

reinforced and policed by each of these areas of human endeavour being located

in separate social spheres that had little interaction between each other.” (cited in

Inglis, 2008, p. 464)

Pierre de Coubertin established the modern structure of the Olympic in the 1890’s. One of his aims was to reconnect the two separate entities of arts and sports. Muller and

Williams highlight this fact “… modern Olympics were to be based upon an alliance of

‘athletes, artists and spectators, the former two groups having come in modernity not only to be socially separated from each other, but also to be mutual antagonists, the one group championing the physical values of the body – sportive prowess, physical strength and so on – and the other upholding the intellectual values of the mind and the soul” (cited in

Inglis, 2008, p. 465). By establishing a Advisory Conference on the Incorporation of the

Fine Arts in the Olympic Games and Everyday Life and the Pentathlon of the Arts, an arts competition of equal status of sports, Coubertin attempted to link arts and sports in the Olympics.

Over the course of the decades, the cultural component of the Olympics faced many struggles. For instance, there was a question of quality of the cultural competitors and the authenticity of the artwork. Inglis provides examples from previous Olympic Games.

Gold and Revill explain “…Paris in 1924 involved a musical composition contest that was judged by … composers such as Bartok, Ravel, Fauré and Stravinsky. Although the eminence of the judging panel seems to betoken that in this particular art world at least,

Olympic arts were being taken seriously, the panel clearly did not think much of the

(relatively few) entries and refused to award any prizes ” (cited in Inglis, 2008, p. 466).

Inglis continued to explain the lack of participation of quality artists when she explained

“the musical avant-garde of the 1920s could just about be persuaded to act as judges for the Olympic music competition, none of these leading lights would ever have thought to have entered a piece into competition themselves – it would have been far beneath their artistic dignity to do so” (Inglis, 2008, pp. 466-467). At times the cultural competitors felt restricted by the themes of the competition. Avant garde artists felt constricted by and rejected the sports related themes as being bourgeois and conformist ” (Inglis, 2008, p.

467). Although the Olympics began as competition of culture and sports, society has separated the two. The modern Olympics focus on the athletic competition between nations. The cultural aspects of the Olympics: Cultural Olympiad and opening and closing ceremonies; includes national programming of cultural exchanges before and during the competition. I selected these publications because they effectively provide historical information that is necessary to ground the cultural aspects of the Olympics.

Below is a table that chronologically displays the cultural programming of the Olympics.

Other publications like Pierre de Coubertin 1863-1937: Olympism Selected Writings edited by Norbert Müller provide historical background of the arts and culture in the

Olympics.

History of Cultural Programming of the Olympics Pentathlon of Arts Competition Arts Festival Cultural Olympiad Muses 1912-1948 1952-1990 1992-Present 1904-1908

Ensure the Arts competitions are organized in Exhibitions and festivals take the place of the competition A program for cultural association of parallel to the sporting competitions Issues: celebrations that lasts four years arts with sports Issues: -similar issues that organizers faced from 1912-1948 before the Games Issues: -differences in regulations and contest - did not increase awareness about the art festivals due to management lacked parameters issues and absence of an international arts organization comparable to the implementation -difficulties with sports theme sports’ international federations due to concern -non-universal nature of the arts competitions over content -professional artists could not be accepted restrictions 1904 St. Louis 1912Stockhol Berlin London 1948 1952 1956 1960 Rome 1968 1980 Moscow, 1992 1996 Atlanta 1908 London m 1936 Helsink Melbourn 1964 Tokyo Mexico 1984 Los Barcelon 2000 Sydney 1920 Antwerp i e 1972 Angeles 1988 a 2004 Athens 1924 Paris Munich Seoul 2008 Beijing 1928 2012 London Amsterdam,

15 1932 Los Angeles 1906 Artists like ‘Nazi Succeeded in The First Differences Became Growth of urban Set a new Organizers’ Consultative athletes could Games’ paralleling the presenc official in length, more cultural policy precedent strategic intention conference on win medals sports with e of the Olympic objectives, ambitious strategies by to use the Games Art, Letters and during the arts first arts arts in arts organization in the and culture-led establishi to improve the Sport competition modern competitions the festival: , theme treatment regeneration ng the city’s urban Olympic Olympi (1)visual of initiatives within model of landscape Arts Parade of torch cs arts/literatu the arts which major the competition Nations (1928) relay, would re(2)music festivals by events like the Cultural Assist in should become take the /drama progressive Olympic Games, Olympiad its international part of each Release of cultural form of ly aligning have played a projection far Games to ensure doves (1920) festival cultural Parade of them with central role beyond the Games the association was exhibiti Flags the of arts with Antwerp an ons and growing Attempt to sports Ceremony ambitious festivals Staged in arts agenda establish the (1920) publicity instead the weeks Cultural campaign of leading up Aspiration Olympiad Would not be Raising of competi to and to address Foundation implemented Olympic flag was used tions during audience until 1912 (1920) as a the Games developme Stockholm propagand nt, Olympic Oath a tool Featured, access, and (1920) local, inclusion national issues and internation al artists Based on information Figure 1. Based on the work of Beatriz Garcia

Olympic Analysis MacAloon’s foundational text Olympic Games and the Theory of Spectacle, examines the modern Games as a spectacle, festival, and ritual which offers a comprehensive understanding the Olympic Games. He highlights spectacle as a noteworthy sight with visual sensory and symbolic codes that are of a certain size and grandeur. It is also dynamic that requires movement and action from the human actors as well as excitement from the spectators (MacAloon, 1984).The artistic program of opening ceremonies lend itself to this definition through performances of history and culture to present and televised audiences. Although Holger Preuss’s work analyzes the economic aspects of the Olympic Games with regard to the host cities, he also recognizes the impact of the opening ceremony. He acknowledged that “…the fact that the opening ceremonies convey to the world press, and television viewers a first impression of the Games, are the motivation for the OCOG to stage this part at a particularly high level” (Preuss, 2004, p.

212). Yet, MacAloon focus on the opening ceremonies also exemplify ritual through the athletic and official processionals marked by anthems, emblems, and national costumes, as well as the lifting of national and Olympic flags and the artistic program. Ritual involves religious forces and ritual action effects social transitions and spiritual transformation (MacAloon, 1984). MacAloon highlighted Coubertin and IOC’s rejection of spectacle and focus on the festival of the game; which functions particularly well with regard to the celebratory nature of the arts festival, but can be problematic when investigating the dramatic elements of the opening ceremony. The essential elements for this inquiry highlights the elements of the opening ceremonies. MacAloon’s focus is not on the cultural programming of the Olympics, but his examination does lend itself to the cultural programming of the Olympics like the artistic program of the Opening

Ceremonies because of his discussion of ritual. Miquel de Moragas’s perspective on the technical elements of the opening ceremonies builds on the other works by highlighting the variability through broadcasting.

He demonstrate how the opening ceremony becomes many different ceremonies

as a result of structural, verbal, and visual modifications by international

broadcasters. Structurally, broadcasters have the ability to add or subtract

programming elements within and around the ceremony. Then, all broad casters

must add verbal narration to the event because the international signal is visuals,

music and natural sound only. Finally, broadcasters may superimpose additional

visual elements, such as graphics, or insert images produced by their own

cameras.(Moragas Spa et al., 1995)

The variability in narration visuals during an Olympic broadcast can reveal the purpose and intentions of the programming.

Purpose of the Olympic Games Rather than a celebration of international competition and achievement, the purposes of the cultural aspects of the Olympics have transformed to fit the needs of the host nation.

The purposes ranged from promoting tourism, projecting positive images of the nations, to cultivating peace amongst nation these purposes relate directly to cultural diplomacy.

Inglis highlights Stockholm as an example of promotion of tourism. The variety in intention is deliberate “The Stockholm games of 1912 had a substantial cultural programme that occurred at the same time as the sporting events, much of the programme

(e.g. opera performances) being aimed at stimulating tourism to the Swedish capital, an early precursor of the general trend of Olympics cultural programming after World War

II” (Inglis, 2008, p. 466). The Stockholm games used elements of cultural diplomacy

because it used culture to influence others. Specifically the cultural program was used to further the city’s interests to increase tourism. The Berlin Games were the first to elevate the culture of the host nation. Inglis states “…the Nazi government that hosted the Berlin games of 1936 regarded its vastly expensive and ambitious cultural events as offering a chance to present to the world an idealised view of life in the emerging Reich” (Inglis,

2008, p. 467). Under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, the games promoted Aryan culture which occurred at the cusp of World War II. The idealized view of Aryan culture could be used to garner support for the Nazi regime. The 1980 Moscow Games were another example of a nation’s elite class using the Olympics as a means for promoting a positive cultural image. “An increasingly massive programme, thoroughly tied to the aims and ambitions of state elites, concerned to demonstrate to the wider world the most positive side of the host country – all these trends were accentuated in the post-War period, sometimes in the guise of Cold War propaganda (e.g. the highly ideologically-loaded programmes of the Moscow games in 1980 and the Los Angeles event in 1984)” (Inglis,

2008, p. 467). The Cold War context of the Moscow games highlights how culture was used to influence others of the positive elements of Russia. The variety in purpose reflects ambiguity in the Olympic Charter. For instance, “…the goal of the Olympic

World Movement is to contribute to building a peaceful and better world … the Olympic spirit which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fairplay” (Olympic ceremonies : historical continuity and cultural exchange :

International Symposium on Olympic Ceremonies, Barcelona - Lausanne, 1995, p. 26).

Yet, the charter clouds the explicit intention of the ceremonies in Rules 69 and 70 with lack of detail.

“Any attempt to describe the substance or merits or the contents of the deep

message which the ceremonies must convey in the charter would have degraded

the contents of the message itself. It would have been most difficult to do it in

such a way as to respect what is embodied in an on going tradition and custom

which has been perpetrating itself and which everybody knows and

understands”(Olympic ceremonies : historical continuity and cultural exchange :

International Symposium on Olympic Ceremonies, Barcelona - Lausanne, 1995,

p. 26)

The evolution of the purposes of the Olympic Games impacted the cultural programming of the Olympics with regard to content and intention. These publications provide the foundation for past cultural programming and discusses the intentions of the Olympic charter, which confirms there is no consensus on a general purpose for the cultural components of modern day Olympic Games. The next steps in this investigation highlight the explicit purposes of the Los Angeles and London Games and relate the cultural aspects of the Olympics to soft power and cultural diplomacy.

Soft Power The cultural programming of the Los Angeles and London Olympics provide opportunities for exercises in soft power cultural diplomacy through the opening ceremonies and Shakespearean programming. Through song, dance, dialogue, and imagery the host city demonstrates its history and traditions. In order for the opening ceremonies to be internationally attractive, the demonstrated culture and values must be universal in nature.The hegemony of western culture and values supports attraction to the opening ceremonies. In order to effectively address the issues surrounding the opening

ceremonies and Shakespearean programming an exploration of Nye’s discussion of soft power is imperative for a comprehensive examination. By reviewing the historical underpinning of Nye’s works, analyzing his current perspectives, and critiques provide the necessary standpoint to explore the cultural programming of the London and Los

Angeles Olympics. Nye’s exploration as to how to attract others to affect change lends itself to the spectacular nature of the opening ceremonies and the relationships building elements of the Arts Festivals. This investigations relies heavily on the resources of soft power which are culture, values, and policies and are explicit in Nye’s concept. By using soft power as a conceptual framework for this investigation, I can review the resources of culture and values for an in-depth examination of the cultural programming being exercises in soft power or cultural diplomacy.

Origins of Soft Power

The term soft power was coined by Joseph S. Nye in the early 1990’s as a response to the perceived declining power of the United States of America. Declinist authors liked Paul

Kennedy and David Caleo argued that US polices during the Cold War had reached a point of overstretch and the cost would start to undermine US power. The theory of overstretch reviews how a great power spends more on defense than in previous generations and finds the world is still an unsecure environment. Overstretch would be responsible for weakening of the US position in the international system, combined with upheavals in foreign policies and state expenditures abroad (Nye, 1990a, p. 47; Zahran

&Ramos, 2010). During this era, there was lack of discussion on other sources of power.

By introducing the term soft power, Nye addresses this lack in the field.

Nye criticizes the idea of overstretch in his book Bound to Lead and continues to develop the term soft power in many other books and publications like The Paradox of the American Power, and Soft Power: A Means to Success in World Politics. “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” ( Nye, 2008, p.94). Today, Nye’s explanation of soft power seems clear, but his understanding of the concept stems from a variety of sources. He reviewed realist thinker E.H. Carr’s argument that there are three forms of international power which include military, economic and ideas. The first two, also expressed as coercion and inducement, fall under the heading of ‘hard power’, while the third belongs to ‘soft power’ or ‘the power of attraction ( Nye, 2008, p.55). As far as Carr’s discussion of ideas as a source of power and Nye’s discussion of the power of attraction, the spectacular nature of the opening ceremonies functions as vehicle for soft power through its artistic programming.

Nye also acknowledged the similarity between his and Susan Strange’s works. Strange explored the term structural power, which is the power to shape and determine structures of the global political economy. The difference between the two arguments is that Nye’s tem encompasses all elements of international politics and is associated with neo-realist theories of Kenneth Waltz (J. Nye, 1990a). This is similar to Nye’s idea of using co- optive power to influence. This indirect way of getting what you want can also be referred to as the second face of power. Nye drew from the Peter Bachrach and Morton

Baratz’s concept of the second face of power as the foundation for his soft power framework (Goldsmith & Horiuchi, 2012; J. Nye, 2004). This refers to “the practice of

limiting the scope of actual decisionmaking to ‘safe’ issues by manipulating the dominant community values, myths, and political institutions and procedures. To pass over this is to neglect one whole ‘face’ of power (Goldsmith & Horiuchi, 2012, pp. 557-558).

Dominant values relates explicitly to Robert Cox’s discussion of Antonio Gramsci’s work. Nye built on Robert Cox’s idea that a critical feature for a dominant country is the ability to obtain a broad measure of consent on general principles that ensure the supremacy of the leading state and dominant social classes and at the same time offer some prospect of satisfaction to the less powerful. If a state can make its power legitimate in the eyes of others, it will encounter less resistance to its wishes (J. Nye, 1990a). The previous works serve as the foundation for Nye’s concept of soft power. The concept became popular because it he treats it as a platform for action, arguing that actors have, can, and should continue to find ways to effectively develop and use this power resource.

In this way Nye conceives of soft power in much the same way as many do hard power: as a tangible tool that can be amassed and deployed through concerted effort” (Mattern,

2005, p. 588). The Olympic cultural programming is an effective tool for soft power.

Nye’s writings do not cast soft power as a theory. According to Layne (2010), soft power needs to be subjected to empirical testing to determine the validity of its claims and the robustness of its causal logic. Soft power is an analytical concept, not a theory, that fits within realists, liberal or constructivist perspectives. (J. Nye, 2010, p. 219). When Nye began to write his first book he noted the absence of intangible resources when comparing military and economic power resources, this led him to conceptualize the idea of soft power(J. Nye, 2010). Although other thinkers like Foucault, Bourdieu have articulated versions of ‘soft’ power. Nye focuses on the dictionary usage in order to be

accessible to policy makers. The fact that Nye wanted to address both theorists and policymakers could account for the limitations in his work.(Mattern, 2005; J. Nye, 2010)

. I employ soft power as a concept within this inquiry because I hope my work appeals to both theorist and policy makers as a platform for action. I also seek to apply the term and its resources to the cultural programming of the Olympics, not revise them.

Early Works

In the 1990’s Nye introduced and explored soft power in Bound to Lead. His first works provided the foundation for future analysis and discussion of this term. By 1989,

Americans were questioning the United States’ economic and military strength in comparison to Soviet Union. Nye wrote Bound to Lead in response to these questions and fears by introducing the term soft power. Nye believed “proof of power lies not in resources but in the ability to change the behavior of states. Thus, the critical question for the United States is not whether it will start the next century as the superpower with the largest supply of re-sources, but to what extent it will be able to control the political environment and get other countries to do what it wants”(J. Nye, 1990b, pp. 153-171).

The idea of getting others to do what you want is a recurring element of soft power. Nye will later relate that to attraction. Using Nye’s discussion of soft power reflects the Cold

War context that is particularly relevant to the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics. The Los

Angeles Olympics followed the Moscow Olympics, which set the stage for comparison.

The ability to exert hard power has many limitations. There was a time when the survival was at stake and hard power was essential. Physical survival is no longer the pressing issue and the use of direct force for economic gain is generally too costly and dangerous

for modern powers (J. Nye, 1990b). Instruments such as communications, organizational and institutional skills, and manipulation of interdependence have become important (J.

Nye, 1990b). The artistic program and the arts festivals are superb instruments for national and international communication. There are at least five trends that have contributed to this diffusion of power: economic interdependence, transnational actors, nationalism in weak states, the spread of tech-nology, and changing political issues.

First, governments can intervene in economic markets. But if this intervention is

done aggressively, they will incur enormous costs in their own economic growth

and risk unintended effects. Transnational investment creates new interests. For

instance, the diffusion of power to private transnational actors and complicates of

national interests and world politics. Increased communication, modernization,

and urbanization in developing countries have also diffused power from

government to private actors (J. Nye, 1990b).

The Olympics also represent a similar diffusion of power from government to private actors with regard to sponsorships and logistical needs of the Games.

Nye began the discussion of soft power primarily as a strategy for the United States to maintain power. Through mega-events like the Olympics other countries have used soft power not only to maintain power, but also to gain it. He explored the relationship between command and co-optive power and the hard and soft resources attributed to both. Command power can rest on inducements (“carrots”) or threats (“sticks”) trying to change what others do. While, getting others to want what you want-might be called indirect or co-optive power behavior (J. Nye, 1990a). Command power can rest on

coercion or inducement. Co-optive power is the ability of a country to structure a situation so that other countries develop preferences or define their interests in ways consistent with its own. This power tends to arise from such resources as cultural and ideological attraction as well as rules and institutions of international regimes (J. Nye,

1990b). Although there are some command power elements like security used in the administration of the Olympics, there is an emphasis on co-optive power through attraction. This is Nye’s first discussion of soft power; he discusses it in relation to resources used for co-optive power. Soft power resources tend to be associated with co- optive power behaviors like agenda-setting and attraction. Whereas hard power resources are usually associated such as coercion and inducement are associated with command power. Soft power is also related to intangible resources like culture, ideologies, and institutions that support the continuum of behaviors between command and to co-optive power(J. Nye, 1990a). Culture, ideology, and institutions exemplify resources that the

Olympics adopt to communicate. In Soft Power: the means to success in world politics,

Nye also develops his discussion on command and co-optive power by linking them to behaviors. He explicitly explained the importance soft power in relation to hard power,”… it is just as important to set the agenda in world politics and attract others as it is to force them to change through the threat or use of military or economic weapons.

This aspect of power—getting others to want what you want—I call soft power. It co‐ opts people rather than coerces them”(J. Nye, 2002, pp. 8-9; Nye Jr, 2014). Later he demonstrates that military, economic, and soft power have different behaviors, currencies, and government policies. This is useful because it operationalizes soft power and allows readers to distinguish different elements within it.

Behaviors Primary Currencies Government Policies Military Power Coercion Threats Coercive Diplomacy Deterrence Force War Protection Alliance Economic Power Inducement Payment Aid Coercion Sanctions Bribes Sanctions Soft Power Attraction Values Public Diplomacy Agenda Setting Culture Bilateral and Policies Multilateral Institutions Diplomacy Table 1. Paradox of Power

In contrast, other scholars see Nye’s currencies of soft power as structural or underlying

factors, constituting a filter through which current foreign policies of a country are

perceived, rather than factors directly affecting the decisions of foreign policy makers.

Soft power manifests itself in views held by country B’s mass public about country A’s

foreign policy”(Goldsmith & Horiuchi, 2012, p. 556). This perspective does not account

for the changes that occur due to perception. For instance, the State Department

implemented the Jazz Ambassador program to present American like freedom

attractively. If this logic is true than hard power is also a filter through which the foreign

policies are of country are perceived. Once again this is the discussion that power must be

tangible. For my investigation, attraction can occur through the staging of an appealing

opening ceremonies,that share the universal culture and values.

Although Bound to Lead functions as an analysis of American foreign policy, it does

highlight that soft power which is the ability to shape what others want, can rest in the

attractiveness of one’s culture and ideology or the ability to manipulate the political

agenda(J. Nye, 1990a). The changing nature of international politics has also made intangible form soft power more important. National cohesion, universalistic culture, and international institutions are taking on additional significance. Power is passing from the

"capital-rich" to the "information-rich"(J. Nye, 1990b) . Nye’s discussion of attraction and universalistic culture represent key aspects of the cultural programming of the

Olympics. In order for the artistic program to be internationally attractive, it has to appeal to a diverse audience. This mass appeal highlights the universalistic nature of the portrayed culture.

The mass appeal of a nation’s culture or ideology relies on channels of communications to share information to affect preferences. For instance, the openness of the American culture to various ethnicities and the American values of democracy and human rights can exert international influence in the form of an expensive of soft power resource (J.

Nye, 1990b). Other nations identify what element of culture they would like to display through the cultural programming of the Olympics that also have mass appeal in order to gain influence through attraction. In Nye’s early works it is unclear how this idea transforms from co-optive power behaviors to soft power resources to being only soft power.

It would be useful to include more discussion on the universal nature of culture and values because it is unclear what qualifies specific culture and values as universal. For instance, he begins discussing of hegemony by stating that the term “is applied to situations when one state appears to have considerably more power than others”(J. Nye,

1990a, p. 38). His analysis focuses on Robert Cox and Robert Keohane’s discussion of the military and economic hegemony by highlighting the lack of general hegemony

between the two entities(J. Nye, 1990a). Yet, Nye’s exploration of hegemony extends to soft power resources of culture or values in a western context. “In short, the universality of a country's culture and its ability to establish a set of favorable rules and institutions that govern areas of international activity are critical sources of power. The values of democracy, personal freedom, upward mobility, and openness that are often expressed in

American popular culture, higher education, and foreign policy contribute to American power in many areas”(J. Nye, 2002, pp. 10-11). Lock builds on this perspective with discussion of where power should be attributed. Should power be attributed to the individual who seeks to attract another by engaging in a certain forms of behavior or should they instead attribute power to the social structure that dictate what it means to be attractive?(Lock, 2010, p. 35) On one hand analysts of power like Nye have argued that the USA can exercise power more effectively within international politics if it promotes certain values and abides by certain norms, these acts of agency can make the USA more attractive and more powerful. On the other hand, neoconservatives have railed against such arguments, contending instead that such a policy merely results in the submission of the USA to international norms (Lock, 2010, pp. 35-36). This same contention is apparent within the cultural programming of the Olympics. The focus of Bound to Lead was to discuss strategies the United States could use, not necessarily the theoretical development of the term soft power. The concept is still applicable within my inquiry because it provides relevant examples of the resources that will be useful for future analysis.

In order to strengthen soft power, Nye highlights universality and favorability as key elements. Nations that gain soft power include dominant culture and ideas that are closer

to prevailing global norms , those with the most access to multiple channels of communication and thus more influence over how issues are framed, those whose credibility is enhanced by their domestic and international performance (Lock, 2010). In this case, soft power is not about the changing of values held by others so that they are more similar to one’s own, but instead about changing the policies of others where broad cultural and political values are already shared (Lock, 2010).

Nye also built on the idea of using soft power to shape the preferences of others associated with intangible resources such as an attractive culture, ideology, and institutions. “If I can get you to want to do what I want, then I do not have to force you to do what you do not want to do” (J. Nye, 2002, p. 9). Soft power is not just influence and persuasion; it’s about attraction. Bially Mattern asserted that attraction is sociolinguistically constructed through representational force1, soft power should not be understood in juxtaposition to hard power but as a continuation of it. This is unique when compared to their perspectives on soft power that consider it the opposite of hard power

(Mattern, 2005). One can be influenced by threats or rewards. Soft power is also more than persuasion or the ability to move people by argument. It is the ability to entice and attract. And attraction often leads to acquiescence or imitation (J. Nye, 2002). The idea of imitation is essential when discussing the artistic program. The Moscow Opening

Ceremonies set the spectacular standard through the use of large props and large cast.

1 “Representational force is a form of power that operates through the structure of a speaker’s narrative representation of ‘reality’ when it is organized in such a way that it threatens the audience with unthinkable harm unless it submits, in word and in deed, to the terms of the speaker’s viewpoint” (Mattern, 2005, p. 586).

Other host cities not only imitated the spectacular nature, but also attempted to be better.

The essence of Nye’s explanation of soft power is attraction. If there is no attraction, there will be no influence or persuasion. Soft power arises through values which are expressed in culture, national policies, and in the way Americans handle themselves internationally(J. Nye, 2002, p. 9). By this time, Nye’s discussion of soft power has developed from being co-optive power with soft power resources to no mention of co- optive power and an emphasis on the expression of values. His focus on international perception is relevant to the international nature of the artistic program and arts festival.

Relationship Between Hard and Soft Power

The complexity of soft power lies in its relationship to hard power because some nations can use soft power to persuade others because the perception of strength ( hard power).

Nye addressed whether hard and soft power can reinforce each other. “Of course, hard and soft power are related and can reinforce each other. Both are aspects of the ability to achieve our purposes by affecting the behavior of others. Sometimes the same power resources can affect the entire spectrum of behavior from coercion to attraction” (J. Nye,

2002, p. 10). The Olympic Games are indicative of the relationships between hard and soft power. The Los Angeles 1984 Olympics were indicative of this relationship because the Cold War Context. Although there is relationship between hard power and soft power, there are instances when they don’t influence each other. For example, soft power is not simply the reflection of hard power. The attractiveness of causes such as economic aid or peacekeeping that are national interests of countries like Canada represent more political authority than their military and economics (J. Nye, 2002).

In“Asia’s First Globalizer” Nye focused mainly on the soft power possibilities of Japan

through information. This article does hint at the relationship between hard and soft power because hard power can supplement soft power.(J. Nye, 2000). Yet, the implementation or combination of soft and hard power depends on context. “Soft power maybe less relevant than hard power in preventing attack, policing borders, and protecting allies. But soft power is particularly relevant to the realization of milieu goals, like shaping an environment conducive to democracy “ (J. Nye, 2004, p. 17). The Los

Angeles and London opening ceremonies shape the atmosphere of the Games due to placement in the beginning the Games. Soft power is preferable to hard power for a variety of reasons.

“…it is relatively cheap … appeal to individuals and collective nonstate actors ….

soft power is available to any actor that can render itself attractive to another..it is

likely to appeal to ethically concerned people….as soft power rests on attraction it

seems to promise an ethically superior method of political interaction. (Mattern,

2005, p. 590)

The opening ceremonies and arts festival are preferred methods of political interaction because they can be attractive and collaborative in nature. These cultural experiences can be attractive to national and international audiences.

Although Nye examined soft power in depth in Powers to Lead, in “Recovering

American Leadership” he provided a more global perspective on power. The Olympics embody this complex global perspective because of multinational participation.

Specifically, he addressed that the description of the world as unipolar or multipolar was incorrect. It is an oversimplification of the sitaution because no one form of power is

decisive. Unipolarity is misleading because it exaggerates the degree to which the United

States is able to get the results it wants in some dimensions of world politics, while multipolarity is misleading because it implies several roughly equal counties”(Joseph

Nye, 2008, p. 58). Context reflects a similar complexity within the Olympics. For instance, the Olympic power dynamics during the Cold War were extremely different than London 2012. The intense competition between the United States and the Soviet

Union in the 1980s was not present in London. Power is distributed among countries in a pattern that resembles three-dimensional chess game, with the top board, as military power is largely unipolar. But on the middle board, economic power among states is multipolar. For instance, the United States, Europe and Japan represent a majority of world economic output. The bottom chessboard is the realm of transnational relations that involve actors crossing borders outside of government control and power is so widely dispersed it makes no sense to speak of unipolarity, multipolarity or hegemony(Joseph

Nye, 2008, p. 58). The reach of multinational corporations like Coco Cola, Visa,

McDonalds, and Samsung during the London Olympics highlight exercises in soft power that is outside of complete government control. By addressing the distribution of power,

Nye is able to make a case for the use of soft power because the world of politics is so complex. Hard power used solely would not be effective because of the variety in polarity from the top board to the bottom. The relationship between hard and soft power is essential, how one improves soft power needs to be explored.

Lock critiqued soft power as unstrategic because of its multiple actors. “A strategic conception of power forces us to appreciate the intersubjective- rather than the

subjective-nature of social structures such as norms and values. It encourages us to consider how the practices of multiple actors serve to constitute certain structures, and not merely how structures benefit certain actors”(Lock, 2010, p. 47). The Los Angeles and London opening ceremonies and arts festivals represent the intersubjective possibilities of soft power. For instance, the host city manages the opening ceremony and can use international consultants to produce the cultural programming. Although soft power is the function of an attraction constructed through a coercive process of communicative exchange it can hardly be said that soft power avoids relentless competition among actors. On the contrary, it depends precisely upon a competition among actors over the terms of the ‘reality’ of attractiveness”(Mattern, 2005, p. 610). In order to exercise soft power, international audiences must agree on the terms of attractiveness of the cultural programming. Technology is essential to the dispersal of the dominant culture and having access to communication channels. Technology can also alter one’s international and domestic performance. But it is only since information technology has made it so cheap and easy to communicate with others around the world that using soft power has become feasible as part of a conscious, sustained grand strategy for all kinds of actors (Mattern, 2005, p. 589). Access to technology, like television or the internet, increases the possible impact of soft power. The Queen of England sky diving during the London opening ceremonies televised around the world allowed all audiences to recognize an iconic British cultural figure presented in a comical manner.

Thus, making British culture more accessible. “Because of its leading edge in the information revolution and its past investment in traditional power resources, the United

States will likely remain the world’s single most powerful country in military, economic

and soft-power terms well into the twenty-first century” (Joseph Nye, 2008, p. 59).

Although the United States may lead in the information revolution, technology is inexpensive which grants more equitable access and exposure to soft power resources.

Soft Power Resources

This inquiry focuses on Nye’s discussion of influence through attraction using culture, values, and policies as resources of soft power. The cultural programming of the

Olympics embody each of these resources through artistic and educational endeavors.

Culture as a resource of soft power serves as the foundation for this dissertation because the history and traditions of a host city are demonstrated during cultural programming like the Opening Ceremonies. Culture is a soft power resource in places where it is attractive to others.

Culture is described as a set of values and practices that create meaning for a

society. If a country’s culture that includes universal value and policies to

promote values and interests that others share, it increases the probability of

obtaining its desire outcomes because of the relationships of attraction. In

contrast, narrow values and parochial cultures are less likely to produce soft

power(J. Nye, 2004).

Although there is a large reach of American culture, it is not always done by the government and is not always well-received. Ambivalence sets limits on popular culture as a source of American soft power, and marketing by American corporations can create both attraction and resistance. Skeptics object to using the term “soft power” in

international politics because governments are not in full control of the attraction because soft power can be developed in firms, universities, foundations, churches, and other nongovernmental groups. This can reinforce or be at odds with official foreign policy goals

(J. Nye, 2004). The cultural programming of the OlympicsAs historian Walter LaFeber puts it, transnational corporations “not only change buying habits in a society, but modify the composition of the society itself (J. Nye, 2002). McDonalds and Coca Cola are prime examples of soft power in action both are multinational companies that represent

American values that maybe at odds with other values. Efforts to balance the scene by supporting exports of American high culture—libraries and art exhibits—are at best a useful palliative. Culture high and low, helps produce soft power in an information age, but government actions also matter—not only through programs such as the Voice of

America and Fulbright scholarships but, even more important through policies(J. Nye,

2002). The term high arts is problematic because such distinctions can be arbitrary when both can be used at the same time. The intentional use of the culture should be reviewed, not the aspect of culture. Many aspects of soft power are more a by‐product of

American society than of deliberate government actions, and they may increase or decrease government power. The background attraction (and repulsion) of American popular culture in different regions and among different groups may make it easier or more difficult for American officials to promote their policies (J. Nye, 2002).To the extent that official policies at home and abroad are consistent with democracy, human rights, openness, and respect for the opinions of others, the United States will benefit from the trends of this global information age (J. Nye, 2002).Nye sums up his perspective on soft power that other NGO’s exercise.

“The soft power that is becoming more important in the information age is in part

a social and economic by‐product rather than solely a result of official

government action. NGOs with soft power of their own can complicate and

obstruct government efforts to obtain the outcomes it wants, and purveyors of

popular culture sometimes hinder government agents in achieving their

objectives”(J. Nye, 2002, p. 73).

He developed his discussion on culture by identifying the difference between high culture and popular culture and their functions within soft power. He likens high culture to explicit foreign policy initiatives, while popular culture can engage or undermine policy initiatives. High culture which is literature, art, and education which appeals to the elites; while popular culture which focuses on mass entertainment (J. Nye, 2004) . These distinctions are difficult to maintain especially with the access to technology and the ability for some culture to cross over from high culture to mass entertainment(J. Nye,

2004). High cultural contacts often produced soft power for the US during the Cold War.

Scores of non-governmental institutions such as theatres, museums, and opera companies performed in the Soviet Union. One Soviet musician observed that they had been trained to believe in the decadent West, yet year after year great symphony orchestras came from

Boston, Philadelphia, New York, Cleveland, and San Francisco (J. Nye, 2004). There is a difference in control of message and impact between high and popular culture. It is easier to trace specific political effects of high cultural contacts than to demonstrate the political importance of popular culture…commercial interests in a capitalists economy seek broad markets that often result in cultural lowest common denominators (J. Nye, 2004).

Although high culture maybe easier to control, popular culture can have similar attractive forces.

Popular entertainment contains subliminal images and messages about individualism, consumer choice, freedom and other values that have important political effects that are not just portrayals of sex, violence, and materialism (J. Nye, 2004). Yet, the U.S government has difficulty exercising soft power because of the many forms and channels that American culture is shared. This is good and bad because American culture is always shared but the US has no control over the message. The reach of American culture is apparent. German journalist Josef Joffe, e xplains America's soft power “looms even larger than its economic and military assets. U.S. culture, low‐brow or high, radiates outward with an intensity last seen in the days of the Roman Empire—but with a novel twist. Rome's and Soviet Russia's cultural sway stopped exactly at their military borders.

America's soft power, though, rules over an empire on which the sun never sets” (as cited in Nye, 2002, p.71) “Or as a Norwegian observed, ‘American culture is becoming everyone's second culture. It doesn't necessarily supplant local traditions, but it does activate a certain cultural bilingualism.’ And like many second languages, it is spoken with imperfections and different meanings. The wonder, however, is that it is spoken at all” (as cited in Nye, 2002, p.71).

More discussion on the fluidity of high and popular culture is essential. “Some analysts treat soft power simply as popular cultural power. They make the mistake of equating soft power behavior with the cultural resources that sometimes help produce it. They confuse the cultural resources with the behavior of attraction” (J. Nye, 2004, p. 11).

Although a person may like Beyonce, this preference won’t necessarily attract people to

agree with US foreign policies. Ferguson (2003) explains soft power is just too soft. This holds true throughout history. In the 19th century Great Britain used soft power to project its culture through the sermons of missionaries and commentaries in Anglophone newspapers. The most Anglicized parts of the indigenous populations of the British

Empire is where the nationalist movements sprang up (Ferguson, 2003). Attraction is not always strong enough to prevent dissent.

Sport is also an element of culture which communicates values as well. This is especially relevant in discussion of the Olympics because the Games highlight culture through sports competitions. “An America is created that is neither military hegemon nor corporate leviathan-a looser place, less rigid and more free, where anyone who works hard shooting a ball or handling a puck can become famous and (yes) rich (J. Nye, 2004, p. 47). Sport lends itself to soft power because messages can easily be communicated without relying solely on language. The Olympics exemplify how the values sports communicate. Each nation presents narratives through the commentary and playing of the

Games. For instance, Gabbie Douglas of the United States gymnastics team represented a tale of American diversity and progress as she became the only African American to win gold medals in the both the individual all around and team competitions. Nye does not discuss that most athletes that become rich or famous are usually winners. Winning teams can more easily share values and communicate ideas because they receive more positive media attention.

Culture transmission can occur through other means like personal contact, visits, and exchanges, which are essential elements of the Olympic Arts Festivals. “The ideas and values that America exports in the minds of more than half a million foreign students

who study every year in American universities and then return to their homes countries, or in the minds of Asian entrepreneurs who return home after succeeding in Silicon

Valley, tend to reach elites with power” (J. Nye, 2004, p. 13). Educational exchanges were essential element of soft power during the Cold War“….Many [Soviet] scientists became leading proponents of human rights and liberalization inside the Soviet Union. In the 1950’s the Ford Foundation, the Council of Learned Societies, and the Social Science

Research Council worked with eventually 1010 American colleges and universities in student and faculty exchanges (J. Nye, 2004). International students return home with a greater appreciation of American values and institutions. “...Oleg Kalugin, who became a high official in the KGB, said looking back from the vantage point of 1997, “Exchanges were the Trojan Horse for the Soviet Union. They played a tremendous role in the erosion of the Soviet system…they kept infecting more and more people over the years”(J. Nye,

2004). “The attraction and soft power that grew out of cultural contacts among elites made important contributions to American policy objectives.”(J. Nye, 2004, p. 46) Nye’s exploration of exchanges is outwardly focused by discussing what happens to international students whose perceptions of the United States are positively impacted. He does not review if American perceptions are changed to be more sympathetic of their international hosts after a visit.

Other soft power resources are political values. Political values can be used as soft power when they are lived up to at home and abroad(J. Nye, 2004). “Racial segregation in the

1950s undercut American soft power in Africa, and today the practice of capital punishment and weak gun control laws undercut American soft power in Europe” (J.

Nye, 2004, p. 13). The domestic policy of segregation undermined the American ideal of

freedom abroad. Weak gun control and capital punishment are examples differences values. Lastly, foreign policies are resources when they are seen as legitimate and having moral authority (J. Nye, 2004) “Domestic or foreign policies that appear to be hypocritical, arrogant, indifferent to the opinions of others, or based on a narrow approach to national interest can undermine soft power”(J. Nye, 2004, p. 14). The opening ceremonies and arts festival portray political values as history and future pursuits. For instance, during the Atlanta Olympics the focus on Civil Rights and

Woman’s movements highlight explicit political values. During the Sochi Olympics artistic program, there was a limited representation of the Cold War. The lack of representation of this part of Russian history, demonstrates that the organizing committee did not want focus on this controversial part of their history on an international stage.

When he first articulated the idea of soft power, Nye narrowed its scope and stressed repeatedly that soft power is about the influence of ideas and culture and not about dangling carrots and sticks in front of others states to affect their behavior. Over time it has expanded. Nye, policymakers, and foreign policy analysts have come to use the term soft power to encompass a wide array of instruments including: multilateral diplomacy, foreign aid, development assistance, the provision of international public goods, the exportation of democracy, and nation building (as cited in Layne, 2010).

Globalization

Over time, globalization has impacted how soft power is exercised. Due to a variety of factors like Hollywood, American culture has been projected and accepted internationally. Globalization does not equal Americanization but there are several

characteristics that make the US the center of globalization (J. Nye, 2004). As a melting pot of immigrants, the United States is a laboratory for cultural experimentation, where traditions are recombined and exported. It functions as place to test if a film or song or game will attract large and diverse audience (J. Nye, 2004). Nye contradicts himself by stating “…..American culture is deconstructed and recontextualized into the everyday experiences of the people. American popular culture is not the monopoly of Americans: it is a medium through which people around the world constantly reorganize their individual and collective identities” (J. Nye, 2004, p. 41) If his original point is that

America is the standard that people use in their lives around the world; why isn’t

Americanization and globalization synonymous. The discussion of globalization as

Americanization is something that needs further exploration. If American culture is a standard that other cultures use how can it truly be used effectively to impact people who are already exposed to American culture?

Smart Power Nye’s discussion of soft power has developed into a discussion of smart power that reflects the nature of the Olympics. Scholars agree that soft power is a term that includes everything, but the kitchen sink. In order to address the development of the concept Nye created smart power. Nye played a major role in advancing smart power, which can be dubbed as soft power 2.0 which has superseded soft power in the foreign policy lexicon

(Layne, 2010). Figuring out how to combine the resources of both hard and soft power into smart-power strategies requires contextual intelligence is the intuitive diagnostic skill that helps policymakers align tactics with objectives (J. S. Nye, Jr., 2009). “Smart power" is a term to counter the misperception that soft power alone can produce effective foreign

policy.(J. S. Nye, Jr., 2009, p. 160). The strategic nature of the bidding process, security and implementation of the Olympics reflect smart power strategies by employing contextual intelligence. Many official instruments of soft power--public diplomacy, broadcasting, exchange programs, development assistance, disaster relief, military-to- military contacts--are scattered across the U.S. government. There is no overarching policy that even tries to integrate them with hard power into a comprehensive national security strategy” (J. S. Nye, Jr., 2009, p. 161). By complementing its military and economic might with greater investments in its soft power, the United States can rebuild the framework it needs to tackle tough global challenges. That would be true smart power” (J. S. Nye, Jr., 2009, p. 163). The cultural programming of the Olympics functions as a strategic exercise of soft power that can work in conjunction with hard power.

Soft Power to Public Diplomacy The implementation of soft power can manifest diplomacy. The Olympics provide opportunities for soft power through the cultural programming. While diplomacy manifests through the arts festival and cultural exchanges. Nye explicitly relates public diplomacy and soft power. “[P]ublic diplomacy is an instrument that governments use to mobilize [soft power] resources to communicate with and attract the publics of other countries, rather than merely their governments” (as cited in (Scott-Smith, 2010, pp. 166-

167). This is not the only time Nye connected soft power and diplomacy. He “argues that public diplomacy is an important tool in the arsenal of soft power, and that, in a certain sense, soft power can only be achieved through public diplomacy” (as cited in Servaes,

2012, p. 643). Edmund Guillion coined the term public diplomacy in 1965, in which the

influence of public attitudes on the formation and execution of foreign policies…through the cultivation by governments of public opinion in other countries; the interaction of private groups and interests in one country with another; the reporting of foreign affairs and its impact on policy; communication between those whose job is communication, as diplomats and foreign correspondents; and the process of intercultural communications

(Servaes, 2012, p. 643). Intercultural communications relate directly to my investigation of the cultural programming of the Olympics because artists, organizations and spectators interact during Arts Festivals.

Nye was not the only scholar that highlighted the relationship between soft power and public diplomacy. Nancy Snow and Philip Taylor also linked the concepts of soft power and public diplomacy in the “Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy”. They built on the discussion by identifying the two approaches to public diplomacy that are currently in tension with each other. The two schools of thought are described by Signitzer and

Coombs:

[one school] hold that the purpose of public diplomacy is to exert an influence on

attitudes of foreign audiences using persuasion and propaganda . . . Objectivity and

truth are considered important tools of persuasion but not extolled as virtues in

themselves . . . The [other] school argues that information and cultural programs must

bypass current foreign policy goals to concentrate on the highest long range national

objectives. The goal is to create a climate of mutual understanding . . . Truth and

veracity are considered essential, much more than a mere persuasion tactic.7(Snow &

Taylor, 2009, p. 9)

The Olympic opening ceremonies embody the first school of thought. The artistic program intends to persuade national and international audiences through spectacular displays of dance, song, and theatre. While the arts festivals reflect the second school of thought because they create a climate of mutual understanding through international arts exhibitions and performances. These experiences allow individuals from different nations to present, explore and discuss artistic works. Snow and Taylor are not the only thinkers who acknowledge the two schools of thought. The initial concept of public diplomacy refers to state-driven activities such as scholarly exchanges, cultural events, and state- supported broadcasting to foreign audiences (Servaes, 2012, pp. 643-644). It has become a more fluid concept in the context of the new media and Internet environment… public diplomacy is targeted at the foreign public that bear directly on another government’s foreign policy decisions, performed by both government and private individuals and groups, through influencing directly and indirectly… (Servaes, 2012, pp. 643-644).

In order to understand how cultural diplomacy is an element of soft power, it is necessary to recognize the different categories of diplomacy. John Brown explored the different components of diplomacy. Government to government diplomacy is the traditional form of diplomacy. “Traditional diplomacy is government-to-government relations (G2G) and if one were to picture it, it would be a photo op of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice sitting across the table from the foreign affairs minister in another nation state” (Snow &

Taylor, 2009, p. 6). This traditional diplomacy is not obsolete because when it comes to making policy change diplomats still make an impact. The Olympics in general do acknowledge the important political figure of the host nation or city that is attending the

ceremonies, but the amount of government intervention varies by Games. Next, government to public diplomacy highlighted the importance of the global public’s perspective unlike the government-to-government diplomacy. “Traditional public diplomacy has been about governments talking to global publics (G2P), and includes those efforts to inform, influence, and engage those publics in support of national objectives and foreign policies” (Snow & Taylor, 2009, p. 6). The ability to inform and engage international audiences or publics is inherent in the opening ceremonies. Yet, the opening ceremony does not fully fit the G2P tradition because the local government may does not always instruct, fund, or subsidize the production. Last, people to people (P2P) diplomacy emphasizes the use of entities other than government. “More recently, public diplomacy involves the way in which both government and private individuals and groups influence directly and indirectly those public attitudes and opinions that bear directly on another government’s foreign policy decisions (P2P)” (Snow & Taylor, 2009, p. 6). The rise of P2P diplomacy can be linked to technology and is reflected in the artists exchanges that are prevalent in cultural diplomacy. “One development is the rise in user- friendly communications technologies that have increased public participation in talking about foreign affairs and the subsequent involvement of public opinion in foreign policy making. Another development is the increase in people-to-people exchanges, both virtual and personal, across national borders”(Snow & Taylor, 2009, p. 6). People to people exchanges can occur during the Olympic arts festivals. The World of Shakespeare

Festival during the London 2012 Olympics highlighted opportunities for people to exchange information and values in person and virtually during conferences and

educational activities. The opening and closing ceremonies of the Olympics function more like government to people diplomacy because of the reach to the global publics.

The United State government emphasized the relationship between public diplomacy and cultural diplomacy. “Cultural diplomacy, which has been defined as ‘the exchange of ideas, information, art, and other aspects of culture among nations and their peoples in

order to foster mutual understanding,’ is the linchpin of public diplomacy; for it is in cultural activities that a nation’s idea of itself is best represented(Diplomacy, 2005, p.

4).The utility of both schools of thought with regard to public diplomacy is essential for my inquiry. The ability to review the Olympic arts festivals, opening and closing ceremonies through each lens is essential. Brown explained the utility as those who view public diplomacy as a necessary evil, a mere ancillary tactic that supports conventional public diplomacy and traditional diplomacy efforts; and those who view public diplomacy as a context or milieu for how nations interact with each other, from public affairs officers in the field to the citizen diplomat and student exchange at the grassroots

(J. Brown, 2009). The opening and closing ceremonies contain elements of public diplomacy, while the international exchanges and collaboration during the Olympic arts festivals demonstrate cultural diplomacy through relationship building. By reviewing outcomes through the lens of public diplomacy, I can then apply them to cultural diplomacy.

As Seong-Hun Yun concluded in one of the more recent theoretical studies in public diplomacy and based on extensive quantitative research: Relationships with publics

provide the best indicator for the effects of excellence in public relations rather than reputation or image . . . The concept of relationship is associated with publics firsthand experience with the organization or foreign government. In contrast, the concepts of image and reputation are less specific and related to masses with second-hand experience.

Thus, a focus of future research should be on the relationships of governments with specific and strategic foreign publics such as congressmen, journalists, and opinion leaders.22 (Snow & Taylor, 2009, p. 9)

Although cultural diplomacy is an element of public diplomacy, Brown discussed the tension between the entities and the utility of cultural diplomacy through a public diplomacy lens. Brown defined arts diplomacy as “The U.S. government’s neglect of (as

I call it) arts diplomacy—which can be defined as the use of high art (music, literature, painting) as an instrument of diplomacy—reflects certain long-term traits of the United

States: puritanical, democratic, without a national culture” (J. Brown, 2009, p. 57). His definition is relevant because it does not use the term cultural diplomacy. The difference between cultural and arts diplomacy is that cultural diplomacy includes popular culture, while arts diplomacy has an emphasis on high art. Both high and popular culture are elements of the cultural programming of the Olympics. For instance, Lionel Ritchie performed during the closing ceremony of the Los Angeles 1984 Olympics and Although

Brown makes this distinction when discussing public diplomacy, the discussion of cultural diplomacy does not hint to any distinction. Brown’s distinction is essential for my framework because he looks at arts policy through a public diplomacy lens; thus, highlighting the relationship between the two entities. The lack of discussion of arts

diplomacy is also explored when Brown argued for hard and other soft power initiatives.

“Some foreign-policy professionals would argue that arts diplomacy should not be on our government’s radar screen because it is not, in the scheme of things, a priority. Far more significant, they would say, is maintaining a country’s hard power while supporting

“serious” soft power programs like international broadcasting” (J. Brown, 2009, p. 58).

By reviewing Brown’s perspective on hard and serious soft power programs emphasizes the complex layers of the concept. Unfortunately, there is no clear distinction between serious and not serious soft power. In analyzing, the outcomes of the cultural programming, I hope to identify cultural outcomes that could validate cultural diplomacy.

This view is relevant to my theoretical framework because it identifies the limits of arts policy which can function as a proxy for elements of cultural diplomacy. The purpose of cultural diplomacy highlights possible cultural outcomes. “Cultural diplomacy is a means by which we may engage and influence that debate”(Diplomacy, 2005). There is one essential element that distinguishes it from public diplomacy: the experience must also be mutually beneficial taking every opportunity to receive as well as to give(Diplomacy,

2005; Frankel, 1969a). This same language can be found in the Information and

Educational Exchange Act of 1948, the founding legislation for cultural diplomacy in the

United States (Diplomacy, 2005, pp. 7-8). By identifying the mutually beneficial nature of the cultural programming of the Olympics, I will be able to connect them to cultural diplomacy and ultimately soft power.

Cultural Diplomacy Publications by Milton Cummings, Charles Frankel, and Richard Ardnt establish the general understanding of cultural diplomacy. Cultural diplomacy is an example of soft

power. Joseph Nye explained the difference between soft and hard power in Public

Diplomacy and Soft Power. “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”(J. S. Nye, 2008, p. 94). Hard power is the “threat or use of military or economic weapons”(J. S. Nye, 2008, p. 95).

Sports are an example of soft power because the competition allows nations to share their values. Especially, if the sports competition is televised, the opposing nations can use the sports as a platform. Host nations use the Olympics to share their values with the world.

Although soft power and cultural diplomacy are exercised for the benefit of nations, at times non-profit organizations implement the exchanges.

The Olympic arts festivals provide ample opportunity for cultural diplomacy based on

Milton Cummings definition. He developed the definition for cultural diplomacy that scholars use today. His work surveys major cultural policy initiatives and cultural relations trends in the United States. Cummings described 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). The exchanges occurred through educational conferences during and artist in residency programs during

London 2012. An essential element of cultural diplomacy is that it must be mutually beneficial. The nature of during the London 2012 arts festival were mutually beneficial because different nations had the opportunity to share, explore, and discuss ideas during the World of Shakespeare Festival. Cummings definition for cultural diplomacy serves as a foundation for this inquiry.

Charles Frankel provided a foundational framework for cultural diplomacy that reflect the diplomatic nature of the Olympic arts festivals. He highlighted an arm’s reach approach for cultural diplomacy in The “Cultural Contest. “The great problem is whether the government can come gradually to the view that there are cultural relationships between the United States and other societies on which their mutual destinies depend, and which cannot be properly cultivated if they are bureaucratized or political-ized.”(Frankel,

1969b, p. 155). Implementing cultural diplomacy through non-profits or nongovernmental agencies allows for more freedom and less governmental control. This also minimizes the cultural exchanges from seeming like propaganda. Both propaganda and diplomacy share information in order to influence. A major difference between propaganda and cultural diplomacy is that cultural diplomacy focuses on mutual benefit.

Propaganda also focuses on specific issues and cultural diplomacy generally reflects relationship building. Relationships are built on mutual benefits which can be gained through the exchange of expertise. In contrast, propaganda exercises tight control over information and is one way. Frankel wanted a singular policy, but Nye recognizes that each resource must be tailored to their environment. Cultural diplomacy is very contextual and more complex then what Frankel explained. The arts festival during the

London Olympics allowed teachers and students to exchange information on Shakespeare before and during the World of Shakespeare Festival virtually as well as in person.

Although Frankel provides the foundational knowledge for this work, Richard Arndt comprehensively reviewed the history and future of cultural diplomacy. By highlighting practical and historical applications of cultural diplomacy, this work helps establish a

timeline for official government involvement and support for exchange and mutual understanding.

Cultural Diplomacy Timeline

Year Title Description

1917 (World War I) Committee for Public Information Formal mix of government cultural, informational, and propagandistic diplomacy, touching every element of US life. 1938 Division of Cultural Relations Provide government leadership in initiating and conducting an organized, coordinated, long-term national effort to strengthen U.S. cultural relations with other countries, where a cultural treaty obligation was pending.

WWII Office of War Information The primary job of the Office of War Information was to explain America’s purposes and objectives to the world. 1945 Office of International Information and Cultural Combined functions of Division of Cultural Affairs ( renamed Office of International Relations, Office of War Information and the

Information and Educational Exchange) Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs 52 for international information 1948 Smith-Mundt Act Called for cultural exchanges to oppose the Soviet’s Cold War 1948 Information and Cultural Exchange Act Conduct international information, education, and cultural exchange activities on a worldwide scale 1953 United States Housed all of the information programs, including Information Agency the Voice of America, administration of the exchange programs, and their operation overseas 1958 The International Cultural Exchange and Trade To strengthen the State Department’s cultural Fair Participation Act (became known as the presentations program Cultural Presentations Program) 1961 Fulbright Hayes Act Executive agreements with foreign governments and to use foreign currencies acquired through the sale of U.S. war surplus to finance academic and cultural exchanges (the Fulbright Program)

Table 2. Cultural Diplomacy Continued

1978 United States Independent agency. that combined the functions International Communication Agency (name of the United States Information Agency (USIA) was changed back to USIA 1982) and the Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs 1999 Reorganization of State Department The functions of the United States Information Agency, with the exception of the International Broadcasting Bureau, were transferred to the Department of State. 1999-2000 Millennium Stimulated approx.. 30 projects, many with the Council Department of State, and included tours of U.S. art and artists in the United Kingdom and beyond. 2000 Congress creates Ambassadors Fund for Supports the preservation of cultural sites, cultural Cultural Preservation objects, and forms of traditional cultural expression in more than 100 developing countries around the world 2006 National Security Language Initiative, Provides merit-based scholarships for eligible high

53 including ECA’s NSLI-Y initiative focused on school students and recent graduates to learn less

American youth commonly taught languages 2008 ExchangesConnect The first social network of the U.S. government

These publications inform my understanding of the integration of soft power and cultural diplomacy. They also highlight the complex nature of possible local, national, and international influence of events like the Olympics.

Outcomes Soft Power and Cultural Diplomacy Outcomes

Nye reviewed the complexities of soft power, by acknowledging that the public can agree with the values of a country and not its policies in “Recovering American

Leadership”. (Joseph Nye, 2008). The complexities of soft power reveal the difficulties in determining outcomes. It is extremely difficult to measure the impact of soft power especially when it is compared to hard power. It’s much easier to trace the effects of carrots and sticks from Washington(Layne, 2010). The ability to measure outcomes of soft power is consistently being reviewed by Nye and further addressed by Goldsmith and Horiuchi. Specifically, it is unclear when soft power affects international outcomes.

Although Nye acknowledged that whether attraction in turn produces desired policy outcomes need to be judged in particular cases. Nye does not know how this is to be judged and leaves the causal mechanisms of soft power, as well as their empirical implications, underspecified” (Goldsmith & Horiuchi, 2012).

This ambiguity is a concern for my investigation of cultural programming of the

Olympics being exercises in soft power. It highlights the difficulties in determining impact. Nye explained this issue “…like love, it is hard to measure and to handle, and does not touch everyone, but that does not diminish its importance” (J. Nye, 2002, p. 9).

Power changes depending on the context - who relates to whom under what circumstance. Soft power depends on the existence of willing interpreters and receivers.

Attraction often has a diffuse effect, creating general influence rather than producing an easily observable specific action (J. Nye, 2004). Since power is contextual, the use of hard or soft power is dependent on different factors. For soft power to work there must be a demonstrated causal connection between public opinion and state policy. The reason is that states( especially strong ones) are autonomous actors that are only constrained minimally by civil society (Layne, 2010). It is unclear whether soft power is an independent variable or merely a proxy for the independent variables specified by other approaches.(Layne, 2010) When ideas have impact policy, it is usually at the level of policymaking elites which occurs in traditional diplomacy. By reviewing the acts of soft power as outputs begins the development of my analytical framework which will include outcomes and impacts of these exercises resulting in potential cultural infrastructure, social capital and Olympic legacies. The connection of these outcomes to policy will truly highlight exercises in soft power.

Unlike discussions of soft power, discussions of place branding can highlight possible outcomes. Place Branding: The State of the Art by Peter Van Ham explained “that place branding is part of a wider spectrum of postmodern power, where soft power and public diplomacy also have their place” (Ham, 2008, p. 126).The Berlin and Moscow games used place branding to promote location specific culture. Through branding, nations promote themselves and culture as products. Ham highlights this idea. “For political scientists, one of the interesting questions is whether place branding also entices people

to “buy” the “products” of brand states, that is, their foreign policies.”(Ham, 2008, p.

128) For instance, Adolf Hitler used the Berlin cultural aspects of the Olympics to promote Aryan culture and used cultural propaganda as a component during World War

II. The outcomes of place branding, was a promotion of culture and propaganda for influence. Place branding impacts relationships between nations in a variety of ways.

“Brand managers offer four arguments for why branding is both necessary and

beneficial for commercial and political actors alike: (1) Products, services and

locations have become so alike that they can no longer differentiate themselves by

their quality, reliability, and other basic traits. Branding adds emotion and trust to

these “products,” thereby offering clues that make consumers’ choice somewhat

easier. (2) This emotional relationship between brand and consumer ensures

loyalty to the brand. (3) By creating an aspiration lifestyle, branding offers a kind

of ersatz for ideologies and political programs that are losing their relevance. (4)

The combination of emotions, relationships, and lifestyle (values) allows a brand

to charge a price premium for their products, services, and locations, which would

otherwise hardly be distinguishable from generics.” (Ham, 2008, pp. 129-130)

Branding is important because it influences how nations trust each other and effects loyalty and impacts ideologies and politics. This also sets the foundation for relationships between them. “For both place branding and public diplomacy, a key element is to build personal and institutional relationships and dialogue with foreign audiences by focusing on values, setting them apart from classical diplomacy, which primarily deals with issues”(Ham, 2008, p. 135). Branding can emphasize shared values and impact

diplomacy. The opening and ceremonies and Olympic arts festival have soft power and culturally diplomatic elements. The opening ceremonies are orchestrated events that broadcast a specific message to the world about the host nation. The arts festivals can be mutually beneficial when arts organizations collaborate and allow international organizations an opportunity to share work.

Identifying the cultural outcomes of soft power like the promotion of a nation’s image is extremely difficult to evaluate because there are a variety of factors that affect relationships between nations. Specifically, cultural material can not be completely controlled by governments because of access to technology. “The consequences of new technologies are twofold: we see 1) an increasingly internationalized mass media capable of dispersing news on 24hour cycle, and 2) public is highly skilled in accessing and harnessing these information and communication technologies in order to create and expand interest and advocacy networks. In sum, these changes amount to somewhat of a

‘limitless local’—that is, to nations that are in a sense shaped, advanced and decided anywhere and everywhere, to cultures that are no longer contained by the traditional boundaries of time and space.”(Rachael Maxwell, 2008, p. 2) In this digital age, events like the Olympic arts festival and the opening ceremonies broadcast messages globally and intensely. The sharing of messages with a purpose to influence relates to soft power.

It is extremely difficult to determine if one specific cultural exchange program had an international effect on concepts like nation branding. Jonathan McClory addressed how to evaluate soft power in New Persuaders: A Ranking of International Soft Power.

“Existing measures of soft power are based primarily on surveys of public opinion – like the Gallup Global Attitudes Survey – as opposed to composite metrics across various indicators. As a result, there is no set methodology for measuring soft power beyond that of opinion polling.”(McClory, 2010, p. 3) The ability for arts organizations, local government, and national governments to highlight the cultural outcomes requires time, financial resources, and expertise. Although there are numerous studies that address the impact of the Olympics, there are few that investigate the long-term effects of the event.

The literature does emphasize some promising components for determining impact like changes in international perception. “Nye has previously pointed to three primary resources that generate soft power: culture, political values, and foreign policy…Our index takes these three pillars as a foundation, but expands on them with a framework that assesses countries’ soft power based on five categories: Business/Innovation,

Culture, Government, Diplomacy, and Education. The framework of categories was built on a survey of existing literature on soft power”(McClory, 2010, p. 3). The review of the cultural aspects reveals that it can be effectively categorized within that arena. Also the investigation of outcomes based in cultural diplomacy literature highlight the difficulty of evaluating impact. By investigating potential outcomes provide insight into an analytical framework for determining the outcomes of the cultural aspects of the Olympics.

The discussion of the cultural programming of the Olympics and their impacts has been reviewed in mega-event, Olympic, and urban development. This literature indicates

outcomes like prestige, positive perception, building of mutual understanding, and cultural infrastructure.

Mega-events

Although it is necessary to understand the historical significance of the cultural aspects of the Olympics, it is also important to note that they fall in the same category of events like

World Fairs and World Cups: mega events. Mega-events are large scale cultural, commercial, and sporting events which have a dramatic character, mass popular appeal, and international significance which is organized by a combination of national, governmental, international, and non-governmental organizations (Roche, 2000).

Although these events are short term, they do have political qualities. They can be analyzed as tools for government policy and ideology (Hiller, 2000). The Olympic opening and closing ceremonies fit within the mega-event arena due to their short term and spectacular nature of the program. The spectacle of the arts program and other traditions such as the representation of the Olympic rings are large scale and internationally significant because they reflect the message the host nation and city hope to share with the world. Donald Getz’s explanation of mega-events links them to soft power. “Indeed, many countries have used mega events to gain legitimacy and prestige, draw attention to their accomplishments, foster trade and tourism, or to help open their countries to global inﬂuences” (Getz, 2008, p. 414). Mega-event literature also can also relate to the Olympic arts festivals with regard to the amount of individuals who participate in events. Since, it occurs during the Games it allows for urban development, development of cultural infrastructure, and an increase tourism. Tourism and prestige are

significant outcomes because they do not always reflect economic or infrastructure impacts. The ability to use the cultural aspects of the Olympics to change the international image of a nation relates to soft power. The cultural programming of the

Olympics fall within the greater literature of mega-events and possible impacts. Mega- events spur urban, economic and infrastructure development. These publications ground the cultural programming of the Olympics in the larger realm of mega-events.

Olympic Perspective

Although the literature on mega-events investigates explicit outcomes of the cultural aspects of the Olympics, the Olympic charter demonstrates a lack of discussion any specific cultural aspects and outcomes. Authors like Floris Langen and Beatriz García address outcomes through an Olympic lens. Inglis highlights the historical difficulty in evaluation. He explained how the International Olympics Committee created a charter.

“In 1950’s the IOC, International Olympics Committee stipulated “…the Charter was amended at this point to stipulate that ‘the programme shall be of an equal standard and held concurrently and in the same vicinity as the sports events. It shall receive full recognition in the publicity released’ by the Organising Committee (cited in Gold and

Revill 2007, p. 71).” There were no clear guidelines as to the nature of the programs.

Since the guidelines are unclear then the expectations of are unclear as well. The traditions within the Olympic Games dictate the identification of the cultural programming. For instance, the Parade of Nations has been a cultural element of every

Games since 1928. The Cultural Olympiad began in 1992 and has become the standard in cultural programming. By reviewing the traditional cultural aspects of the Olympics

establishes a proxy standard. Since there is no criteria to for the cultural programming, it makes it difficult to identify specific cultural outcomes of the Olympics in reference to its charter.

Since evaluation of the cultural programming of the Olympics is difficult to achieve, so can measurement of change in the country’s soft power. Although there are barriers to evaluate elements like the building of tolerance and understanding, I have included some literature that attempts to do just that. This information is found in Measuring the Impacts of Large Scale Cultural Events: A Literature Review a report by Floris Langen and

Beatriz García. One publication included in the report is Enhancing sports marketing through cultural and arts programmes. Lessons from the Sydney 2000 Olympic Arts

Festivals by Beatriz García. She assesses how the marketing material of the Sydney

2000 Olympic Arts Festivals affects change through a four-year study of media clippings and concludes that the activities were marginal to the mainstream promotion of the

Olympic Games and that the event was thus perceived as a separate programme, which limited its impact amongst Olympic audiences( as cited in Langen & García, 2009) This study highlights how media can be used to determine perceptions and impact. Although it does not specifically use the term soft power, the review of media reflects that importance of sharing messages.

The next study by Popma focuses on the effects that the 2010 Cultural Olympiad in

Vancouver had on the host city. Specifically, she “assesses the potential impact of the

2010 Cultural Olympiad and the Olympic Arts Festival on the host community of

Vancouver, as well as the potential benefits for the local cultural sector. This assessment

is based on a lessons learned approach, building on a review of existing documentation and literature on previous Olympic arts events and other Hallmark events on local arts and culture, as well as interviews” ( as cited in Langen & García, 2009). Although this is not an example of international soft power, it highlights the effects of the cultural components on local cultural development. The Olympic Games Impact (OGI) Study for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games: Post Games Report prepared by The

OGI-University of British Columbia Research Team is currently unavailable. Since, there is very little information on the examination of the impact of cultural programming or the changes in soft power due to the cultural components of the Olympics, I will review the literature on the evaluation of other large scale arts events for assistance. For instance,

Creating an Impact: Liverpool’s experience as European Capital of Culture a report by

Beatriz García, Ruth Melville, and Tamsin Cox demonstrates a research framework focuses on five thematic clusters: cultural access and participation, economy and tourism, cultural vibrancy and sustainability, image and perceptions, and governance and delivery processes (Beatriz Garcia, Melville, & Cox, 2010). Although this publication only addresses impacts on elements like participation, image and perception one year after the event, the framework is still applicable to long-term evaluation because it highlights important elements to support exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy like particicipation.

The reviewed literature emphasizes international and diplomatic effects of soft power and then shifts to domestic and local impacts such as the building of mutually beneficial partnerships because the cultural aspects of the Olympic Games manifest both. The

mega-event and Olympic literature highlight tourism and image projection as possible outcomes. The cultural aspects of the Olympics can be categorized within the mega- events literature, but not explicitly within the Olympic Charter. Yet, the traditional nature of the cultural aspects allows them to fall within the Olympic arena. I will use these resources and public value and combine them with efforts to investigate soft power and cultural diplomacy.

Urban Development/Globalization

Lastly, the cultural programming of the Olympics stimulates globalization and urban development. The globalization of a city through the Olympics provides a platform for that city to share its identity internationally. The Olympic Games also highlight other issues with regard to how culture connects to globalization and urban development. Short and Kim in Globalization and the City explained “culture has become a commodity.

Cities around the world are fully aware that they can boost their economies through entertainment industries and urban tourism. The commodification of culture is an important element in urban economic health” (1999, p. 80). Olympic cities have an opportunity to create a global identity through televised spectacles like the opening and closing ceremonies that are broadcasted all over the world. Short and Kim explicitly relate globalization to global identity. “Globalization involves the creation of global identities. Shared consumption patterns, similar work experiences and worldwide circulating repertoire of images and icons are important elements in shaping of these identities among people (Short & Kim, 1999, p. 8). The concept of branding is also

linked to global identities and worldwide image. “ For the host cities themselves the

Cultural Olympiad and Olympic Arts Festivals now take their place along other strategies in efforts to rebrand the Olympic city, create a platform for growth in cultural tourism and improve the quality of life for residents… the Games now leave a legacy of cultural venues and improved urban infrastructure that benefits residents and visitors alike, but in terms of rebranding, it is the Opening and Closing Ceremonies with their artistic segments that have far greater impact in projecting the image of the city and nation to the world….”(John R. Gold & Margaret M. Gold, 2011). Gold and Gold make the connection between local impacts like of urban infrastructure to the projection of a city’s image internationally. The next steps in this inquiry will be to determine who consumes the images and to relate them to the global identities of Los Angeles and London.

Not only do the Olympics impact the globalization of a city or nation, it can also impact the city’s urban development. For instance, new facilities can be built and transportation can be updated within the city due to the Olympics. Short and Kim stated “Summer

Games are a major opportunity to reimagine and transform a city”(Short & Kim, 1999, p.

92). The authors highlight the infrastructure changes that occurred as a result of the

Olympic Games in Atlanta, Georgia. “The Games transformed the city’s landscape. The

Centennial Olympic Park was constructed on a 21 acre downtown site a $209 million

Olympic stadium was built, now the home of the Atlanta Braves, and major improvements were made to the airport”(Short & Kim, 1999, p. 92). Works by Zhang and

Zhao (2009) and Short (2004) also highlight development. Although economic and

infrastructure development are essential elements of the Olympics, for the purposes of this inquiry I focus on the cultural components of urban development.

The Olympic Arts Festivals exemplify how cultural elements of the Games relate directly to urban regeneration. John R. Gold and Margaret M. Gold highlighted the idea of the

Olympic Arts Festival functions as a showcase for the host city and nation and as an event that mixes the urban policy goals of the host cities. These goals include showcasing the cultivated nature of the host society, serving the goals of the political ideology, addressing economic development and urban regeneration, and addressing the growing arts agenda that developed after World War II(J. R. Gold & M. M. Gold, 2011; John R.

Gold & Margaret M. Gold, 2011). Gold and Gold highlight how the Olympic Arts

Festivals were the catalyst to develop cultural infrastructure by building or refurbishing exhibition and performance spaces. These developments were usually accompanied by upgrades to the urban environment to provide basis for developing cultural and business tourism.(John R. Gold & Margaret M. Gold, 2011). This is especially relevant for the

ArcelorMittal Orbit in London. The space was created for the London 2012 Olympics and continues as a space for tourists. Although these publications link the cultural elements to outcomes like infrastructure and economic development, I’m also interested in investigating if these components provide the means for other cultural impacts like increased cultural activities.

Ultimately, the literature on mega-events, Olympics, soft power, and urban development of the Olympic cultural programming is diverse. The review of the literature demonstrates that each arena can explain or categorize the cultural aspects of the

Olympics. Soft power best frames the cultural aspects of the Olympics because of the political intention of a long-term programming that is also mutually beneficial. The literature also highlights a variety of potential outcomes. Yet, there are some commonalities between the literature. All arenas relate their outcomes to ideas that are similar to image projection and tourism. Also urban development and soft power both identify outcomes that are related to cultural infrastructure. These arenas provide the foundation for an analytical framework that allows for the review of potential outcomes using specific indicators. Once these outcomes have been identified, the value of these outcomes explored to validate the existence of the cultural aspects of the Olympics.

Despite the notion that the Olympics provide many economic and infrastructure opportunities, issues regarding issues like equity and sustainability are also significant factors in presenting the Games.

Public Value The outcomes of arts experiences like the cultural components of the Olympics can reflect social, educational, cultural and economic benefits and possible intended or unintended purposes. These benefits reveal public value. The following publications define public value and connect to the outcomes of the cultural aspects of the Olympics.

Firstly, Creating the Public Value through State Arts Agencies by Mark H. Moore and

Gaylen Williams Moore highlights conversations between arts communities and state arts agencies about the public value of arts stemming from the State Arts Partnerships for

Cultural Participation (START)initiative. It asserts “that art is good for its own sake; … that individuals spend time and money on the arts because they value them; that the arts

produce economic benefits for individuals …; that the arts help make better neighbors, better citizens, and a stronger civic and democratic culture...”(Moore & Moore, 2005, p.

31) These benefits can relate to a variety of outcomes explored in the four arenas. For instance, the concept of making better neighbors can lend itself to mutual understanding and shared values which have been identified as outcomes within the cultural diplomacy and Olympic literature. This also speaks to the embedded values in arts activities.

Creating the Public Value through State Arts Agencies by Mark H. Moore and Gaylen

Williams Moore, this 2005 report functions as an application of the concept and builds on the foundational work Creating Public Value: Strategic Management in Government

(1995) by Mark H. Moore. The previous publications highlight a North American perspective of public value. I hope to add to the inquiry by investigating international views by Carol Scott in Museums: Impact and Value and Beck Jørgensen and Barry

Bozeman in Public Values an Inventory. The ability to link outcomes of the cultural aspects of the Olympics to personal, social, relational, and economic value could validate it as a case for soft power and cultural diplomacy because the outcomes can be used as elements for influence.

The next publication, Gifts of the Muse: Reframing the Debate About the Benefits of the

Arts by Kevin F. McCarthy, Elizabeth H. Ondaatje Laura Zakaras, and Arthur Brooks, acts as a commentary on public value. It defines three ways that arts can benefit individuals and communities. Firstly, the authors identify the personal or individual benefits of the arts that can improve one’s life. The other element is that the individual’s

benefits spill over to improve the community. Thirdly, the arts can improve economic growth and social capital (Rand Corporation 69). These definitions relate directly to how the arts benefit individuals and communities. The publication also asserts “The arts produce benefits—economic growth, education, and pro-social behavior—that all

Americans (not just those involved in the arts) recognize as being of value” (1). The publication also stresses that the most influential time for exposure to the arts that will result in more arts involvement occurs during childhood(McCarthy, 2004, p. xvii) . The urban development literature explicitly states that a possible outcome of the cultural aspects of the Olympics is arts participation. If a child engages in arts programming due to a Cultural Olympiad, the programming could produce educational or social benefits.

The Rand Corporation classifies instrumental benefits of the arts as measurable benefits like economic growth. Ticket sales of events and other activities connected to the cultural aspects of the Olympics can economically impact the host city and arts community. The publication also defines intrinsic benefits as enhancing to peoples’ lives. If a person experiences captivation while witnessing the opening and closing ceremonies could be an example of an intrinsic benefit. The opening and closing ceremonies function as a platform for the host nation to demonstrate its history and values in an appealing way.

These message driven experiences relate to outcome of image projection of that host nation that is relevant in all four literature arenas. By sharing a specific image that is captivating connects potential outcomes of the cultural aspects to public value.

This publication disputes that all intrinsic benefits of the arts are private and do not affect the public. These private benefits can indirectly spillover to the public. The authors state

“the arts experience can promote greater individual receptivity to new perspectives and tolerance for others, two private benefits that provide clear spillover benefits to a society whose population is growing increasingly diverse and whose central values include free speech and freedom of religion” (McCarthy, 2004, p. 69). Tolerance is a key element of for mutual understanding which cultural diplomacy attempts to foster. Culture, values, and policies are tools of soft power (Nye 2008) and the use of the arts demonstrate these values. The most useful element of Gifts of the Muse is the “Framework for

Understanding the Benefits of the Arts” for this inquiry because it creates a spectrum of benefits that can be used to compare instrumental, intrinsic, public, and private benefits.

By highlighting the spectrum of benefits provides more examples of possible impacts of the cultural aspects of the Olympics.

Figure 2. Framework for Understanding the Benefits of the Arts

Although the “Framework for understanding the Benefits of the Arts” is relevant to my work, it is also important to gather other perspectives on the topic of public value. Joni

Maya Cherbo challenges this distinction between instrumental and intrinsic benefits in

On Valuing the Arts. She specifically states “The distinction, however, is a false dichotomy—an incorrect, culture-bound concept of art that muddies the discussion of its value to society. It is precisely the intrinsic nature of art that makes it so valuable instrumentally”(Cherbo, 2007, p. 170).

Margaret Wyszomirski discussion of the public purpose of the arts translation into policy especially applicable to my discussion of the cultural programming of the Olympics as exercises in soft power or cultural diplomacy with the intention to impact policy. She explains that public purposes have one requirement: the assembly and sustainment of a manageable consensus that recognizes the value of each purpose and therefore legitimates the allocation of the public effort and resources”(Cherbo & Wyszomirski,

2000, p. 51). Through the visual representation of a decision tree, Wyszomirski visually links purposes, grounded in values, to political, social, and economic circumstances that branch toward issues and sprout program strategies and administrative tools(Cherbo &

Wyszomirski, 2000). She reviews five basic public purposes: furthering the quest for security, fostering community, contributing to prosperity, improving quality and

conditions of life, and cultivating democracy(Cherbo & Wyszomirski, 2000, p. 60). An analysis of the cultural programming as exercises in soft power or cultural diplomacy fits within these frames. For instance, security during times of conflict highlights the need for positive image projection and fostering community can occur through exchanges between artists and organizations.

By reviewing these publications, it demonstrates the breadth of the term and possible applicability to the outcomes of the cultural aspects of the Olympics within the four arenas which could be used to validate it as an exercise in cultural diplomacy.

Another publication that differs from Gifts of the Muse is An Architecture of Value by

Alan Brown because it tries to define arts value through different perspectives for artists and arts administrators in order to make the ideas more implementable. He breaks down the dimensions of value into five categories; personal development, imprint of the arts experience, human interaction, economic and social benefits, and communal meaning.

Brown explains personal development as growth, maturity, health, mental acuity, and overall development of the person, all of which have value for both the individual and society (A. Brown, 2006, pp. 19-20).The impact the cultural aspects of the Olympics can range from a person gaining educational skills to a neighborhood developing social cohesion. He continues to explain the “imprint” of an arts experience. These elements include what happens to an individual during and immediately after an arts experience, including intrinsic benefits such as captivation, spiritual awakening, and aesthetic growth

(Brown, 2006, pp. 19-20). This provides an example of how benefits during the experience can be compared to benefits after the opening and closing ceremonies. The immediate benefits can be used as a baseline for evaluating the long-term impacts of the cultural aspects of the Olympics. Next, Brown defines human interaction as benefits that improve relations between friends, family members, co-workers, and others because they enhance personal relationships, family cohesion, and expanded social networks. This benefit relates explicitly to the mutually beneficial nature of cultural diplomacy and the relationship building element of urban development. The literature from the four arenas indicates potential outcomes that can be linked to benefits to the community, which can also be identified as public value.

Another element that Brown suggests is the communal meaning and civic discourse which includes positive outcomes at a community level that are inherent in the arts experiences available to members of that community. These include both benefits that occur at the time of the experience and also those that occur over time (Brown, 2006, pp.

19-20). Cultural aspects of the Olympics like programming during the Cultural Olympiad occur solely in the host nation. Thus, outcomes like enhanced personal relationship and expanded social networks can be components that foster mutual understanding. Arts institutions can also develop long-term international partnership during the Cultural

Olympiad. These possible outcomes reflect the public value of mutually beneficial experiences. These mutually beneficial aspects of the experiences are elements of cultural diplomacy. These benefits are similar to the outcomes within the Olympic and cultural

diplomacy literature because both arenas indicate that identification or the sharing of values as outcomes. In order to expand social networks and foster mutual understanding, people, institutions, or nations identify their shared values to strengthen relationships and ties. This example highlights the relationship between outcomes of the cultural aspects of the Olympics and public value. Lastly, economic and macro-social benefits are community benefits. Tangible benefits such as economic impact and lower school drop- out rates, and intangible benefits such as civic pride and social capital are examples of these benefits (Brown, 2006, pp. 19-20). These benefits are similar to the benefits explained by Gifts of the Muses highlight how exchanges can transform national and foreign publics into a shared community capable of shared meaning and discourse. The capability to create shared meaning and discourse allows nations to influence one another; thus, exercising cultural diplomacy.

Participation is another dimension of the value of arts that Brown does not include in the five clusters that is essential to the cultural aspects of the Olympics. It is also an outcome that urban development literature investigates. Although it is not included within the clusters, it is still a relevant component for evaluating the long-term effects of the cultural aspects of the Olympics. Inventive, interpretive, curatorial, observational and ambient are all modes of participation that An Architecture of Value emphasizes. Brown explains each of them. Firstly, the inventive arts participation mode does not require any skill and engages the mind, body and spirit in the act of art creation. Secondly, interpretive arts participation adds value to existing works of art. Curatorial participation is another mode

that refers to the selection, organization, and collection to the approval of one’s artistic sensibility. The fourth mode of participation is observational and emphasizes an arts experience that one selects because he or she is motivated by the expectation of value.

Lastly, ambient participation stresses experiencing art consciously or unconsciously that one does not select. The arts participation mode can occur during the cultural aspects of the Olympics. For instance, observational arts participation can occur from witnessing the opening and closing ceremonies. Curatorial participation can take place during through the creation of an exhibition. This source provides additional support for public value of arts through its examples of human interactions and civic discourse that are applicable to the cultural aspects of the Olympics. The public value of the cultural aspects of the Olympics relates to the specific outcome of arts participation that urban development literature discusses. Thus, relationship between the outcomes of the cultural aspects of the Olympics can be argued using the term public value to validate the experiences.

Figure 3. Five Clusters

Although I will rely on the American perspective, I will use others perspectives to strengthen my argument on public value and its relationship to the cultural aspects of the

Olympics. Torben Beck Jørgensen and Barry Bozeman from the University of

Copenhagen, Denmark identify public value concepts, relevant literature, and explore boundaries and meanings of public value in Public ValuesAn Inventory(Jørgensen &

Bozeman, 2007). They identified seven constellations of public value based on their interpretation of the relationship among them from Britain, United States, and Denmark perspectives. These constellations include values associated with the public sector’s contribution to society, transformation of interests to decisions, relationship between public administrators and politicians, relationship between public administrators and their environment, intraorganizational aspects of public administration, behavior of public- sector employees, and relationship between public administration and the citizens. The

pertinent components of this publication for my inquiry are the elements within values associated with the public sector’s contribution to society. They reflect the common good and public interest. The cultural aspects of the Olympics at times are supported by the public sector. Through programs and collaborations arts experiences are supposed to contribute to the local community. The next steps are to link common good and public interest to cultural diplomacy and the outcomes of the cultural aspects of the Olympics.

The publication addresses the ambiguity of the terms by stating “they do incorporate certain characteristic expectations: The public sector must not serve special interests, it must serve society as a whole; the public sector is there for everybody, it is not the extended arm of a particular class or group”(Jørgensen & Bozeman, 2007, p. 361).

Publications by Carol Scott (2006) highlight British and Australian perspectives on public and value. She explains the public values the intangible impacts of museums like personal learning. Scott’s work links British and Australian governmental policies to long-term social impacts specifically using cultural institutions to build social cohesion.

This perspective is valuable for my inquiry because the creation, facilitation, and production of the cultural components of the Olympics are related to government agencies and policies. By reviewing her work, I hope to identify who is the public and who can affect impact. Crouch (2011) deepens the British perspective because he also provides characteristics the public. Other relevant works on public value include

Benington & Moore (2011). By reviewing public value, it is important to note how the outcomes of the Olympic Games that have been identified through a diversity of literature can be linked to the concept and potentially validate the Olympic cultural

elements. In order to have an effective understanding of potential impacts, it is necessary to understand the history of the Olympic cities I plan to investigate.

Conclusion The selection and use of the concepts from the literature direct the construction, implementation, and conclusions of this investigation. For the purposes of this inquiry, historical context for the cultural programming of the Olympics establishes it as a means for development with potential international repercussions and relates it to soft power.

Although there are many different theories and perspectives on power, soft effectively serves as the basis for the conceptual framework due to its diplomatic nature. The outcomes of soft power and cultural diplomacy are ambiguous, using literature from mega-events and Olympics to examine potential cultural outcomes guides this study.

Lastly, validation for through public value position cultural programming within the

Olympic impact context, without referring to economic outcomes; thereby, contributing a new perspective to the field.

Chapter 3: Theoretical and Analytical Framework

This dissertation springs from several theoretical and conceptual foundations that include international relations theory, diplomacy, and arts policy. The authors referenced have influenced the development, critique, and application of soft power. Soft power serves as the foundation for my investigation because of the culture, values, and policies are represented throughout the cultural programming of the Olympics and they are used to influence policy. Joseph Nye created and developed the term soft power (Nye 1990;

2002; 2004). “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” (Nye, 2008, p. 94). .Nye’s work influenced the way scholars, public administrators, and political figures discuss and investigate power.

Soft power fits within realist, liberal, and constructivist perspectives based in international relations theory. J. Nye (2010) defers to the realist model that portrays states as the main actors, security as their major goal, and military force as their ultimate instrument which is relevant to discussions of the Olympic Games where the security of the athletes and spectators has become a priority. The realist E.H. Carr’s exploration of

three interdependent categories of political power in an international sphere greatly influenced Nye’s perspective on soft power. Carr’s book The Twenty Years' Crisis “was written with the deliberate aim of counteracting the glaring and dangerous defect of nearly all thinking, both academic and popular, about international politics in English- speaking countries from 1919 to 1939 and the almost total neglect of the factor of power”

(Carr, 1946, p. vii). Carr relied on the works of Niccolo Machiavelli to support his perspective on realism. According to this perspective, history is a sequence of cause and effect that can be analyzed, but not directed by imagination. Second, theory does not create practice, but practice theory. Last, that politics are not a function of ethics, but ethics are a function of politics (Carr, 1946). Carr’s work explained that political power in the international sphere may be divided into three interdependent categories: (a) military power, (b) economic power, (c) power over opinion (Carr, 1946). The first two, also expressed as coercion and inducement, fall under the heading of ‘hard power’, while the third belongs to ‘soft power’ or ‘the power of attraction” (Nye, 2008, p.55). Host cities and nations use the power of attraction during the opening and closing ceremonies to promote their values and brand the city or nation. The difficultly of a country, for any length of time, possessing one kind of power in isolation from the others (Carr, 1946) directly relates to Nye’s review of the relationship between hard and soft power and the use of smart power to strategically address political concerns. Nye acknowledged the work of other classical realists like Thucydides and Hans Morgenthau on a broad conception of power (J. Nye, 2010). Although there is a relationship between hard and

soft power, Nye examines and challenges the interdependence of soft power and other factors.

Nye built on his understanding of soft power by reviewing the work of neorealist

Kenneth Waltz that focuses on polarity in the world. According to Nye,

“Waltz…..developed a parsimonious theory that tried to explain the stability of bipolar world…and treated power largely as a set of concrete measurable resources”(J. Nye,

2010, p. 220). Waltz compared interdependence to a chess game, which is a metaphor that Nye later develops in his discussion of multipolarity and soft power. Waltz also highlighted size of population, territory, military strength, political stability, and competence as examples of resources that impact a state’s power (Waltz, 1979). Nye later challenged this idea with his explanation that power does not only rely on a nation’s hard resources. Soft power resources, like culture and value used for exchanges during the World Shakespeare Festival during London 2012, can impact a nation’s overall power.

Although resources are a prevalent element of Nye’s discussion of soft power, his international analysis lend itself to constructivist features which relate to the cultural programming of the Olympics. Within International Relations theory, constructivism “is a view that the manner in which the material world shapes and is shaped by human action and interaction depends on dynamic normative and epistemic interpretations of the material world” (Adler, 1997, p. 322). It is not a theory of politics, but rather a social theory on which constructivists theories of international politics are based (Adler, 1997).

Constructivism can illuminate features of international politics that were previously

enigmatic and have practical application for international theory and empirical research.

These politics can include war, cooperation, or international community (Adler, 1997).

These features explicitly connect to the use of culture and values to influence others during the cultural programming of the Olympics because the influence fosters cooperation.

One objective of Nye’s soft power is to use universal values to attract. He refers to

Robert Cox’s discussion of Marx inspired Antonio Gramsci to explore hegemony.

Specifically, Cox discussed “that world hegemony is expressed in universal norms, institutions, and mechanism which lay down general rules of behavior for states and for those forces of civil society that act across national boundaries…” (Cox, 1983, p. 171)

Universal norms or values are expressed throughout Nye’s discussions and apply directly to the demonstration of values during the artistic program of the opening ceremony. He also built on Cox’s idea that a critical feature for a dominant country is the ability to obtain a broad measure of consent on general principles that ensure the supremacy of the leading state and dominant social classes. At the same time, it should offer some prospect of satisfaction to the less powerful (Nye, 1990). The opening ceremonies function as a vehicle for consent because of the spectacular demonstrations of universal or dominant values for spectators. Frankel accounts for this universal nature in cultural diplomacy as well, which relates directly to Gramsci’s discussion of hegemony (Frankel, 1969a). The projection and possible acceptance of values and messages during the opening ceremonies highlights possible hegemony.

Nye began his investigation of the term soft power in Bound to Lead: The Changing

Nature of American Power addressing American leadership in the 21st century. Nye’s books Bound to Lead and The Paradox of American Power focus on foreign policy and

US power (Zahran & Ramos, 2010). While Soft Power: The Means to Success in World

Politics reviewed the term more critically through a detailed exploration of the resources in soft power and identifying the limits of the soft power. “Soft power is not merely the same as influence; influence can also rest on the hard power of threats or payments. And soft power is more than just persuasion or the ability to move people by argument…..It is also the ability to attract, and attraction often leads to acquiescence” ( Nye, 2004, p. 6). .

The foundation of soft power rests on Nye’s discussion of command behavior and co- optive behavior. “The types of behavior between command and co-option range along a spectrum from coercion to economic inducement to agenda setting to pure attraction”

(Nye, 2004). He highlighted the resources that are necessary for soft power as culture (in places where it is attractive to others), political values (when it lives up to them at home and abroad), and foreign policies (when they are seen as legitimate and having moral authority)( Nye, 2004). Each resource is relevant to my investigation because they are applicable to Olympic cultural programming. For instance, the arts festival and opening ceremonies use the culture to demonstrate the values of the host city and nation. These values may or may not reflect the political values, as well as legitimize the foreign policies of the host city or nation. Nye’s discussion of high and popular culture as

producers of soft power also impacts my investigation because Olympic cultural programming can combine both during the artistic program of the opening ceremonies of the Los Angeles and London Olympics.

Although soft power can effectively be applied to my investigation, there are many critiques that are useful to review. Through the critique of the term, I possess a better understanding of the concept because I recognize the limits of soft power. Lukes criticized soft power as too blunt, Fergusen saw it as too soft, and Bially Mattern thought it was too vague ( as cited in Lock 2010). Although there are limitations to the soft power as a concept, it fulfills the needs of this dissertation because of the use culture, values, and policies as resources are present during the cultural programming of the Olympics.

Analytical Framework

In application of the analytical framework, I use the current literature on the Olympics, and cultural diplomacy to identify indicators for potential effects of Olympic cultural programming. The indicators highlight the cultural programming effects of Los Angeles

1984 and London 2012. By identifying these effects, I relate them to larger initiatives like cultural infrastructure, social capital, and legacy as potential long-term impacts of cultural diplomacy or soft power.

The analytical framework loosely builds on a logic model, which is routinely used in program evaluation, by identifying outputs and outcomes of cultural programming.

Although this is not an evaluative inquiry, the evaluative framework lends itself to identifying the effects of cultural programming for non-profits and cultural organizations

which are participating entities in the cultural programming of the Olympics. This section defines the elements of the logic model and applies them to Olympic cultural programming in order to effectively analyze the structure and outcomes of the cultural programming of the Olympics as possible exercises in cultural diplomacy or soft power.

The first element of a logic model is the inputs section which represents the resources needed to produce the programming and fulfill the mission of the programming. This can include funds, staff, or equipment. Next, outputs are the direct products of program activities and can include the activity, numbers of participants or number of meetings.

Last, outcomes represent the longitudinal goals for change(Fitzpatrick, Sanders, &

Worthen, 2004). By examining outputs of the cultural programming as the cultural activities like artistic program during the Opening Ceremony and Shakespearean programming, it how culture, values and policies are represented and opportunities for exchanges which leads to possible impacts. The short to long term outcomes are changes that occurred due those activities between those individuals and institutions and can exemplify the lasting effect of the Los Angeles and London Games.

Cultural Diplomacy and Soft Power

The first analytical step identifies whether certain components of the Olympics are exercises in only soft power or also cultural diplomacy. Milton Cumming 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). “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).Since cultural diplomacy is an element of soft power, all programming that is culturally diplomatic will be exercises in soft power. Yet, all exercises in soft power are not cultural diplomacy because the acts of attraction are not always the mutually beneficial.

Inputs

Funds, individuals, and spaces generally represent inputs within a logic model, for the purposes of this inquiry into the cultural programming of the Olympics I expand the idea of inputs to include elements like management, development, and interurban competition.

These elements are essential to creation and implementation of the cultural programming.

Management, development, and interurban competition must be reviewed in order to comprehensively understand soft power or cultural diplomacy in the Olympic context, as well as, potential cultural impacts.

Management

An analysis of management styles of the Olympic Games highlights the resources necessary to stage the Olympics. A review of the Olympics complicates Harvey’s (1989) neoliberal description of public-private partnerships focusing on investment and economic development because not all Olympic Games use private funds or investments to host the Olympics. These styles range from state management to completely private management. There is no consensus of management style, which reflects the diversity of

contexts of the Olympics. State management occurs when the control of the cultural program has been in the hands of one or various public bodies which was the model for the management, planning and production of the Moscow 1980 Games (Beatriz Garcia,

2008, p. 372). The context of the Moscow Olympics which occurred during the Cold War highlights the significance of the need for state control of messages shared on an international platform. It also occurred before privatization became an ideal as means for

Olympics profits.

Central management is another style that has been popular amongst the Games (Mexico

1968, Munich 1972, Seoul 1988 and Sydney 2000). It occurs when the cultural program is the sole responsibility of the organizing committee (Beatriz Garcia, 2008). There have been some cases of mixed management when the Games are dependent both on the organizing committee and an outside entity. Barcelona 1992 used a special organization for the production of the cultural program: Olimpiada Cultural SA (OCSA). OCSA was at the same time separated and dependent upon the Olympic Organising Committee

(COOB). On the one hand, it had an administrative committee composed of public administration representatives independent of the OCOG; on the other, the OCSA Board of Directors was presided by the Mayor of Barcelona, who was also president of COOB

(Beatriz Garcia, 2008, p. 372). Barcelona 1992 is unique because it represents a change in cultural programming from a general arts festival to a four-year Olympiad that has become the new standard for arts participation and cultural renewal. This could be due the autonomy of the OCSA. This autonomy can impact the perspective on the purpose of the cultural programming because the organizing committee is empowered to determine

if the programming will be solely an exercise in soft power or include cultural diplomatic elements.

Lastly, shared or decentralized management occurs when the “cultural responsibilities have been the obligation of the OCOG in partnership with other organisations either private or public” (Beatriz Garcia, 2008, p. 372). Montreal 1976 and London 2012 are examples of decentralized management. For Montreal 1976, Canadian provinces were in charge of designing the arts programmes while the OCOG’s cultural department was in charge of the logistics(Beatriz Garcia, 2008, p. 372). London 2012 employed regulatory capitalism to manage the Games. [R]egulatory capitalism is characterized by the emergence of new public– private hybridities in the development and implementation of policy interventions”(Raco, 2014, p. 177). The London Games created the Olympic

Delivery Authority (ODA)1 which is indicative of neoliberal tendencies of privatization.

. It “represented a new mode of state-led privatization in which public funds and objectives have been converted into privately run and contractually delivered programmes of action.”(Raco, 2014, p. 177). This was the first example of state-led privatization of the Games. Although it is public-private hybrid, the accountability to citizens is still important to review because it relates directly to potential impacts of cultural diplomacy and soft power.

1 The ODA was a quango1 body, made up of appointees and a contracted workforce. It was managed by a board consisting of representatives from a range of business interests, along with a trade union member and others with expertise in the creative industries and voluntary sectors” (Raco, 2014, p. 185)

Investments and sponsorships are essential to the production of modern day Olympics and reflect neoliberal idea of privatization. Harvey highlighted the intention behind investment and infrastructure. “[P]ublic and private investments in the kinds of physical and social infrastructures that strengthen the economic base of the metropolitan region as an exporter of goods and services” (Harvey, 1989, p. 8). Los Angeles 1984 used television sponsorships and corporate sponsorship for the Seven Eleven velodrome and

McDonald’s swimming facility to defray costs and boost profits. Sponsorship agreements with national and international firms are fixed early and development projects are signed and sealed after the event has been won and market changes are unlikely to upset an

Olympic project (Raco, 2014). The Vancover Games also exemplified a neoliberal privatization model through investments from Insurance Corporation of British Columbia and Visa sponsorships. “These investments tied local processes into wider economic circuits using local elites and transnational actors (Vanwynsberghe, Surborg, & Wyly,

2013). Although an economic analysis is not the focus of this investigation, a review of sponsorships and investments lends itself to an examination of inputs which mirrors the analytical framework.

Management styles are not generally reviewed as inputs, but for the purposes of this inquiry they directly impact potential outputs and impacts due to decision-making and potential priorities of the organizing committee. Thus, the creation and implementation of the cultural programming of the Olympics reflect the intentions of the local organizing committees which effect potential impacts of cultural diplomacy and soft power.

Interurban Competition

Interurban competition as an Olympic input exemplifies the ceaseless competitive elements within the bidding process that impacts cultural programming as well as legacy production. “The urban region can also seek to improve its competitive position with respect to the spatial division of consumption. (Harvey, 1989, p. 9). Interurban competition also connects potential host nations to economic gains as it attracts sources of capital investment. Peck and Tickell highlights the relationship between mega-events like the Olympics to neoliberalism and interurban competition,

“Urban entrepreneurialism with neoliberalism therefore provides the ideological

justification for place-competitive re-imaging strategies including the hosting of

sports mega-events while such events also provide an example of the manner in

which ‘local neoliberalisms’ are embedded within wider networks and structures

of neoliberalism (as cited in (C. M. Hall, 2006, p. 64).

To host a mega-event, like the Olympics, cities must bid on the mega-event circuit and demonstrate they have the infrastructure to manage the event. These cities usually have a cross section of public agencies, private firms, and non-profit enterprises to offer financial assistance in order to get on the circuit (Vanwynsberghe et al., 2013, p. 2079).

Only cities that are currently well endowed with this infrastructure can compete. The relationship between interurban competition and the bidding process function as input because they are resources that affect the cultural programming and potential cultural diplomacy and soft power.

Hall (2006) highlighted three reasons why sports mega-events like the Olympics emerge as central elements in place competitions:

First, the infrastructure required for such events is usually regarded as integral to

further economic development whether as an amenity resource or as infrastructure.

Second, the hosting of events is seen as a contribution to business vitality and

economic development. Thirdly, the ability to attract events is often regarded as a

performance indicator in its own right of the capacity of a city or region to

compete.” (p. 64)

Interurban competition begins before a city even makes an Olympic bid. The creation of coalitions to foster support for the bid and hosting of mega-events is reflective of

Molotch’s (1976) theorization of the city as a growth machine. The city’s ‘ desire for growth provides the key operative motivation toward consensus for members of politically mobilized local elites, however split they might be on other issues’(C. M. Hall,

2006, p. 63). The idea that city growth and urban competition can bring opposing groups together to support initiatives is not exclusively for the Olympic Games. Such pursuit of growth is regarded as shaping not only the local political system but also the pattern of urban development in which museums, sports teams, convention centres and mega-events become an integral part of urban re-imaging strategies and place competitiveness (C. M.

Hall, 2006, p. 63). Interurban competition relates directly to cultural impacts like museum development. Museums offer opportunities for influence through culture as well as foster mutual understanding which are major tenets in soft power and cultural diplomacy.

The stakeholders that support these initiatives are usually upper class individuals that extol influence in a variety of sectors that could benefit from the Games. “The clients are

already powerful politicians, bureaucrats, consultants and business leaders who are accorded even greater special powers in the name of a ‘once-in-a-lifetime’ mega-event and its planning needs” (Vanwynsberghe et al., 2013, p. 2077) . Even community support for the Sydney 2000 Olympics came from elite interests (Hall, 2006, p. 64). Since the only the elite individuals of the city sit on the committees and participate in coalitions for the Olympics, the underrepresented groups interests are likely to be ignored or overlooked which could affect the programming of the Games and potential impacts.

The process of distinguishing one city from another through bidding for the Olympics typifies a certain level of power. Interurban competition causes cities to distinguish themselves as they compete for resources which causes it to operate as an "external coercive power" over individual cities to bring them closer into line with the discipline and logic of capitalist development (Harvey, 1989). Yet, this competition does not always benefit the cities due to limited resources. This proliferation of international competitions suggests that always limited sponsorship monies will become even more difficult to obtain(C. M. Hall, 2006). Due to multiple cities engaging in similar processes at the same time, it prevents city or region distinction. Interurban competition can force repetitive and serial reproduction of certain patterns of development of cultural and entertainment centers (Harvey, 1989). Cities can lose the bid even if they have developed infrastructure due to these repetitive practices.

Place competition has the potential to be a zero sum game because innovations and investments used to make the city attractive are being imitated in other places, thus rendering anytime of advantage ephemeral. Yet, coalitions try to stay ahead of the game

due to the coercive nature of competition (C. M. Hall, 2006, p. 63) Although there is a bevy of information that shares the negative impacts of the Olympics, cities still bid in hopes the event will improve their status. “Indeed, many countries have used mega events to gain legitimacy and prestige, draw attention to their accomplishments, foster trade and tourism, or to help open their countries to global inﬂuences” (Getz, 2008, p. 414).

Even though Los Angeles won the uncontested 1984 bid, it still used similar strategies like the renovation of the Coliseum in 1932 to remain competitive. These renovations allowed Los Angeles to defeat other cities by hosting events like the World Cup(Dyreson,

2010). This is indicative of Los Angeles strong position as a world city with strong industry and infrastructure. The inter-urban competition on this level is very expensive and peculiarly tough because this is an area where agglomeration economies remain supreme and the monopoly power of established centres, like Los Angeles, New York,

Chicago, and London, is particularly hard to break. (Harvey, 1989, p. 9). London and

Los Angeles reflect the monopolistic power of the established centres because both cities have hosted the Olympics at least two times.

Although every city is not an established center, aspirations of being a world class city drive corporate interest. Corporate interests have substantially contributed to the desire of public private urban growth coalitions to host sporting mega-events…direct media attention to the cultural capital of cities that aspire to be world class and further reinforce not only the discourse of interurban competition but also its lived experience”(C. M. Hall,

2006, p. 67). The Olympics cities embody intangible legacies that can produce tangible outcomes.

Los Angeles 84 exemplifies these intangible outcomes with its “can do” idea. “L.A. is a

“can do” place presents perhaps the most important, albeit intangible, discursive legacy…this “can do” image continues to bring in opportunities but the region’s private sector clearly seems to have the upper hand in taking advantage of them”(Andranovich &

Burbank, 2011, pp. 833-834). Despite the understanding of the risks associated with bidding for and producing the Olympic, cities still risk financial stability to possibly affirm or confirm their status. Ultimately, neoliberalism and interurban competition do not guarantee any positive outcomes like financial success or cultural infrastructure for the Olympic Games due to management style and replication of the development strategies. Although positive outcomes are not guaranteed, it is imperative to examine inputs like management style and interurban competition because they serve as the foundation for exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy. These are not the only inputs that are relevant for review; I include funds targeted toward the cultural programming due to the financial means being essential to the creation and implementation of the cultural programming.

Arts Support

The funds from corporate sponsors and investments can support arts programming and opportunities for participation. Corporate sponsorship of the Los Angeles Games had an obvious impact on cultural support.

Corporate sponsors and suppliers contributed nearly $44 million in goods and

services ($9 million went into cultural programming). Local governments

received $47.2 million from taxes and fees, with the city of Los Angeles earning

the lion’s share ($32.8 million). The State of California received a $49 million

revenue boost. Before the event, the cultural programming had money spent on

them. Pre-event estimates of the benefits to the Los Angeles regional economy

were for a total impact of $1 billion …. an additional $150 million in Olympic-

related spending and cultural events (Andranovich & Burbank, 2011, p. 831)’.

Unfortunately, the potential for support does not always come to fruition. Individuals in the United Kingdom arts sector received the announcement of the successful Olympic bid with some apprehension. They feared that the arts would be perceived as a drain on for other lottery funded causes like the voluntary sector(Gilmore, 2012). “[C]ommentators voiced concern that the Olympics could only lead to the ring-fenced prioritisation of resources over other activities, such as the arts, to the centre and away from the regions, particularly in the face of (expected) incremental hikes in public funding of the Olympics infrastructure”(Gilmore, 2012, p. 156). Olympic funds targeted at the cultural programming are at risk of being reallocated due to the needs of the Games. Yet, private sponsorship allows for less dependence on Olympic funds and the possibility of more cultural programming that could be exercises in soft power or cultural diplomacy.

There is an emphasis on inputs with regard to explanation due to the uncharacteristic inclusion of management style and interurban competition as possible inputs within the

Olympic logic model. Although these elements are not explicitly included in traditional logic models, it is necessary to examine them as inputs because they function as resources for potential outputs and impacts.

Outputs

The emphasis on inputs reveals its prevalence in Olympic literature and the lack of explicit discussion on the cultural programming. As well as, the potential and documented effects of the cultural programming. Outputs are the activities that are produced as a result of inputs and effect program outcomes. For the purposes of this dissertation, the outputs consist of the cultural programming of the Olympics which include the artistic program of the Opening Ceremony and Shakespearean programming of the Arts Festival of the Los Angeles and London Olympics.

Outcomes

Outcomes of Olympic cultural programming can be short, medium, or long-term changes because of the programming (Fitzpatrick et al., 2004). There was also a lack of discussion on the specific outcomes for the cultural programming within Olympic literature. Gold and Revill explained “ …IOC, International Olympics Committee stipulated ‘…‘the [artistic] programme shall be of an equal standard and held concurrently and in the same vicinity as the sports events. It shall receive full recognition in the publicity released’…”(Inglis, 2008, p. 468). There were no clear guidelines as to the nature of the programs. Since the guidelines are unclear then the outcomes are also ambiguous, I look to the elements of cultural diplomacy to indicate possible indicator of outcomes: relationship building, mutual benefit, and shared value. Whether it is through artist residencies or exchange programs between institutions; I will be able to investigate

if the cultural programming has built relationships, was mutually beneficial and highlighted shared values and indicate social capital.

During the course of this investigation, I noted a lack of literature on evaluation of the cultural programming of the Olympics. The evaluation literature is relevant to this inquiry because it could highlight possible outputs. Even, the official studies done by the

Olympic industry are not available. For instance, the Olympic Games Impact (OGI)

Study for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games: Post Games Report prepared by The OGI-University of British Columbia Research Team was supposed to be available in 2013 and is still inaccessible. Due to this gap in the literature, I reviewed the literature on the evaluation of other large scale arts events for assistance. For instance, Creating an

Impact: Liverpool’s experience as European Capital of Culture a report by Beatriz

García, Ruth Melville, and Tamsin Cox demonstrates an effective framework that focuses on five thematic clusters: cultural access and participation, economy and tourism, cultural vibrancy and sustainability, image and perceptions, and governance and delivery processes(Beatriz Garcia et al., 2010). This report functions as a model for my investigation because it deeply examines outputs like participation. By identifying the origin of the audience members, audience demographic information ,and noting any changes in the amount of participation highlights the reach of the cultural programming.

I can also investigate cultural access and participation by reviewing geographic and socio-economic inclusivity(Beatriz Garcia et al., 2010). The renovation and construction of cultural venues provides a setting for Olympic and future arts participation.

Development

Cultural regeneration is a goal for many mega-events that functions as an outcome within this analytical framework. Surborg and other authors explored how “urban development projects completed in the name of the Games will create new entertainment and tourist spaces, as well as elicit the interests of international property firms” (cited in

Vanwynsberghe et al., 2013, p. 2079). The Cultural Olympiad and Olympic Arts

Festivals are part of the overall development strategies. The cultural programming creates a platform for growth in cultural tourism and the leave a legacy of cultural venues and improved urban infrastructure that benefits residents and visitors(John R. Gold &

Margaret M. Gold, 2011). These benefits can continue after the games end, if the artistic infrastructure had been developed appropriately. The opening and closing ceremonies with their artistic segments that have far greater impact in projecting the image of the city and nation to the world (John R. Gold & Margaret M. Gold, 2011).

Since the 1980’s sponsorships from multinational companies have support the Games and this regeneration. During the Los Angeles Games, the private sector and large institutions tended to receive benefits, and sports development was energized to become a motor of the regional economy”(Andranovich & Burbank, 2011, p. 832). The development was supported by a variety of companies Southland Corporation, Seven Eleven, McDonald’s, and Fuiji Film (Andranovich & Burbank, 2011). This development is also connected to a visible legacy. Whether the spaces are maintained, reused, or dilapidated speaks to the city and its capacity. Some cities take maintenance seriously. In Salt Lake City, the “city and state government established a mechanism for supporting its Olympic legacy,

“legacy” which was defined only in terms of the maintenance of specific facilities (both

were located outside SLC) and the city itself was unable to realize an Olympic legacy”(Andranovich & Burbank, 2011, p. 840). This recurring idea of legacy usually reflects facilities; this investigation could highlight other Olympic cultural legacies.

Barcelona 1992, is revered for using the Olympic cultural programming specifically for their city’s development initiatives. “Barcelona’s cultural program involved a major urban renewal effort that included the renovation and construction of museums and theatres throughout the city” (Good, 1999, p. 164). These Games are significant because they were constructed as part of a four year urban plan. Gold and Gold explain, “The city had deployed the Games as part of a conscious long-term development strategy that existed before the nomination to stage the Olympics and continued afterward” (J. R. G.

Gold, Margaret M., 2011, p. 46). Not only did the change in programming relate to structural development, but also offered host cities greater chances to develop consistent cultural policy initiatives and build up longer term strategies to promote and expand awareness of the host city and national idiosyncrasies (García, 2008, p. 366). Cultural programming can benefit from private endeavors like the development of a city structures.

Private sector sponsorship influence varies for each Olympic Games. It can contribute to cultural infrastructure and arts participation. Unfortunately, there is a lack accountability with regard to private sector involvement. Effective privatization of the Games would support the cultural programming and participation, while maintaining appropriate feedback channels.

Impacts

Within a practical logic model, outcomes and impacts are at times analogous. Within this inquiry, I do not distinguish the two because the long-term nature of outcomes lends itself to the Olympic discussion of legacy. Place branding is an indicator of an outcome and also another example of soft power. Peter Van Ham explains “that place branding is part of a wider spectrum of postmodern power, where soft power and public diplomacy also have their place” (Ham, 2008, p. 126). The opening and closing ceremonies are effective tools for place branding because the share the history, culture, and values of the city or nation with an international audience. For example, the Moscow Games attempted to promote location specific culture that reflected the Cold War context. “For political scientists, one of the interesting questions is whether place branding also entices people to “buy” the “products” of brand states, that is, their foreign policies”(Ham, 2008, p.

128). Branding is important because it influences how nations trust each other and sets the foundation for relationships between them. “For both place branding and public diplomacy, a key element is to build personal and institutional relationships and dialogue with foreign audiences by focusing on values, setting them apart from classical diplomacy, which primarily deals with issues.”(Ham, 2008, p. 135). I differentiate between shared values and place branding within my analytical framework because I want to emphasize that shared values is also significant element within soft power. The term legacy is placed within quotation marks to highlight the problematic nature of the term. Within the Olympic literature legacies are positive. By placing the term in within quotation marks, it highlights that there could be other negative consequences.

This analytical framework allows for effective examination of the cultural programming of the Olympics as exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy, as well as identifying cultural outcomes because it organizes and highlights the cultural programming.

Analytical Framework Inputs Outputs Outcomes/Impacts Bidding Process Shakespearean Programming Cultural Regeneration Interurban Artistic Program during Opening Relationship Competition Ceremony Development Image Projection/Place Management Branding Increase in Arts Participation Figure 4. Analytical Framework

100

Chapter 4. Methodology

Case Studies In this dissertation, I employ case study methodology as a means of investigating if the cultural programming of the Olympics are exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy using publications like “Case Study Research: Design and Methods” by Robert K. Yin, “Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches” by John Creswell and “The Art of Case Study Research “by Robert E. Stake for guidance. Yin examines case study as a method for research and addresses concerns about the method’s weaknesses. And Creswell provides foundational information for case studies. Lastly, Stake highlights specific methods that are applicable for my inquiry. The categorization of the cultural programming of the Los Angeles and London Olympics as cases and identification of programming experiences as exercises in cultural diplomacy or soft power serve as the foundation for this study. The particularity and complexity of case, coming to understand its activity within important circumstances embody the Olympic Games(Stake, 1995). Specifically, the cases function within a variety of important circumstances like the Cold War. The well-documented difficulties in determining specific outcomes of soft power or cultural diplomacy address Creswell’s idea that case studies-“…attempt[s] to understand an issue or a problem using the case as a specific illustration.” (Creswell, 2007, p. 73). Due to constraints like time and cost, long-term investigations have been limited. I plan to address this gap by using case studies to review the context of the programming which impacts outcomes ranging from fostering mutual understanding to the construction of murals. Creswell highlights this idea when he states, “Case study research involves the study of an issue explored through

101

one or more cases within a bounded system( i.e. a setting, a context).” (Creswell, 2007, p. 73). Yin’s definition of case study research relates to this topic by exploring it as preferred in examining contemporary events, but when relevant behaviors cannot be manipulated” (Yin, 2009, p. 11). The cultural programming (opening ceremony and arts festival) of the Los Angeles and London Olympics exemplify modern Olympic goals and with historical and present-day significance. Stake and Yin provide insights to different types of case studies and their significance which classifies this as an intrinsic and instrumental exploratory case study with an individual theory orientation. Stake’s identification of three categories or purposes for studying cases as intrinsic, instrumental, and collective guide this investigation (Stake, 1998). While Yin claims that case studies are exploratory, descriptive, or explanatory (Yin, 2009, p. 8). The goal for exploratory case studies is to develop pertinent hypotheses and propositions for further inquiry. In contrast to descriptive line of inquiry which focuses on how questions such as how many or much. Lastly, explanatory case studies focus on “why”(Yin, 2009, p. 9). The review of cultural programming as exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy functions as an instrumental and collective exploratory case study given that there are two Olympic Games for analysis, and an investigation of soft power; which can be argued as a theory or solely a concept, for development of further inquiry. It is not necessarily useful to sort cases into one of three categories because this dissertation functions within both, but the methods for investigation of the cases can be different to fit each category(Stake, 1995). This dissertation also reflects both Stake and Yin’s claim that case studies can be used for theoretical elaboration or analytic generalization(Schwandt, 2007). Specifically, Yin (2009) asserts that case studies include a theoretical orientation that functions a vehicle for generalizing the results and aids in defining the appropriate research design and data collection. Since soft power functions as the framing concept/theory, a case study approach suits this dissertation. Case studies are also defined by special features being characterized as particularistic, descriptive, or heuristic. A case study, like the Los Angeles and London 2012 Olympics

102

reflects particularistic characteristics by focusing on a specific situation event, program, or phenomenon and the case itself is important for what it reveals about the phenomenon. (Merriam, 2009). For instance, the cultural programming of the Olympics reflects specific event and program, while using a soft power lens to it exposes specific cultural outcomes.

Intrinsic case study Undertaken because one wants a better understanding of this particular case or it is of interest Instrumental case study Is examined to provide insight into an issue or refinement of theory Collective case study Researcher may study a number of cases jointly in order to inquire into the phenomenon, population, or general condition

Figure 4. Case Study

The literature highlights a debate regarding the purpose of case study. “Although Stake (2005) states that case study research is not a methodology but a choice of what to be studied (i.e., a case within a bounded system), others present it as a strategy of inquiry, a methodology, or a comprehensive research strategy (Denzin &Lincoln, 200 5; Merriam, 1998; Yin, 2003). I choose to view it as a methodology, a type of design in qualitative research, or an object of study, as well as a product of the inquiry”(Creswell, 2007, p. 73).

103

For this investigation case study is categorized as a methodology because it as a research strategy that can include guidelines and procedures that fit my inquiry. The variety in data could also include some quantitative evidence using descriptive statistics. The inclusive nature of case studies allows for possibly mixing methods. The difference in documentation could expand how I review data on cultural impact. This dissertation fulfills Yin’s (2009) five components for case study: 1. Research questions 2. Propositions a. Directs attention to something that should be examined within the scope of the study 3. Unit(s) of analysis 4. Linking the data to the propositions 5. Criteria for interpreting the findings

Research Questions 4. Does the cultural programming of the Olympics function as an exercise in soft power or cultural diplomacy based on the definitions within current literature? a. If yes, how do the cultural programming of the Olympics function as an exercise in soft power or cultural diplomacy? 5. What are the cultural impacts of the cultural aspects of the Olympics? 6. How does the outcomes of the cultural programming of the Olympics relate to public value? a. What factors may constitute an effective framework for the evaluation of long-term impact and public value?

Propositions Select cases that not only provide unique insights but are easy to get to and hospitable to out inquiry, perhaps for which a prospective informant can be identified with people

104

willing to comment on certain draft materials (Stake, 1995). I selected cases with Stake’s assertion in mind. Los Angeles stands out as the first Olympics to ever make a profit off of the Olympics in the wake of other Olympic economic failures like Montreal 1982. London is the only city to ever host the Olympics three times. Los Angeles is unique because it had one of the most spectacular opening and closing ceremonies within a Cold War context. Using London 2012 for comparison can demonstrate if cultural diplomacy changed over time. Besides standing out on their own merits, Los Angeles and London are comparable as global cities, cultural centers and both contain large scale institutions. These two cities have been explored and compared as world or global cities in the literature based on demographic size, interconnected through decision-making and finance, production and markets, destination for domestic and international migrants and advanced producer services(Beaverstock, 1999; Dogan, 2004; J. Friedmann, 1986; J. W. G. Friedmann, 1982). Also, the international reach of cultural elements like Hollywood and Shakespeare are apparent in both cities. “American dominance of the audio-visual industry including franchising and joint ventures with overseas companies, especially in television production, is unmatched anywhere”(De Zoysa & Newman, 2002, p. 193). Also approximately 50% of the world’s children are studying Shakespeare at school (Company, 2010). These cases have comparable cultural institutions (Arts Council England and California Arts Department) that could impact the legacy of the cultural programming of the Olympics. Also, I access organizations like LA84 Foundation and the Royal Shakespeare Company that have a bevy of information on the cultural programming of the Olympics that are compared. Other Strong Cases I acknowledge that there are many strong cases in Olympic history, but since 1980, Los Angeles and London are most comparable for my investigation. The Beijing Games did provide some iconic structures ( Bird’s Nest and Water Cube) and spectacular ceremonies(J. R. Gold & M. M. G. Gold, 2011). The logistical issues of overcoming a language barrier and navigating an unknown bureaucracy makes using Beijing as case unlikely. The Athens Games have obvious historical significance as the birth place of the

105

Olympics. Unfortunately, the economic crisis that impacted Greece by 2008 made achieving the legacy goals of the government more difficult(M. Gold, 2011). The economic downturn of Greece could complicate my investigation. The Sydney Games have been lauded as a success with a comprehensive business development program and image legacy that makes a case for Sydney being a world city(Beatriz Garcia, 2011). Yet, it does not compare as well as Los Angeles and London because they were both already distinguished as world cities before they hosted the Olympic Games. Atlanta 1996 would seem like that it would be comparable due to it being an American host city. Unfortunately, these Games did not enhance its broader image as a cultural centre (J. R. Gold & M. M. G. Gold, 2011). Lastly, the Barcelona and Seoul Olympics are not far enough removed from the Los Angeles Olympics to demonstrate any changes over time. Units of Analysis The cultural programming of the Los Angeles and London 2012 Olympics offer a variety of options for analysis, which reflects Creswell and Yin’s perspective of the approach. “Case study research is a qualitative approach in which the investigator explores a bounded system ( a case) or multiple bounded systems ( cases) over time, through detailed, in depth data collection involving multiple sources of information ( e.g observations, interviews, audiovisual material, and documents and reports), and reports a case description and case-based themes (Creswell, 2007, p. 74). The cultural programming of the Olympics are a specific contemporary event and the cultural programming of the Olympics is contemporary event that can be examined through different sources like video footage and via interviews by individuals who participated in some element of it. Yin also explains how a variety of sources can be used for investigation when he states“…the case study’s unique strength is its ability to deal with a full variety of evidence-documents, artifacts, interviews, and observations” (Yin, 2009, p. 11). By reviewing both the arts festivals and the opening ceremonies highlight the connection to the strength of the sports event.

106

A diversity in resources can provide a comprehensive perspective for this inquiry because the elements and results of the cultural programming of the Olympics’ were presented in different ways (i.e. video recording, programs, academic literature). For instance, present physical structures like the Olympic Gateway in Los Angeles and partnerships between organizations like the Tate Gallery and Royal Shakespeare Company are reviewed to provide insights into cultural outcomes. I also interview producers and organizers of the events to determine the impact of these experiences. I identify participants through professional resources and by implementing a snowballing technique. The use of photos, interviews, surveys, reports, video, global opinion surveys and other documents address the how Los Angeles and London Olympics state their goals, how they are measured, and their long-term impact. The analyses of these resources are archival and historical in nature. For instance, I compare photos of Olympic Mural Project during and years after the completion of the Los Angeles Games to get a sense of appreciation and value. I also analyze video and other materials to identify its purpose and intended messages using the E. McClung Fleming approach that focuses on an artifact's history, material, construction, design, and function. By specifically reviewing significant media coverage, I analyze the content to investigate possible impacts like international perception. Companies like Ipsos Mori, Anholt-GfK Roper Nation Brands Index, Country Brand Index (CBI) Future Brand , and Country RepTrak the Reputation Institute employ a variety of opinion surveys, models, rating systems that allow for perception and branding comparisons for events and nations. The results the tools identify how the Olympic cities rank as a means for potential impact.

Interviews Topical, detailed and in depth semi-structure interviews represent an element of data collection. I interviewed Jacqui O’Hanlon, Education Director of the Royal Shakespeare

Company, because was responsible for organizing the Worlds Together Conference and

107

provided insights on exercises in cultural diplomacy. I also interviewed Hope Schneider,

Associate Director of the Olympic Arts Festival during the Los Angeles in 1984, because she highlighted the explicit intention of the Arts Festival. The semi-structured nature of the interviews allows for flexible questions even though there is specific data required from respondents(Merriam, 2009).The goal of topical interviews is to work out a coherent explanation by piecing together what different people have said, while each person may have his or her own construction of events (Rubin & Rubin, 2011). This lends itself well to my inquiry because I garner perspectives from different fields that could have experienced the cultural programming in varied ways. Detailed interviews provide description. While in-depth interviews highlight develop meaning (Rubin &

Rubin, 2011). “In-depth interviews rarely constitute the sole source of data in research… they are used in conjunction with data gathered through such avenues as…direct observation, informal interviewing, documentary records, and team field research

“(Gubrium, 2002). Direct observation of the spaces like the Gateway and Mural Project and reviewing documentation will be other sources of data. The typical in-depth, semi- structured, or unstructured interview aims to elicit stories of experience(Schwandt, 2007).

By interviewing individuals that were involved with cultural programming will provide essential insight for my investigation. I follow Yin’s suggestions for successful interviews by speaking in modest amounts, being non-directives, staying neutral, maintaining a rapport, using an interview protocol, and analyzing while interviewing (R.

K. Yin, 2011). The interviews were also responsive. Although there is a topic in mind, the interview will change based on the interviewee (Rubin & Rubin, 2011). The

108

responsive nature of interviews was apparent in my conversation with Isabel Rojas-

Williams, Executive Director of Mural Conservancy Los Angeles, when she highlighted the conservation issues surrounding the Olympic Mural Project. My goal is not just to conduct an interview, but to also have my questions answered and get quality information(Feldman, Bell, & Berger, 2003).

Surveys I created multimode surveys because participants may favor one mode over another based on time and convenience(Fowler, 2009). Specifically, I survey the Olympic cultural programming audience. Although some cases have occurred relatively far in the past, I contact audience members using professional sources which include people who have attended any of the cultural events like the cultural Olympiad or the opening and closing ceremonies. The audience perspective on possible cultural impacts is essential in order to conduct a comprehensive investigation. The surveys are modeled off current tools to help address the local effects like arts participation and perception of the cultural aspects of the Olympics. For instance, Impacts 08 Local Area Study Survey measures individual’s perception of Liverpool being the Capital of Culture. This survey is useful because it includes demographic information and items that address arts participation.

Although it measures the impacts of Liverpool as the Capital of Culture, I has been adapted to effectively measure the impacts of the cultural aspects of the Olympics. The format which includes open and closed questions provides a diversity and rich data. Open questions allow respondents to more closely describe their views and maybe less frustrating. Closed questions can be beneficial for communicating to respondents what

109

an appropriate response would entail. They are easier for the researcher to interpret, may be more analytically useful, and are easier format for recording answers(Fowler, 2009).

Sampling

I used non-probability sampling which has been discussed by Robinson (1989) Henry

(1990). “ Non-Probability modifications of sampling procedures vary, they all share the property that, at the last stage, interviewer discretion and/or respondent characteristics not part of the sample design affect the likelihood of being included in a sample”(Fowler,

2009). I target certain populations because it is less expensive and time consuming.

Nonprobability sampling methods produce cost savings for personal interview surveys and make it possible to conduct surveys in a few day(Fowler, 2009).Specifically, I applied convenience and purposive sampling that specifically selects individuals that will provide useful information in order to address the cultural aspects of the Olympics. I hoped to interview individuals that are available and look for individuals that can give the most pertinent information(R. Yin, 2009).The sample size is currently unknown because I use a snowballing technique to gain access to the appropriate participants. There is likely a bias in the direction of availability and willingness to be interviewed(Fowler, 2009).

I selected the participating organizations and individuals based on the art discipline, type of institution, and role in the cultural aspects of the Olympics. These distinctions are important to note because they could affect their perspective of the cultural aspects of the

Olympics. I adhere to Stake’s notion on selection. “Selection of data sources can be too much left to chance…The researcher should have a connoisseur’s appetite for the best persons, places and occasions…that best help us understand the case…”(Stake, 1995, p.

110

56). For instance, a smaller institution may not have access to resources necessary to create an evaluation tool or funds to devote to evaluation. A larger institution or agency may have connections to academic endeavors in order to gain measurable insights.

Personal or educational contact or experience also will determine the selection of each participant. I intended to contact agencies like the British Council, Arts Council England,

Department of Cultural Affairs Los Angeles and California Arts Council to receive a variety of governmental perspectives. The California Arts Council could identify different institutional collaborations as local cultural impacts. Each agency’s specialty and potentially unique connection to the cultural aspects of the Olympics can provide diverse insights that are essential for my inquiry. By contacting individual institutions like Goodman Theatre/Flying Karamazov Brothers, Piccolo Teatro Di Milano, the Royal

Shakespeare Company, and Le Theatre Du Soliel, I gather information on possible collaborations and networks that were established. A similar selection process will occur with specific individuals who have assisted administratively with the creation and implementation of the cultural aspects of the Olympics. In order to get a variety of perspectives these individuals could include teaching artists, executive directors of agencies, and ministers of departments. For instance, Leslie Thomas, Community Arts

Division Director from Department of Cultural Affairs Los Angeles highlights not only that collaboration has occurred locally but also the national and international impact of the collaboration. While a teaching artist may reveal more specific impacts to a community or an individual.

111

My intention was to use the results of the surveys as the core of my data. Yet, I did not receive buy in from participating organizations and focused my analysis on document and materials analysis.

Space Review

I observed spaces in Los Angeles, specifically, the Olympic Gateway and Olympic Mural

Project, to provide insight into themes and messages for 1984 Olympics. During the process of observing the space I recorded events to provide description for further analysis and reporting. Specifically, I will use material culture as a means of analysis of these spaces. Schreth explained that method of cultural inquiry employing physical objects as its primary data (P. E. Bolin & Blandy, 2003). “All human-mediated sights, sounds, smells, tastes, objects, forms, and expressions are material culture. When there is purposeful human intervention, based on cultural activity, there is material culture. This being the case, nothing affected by human agency is overlooked as too insignificant for intensive examination, nor viewed as too small for eliciting substantive meaning (P. E.

Bolin & Blandy, 2003, p. 249). In the observational situation, I focus on actions that take place in the field, as opposed to describing a person or a scene, is one way of noting what is going on while minimizing the stereotyping ( Yin, 2010, p. 178). Also I will employ E.

McClung Fleming’s approach to artifact study to the public art pieces.

History. Where and when the object was made, by whom and for whom and why

successive changes in ownership, condition, and function.

112

Material. What the object is made of—wood, fibers, ceramics,metals, glass, and

so on.

Construction. This has to do with the techniques of manufacture employed,

workmanship, and the way parts are organized to bring about the object's

function.

Design. This includes the structure, form, style, ornament, and iconography ofthe

object.

Function. This embraces both the uses (intended functions) and the roles

(unintended functions) of the object in its culture, including utility, delight, and

communication (Blandy & Bolin, 2012, p. 156)

This approach lends itself to exploring the messages that spaces are trying to share and if this cultural artifact can highlight elements of cultural diplomacy or soft power. While I am in the spaces, I take notes that support the later analytic and compositional needs(R.

K. Yin, 2011). “In both the observing and interviewing situations, and especially during the early fieldwork, your notes should avoid using not only your own paraphrasing but, more subtly, your own “categories” for describing reality”(R. K. Yin, 2011). I hope to avoid lapsing into an ethnocentric or other self-• centered perspective whereby unfamiliar expressions are associated with an alien connotation; interpretations carry with them the unstated assumption that a single view is “true”; or descriptions are framed in terms of

“what is supposed to be”(R. K. Yin, 2011).

113

Materials Review

I visited the LA84 Foundation and University of California Los Angeles’ Special

Collections and reviewed any material (objects, reports, flyers, videos, meeting minutes etc.) that would be pertinent to investigating exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy. I identified the usefulness of the material and estimate the time that should be allocated to it in advance (Stake, 1995). I also employed material culture studies perspective, as I review any artifact’s history or function. The analysis can be different for artifacts and documents materials. “For materials there will be an emphasis again on capturing the exact words and phrases in the written material (R. K. Yin, 2011, p. 181).

Film captures events as they happen, but is limited by what the mind can imagine and the camera can record(Merriam, 2009). Although film is limited, I used Youtube to review the artistic program of the Los Angeles and London Opening Ceremonies. Developing analytic files and applying rudimentary coding schemes to the data that I collect helped me learn from and manage the information I receive(Glesne, 2006).

Linking Data and Interpretation

Data Analysis

I analyzed the interview data through coding. Specifically, by looking at both the frequency of certain responses as well as looking for patterns by coding. Coding the qualitative data is an important of the analysis process. Specifically, I use open coding the first time I review the data in order to assign labels and categorize the data (R. K. Yin,

2011). Through attribute and magnitude coding, I assign identifiers and note the frequency and intensity of an element (Saldana 2009). During this first cycle of coding, I

114

also employ structural coding that links themes specifically to my research questions

(Saldana 2009). Through the second cycle of coding, I use selective coding to use the codes that I found in the first section and try to reduce them(R. K. Yin, 2011). I also identify theme by creating linkages and establish patterns(Saldana 2009). The use of tables and matrices will allow me to organize the data. Lastly, I address rival explanations to strengthen my arguments and battle criticism(R. K. Yin, 2011).

Subjectivity

“Standard qualitative designs call for persons most responsible for interpretations to be in the field, making observations, exercising subjective judgment, analyzing and synthesizing, all the while realizing their consciousness”(Stake, 1995, p. 41) As a participant of the Stand Up for Shakespeare Program, I had the opportunity to travel to the Royal Shakespeare Company and participate in their educational programming.

Through this experience, I was introduced to the company’s programs and its participation in the London Olympic Games. As a researcher, I’m conscious of how this experience could impact my investigation.

Limitations

Although there are some concerns regarding case studies like time and lack of generalizability, there are many ways to address them. Yin explained through diligent research and adherence to procedures could reduce the lack of rigor. He also highlighted that case studies are not supposed to be generalizable to populations but to theoretical propositions (2009). This investigation can provide insights into different concepts that can lead to quantitative inquiries that can be generalizable. Likewise Yin stated, “Case

115

studies do not depend solely on participant-observer data and it can be done via the internet or phone.” (Yin, 2009, p. 15). Time is also not a concern because technology can remedy most issues. Lastly, case studies can be used to complement quantitative experiments not replace them. (Yin, 2009, p. 16) This approach can highlight or provide detail for current quantitative investigations on the Olympics. In conclusion, case study research could best fit my inquiry because of the exploratory nature and the sources of data. I can address the concerns during the research process.

Validity To avoid bias and ensure validity I use an extensive literature review and interviews.

Recordings and transcriptions of the interviews will allow research participants to confirm the accuracy of his or her representation. I address construct validity by identifying correct operational measures using multiple sources of evidence: interviews, surveys, observations and material reviews. By using pattern matching, building of explanations, and addressing rival explanations, I establish internal validity. To address external validity, I will define the domain to which a study’s findings can be generalized as the cultural programming of the Olympics. These cases will be reliable because I demonstrate how the operations of a study, specifically my data collection can be repeated with the same results (R. Yin, 2009).

116

Chapter 5: Los Angeles 1984

Introduction

This chapter argues the Los Angeles 1984 Olympics exemplified exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy through cultural programming. 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 its resources of culture, values, and policies” . Cultural diplomacy, which is an element of soft power, is described by Milton Cumming (2003) as the exchange of ideas, information, art, and other aspects of culture among nations and their peoples in order to foster mutual understanding. The Cold War context of the Los Angeles Olympics provided ample opportunity for the sharing of values and culture with the intention to influence. A review of interurban competition, management and boycotts of the Los Angeles Games furthermore reveal the necessary resources for soft power and cultural diplomacy. The artistic program during the opening ceremony functioned as an exercise in soft power because it highlighted American values through song and dance in an appealing manner, which was the intention of the Los Angeles Organizing Committee. In addition, the Arts

Festival provided opportunities for cultural diplomacy because it fostered mutual understanding specifically through the use of Shakespearean programming. An

117

investigation of the current state of the Mural Project and Olympic Gateway demonstrate cultural outcomes of the Los Angeles Games. The artistic program and the

Shakespearean programming typified soft power and cultural diplomacy during the Los

Angeles 1984 Olympics. Exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy occurred during the Los Angeles Games based on an examination of resources, artistic program and

Shakespearean programming and cultural legacy.

Inputs: Resources of Cultural Programming of Los Angeles 1984

Resources necessary for the creation and implementation of Los Angeles 1984 represent inputs that serve as the foundation for exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy.

Although elements like funds and materials generally function as inputs within a logic model. For the purposes of this chapter, I expand the idea of inputs to include elements like interurban competition, management, and boycotts which must be in place for a city to contend for the Games. They further create a cultural legacy because they impact a city’s present and future infrastructure.

The 1984 Olympic Games in Los Angeles, California, stand out in the history of the

Olympics as the first Games to effectively use sponsorship to make a profit. Paul Close,

David Askew, and Xu Xin highlighted this idea in The Beijing Olympiad. As the authors explained, the total revenue of the 1984 Los Angeles Games was US $123 million. In addition, corporate sponsorships achieved global penetration or reach as the Games were broadcast to 156 countries, local businesses made money, and the city became the center

118

of world’s attention without accruing long-term costs or heavy debt burdens (as cited in

Short, 2003). Corporate sponsorship, which became a model for future Olympic marketing programs, also was an outcome of the 1984 Los Angeles Games. Other scholars, such as Dyreson and Llewellyn (2010), also emphasize the financial success as well as the legacy of the California lifestyle epitomized in this particular Olympic Games.

This legacy highlighted the inclusion of new sporting events, like windsurfing, that reflected California pastimes. Dyreson and Llewellyn (2010) also explain other impacts related to cultural diplomacy: “The Los Angeles Olympics, it seemed, had restored faith in American exceptionalism throughout the nation” (p. 122).

Although this dissertation does not focus on the economic outcomes of the Olympics, the significance of the financial success of the sponsorship model make the 1984 Games unique among others. The successful marketing program and the global penetration not only shared corporate interest but also reflected values of the United States, thus exemplifying soft power. Since this was the first financially successful Olympics, it became a standard for other Games. The interurban competition and the bidding process are inextricably linked because a host city must be distinct prior to hosting the Games, this distinction through cultural development. Investigating those elements as well as management and boycotts as inputs allows for an examination of the resources that supported exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy.

Interurban Competition

119

Although Los Angeles won the uncontested 1984 bid, it had been employing interurban competition strategies for years to secure the city’s distinction. For instance, e the renovation of the Coliseum in 1932 to remain competitive among other cities.

Urban competition is an external coercive force that puts clear limitations upon

the power of specific projects to transform the lot of particular cities… It may

even force repetitive and serial reproduction of certain patterns of development

(such as the serial reproduction of "world trade centers" or of new cultural and

entertainment centers, of waterfront development, of postmodern shopping malls,

and the like). (Harvey, 1989)

These renovations allowed Los Angeles to defeat other cities’ in bids to host events like the World Cup in 1994 (Dyreson, 2010). The Los Angeles Games could be a piece of a greater serial city development. The Olympic Games are the mega-event of choice for city and national government development agendas and are intended to attract tourist revenues and more important, national, and international media recognition for the host city(Andranovich, Burbank, & Heying, 2001). For instance, Los Angeles built and then renovated the Coliseum for the 1932 and 1984 Los Angeles Olympic Games and the

World Cup. Los Angeles’ strong position as a world city is due to strong industry and infrastructure. The ability to stand out as a world city could draw from economic stability, infrastructure development, and cultural development, which displays a relationship between soft power and place branding. The distinctive characteristics of cities due to interurban competition allow for place branding. According to Ham

(2008),“For both place branding and public diplomacy, a key element is to build personal

120

and institutional relationships and dialogue with foreign audiences by focusing on values, setting them apart from classical diplomacy, which primarily deals with issues.”(p. 135).

The inter-urban competition on this level is very expensive and particularly tough because this is an area where agglomeration economies remain supreme and the monopoly power of established centres, like Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, and

London, is particularly hard to break. (Harvey, 1989, p. 9). Interurban competition functioned as an input (resource) for the Los Angeles Olympics because it was a part of city development that includes other mega-events and infrastructure development, which positively impacted London’s ability to host the Games.

Private Management Style

Management functions as a resource for the production and implementation of the Games because it impacts autonomy, which influences the Los Angeles Olympic Organizing

Committee’s (LAOOC) ability to exercise soft power. The LAOOC’s unique position as the only city to bid for the 1984 Games resulted in more autonomy through the establishment of the LAOOC as a private entity. The Committee and Los Angeles Mayor

Bradley secured the terms of the agreement by threatening to withdraw their bid. The final agreement stated that the United States Olympic Committee and the Los Angeles

Olympic Organizing Committee would provide a $50 million trust fund and would release Los Angeles from fiscal responsibility of the Games. Any surplus would be divided between the United States Olympic Committee (40%), sports activities for residents in Southern California (40%) and sports activities across the United States

(20%) (Metcalf, 1996). The financial autonomy allowed for management autonomy

121

which that trickled down to the choices made for the opening ceremony and Olympic

Arts Festival, which is a clear example of soft power efforts and intentions.

Los Angeles had the opportunity to learn from its previous hosting experience in1936, as well as other nations’ strategies, that allowed the Games to implement a private management style. Financial issues with the Montreal 1976 Olympics and international unrest created an environment where no other cities bid for the 1984 Olympics. This allowed the Los Angeles Olympic Organizing Committee to negotiate with the

International Olympic Committee to assume financial responsibility (Metcalf, 1996).

Following the Moscow Games, Los Angeles 1984 embodied a unique management style because the Los Angeles Olympic Organizing Committee managed it privately, reflecting a neoliberal approach. According to Vanwynsberghe, Surborg, and Wyly (2013), “A central component of neoliberal urbanism entails a shift from the delivery of public services to various forms of private sector innovations designed to achieve social change through market incentives” (p.2089). The Los Angeles Olympic Organizing Committee was established as a private company and its cultural department hired co-producing agencies to organize the arts events. This was also the case in Atlanta 1996 (Beatriz

Garcia, 2008, p. 372). In order to privatize the Games, city stakeholders needed to buy-in to the idea of relinquishing not only accountability, but also control. Harvey (1989) argued that city administrators or wealthy business leaders need to put a particular stamp on the nature and direction of urban entrepreneurialism to shape it to political ends.

Mayor Tom Bradley represented the stakeholder buy-in with his support the Los Angeles

122

Olympics. He promised to keep the city at arm’s length from the organization of the

Games, appointed a local organizing committee (the Los Angeles Olympic Organizing

Committee, described as a “who’s-who” of business, sports, and entertainment in Greater

Los Angeles), and put the city in position to reap the financial benefits of hosting the

Olympics (Andranovich & Burbank, 2011, p. 831). This third party agency management approach displays a similar soft power element that seeks to deemphasize government involvement, which fulfills Frankel’s claim. “The great problem is whether the government can come gradually to the view that there are cultural relationships between the United States and other societies on which their mutual destinies depend, and which cannot be properly cultivated if they are bureaucratized or political-ized.”(Frankel,

1969b, p. 155). The members of the organizing committee would make sure that private interests were met because they were congruent with the committee members’ interests.

In order to effectively host the Olympic Games which included the creation and implementation cultural programming, private management functioned as an input by assembling leadership and funds in order to design the Olympic experience.

The privatization of the Los Angeles Olympic Committee allowed for distinct leadership styles of Peter V. Ueberroth, the president of the Los Angeles Olympic Organizing

Committee, and Robert Fitzpatrick, director of the Olympic Arts Festivals of 1984, to flourish due to the lack of government oversight. Ueberroth’s distinct management style intimidated, inspired and alienated his employees. In an interview with Kenneth Reich,

Ueberroth explained the purpose for his technique “…in something like the Olympic

123

Games you don’t have time to try and take a someone in and give them counseling and explain and work out the problems. You need to make an example of the problem at the very time it happens, so that everybody that’s involved who might also be making the same kind of mistake, can learn from it”(Reich, 1986). His controlling management also characterized relationships with international elected officials, President Regan, employees, press, and sponsors. He was never afraid to say no. It was actually a preferred management method for the organizing committee to respond in such a way to potential vendors(Reich, 1986). Ueberroth’s intense approach was intended to prepare employees for the stress of Olympic Games, but at times it alienated the individuals he was supposed to be encouraging.

Harry S. Usher, vice president of the LAOOC, utilized Ueberroth’s approach as well.

Although Ueberroth led with force, he delegated the management of the Olympic Arts

Festival to Robert Fitzpatrick. Recommended by members of the LAOOC, Paul Ziffren, and Mayor Tom Bradley, Fitzpatrick the then president of California Institute of the Arts

Valencia, became the director of the Olympic Arts Festival in 1980(Peter Ueberroth,

1985). Fitzpatrick, known as a benevolent dictator, directed the Olympic Arts Festival with an artistic challenge. He believed the Arts Festival shouldn’t have a committee or be reviewed by outsiders because anything that was interesting, provocative, or unfamiliar would be removed (Reich, 1984). He needed complete control and total freedom, which he received from Ueberroth. Although Fitzpatrick included challenging works in the festival, within the theater program he relied on classic pieces, specifically with regard to

Shakespeare, that were used to express the shared values and cultures of many nations.

124

Ueberroth’s and Fitzpatrick’s management styles functioned as a resource for exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy because they served as the substance for outputs (the opening ceremony and arts festival) that highlighted Olympic legacies.

Olympic Boycotts

Olympic boycotts acted as inputs because the political values they expressed served as the foundation for the Los Angeles Games. Political values can be used as soft power when they are lived up to at home and abroad and are resources when they are seen as legitimate and having moral authority (J. Nye, 2004). The Cold War context of the

Moscow and Los Angeles Olympics reflected the relationship between sports and politics which has occurred many times throughout the history of the Games: Berlin 1936,

Mexico 1968, and Munich 1972 (Morrow, 1980). The Olympics attract other groups, including nonstate actors like Mexico City’s (1968)Tommie Smith and John Carlos when they gave the black power salute or the orchestrators of the Munich (1972) massacre.

These instances highlight how the Olympics can be utilized as an effective platform for states, nonsovereign nations, and nonstate actors in giving them the same degree of international attention as the superpowers and their allies (D'Agati, 2013). The nongovernmental actors are an essential element of exercises in soft power. The International

Olympic Committee (IOC) also became more politicized as it grappled with inclusion during the Cold War. For instance, the IOC wrestled with the issue of how, or even if, it would incorporate the Soviet Union and the other Communist nations into the Olympic movement as well as which of the Germanys, Koreas, and Chinas should participate in the movement (Sarantakes, 2009).The political nature and foreign policy initiatives of the

125

United States and Soviet Union developed the setting for the boycotts of the Moscow

1980 and Los Angeles 1984 Games that supports this investigation of exercises in cultural diplomacy and soft power. The capitalist, nongovernmental, private sector

Games of the western bloc superpower was the antithesis of Soviet socialists, government-centered and government controlled Games of the superpower of the eastern bloc. This prompts the question: Who hosts a stronger Olympics? (D'Agati, 2013). Thus, cultural programming of the Los Angeles Games fits within soft power framework because the soft power resource of political values was used to influence.

Given the invasion of Afghanistan, the United States used democratic and liberal ideals to boycott the 1980 Moscow Olympic Games, demonstrating elements of soft power like influence through political values. President Jimmy Carter insisted that he introduced the boycott solely to defend human rights, international law and the security of the USA and many other free world nations. He added that this stand did not detract in any way from the United States' devotion to the Olympic movement (Hill, 1999). A general outcry from the National Olympic Committee reverberated throughout the United States because the

United States government prevented athletes from representing their country and for potential repercussions for the Los Angeles Olympics. Official government documents highlighted soft power elements with regard to the Soviet Union. For example,

Congressman Doran used phrases in government correspondence to the House of

Representatives like “cost” and “international prestige” as consequences for the Soviet

Union when the United States and other countries boycotted the Moscow Games (Doran,

126

1980). This language displays Getz’s (2008) definition reflects elements soft power.

“Indeed, many countries have used mega events to gain legitimacy and prestige, draw attention to their accomplishments, foster trade and tourism, or to help open their countries to global inﬂuences”(Getz, 2008, p. 414). The Soviet counter-campaign did not accept that the invasion of Afghanistan as the reason for the boycott. An article in

Sovietski Sport from January 20th, 1990 explained that the United States, England and some other imperialist states, are striving to utilise sport as an instrument of their policy and hinder the forthcoming meeting of world youth on the arenas of the Moscow

Olympic Games (Hill, 1999). The United States government did its best to persuade its allies to join the boycott, specifically it tried to persuade West Germany, Japan, and Great

Britain because its government responses were linked to other issues in foreign and domestic politics (Hill, 1999). Ultimately, 65 nations including the United States, West

Germany, and Japan boycotted the Moscow Games. The support of these nations was essential to the United States because it demonstrated unity during the Cold War and set the stage for exercises in soft power for Los Angeles 1984.

The 1984 Los Angeles Olympics amplified previous international tensions that emphasize the Cold War context and exercises in soft power specifically with regard to the Soviet Union boycott. Philip D’Agati illuminates the circumstances, “[i]f the Los

Angeles Olympics have less positive and more negative moments, the Soviet Union is handed the perfect comparison between the East and the West. (D'Agati, 2013, p. 150)

The political elements of the time caused American and Soviet responses that led to the

127

ultimate boycott. For instance, the California state legislature passed a resolution recommending the Soviet athletes be banned from Los Angeles in response to the Soviet air force’s shooting down of a Korean airliner and the formation of the Ban of the

Soviets Coalition (Hill, 1999). The United States and Soviet Union had differing perspectives as to the cause of Olympic and international tension. The Soviet Union highlighted other issues. “Soviet boycott is not as straightforward because its policy featured a complex series of complaints related to Olympic policy, Soviet security, and

American organizational plans”(D'Agati, 2013). With regard to the American organizational plans, the Soviet Union disagreed with the private organization of the

Games because previous games had government involvement. This reflected the differing ideologies of the host cities and nations, which were attempting to appear attractive to the world. The official Soviet statement highlighted American authorities’ interference in

LAOOC affairs and political aims as well as anti-Soviet hysteria as motives for their non- participation("Soviet Text Cites 'Rude Violations'," 1984). Both the United States and the Soviet Union used the 1984 Games to further policy and international issues.

The Soviet boycott of the Los Angeles Olympics reflected a failed attempt at using traditional diplomacy to encourage cultural diplomacy. The many visits from Fitzpatrick and Armand Hammer to the Soviet Union to discuss possibilities of collaboration ended in the Soviet Union’s refusal to participate in the Games (Hammer, 1983). Romania, the only country from the Eastern Bloc to accept the invitation to participate in the Games, was welcomed into the opening ceremony with a standing ovation. Their participation

128

appealed to the audience’s belief in American soft power through Romania’s seeming identification with capitalism as a result of their participation and apparent separation from the Eastern Bloc. The actions of the United States and the Soviet Union caused more discussion and unrest with regard to political issues like the Soviet invasion than actual participation in the Games. By not attending the Games these nations exercised soft power by using their absence to influences in public opinion and political outcomes.

Reviewing the interurban competition, management, and boycotts of the Games as inputs for the exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy, highlights the unique resources the

Los Angeles Games employed that led to outputs and impacts that were exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy.

Outputs

For the purposes of this inquiry the cultural programming of Los Angeles Olympics refers to the artistic programming during the opening ceremony and the Shakespearean programming during the Arts Festival. The examination of the goals and programming for potential outputs of the Games effectively fits within the analytical framework and leads to the discussion of potential cultural outcomes and legacies such as the elevation of

American culture internationally or the checkered legacy of the Mural Project; thus, determining that different cultural programs were exercises in cultural diplomacy or soft power.

Los Angeles Olympic Goals

129

An examination of branding and exchanges as cultural programming goals reflects the soft power and cultural diplomacy intentions of festival and government entities. The official Olympic report does not include great detail with regard to the international relevance of the opening ceremony, yet it does explore its relationship to Olympic sports as a potential goal: “ the planners of the Opening Ceremonies were given an important goal to accomplish: get the Games started on a positive, emotional and thrilling note and lay the groundwork for a successful Olympic Games” (L. A. O. O. Committee, 1985, p.

200). Robert Fitzpatrick and Kenneth Reich echoed the emotional sentiment of the opening ceremony (Reich, 1984). Official Olympic literature lacks extensive comparison of the Los Angeles Olympic opening ceremonies to the Moscow opening ceremonies probably due to the intentional separation of politics and sports. But, other outlets, news media compare both ceremonies; not only in an Olympic context, but also an international affairs context. Although the official goals and official Olympic literature do not emphasize soft power implications of the Los Angles opening ceremony, the Cold

War context, Olympic boycotts, and following the Moscow Games ensured that the soft power implications through the presentation of American culture and values during the

Los Angeles opening ceremony are inescapable.

The explicit goals of the 1984 Olympic Arts Festival reflected primarily local initiatives that would benefit the Los Angeles community, but there was one goal for this international festival that relates specifically to cultural diplomacy. Ueberroth explained the LAOOC contradicted Rule 34 of the Olympic Charter which limited the program to

130

cultural expressions of the host country, by creating an international program (Peter

Ueberroth, 1985). According to the LAOOC, the intentions of the arts festival were:

“to be the year’s major international arts festival; to serve as an elegant prelude

and joyful accompaniment to the 1984Olympic Games; to celebrate the

international brotherhood of the artist as the Games celebrate the international

brotherhood of the athlete; to showcase cultural diversity and excellence; to

present artists and works that have been seen infrequently by Los Angeles

audiences; to make a lasting contribution to Los Angeles and its artistic and

cultural growth; to provide a cross-cultural forum for world artists and audiences;

to create an atmosphere of festival and celebration throughout the greater Los

Angeles area”(L. A. O. O. Committee, 1985).

The goal, which is included in the final report of the Los Angeles Games, to provide a cross-cultural forum for world artists and audiences exhibits characteristics of cultural diplomacy by hinting at a mutually beneficial experience for international interests. The idea that the intention of the cultural programming of the Olympics was an exercise in soft power or cultural diplomacy is later supported by a statement made by Mayor Tom

Bradley of Los Angeles. In Olympic Arts Festival “Prelude to the Olympics: A Gala

Concert” brochure Mayor Bradley hoped “that the legacies left by the Olympic Arts

Festival will include…a permanent arts link between local arts groups and international troupes” (Bradley, 1984). This permanent link emphasizes a relationship between the organizations that would need to be mutually beneficial to last. The Cold War context provided unintentional goals for the opening ceremony that embodied soft power

131

characteristics and the explicit discussion of mutual benefit and relationship building as instances of cultural diplomacy.

Artistic Program

The artistic program of the Los Angeles Opening Ceremony was an exercise in soft power because it used American values, culture, and policies to attract national and international audiences. The Opening Ceremony, broadcasted by ABC with Jim McKay and Peter Jennings as commentators welcomed visitors, athletes, and viewers to the

Olympic Games igniting an emotional response through spectacle. The Los Angeles ceremony did conform to most Olympic traditions, but disregarded tradition also by presenting the artistic program before the ceremonial portion. The remarkable ceremony which consisted of an 800 member marching band, Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue" performed 85 grand pianos, and a 92,000 person card stunt involving the entire audience, where all the flags of the participating countries were displayed, could only be compared to Moscow 1980 with regard to scale and form.

An examination of characteristics of the artistic programming of Los Angeles opening ceremony through a material culture lens reveals it as an exercise in soft power. By elevating American culture and values, the artistic program attempted to attract spectators around the world. The following approach proposed by E. McClung Fleming (1974) focuses on an artifact's history, material, construction, design, and function" (D. B. a. P.

Bolin, 2012). The emphasis of this analysis is on the design and function of the presentation of the artistic program. The staff wanted to present Opening Ceremonies that were emotional, majestic and inspirational. David Wolper (creator of the Opening and

132

Closing Ceremonies), who had attended six previous Olympic Games, understood the importance of the Opening Ceremonies and also understood that if they were not spectacular, Hollywood’s entertainment industry in particular and the United States in general might be subject to severe criticism” (L. A. O. O. Committee, 1985, p. 200). The creation of the artistic program allowed for exchange in multiple ways. Building from ideas presented in Global Positioning Strategies for the Arts, “Everything we do in the area of foreign policy is presenting our own country in the most positive image - but you also put yourself in the shoes of the other country”(Organizations, 2009). By highlighting that the opening ceremony could receive criticism, Wolper demonstrated its soft power through the need to review it through an international lens, thus, he presented a two-way pattern of using this lens for critique when creating and presenting the program.

The blue skies above the green fields of the Los Angeles Coliseum provided the picturesque backdrop for the crisp movements, pristine uniforms, and regal music, which demonstrates the extreme care and attention to detail of the organizing committee. The opening ceremony functioned as the formal welcome for the Olympics and the means for disseminating American values through the music, movement, and visuals. Jim McKay and Peter Jennings reported for the ABC broadcast and provided commentary with

Jennings as an international expert.

The 800 member All American member marching band conducted by Dr. Ardnt Bartner from the University of Southern California included brass (tubas, trombones, and trumpets), drumline (snares, bass drums, quads, cymbals) began the artistic program by performing “Fanfare for the Common Man” by Aaron Copeland. The marching band and

133

color guard represented an American tradition that rooted in formal education, community parades, and military. The color guard dressed in white shirts and shorts maneuvered flags with the Olympic- logo- a white star with red background- among the performers.

The marching band propelled the energetic atmosphere with Songs of the South and

North section of the program, which represents America’s Civil War history in a model manner. It characterizes the union of the United States through songs like “Battle of

Hymn Republic” and supported by detailed choreography where straight lines of musicians mesh and connect. The artistic program effectively portrays a controversial time in American history positively which embodies soft power by highlighting United

States political values in an attractive fashion. Amid the marching band performances, the commentators shared the story of Julie Wood. She was a flautist killed in a car accident the night before the opening ceremony where 39 people were injured and two others were killed in Los Angeles. Another band member was injured, yet decided to perform (Spiritof84, 2014). The commentators’ sharing of this account reflected

American resilience in the face of adversity at an individual level, something that would be echoed in future segments of the program. The energetic and precise music and movements of the opening section of the artistic program prepared the audience for what was to come. References to the Soviet Union references followed, which supports the

Cold War context and other exercises in soft power. Jennings’s and Mckay’s commentary described how the USSR “declined to take the field” (Spiritof84, 2014). By explaining that the opening ceremony was not broadcast in the Soviet Union, and noting that

134

individuals would be forced to travel north of Leningrad (St. Petersburg) to watch it on

Finnish television, emphasized that the Los Angeles Games and American values were so appealing that Soviets were willing to travel great distances to witness them.

This Americana Suite section of the program included a medley of patriotic songs like

“You’re a Grand Old Flag”, “This Land Is Your Land” and “This is My Country”. The use of primarily instruments and not vocals with lyrics avoided translation issues and allowed for fewer barriers for message reception. The commentators, however, did mention, “This is my country…grandest on earth” lyrics from “This is My Country” which celebrates America as a premiere nation. Thus, bringing American pride and grandeur to the forefront again. The first explicit American feature was the map of the

United States of America. This symbolized the creation of one people from many employing covered wagons and a land rush enticed by the pioneer spirit and exuberance.

The validation of American culture continued through the program’s exploration of the history of jazz in the “Dixieland Jamboree” and “Urban Rhapsody” sections. From Etta

James’ resonating rendition of “When the Saints Go Marching In” with depictions of stain glass windows and mass choir to George Gerswhin’s “Rhapsody in Blue” played on

86 grand pianos, it harkens to the use of jazz in diplomacy. The accessibility of jazz as a genre and it being an American art form positions the artistic program as an exercise in soft power. Historically, jazz has been used during the Cold War to present American

135

ideals like equal rights and freedom due to its improvisational nature and predominance of African American artists at that time. The jazz section also highlighted the works of

Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers as core Hollywood and American symbols and big band masterpieces by Count Basie and Glen Miller. “Sing, Sing, Sing” by Benny Goodman completes this section with a spectacular composition of music and drill team that swing by saturating the arena with sound and furling and unfurling in formation to cover the field. Commentators reaction to this display reinforce the idea that the artistic program is an exercise in soft power, by stating the Moscow Olympics had great precision but Los

Angeles Olympics had precision and spirit (Spiritof84, 2014). This sentiment supports the idea that Games are in competition with each other and alludes to a deeper Cold War context by focusing on the Moscow and not Montreal Games.

A mash-up of music from “A Chorus Line”, “Fame” and Michael Jackson provided a contemporary portrayal of American culture that had international appeal that also fits within this discussion. By playing, marching and dancing to Michael Jackson’s song

“Beat It” from the Thriller album, the bestselling album of all time, established the dominance of American culture throughout the world. The Michael Jackson’s influence on music, dance, and fashion appealed tointernational audiences; thus, fulfilling the ideal of soft power and leads to the last explicit display of American culture.

The artistic program ended with the marching band encasing all of the performers in an outline of the United States of America while playing “America the Beautiful.” The commentators remarked on the development of America which began as a nation outlined and ends with a nation full of Americans (Spiritof84, 2014). The explicit symbol of the

136

nation coupled with the lyrics sung by performers and spectators created an emotional moment shared across the world. Thus, fulfilling Wolper’s intention and exercising soft power through the attractive spectacle of American traditions and values. The exhibition of American history, controversy, distinct contributions, and popular culture reminded international and national spectators about the positive elements of American values and culture through music, dance, and marching.

Figure 5. Los Angeles Opening

Ceremony

Arts Festival

The Olympic Arts Festival, specifically the Shakespearean programming, was also an exercise in soft power because of the use of culture and values for influence. The

137

Olympic Arts Festival included 424 performances, exhibitions and events that represented 18 different countries over the course of 10 weeks that began on June 1st and commenced on August 12th. There were 145 performing arts companies with 1,500 artists. In total 1,276,000 people attended the Olympic Arts Festival ("Retrospective:

Olympic Arts Festival Los Angeles June 1-August 12, 1984," 1984). There were 60 dance, 33 music, and 300 theatre performances as well as 24 art exhibitions and 7 festivals and films that occurred before, during, after the athletic portion of the Games.

Shakespearean productions during the Los Angeles Olympic Arts Festival merit deeper analysis because of their prevalence in the theatrical offerings.

Focusing on theatre, specifically Shakespearean programming, allows for an in depth analysis of soft power and cultural diplomacy in a field that engages in collaboration and that relies on language for performance. It has been argued that Shakespeare is no longer solely an emblem of British culture due to the fact that over 50% of the world reads his plays, the themes of which are universal in nature, and because many Shakespearean productions have allowed them to become vehicles for expression, not only examples of

British arts and culture. The Olympic Arts Festival relied heavily on classic theatrical works, with an emphasis on Shakespeare. For instance, the Goodman Theatre/Flying

Karamazov Brothers (United States of America) presented Comedy of Errors, while

Piccolo Teatro Di Milano (Italy) performed the Tempest and the Royal Shakespeare

Company (United Kingdom) presented Much Ado About Nothing. Lastly, Le Theatre Du

Soliel (France) presented multiple works: Henry IV, Part I, Richard II, and Twelfth

Night. Each theatre company had staged and presented these productions before they

138

were mounted at the Los Angeles Olympic Arts Festival. The producers of the Arts

Festival selected these productions based on artistic merit (Schneider, 2014). The reliance on Shakespeare’s work during an international festival reflects opportunity for arts organizations to attempt to make their interpretation of a theatrical work accessible for diverse audiences. By using Shakespeare, most audiences are familiar with the plots and have the opportunity to focus on the value presented by the production instead of being distracted with general comprehension. The opportunity for cultural diplomacy inhabits the potential relationships that were built during and lasted after the Arts Festival.

According to Hope Schneider, Associate Director of Olympic Arts Festival, the intent was to present an outstanding international festival, not to be culturally diplomatic or exercise soft power(Schneider, 2014).

Although the selection was artistically motivated, that does not mean that there were not diplomatic by-products. The theatrical program occurred in repertory (Le Theatre Du

Soliel June 10-16, Piccolo Teatro Di Milano July 1-7, Royal Shakespeare Company July

8-14, and The Goodman Theatre/Flying Karamazov Brothers July 15-21) which limited opportunity for exchange and relationship building through performance or collaboration

("Retrospective: Olympic Arts Festival Los Angeles June 1-August 12, 1984," 1984).

Cultural diplomacy, however, could occur during receptions and talks because these were spaces where artists and administrators could dialogue. That said, there were no explicit culturally diplomatic outcomes with regard to the Shakespearean programming because of the repertoire style of the theatre festival. This dissertation only focused on the

139

Shakespearean programming, future work will look at the availability of formal and informal spaces for cultural diplomacy like academic seminars and social gatherings.

Examining the goals of the cultural programming, during the artistic program, and the

Shakespearean programming during the arts festival as outputs of the Los Angeles Games allows for an in-depth investigation of the instances of soft power or cultural diplomacy.

The expression of American culture and traditions through the use of a marching band and patriotic songs attempts to influence through attraction. In addition, using

Shakespeare as a vehicle for the expression of culture and values of different nations had the opportunity to embody soft power elements although that was not the intention. By reviewing the outputs of the Los Angeles Games sets the foundation for outcomes of soft power and cultural diplomacy.

Outcomes: Olympic Cultural Legacy

The Los Angeles Olympic Organizing Committee commissioned two lasting cultural outcomes of the Los Angeles 1984 Olympics: The Olympic Gateway and The Mural

Project. These tangible outcomes reflect an intentional cultural legacy of the Olympics.

Observation of the spaces and an examination of literature highlights these cultural spaces as examples of soft power. By reviewing the individual culture through an international lens lends itself to the two-way element of soft power. Thus, creation and distribution of the culture allows for the sharing of values with international spectators and a review of values by the Los Angeles Olympic Committee.

140

The Olympic Gateway

The Olympic Gateway functioned as an exercise in soft power during the Los Angeles

Games and became a lasting cultural Olympic legacy. The following approach to artifact study proposed by E. McClung Fleming (1974) “focuses on an artifact's history, material, construction, design, and function" ( as cited in Bolin, 2012). The Olympic Gateway is located in the entrance of the Memorial Coliseum in Los Angeles, California and was dedicated on June 1, 1984. The LAOOC commissioned The Olympic Gateway. It was created by renowned Californian sculptor Robert Graham and sponsored by the Times

Mirror Company. It is composed of cast bronze, gold leaf, zinc, and cement and 25 feet above ground and weighs 20,000 pounds, (Graham, 1984). The torsos were modeled in clay at 27 inches in height and the scale was enlarged to three-times its size with the use of a pantograph, a pointing machine. Sixteen individual clay reliefs of male and female torsos in motion were molded in clay from a water polo player and sprinter. Each element was constructed of bronze plate and patinaed. On each column, line drawings of torsos in athletic movements were inlaid in zinc, and the base of each cone was gold-leafed. All the work was completed at the Robert Graham Studio in Venice, California. During the

Games, the Olympic Gateway was in ideal condition. This lasting monumental artwork for the 1984 Olympic game site was intended to be a beacon of welcome, a meeting place, and an international symbol of Olympic unity. The variety of the athletic shapes on the columns and the ambiguous nature of the torsos made it possible for them to signify any ethnicity or nationality, highlighting the universal nature of the piece. Universal characteristics can lead to appeal, which fulfills elements of soft power.

141

The site was observed, the researcher while tailgating before a University of Southern

California and Fresno State football game. The current condition reflects years of wear and tear on the structure, as the cement has old chewing gum stuck to its base as well as some dirt and grime that can be found both on the gateway and the general space surrounding it. The mount was chipped along the corners and bird droppings were left untouched on the bodies of the male and female. There were no crowds or barricades that prevented access to the space. There was only a scaffold that was placed next to the structure. At the time of observation it did not serve a functional purpose accept as shade for attendees at the game. A plaque at the base of the structure displays the title (Olympic

Gateway), artist (Robert Graham), lists Times Mirror Company as the official Olympic sponsor and highlights it was dedicated at the inception of the Olympic Arts Festival on

June 1, 1984. The torsos frame the Olympic cauldron that housed the Olympic flame. The

Olympic Gateway symbolizes strength, Olympic spirit and unity, and was supposed to garner international prestige, but most individuals did not engage with the piece in any way during my observation. During the Games, the structure exercised more soft power because spectators would have passed by it to view events held at the Coliseum. The

Olympic Gateway’s relationship to the Olympic Games was explicit and intentional because the piece was created and displayed for the Games. Yet, recently it seems as if the power has dwindled due to the current spectator engagement and limited events

(compared to the Olympics) at the Coliseum. The commemorative plaque clarifies the

142

intention of the piece by reminding spectators that the sculpture is an Olympic legacy that relates to soft power with regard to the cultural programming of the Olympics.

Figure 6. Olympic Gateway

Mural Project

The Mural Project, another LAOOC project in partnership with the Brockman Gallery (a gallery that showcased work from African Americans), functions as an intentional cultural legacy because it was created for the Games and is still available for review.

“Commissioned in 1984, these murals are part of ten pieces created during the Olympic

Arts Festival in commemoration of the city hosting the Summer Games. The effort was a milestone in the city's art history, adding credibility to L.A.'s "mural capital of the world" claim while burnishing sheen on the careers of muralists in the city.(Jao, 2013). The

143

international credibility lends itself to soft power due to the use of culture and values to influence.

The murals original location was along the Harbor Fwy/101 Fwy/110 Fwy approaching the Los Angeles Coliseum, which allowed for national and international spectators to see the murals as they drove to the Olympic Games. A diversity of murals were produced by ten mural artists: Alonso Davis, Judith Francisca Baca, Glenna Boltuch, William

Franklyn Herron Ill, Frank Romero, Terry Schoonhoven, Roderick Sykes, Kent

Twitchell, John Wehrle and Richard A. Wyatt. (L. A. O. O. Committee, 1985). The mural project organized by Alonzo Davis consists of murals painted on cement with acrylic or silicate and the size of freeway underpasses. The life expectancy of the murals was 30 years and Caltrans (California Department) officials believed they would remain untouched for 15 to 20 years (Dubin, 1987). Unfortunately, that was not the case. After two years, Wyatt’s works (Spectators and James) had been targeted and vandalized approximately 14 times. Bob Goodell, a Caltrans official, suspected that the works were targeted because they portray minorities(Seiler, 1986).

Over time the state of the murals changed due to graffiti and the elements, suggesting a lack of care and value. “Layer upon layer of graffiti piled up, and three murals were destroyed by highway construction or the elements. Beginning in 2007, Caltrans started covering the murals with gray paint to prevent further damage” (Gelt, 2014). Around that sametime, Los Angeles ordinance 182706 established that murals could be painted on private property and indicated a in the relevance of these works of art. In 2011, the

144

restoration process began spurred by the gathering of funds via grants and donations. The goals of the mural were to help Los Angeles be recognized as a cultural destination and promote the city internationally(Rojas- Williams, 2014). Each of these intentions fits within the soft power concept by attempting to influence using culture. At the time of the observation, the murals were visible without graffiti and with vibrant colors, which is indicative of being recently restored and highlights the focus on care and preservation of this Figure 7. Going to the Olympics Olympic site.

Figure 7. Going to the Olympics

The L.A. Freeway Kids by Glenna Boltuch Avila is located on South Side of the

Hollywood Freeway, between the Los Angeles and Main Street overpasses. The mural was completed in 1984, in celebration of the Los Angeles Olympics of that year. In the mural, large figures between 18' and 22' tall represent a racial and ethnic cross section of city children (Wallach, 2010). Luchas del Mundo (Struggles of the World) by Willie

145

Herron , on the other hand, is a reflection of the ongoing restoration process because it is currently partially covered with paint waiting to be restored. This process represents the care and value the murals presently have. Luchas del Mundo is located on the Hollywood

Freeway (101) at Alameda, is painted with acrylic, and is 25’ x 90’. The mural featured

Olympic monograms, competing wrestlers, and a helicopter hovering over La

Placita(Wallach, 2010). Going to the Olympics by Frank Romero is also located at

Hollywood Freeway (101) at Alameda painted with acrylic and stand 22' x 103'. This is a tribute to LA's car culture that currently ushers traffic in and out of the city(Wallach,

2010). The depiction of car culture highlights specific characteristics that are unique to

Los Angeles and attempts to make them appealing to Olympic spectators, thus exercising soft power. Having high automobile ownership rates in the United States demonstrated our economic prowess as a capitalist country the Cold War context in comparison to other countries like Cuba which did not have access to such automobile industries. 7th

Street Altarpiece by Kent Twitchell used to be at the 7th Street underpass at the 110

Freeway. The two-part piece includes portraits of artists Lita Albuquerque and Jim

Morphesis. It is unclear whether the mural is still longer at this location or is awaiting renovation at the time of this analysis, but it is no longer located in its original location, which indicates a lack of complete restoration or renovation capabilities and the loss of some of the Olympic legacy. Lastly, Galileo, Jupiter, Apollo by John Wehr is located on the Hollywood Freeway (101) at Spring St., is made of silicate on concrete, and measures

24’ x 207’. Michael Several explained the work as Los Angeles being both a center of high technology and the home of the 1984 summer Olympics, it depicts fragments of

146

classical Greek buildings and statuary floating in space. Integral to the surrealistic fantasy

is a sculptural piece shaped like a finger, pointing to an astronaut on Jupiter's left. It

recalls Michelangelo's Creation of Adam (Wallach, 2010). This lasting cultural icon for

the 1984 Olympic Games exemplifies Los Angeles culture as well as the Olympic legacy

of the Games.

Figure 8. Galileo, Jupiter, Apollo

By placing the murals along the freeways thousands of Los Angelenos and visitors view

them daily. It is unclear whether the general public recognizes it as an Olympic legacy;

147

thus representing the fluid appreciation for public art. The necessary renovation of the surviving murals indicates the deterioration and rebirth of the Olympic legacy and true indication of soft power.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the cultural programming of the Los Angeles Olympics is an exercise in soft power and cultural diplomacy with lasting cultural outcomes. Using a logic model as an analytical framework with regard to inputs, outputs, and outcomes, allows for an examination of the context, activities, and outcomes through a logical lens. The lack of competition and management provided the foundation for possible exercises in soft power. It highlights how financial autonomy and management can assist in the presentation of American capitalist and neoliberal values. Within the Cold War context reflects opportunities for exercises in soft power. The cultural programming for the

Games exemplified the outputs that led to it being a cultural legacy and was an exercise in soft power due to the use of the following: marching bands and a color guard to display American history and patriotism during the opening ceremonies, Shakespearean programming as a vehicle for international values, and the cultural context that led to the cultural legacies of the Olympic Gateway and the Mural Project. In the future, scholars should examine the Los Angeles Festival as an explicit consequence of the Olympic Arts

Festival with both a local and international focus.

148

Chapter 6: London 2012

Introduction

This chapter examines the cultural programming of the London 2012 Olympics as exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy. 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 its resources of culture, values, and policies” (Joseph Nye,

2008). Cultural diplomacy, which is an element of soft power, is described by Milton

Cumming (2003) as the exchange of ideas, information, art, and other aspects of culture among nations and their peoples in order to foster mutual understanding. The artistic program during the London 2012 Opening Ceremony highlighted British culture and values in a humorous manner in an attempt to reject the “stuffy” image of the country and rebrand the city and region. The artistic program, Isles of Wonder, functions as an exercise in soft power because the organizers attempted to influence spectators by making British culture and values appealing. London 2012, the arts festival component of the London Olympic games, provided opportunities for cultural diplomacy through the

World Shakespeare Festival (Globe to Globe and Worlds Together Conference) because it fostered mutual understanding through artistic and audience exchanges. Using a logic model as an analytical framework for examining soft power and cultural diplomacy provides a logical progression from Olympic inputs to Olympic outcomes. Exercises in

149

soft power and cultural diplomacy were prevalent during London 2012 based on an examination of resources, artistic and Shakespearean programming, and cultural legacy.

Inputs: Resources for the Cultural Programming of London 2012

Resources that are necessary for the creation and implementation of London 2012 represent inputs that serve as the foundation for exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy. Generally, elements like funds, spaces, and websites function as inputs within a logic model. For the purposes of this chapter, I expand the idea of inputs to include elements like management, development, and interurban competition. These elements must be in place for a city to win a bid and create a cultural legacy because they impact its present and future infrastructure. Interurban competition and management must be reviewed in order to comprehensively understand soft power or cultural diplomacy in the

Olympic context, as well as potential cultural impacts. London’s world city status and distinct management style during the Games created an atmosphere that made exercises in cultural diplomacy and soft power possible. London 2012 was the third time that the modern Games had been hosted in the city; which was already a center for culture and industry. Reviewing the bidding process and management styles as inputs allows for an examination of the resources that supported exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy for a city that was already at the top of the urban hierarchy.

Interurban Competition

150

Interurban competition supports London’s existing strong cultural position in the world and impacts the city’s future status.

Urban competition is an external coercive force that puts clear limitations upon

the power of specific projects to transform the lot of particular cities…. It may

even force repetitive and serial reproduction of certain patterns of development

(such as the serial reproduction of “world trade centers” or of new cultural and

entertainment centers, of waterfront development, of postmodern shopping malls,

and the like). (Harvey, 1989)

The presentation of culture and values during the cultural programming of the London

Olympic Games could affect the international reputation of the city and its world city status. The London Olympic Games in 2012 were not challenging a negative international reputation for the city, but reinforcing the progression and development of

London’s generally positive image. The Work Foundation (2010), an organization that provides research, analysis, and policy advice, emphasized that the London Games could provide a signiﬁcant opportunity to reinforce the city’s strengths as a global knowledge capital. A foundational understanding of a world city includes capabilities of control and influence over culture (P. Hall, 1966; Kumar, 1980; Mattelart, 1979; Schiller, 1976), which is essential to the analysis of the cultural programming of London 2012 in this chapter. Friedman (1986) highlights London and Los Angeles as cities with ideological penetration and control, as well as being centers for disseminating information, news,

151

entertainment, and other cultural artifacts. The ability to present and shape ideas through culture (Hollywood and Shakespeare) makes these cities unique.

London was at the top of the urban hierarchy because of its global capabilities with respect to power and influence of culture (Beaverstock, 1999). The ability to control and influence using culture exemplifies Nye’s (2004) discussion of soft power and positions London as a space that exercises it due to its world city status, which is necessary for the development of the city’s image. Grix and Houlihan’s (2014) review of documents from the House of Commons highlights Britain’s goal to develop London’s image through the Olympic Games. Although Britain’s overall worldwide reputation was strong because the United Kingdom was seen as fair, innovative, diverse, conﬁdent, and stylish, it was also viewed as arrogant, stuffy, old-fashioned, and cold (Grix & Houlihan,

2014, p. 583). The artistic program during the Opening Ceremony addressed these views with humor and creativity and fulfilled the Foreign & Commonwealth Office’s desire to project an image of a “modern Britain… open (welcoming, diverse, tolerant), connected

(through involvement in the UN and G20, politically, geographically, in terms of trade and travel), creative and dynamic” (Grix & Houlihan, 2014, p. 583). The development of

London’s image and its position as a world city relates to place-branding, which also emphasizes Nye’s (2004) discussion of soft power. The distinct characteristics of cities, due to interurban competition, allow for place branding. According to Ham (2008), “For both place branding and public diplomacy, a key element is to build personal and institutional relationships and dialogue with foreign audiences by focusing on values, setting them apart from classical diplomacy, which primarily deals with issues” (Ham,

152

2008, p. 135). The discussion of values in place branding is linked with the discussion of values in soft power because the intention is to influence. Viewing London as open, creative, and dynamic allows for relationship development between institutions based on values, and manifests soft power.

The London 2012 Olympic Games exemplified elements of soft power due to its distinction as a mega-event. Mega-events are large-scale cultural, commercial, and sporting events that have a dramatic character, mass popular appeal, and international significance (Roche, 2000). The exploration of these characteristics of mega-events relates explicitly to discussions of soft power with regard to influence through attraction using culture, values, and policies. Since the artistic program and arts festivals of the

Olympic Games fulfill the mega-event definition with regard to scale, appeal, and significance, an examination of the programming as exercises in soft power is plausible.

Cities and countries have used mega-events to gain legitimacy and prestige, draw attention to their accomplishments, foster trade and tourism, or to help open their countries to global inﬂuences (Getz, 2008, p. 414). These actions relate explicitly to interurban competition by helping the city stand apart from others by highlighting its distinct urban characteristics.

The Games were one element of an array of mega-events and development projects that allowed London to remain competitive. The city has hosted previous sporting events with large numbers of spectators (e.g., London Marathon and is home to six Premier League football clubs), which emphasizes that mega-events are commonly produced and hosted by the city and that it has the capacity to remain competitive

153

(Newman, 2007). The hosting of these mega-events also reveals the infrastructure development needed to accommodate both the spectators and the events themselves (e.g., the 60,000 seat Arsenal Stadium was opened in 2006). London 2012 highlights a strategy for city development that includes hosting multiple mega-events and improving infrastructure over the course of years to positively impact interurban competition and

London’s ability to host the Games.

Although mega-events can be culturally focused on sharing the values of that city, the economic elements still drive the event. According to Hall (2006), “[A]strong link has been forged between transnational capital and global sports events that provide a basis for the creation of partnerships between local and transnational interests” (C. M. Hall, 2006, pp. 62-63). The London Olympic Games were no different. The British government’s concern was to use the soft power of public diplomacy to make the country attractive for inward investment and potential business partners (Grix & Houlihan, 2014, p. 586).

Attracting corporate sponsor support and ensuring the development of the sophisticated

Presenting Partner program became the priority for the Cultural Olympiad Board.2 There was also significant support from the Olympic Lottery Distributor, Arts Council England,

Mayor’s Office, BBC, British Council, and Legacy Trust UK (B. C. Garcia, Tamsin,

2013). The reliance on private funds highlighted another aspect of soft power, which is an attempt to separate from government control. Unfortunately, those strong links do not always transform into long-term sustainable opportunities. The vast majority of firms

2 British Telecom (BT) and British Petroleum (BP) became Presenting Partners 2009 (B. C. Garcia, Tamsin, 2013).

154

attracted by mega-events tend to only relocate in the short-term, unless they are also involved with long-term infrastructure management (Hall, 1992). Capacity is necessary to attract a mega-event, but flawed implementation can produce a negative experience.

Implementation capacity is also needed to exercise soft power. The responsibility of long- or short-term infrastructure management begins with the administrators of the

Olympic Games and an examination of management structure serves as an input that will develop into an output.

Management: Structures and individuals responsible for production and implementation

Management functions as a resource for the production and implementation of the Games because it impacts autonomy and accountability, which influences the Organising

Committee for the Olympic and Paralympic Games’ (OCOG) ability to exercise soft power. London represented a new mode of management, including support from the

International Olympic Committee (IOC). London 2012 was the first OCOG to integrate the IOC’s Games model and benefitted from IOC guidance and recommendations during every step of the preparation and delivery (IOC, 2013). The management style of the

Olympic Games has been different for each host city and has included central management (Mexico 1968, Munich 1972, Seoul 1988, and Sydney 2000), decentralized management (Montreal 1976), private (Los Angeles 1984), and state-management

(Moscow 1980). The London 2012 model includes the IOC’s support and coordination of activities through its Games Coordination Office (GCO), which monitors and guides the

155

OCOG during the Games and is chaired by the IOC President. These two structures worked closely together to ensure that the Games ran smoothly and that any issues that may have arisen were quickly resolved ("Close collaboration is key to delivering the

Olympic Games," 2014).Although London 2012 employed this new method, it is unclear, outside of the IOC’s laudatory perspective, how this method impacted image or value projection during the cultural programing. The London Organising Committee of the

Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) had a key relationship with the IOC, but liaised with other key bodies: the Olympic delivery authority, the UK Government, the

London mayor’s Office, and the British Olympic association via the overarching

“Olympic Board” (I. O. Committee, 2013). Given the abundance of groups involved in decision-making, it is unclear how conflicting ideas were resolved. The potential lack of autonomy could have also impacted how London 2012 used culture, values, and policies during the cultural programming to influence.

156

Figure 9. Final Report of the IOC

In addition to its unusual governance, the London Games also employed a unique financial system, state-led privatization, which relates to Frankel’s claim of the de- emphasis of government involvement in cultural relationships. State led privatization exists when public funds and objectives have been converted into privately run and contractually delivered programs of action (Raco, 2014, p. 177).3 According to Raco

(2014), “[R]egulatory capitalism is characterized by the emergence of new public-private hybridities in the development and implementation of policy interventions” (Raco, 2014,

3 Other authors like Braithwaite (2008) and Levi-Faur (2011) highlight that this process reproduces and reflects a shift toward new modes of regulatory capitalism (Raco, 2014).

157

p. 177). The London Games created the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA),4 which is indicative of neoliberal tendencies toward privatization and relates to Nye’s (2004) discussion of soft power being at an “arms-length” from government. This was the first example of state-led privatization of the Games, but lack of accountability can, unfortunately, be a consequence of privatization. Accountability to citizens is still important because it influences the potential outcomes of cultural diplomacy and soft power. For instance, citizens may not have a voice in decision-making that could affect them socially, economically, or financially (e.g., the construction of a stadium).

Interurban competition and management functioned as inputs by providing resources and support to host the Olympic Games, which included the creation and implementation of cultural programming.

In conclusion, examining the resources of London 2012 (i.e., interurban competition and management) as inputs highlights how they serve as the foundation for exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy. London’s unique position as a world city and cultural capital indicates that the city had the infrastructure to present a new image.

Interurban competition uses values, culture, and policies, which are Nye’s resources for soft power, as a means to stand out among other cities. London has used mega-events like

Wimbledon the London Marathon to remain competitive and make the city appealing for its bid to host the Games. Thus, using interurban competition to be appealing serves as an

4 “The ODA was a quango1 body, made up of appointees and a contracted workforce. It was managed by a board consisting of representatives from a range of business interests, along with a trade union member and others with expertise in the creative industries and voluntary sectors” (Raco, 2014, p. 185).

158

input, which includes the cultural programming. The management of the Games impacts the creation and implementation of the cultural programming because decision-making power rests with both the governing bodies and individual groups. Specifically, the IOC’s integration into not only overall governance, but also daily operations of the Games provided opportunities for their interests to infiltrate and overshadow those of the

LOCOG. Reviewing the unique LOCOG management style allows for a more comprehensive understanding of the Olympic context. Less autonomy could impact which messages and values were presented, with values representing a resource of soft power. Similarly, the public/private hybrid of regulatory capitalism relates to the limited government involvement of soft power. In addition, the emphasis on interurban competition and management, instead of resources like funding, adds to the current literature, which focuses primarily on the economic elements of the Olympic Games.

Finally, highlighting resources leads to the discussion of Olympic outputs as exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy.

Outputs: Globe to Globe and Worlds Together Conference

London 2012, the Cultural Olympiad of the London Olympics, featured artistic and cultural programs in the United Kingdom for four years prior to the Games and included an arts festival that accompanied the Olympics. More than 16 million people across the

United Kingdom took part in or attended performances and over 169,000 people attended

159

more than 8,300 workshops. In addition, more than 3.7 million people participated in nearly 3,700 events. The Cultural Olympiad culminated with the London 2012 Festival, which ran from June 21 to September 9, 2012. The Cultural Olympiad included three flagship programs: Artists Taking the Lead (12 public art commissions), Stories of the

World (showcase of innovation and excellence in museums, libraries, and archives to tell inspirational stories about the UK’s international relationships with a focus on youth), and Unlimited (29 commissioned works by deaf and disabled artists) ("Cultural

Olympiad and London 2012 Festival,"). The Cultural Olympiad had four overarching goals, according to the United Kingdom’s Department for Culture, Media and Sport

(DCMS): to augment cultural participation, boost economic benefits and skills, promote identity, and sell a new image (Inglis, 2008). Although Cultural Olympiad provided four years’ worth of programming prior to the Games, which had soft power and cultural diplomacy elements, the focus on the Arts Festival (i.e., London 2012) allows for comparison to Los Angeles 1984. The fulfillment of the goals of London 2012 reflect

Nye’s (2004) discussion of soft power with regard to identity promotion and new image and Cummings’s (2003) definition of cultural diplomacy by providing mutually beneficial programming; thus affirming the claims of this dissertation.

Nation branding typifies soft power, according to Nye’s (2004) and van Ham’s discussion of how soft power and branding both demonstrate values, which directly connects to London’s goal to sell a new image of the city. As Culf explained, “the final component of the London bid for the Cultural Olympiad was to act as a re-branding

160

exercise in terms of (re-)shaping global perceptions of both London and the UK as a whole” (as cited in Inglis, 2008, p. 472).

According to the London 2012 website, the number 2012 was this new

brand.

It is universal and understandable worldwide. Our emblem is simple, distinct,

bold and buzzing with energy. Its form is inclusive yet consistent and has

incredible flexibility to encourage access and participation. It can communicate

with anyone from commercial organisations to kids playing sport. (LOCOG,

2012)

The number is inclusive because it does not need translation. Every nation can recognize the symbols. The simple mention of “London 2012” in the title would act as the trigger to associate the Festival with the Olympics, without it becoming overshadowed by the main event (Coveney, 2013). The concept of culture at the heart of the Games was reinforced through integrated and highly visible branding with the Cultural Olympiad, using a variation of the main Games’ logo (Shakespeare on a Global Stage). The inclusive nature of the Olympic brand relates to soft power because it attempts to influence through culture and values.

Reviewing the political atmosphere during the bidding process highlights the intentions of soft power during London 2012. Nye (2008) defined soft power as “… 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 its resources of culture, values, and policies” (Joseph Nye, 2008, p. 94). Although Olympic literature emphasizes a separation

161

between sport and politics, it is essential to understand the political context in order to understand exercises in soft power. Power changes depending on context—who relates to whom under what circumstance—and soft power depends on the existence of willing interpreters and receivers. In addition, attraction often has a diffuse effect, creating general influence rather than producing an easily observable specific action (J. Nye,

2004). Since power is contextual, the use of hard or soft power is dependent on various factors. For example, for soft power to work there must be a demonstrated causal connection between public opinion and state policy (Layne, 2010). Acknowledging the

“New Labour cultural policy imperatives, which are themselves a mixture of orientations towards boosting the money-making capacities of British ‘culture industries,’ and fostering social inclusion through encouraging access to, and participation in, arts-related activities” (as cited in Inglis, 2008) highlights the soft power intentions of London 2012 and sets the framework for the World Shakespeare Festival.

World Shakespeare Festival

Focusing on the World Shakespeare Festival, one component of London 2012, allows for an in-depth examination of the cultural programming of the Olympics as an exercise in soft power and cultural diplomacy. The World Shakespeare Festival functioned as both by fulfilling two aims of the Cultural Olympiad: augmenting cultural participation and the selling of a new image of the city. The World Shakespeare Festival had nine programming themes: (1) What Country, friends, is this?, (2) Nations at War, (3) Globe to Globe, (4) Digital and Film Projects, (5) Open Stages, (6) Collaborations and

162

International Productions, (7) Non-Theatre Spaces, (8) Exhibitions, and (9) Music. For the purposes of this inquiry, the focus will be on the Globe to Globe programming and the World Together International Conference.

Globe to Globe

The Globe to Globe programming supported the Olympic goal of augmenting participation as well as demonstrating instances of cultural diplomacy. This portion of the cultural programming lasted six weeks and featured international companies performing

Shakespeare entire theatrical oeuvre in 37 different languages. Globe to Globe supported the aim of London 2012 “… to encourage ‘people of all ages to participate in cultural activity,’ and to foster ‘the Olympic ideal of people achieving their potential through culture, education and sport’” (Inglis, 2008, p. 472). Elements of cultural diplomacy were fulfilled through the mutually beneficial programming. An evaluation published by Arts

Council England and LOCOG revealed that the “World Shakespeare Festival demonstrated the international appeal of Shakespeare and fostered exchange and collaboration between UK and international theatre companies” (Board, 2013). These experiences exemplified cultural diplomacy by fostering mutual understanding between the British and international audiences and performers through the investigation of language and the cultural context of the productions.

The selection process for participating productions did not adhere to specific rules or guidelines. Tom Bird, the festival director, asked thespians, academics, journalists, cultural attachés, and ambassadors for insights on the best actors, directors, and

163

musicians (Shakespeare Beyond English, 2013). The Globe staff also took logistics under consideration as well by selecting companies that could play anywhere at a moment’s notice (Bird, 2013). Although artistic merit was the most important concern for the Globe to Globe Festival, other local concerns in regard to international qualities of the various productions also influenced the selections. As Bird (2013) note, “It was vital to us that a large proportion of the productions we chose should be in languages that are widely spoken in London, and in turn that we attracted speakers of those languages to the Globe for the Festival” (p. 14). For instance, tens of thousands of people in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, about a mile from the Globe, speak or understand Bangla. Based on the recommendations of many theater-makers who had worked in Bangladesh and South

Asia, the Globe invited Nasiruddin Yousuff’s Dhaka Theatre to participate in the festival

(Shakespeare Beyond English, 2013).

The inclusion of languages familiar to the London community addressed some barriers with regard to the international touring companies. Other barriers included lack of knowledge of the cultural context of the international productions, which could impact audience comprehension and message reception. Addressing these concerns was particularly important given the use of the Globe for the performances, since the theater was founded with the goal of restoring “authentic” performance conditions for original

Shakespeare texts, as many spectators would likely possess powerful expectations of the works performed there ("Shakespeare on the global stage : performance and festivity in the Olympic year," 2015). The ability of the audience to make meaning during the performances was complicated by their familiarity with the text, culture, and language,

164

but collaboration among the spectators allowed for meaning making. This is due in part to the Globe’s efforts to recruit spectators who spoke the various languages represented onstage, “the languages of translation, and whose reactions to the dialogue made their group presence a visible and audible component of the performance event” ("Shakespeare on the global stage : performance and festivity in the Olympic year," 2015). The reactions of the audience members familiar with the language and the culture presented onstage served as the foundation for multicultural understanding for others present who were not familiar with the language or culture.

Rather than simply consuming a performance’s ‘exoticism’ or rejecting it as un-

Shakespearean, many spectators who could not understand the productions

became more aware of how their cultural positioning shaped their responses.

Questioning their own interpretative abilities, many looked to others for guidance.

("Shakespeare on the global stage : performance and festivity in the Olympic

year," 2015)

This reflective exercise typifies the type of soft power explored in the report Building from Ideas Presented in Global Positioning Strategies for the Arts: “Everything we do in the area of foreign policy is presenting our own country in the most positive image—but you also put yourself in the shoes of the other country” (Organizations, 2009). Through reflectivity, individuals examine personal messaging, which impacts delivery and reception. Conversely, many spectators able to speak the languages presented onstage found the event powerful due to the rarity of seeing aspects of their heritage represented in mainstream London artistic productions. Rose Elfman (2015), a researcher of the

165

politics of theater spectatorship, observed that many “enjoyed adopting roles as ‘experts,’ as they explained the performances to other spectators” ("Shakespeare on the global stage

: performance and festivity in the Olympic year," 2015). These internal and external exchanges embody the mutually beneficial elements of cultural diplomacy.

The Globe to Globe program was an exercise in soft power and cultural diplomacy, which was exemplified through the culture, values, and exchanges that occurred between audience members and artists. The program made British culture (i.e.,

Shakespeare) appealing by reaching people via their familiarity with a particular cultural context and language. Although literature focusing on soft power and Olympic Arts festivals is scarce, more scholars are examining it. Writers like Erin Sullivan (2015) refer to Joseph Nye’s concept and the Global Shakespeare partnership between Queen Mary

University of London and the University of Warwick provides a multidisciplinary platform for examining the political context of Shakespeare. This dissertation is unique in that it focuses on explicit exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy, and examines the World Shakespeare Festival as an example of these concepts with a focus on the

Globe to Globe programming and Worlds Together Conference.

Worlds Together Conference

Participation was not the only goal of the London 2012 arts programming that demonstrated cultural diplomacy. The Worlds Together International Education

Conference represented the mutual understanding component expressed by Cummings, which is imperative in exercising soft power. The conference “brought together education

166

professionals, international artists and academics to share their practice and investigate learning through Shakespeare and the arts” (Cutler & O'Hanlon, 2012). This exchange of ideas and culture via individuals from schools and arts institutions not only fostered mutual understanding, but also highlighted the depoliticized nature of cultural diplomacy explored by Frankel. This ideally prevents information presented from seeming like propaganda and therefore will likely be better received. The Globe to Globe program and

World Together International Educational Conference not only fulfilled the Olympic goal of augmenting participation, but also were exercises in cultural diplomacy through the mutually beneficial participation and exchanges created.

The Royal Shakespeare Company (RSC) and Tate Gallery partnered with the

National Theatre and British Museum to create the Worlds Together Conference, which hoped to “take stock and reflect, and explore the importance and value of the place of art in young people’s learning. Why might the arts be central to their lives?” (Cutler &

O'Hanlon, 2012). Anna Cutler, Director of Learning at Tate, and Jacqui O’Hanlon were

“discussing respective plans for 2016 and realized we both wanted to do a major international conference that explored the place of the arts in the lives of young people”

(O'Hanlon, 2015). There were two parallel programs: exploring the worldwide influence of Shakespeare in education and looking more broadly at contemporary arts education practice. The conference provided opportunities for exchange specifically in regard to the discussions that occurred in the Tanks, a space that accommodates approximately 400 people in the Tate Modern. Words Matter, a panel discussion that included Peggy

O’Brien, CEO of the Great Teaching Project and resident consultant for the Folger

167

Library, and Cicely Berry, Voice Director at the Royal Shakespeare Company, served as a platform for exchange. This panel discussion served as a debate among leading voices from the worlds of theater and education exploring the power that lies in Shakespeare’s language. It invited delegates to reflect on the power of language following the morning workshops to explore how this might translate into work with children and young people

(Cutler & O'Hanlon, 2012). The other panel discussions allowed participants to choose from a range of presentations that explored innovative ways of working with Shakespeare and young people with the explicit intention to discuss and exchange ideas and experiences (Cutler & O'Hanlon, 2012). These and other debates fit within a culturally diplomatic framework in a formal manner. Specifically, the 400 people that attended the conference came from 25 different countries (including Norway, Singapore, Armenia,

Israel, Australia, Denmark, Hong Kong, US, Portugal, Japan, South Africa, Uganda,

Qatar, Brazil, and India) and had the opportunity to debate, discuss, and learn from each other (Tate). The mutually beneficial participation between British and international arts organizations and individuals exemplified the essence of cultural diplomacy and laid the foundation for long-term relationship building and potential long-term cultural impacts.

Artistic Program

The artistic program of the London Opening Ceremony (Isles of Wonder) was a combination of history, humor, and technology that effectively fulfilled the House of

Commons’ desire to present Britain not as “old-fashioned and stuffy” but as modern and dynamic. The artistic program highlighted the emphasis on Shakespeare that was

168

prevalent throughout London 2012, as well as the importance of innovation to London culture from the Industrial Revolution to the creation of the Internet. The combination of high and mass culture with regard to music, literature, and social services supports the soft power aim of changing the image of the United Kingdom.

The Opening Ceremony began with the ringing of the Olympic Bell by Bradley

Wiggins. The bell, inscribed with a quote from the Tempest, was the first of many references to Shakespearean works throughout the games. Kenneth Branagh continued this Shakespearean connection by portraying Isambard Kindgom Brunel, a 19th-century

British innovator, guiding television and arena audiences through the times before, during, and after the Industrial Revolution. “Creative director Stephen Daldry said the ceremonies will show ‘who we are, who we were and who we wish to be’”(Magnay,

2012). The representation of the period before the Industrial Revolution was exemplified by a British village, including homes, foliage, and a maypole. The opening ceremony organizers could have begun at any time in Britain’s long and rich history, yet starting with the Industrial Revolution demonstrated an emphasis on contemporary London and the United Kingdom, which relates to the LOCOG’s attempt at promoting a new identity that focused on modernity.

The relationship between high and mass culture was highlighted by the inclusion of a short film featuring Queen Elizabeth II and Daniel Craig as James Bond flying in a helicopter over iconic structures in London. In the film, they both arrived at Olympic stadium and skydived to the arena floor. The entire scenario served to put a humorous spin on traditional elements of British culture, thus opening the Olympic Games by

169

rejecting cold or snobbish stereotypes. This atmosphere highlights how London, as a city, and British culture have historic roots that resonate with contemporary culture and lend themselves to the goals of the Games, which further reflects exercises in soft power by projecting a modern and creative Britain to viewers and spectators.

The Opening Ceremony then shifted to focus on the history of health services, connecting it to children’s literature. The unique inclusion of the National Health Service

(NHS) and Great Ormond St. Hospital during the artistic program emphasized their impact on culture. Boyle explained, “Everybody is aware of how important the NHS is in this country … we believe in universal health care … no matter how poor … no matter who you are, you will get treated” (Knight & Ruscoe, 2012, p. 42). The explicit discussion of universal health care also relates to Nye’s discussion of using culture, values, and polices as resources for soft power. Specifically, Boyle’s comment reflects international awareness of the health care model and its altruistic nature, thus reflecting the soft power exercise in presenting and affirming culture. The transition from health care to British literature occurred symbiotically, as the Great Ormond Street Children’s

Hospital has been funded in part from the royalties of J. M. Barrie’s Peter Pan since 1929

(Knight & Ruscoe, 2012, p. 42). This connection between health care and literature was created using an image of a child reading Peter Pan in a hospital bed. The large set pieces represented the villains of British literature and highlighted the country’s artistic prowess and creativity. Mary Poppins then swept in as a hero and saved the children from them.

The focus on villains from British children’s literature was also unique because the organizers could have easily used heroic characters instead. The villains included those

170

from the books Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (Childcatcher), 101 Dalmatians (Cruela

Deville), and Harry Potter (Voldemort), covering 100 years of British literature. By incorporating classic texts from a wide swath of time, people from a variety of generations were able to identify with the values and messages.

Technology also functioned as a trope throughout the program, assisting younger generations in understanding a review of sixty years of British music and television, including clips from the songs “My Generation” by The Who to “Valerie” by Amy

Winehouse and the film Four Weddings and Funeral. Specifically, Frankie and June (the main characters of the artistic program) took spectators through the history of British pop culture via texting and social media updates as they tried to reconnect after June lost her cellphone. The technological theme reinforced the aim for Britain to seem innovative and the emphasis on London before, during, and after the Industrial Revolution served to highlight this. This fulfilled the goal of the Opening Ceremony of affirming instead of presenting something new to the world. The artistic program was framed by British innovators (e.g., Brunel, Industrial Revolution innovator, and Berners-Lee, creator of the

Internet), which speaks to the UK branding itself not only as a place with a rich history that may at times seem very formal and traditional, but also as a place for innovation and creativity.

The London Opening Ceremony artistic program was quirky and humorous with a bit of an edge. The emphasis on technological advancement assisted in the development of a new image for Britain that focused on innovation both past and present, which is an exercise in soft power. This chapter identifies cultural outcomes that can be attributed to

171

the outputs (e.g., the World Shakespeare Festival and Opening Ceremony) as exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy, which characterizes the logic model as the analytical framework.

Outcomes: Olympic Cultural Legacy

The London 2012 Olympic Games provided ample opportunities for exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy through the artistic program during the opening ceremony and the World Shakespeare Festival. Research conducted by Ipsos Mori, on behalf of the

British Council, indicates that over two thirds of audiences internationally believe that the

UK did a good job hosting the Games and nearly 34% of international audiences believe that the UK’s influence over international affairs have improved as a result(Centre,

2012). For the purposes of this chapter, I investigate outcomes of soft power (changes in public opinion) and cultural diplomacy (long-term partnerships) for the cultural programming. Outcomes are defined as short, medium, or long-term changes to individuals, entities, communities, etc. (Fitzpatrick et al., 2004). Nye (2002) explained that identifying the outcomes of soft power can be difficult to measure because “…like love, it is hard to measure and to handle, and does not touch everyone, but that does not diminish its importance” (J. Nye, 2002, p. 9), unlike hard power (e.g., war), which has easily identified outcomes. Public perception connects explicitly to the soft-power element of influence through appeal. In addition, partnerships between institutions and organizations reflect a mutual benefit that relates to cultural diplomacy. An examination of national and international surveys and media responses (e.g., Project Survey by

172

Institute of Cultural Capital, London 2012 Festival Audiences survey by

Nielsen/LOCOG) demonstrates the change in public perception with regard to the artistic program. The continued staging of Globe to Globe productions at the Globe Theatre highlights long-lasting relationships between international institutions (e.g., Belarus Free

Theatre). The soft power and cultural diplomacy outcomes include an increase in cultural tourism, changes in public perception, and long-lasting relationships due to Olympic cultural programming.

Cultural tourism is an outcome of cultural diplomacy and soft power that reflects governmental and organizational aims. According to the Cultural Olympiad Board, the

“Department for Culture, Media and Sport aimed to foster and encourage programming which would attract domestic and international tourists and use the events of 2012 as marketing material to stimulate cultural tourist visits in 2013 and years beyond.”

Partnerships between government entities and agencies allowed for an increase in cultural tourism and benefitted both entities with international recognition, which explicitly relates to soft power.

Visit England and Arts Council England have agreed to continue working

together on joint initiatives, and the Mayor of London’s ofﬁce is working with the

GREAT campaign and British Council to tour one of the London 2012 Festival’s

“greatest hits” round the world, extending the use of artistic commissions to raise

the proﬁle of cultural tourism to the UK. (Board, 2013, p. 13)

The ability to stimulate tourism allowed not only governmental diplomacy, with the

Department of Culture, and Media and Sport encouraging the exchanges, but for

173

diplomacy on the individual level, i.e. person-to-person diplomacy. According to Snow and Taylor (2009), “More recently, public diplomacy involves the way in which both government and private individuals and groups influence directly and indirectly those public attitudes and opinions that bear directly on another government’s foreign policy decisions (P2P)” (Snow & Taylor, 2009, p. 6). The rise of P2P diplomacy is prevalent in cultural diplomacy and can be linked to technology. As Snow & Taylor (2009) note,

“One development is the rise in user-friendly communications technologies that have increased public participation in talking about foreign affairs and the subsequent involvement of public opinion in foreign policy making. Another development is the increase in people-to-people exchanges, both virtual and personal, across national borders” (Snow & Taylor, 2009, p. 6). Social media serves as a platform for people to share and discuss their ideas with other people, organizations, and governments. Maxwell

(2008) explains, “In sum, these changes amount to somewhat of a ‘limitless local’—that is, to nations that are in a sense shaped, advanced and decided anywhere and everywhere, to cultures that are no longer contained by the traditional boundaries of time and space”

(p. 2(Rachael Maxwell, 2008). Social media allows everyone to “have a voice,” which relates to Matterns’s (2005) discussion of technology as an accessible means for communication, permitting many actors to use soft power.

Social media was only one of many media sources that represented exercises in soft power with regard to the artistic program during the Opening Ceremony. Soft power can be identified by the examination of spectator responses to media during London

2012. “In a survey by Visit Britain, 74% of tourists agreed that coverage of the Games

174

had made them aware of the UK’s diverse cultural experiences and events”(Board, 2013, p. 13). Awareness is necessary for individuals to form an opinion on the appeal of the culture, values, and policies presented. According to the Cultural Olympiad Board,

“Anecdotal evidence suggests that the programme itself and the media coverage it attracted contributed to the UK rising from the ﬁfth to the fourth most popular tourist destination (according to the Nation Brands Index)” (Board, 2013, p. 13). Attraction is an element of Nye’s discussion of soft power and it impacts how spectators and international audiences viewed Great Britain. Furthermore, the change in perspective the audience experienced is an outcome of this exercise in soft power. The international response to the artistic program as presented by the news media reflected the intended development of Britain’s image. The use of culture, values, and policies as resources for soft power were explicitly discussed in the news. Danny Boyle, Artistic Director of the London 2012

Olympic Opening Ceremony, said, “Our Isles of Wonder salutes and celebrates the exuberant creativity of the British genius in an Opening Ceremony that we hope will be as unpredictable and inventive as the British people” ("Dazzling opening ceremony launches 30th Olympic Games," 2012). The idea that the British were inventive and creative was expressed during the artistic program. The Sydney Herald highlighted the mix between high and popular culture and how humor was an essential element: “When the Queen appeared as herself in a film clip, with Daniel Craig, readying herself for a

James Bond-style helicopter entrance to the stadium. That bit was fudged, of course. But even Britons in future might see their Queen in a new light, to wit, strobe” (Baum, 2012).

Using terms like “future” and “a new light,” the Sydney Herald related the Opening

175

Ceremony’s intended development of a new image and a change in perception that functioned as an outcome of soft power. Zhuang Chen, writing for the BBC Chinese

Service on Radio 4, explicitly used soft power language to describe the outcome of the artistic program: “The Chinese official Wang Ning, director of the Beijing Olympics opening and closing ceremonies, said he would give 90 out of 100 marks to Britain, which is quite high. He liked the innovative ways to illustrate British culture, its influence and also its new image” ("Media reaction to London 2012 Olympic opening ceremony,"

2012). According to international media sources, the artistic program of the Opening

Ceremony was an exercise in soft power that achieved its goal of changing Britain’s image.

Soft power outcomes of the artistic program include increased cultural tourism and changes in perception, while relationships between organizations reflect the outcomes of cultural diplomacy. These relationships be developed and shaped in a variety of forms:

International co-commissions and partnerships to create the commissions and

projects for the London 2012 Festival enabled the UK and UK-based cultural

organisations to showcase their work to audiences and markets round the world,

in the countries of their cocommissioning partners. The showcasing and exporting

of UK artists and creative industries is one of the simplest ways to contribute to

economic growth, and open new markets. (Board, 2013, p. 13)

An example of an outcome of cultural diplomacy is the longevity of the Globe to Globe program at the Globe Theatre, as the theater invited productions from the festival during

176

London 2012 to return. Maintaining productions and touring and restaging the programs reflect outcomes of cultural diplomacy because it requires a continued relationship between the Globe Theatre and the partnering international theaters. For instance, Belarus

Free Theatre’s production of King Lear returned to the Globe Theatre in the summer of

2013, after being staged during the Globe to Globe program. “Cape Town’s Olivier award-winning Isango Ensemble returns to the Globe this summer with their stunning production of Venus & Adonis. One of the most celebrated shows of the 2012 Cultural

Olympiad, it brings song, dance and beautiful physicality to Shakespeare’s epic love story” ("Venus and Adonis,"). This relationship is ongoing, as Isango Ensemble returned to the Globe to stage Mysteries in March and April 2015. The continued relationship between international theater companies and the Globe Theatre is an outcome of the

Globe to Globe program, which functioned as an exercise in cultural diplomacy.

In conclusion, the outcomes of soft power and cultural diplomacy for the cultural programming of London 2012 include cultural tourism, changes in perception, and relationships between institutions. In general, the London Games positively impacted cultural tourism due to the diligence of government agencies and institutions. The artistic program during the opening ceremony intended to change the perception of London and the UK by global audiences. Based on surveys and international responses, the artistic program achieved this goal. The lasting relationships with regard to the restaging of

Globe to Globe program productions is also an outcome of cultural diplomacy. These elements fulfill the Olympic cultural legacy and together they support my examination of

177

the cultural programming of London 2012 as an exercise in soft power and cultural diplomacy and its identifying outcomes.

Conclusion

This chapter argues that the cultural programming of the London 2012 Olympics are exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy. The use of a logic model as the analytical frame allows for clear identification of the inputs needed for the exercises, examination of the exercises (Artistic Program and World Shakespeare Festival), and the investigation of outcomes. The necessary resources for the cultural programming of the Olympics

(exercises in soft power) include interurban competition and management because they serve as the foundation for winning the bid, implementing the games, and creating an

Olympic legacy. The artistic program, Isles of Wonder, exemplified soft power because it used British culture, values, and policy to rebrand the city and region and appeal to audiences, which relates to the change in public perception and increased tourism.

London 2012, the arts festival component of the London Olympic games, provided opportunities for cultural diplomacy through the World Shakespeare Festival (Globe to

Globe and Worlds Together Conference) because it fostered mutual understanding due to artistic and audience exchanges. The continued Globe to Globe program further reflects relationship building as an outcome of cultural diplomacy. The examination of inputs, outputs, and outcomes fit into the larger discussion of intention, purpose, and evaluation of the cultural programming of the Games, which has to date had limited review. In what

178

follows, this dissertation will compare the cultural programming of Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 as exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy.

179

Chapter 7: Comparing Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012

Introduction

A comparison of cultural programming reveals the similarities and differences in exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy for Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012.

Using a logic model as an analytical tool allows for an effective and organized comparison of the cities ( inputs, outputs, and outcomes) and their impact on exercises of soft power and cultural diplomacy. The differences in resources for the Games did not have a distinct effect on the implementation of the programming. This chapter highlights the variations in the artistic programs, as outputs, reflect the political context of Cold War era Los Angeles and new millennium London and the surprisingly similar significance the Shakespearean programming shared in both Arts Festivals. This chapter also reveals that different programs can have similar outcomes. An examination of the outcomes, exemplifies the public value of the games. Although the cultural programming of Los

Angeles 1984 and London 2012 occurred almost thirty years apart, they both exercised soft power through image projection. Yet, the major difference between Games is the explicit inclusion of mutually beneficial programming that fostered understanding for

London 2012 and absence during Los Angeles 1984 which reflects the differences in context for cultural diplomacy.

180

Inputs

Inputs are the resources that are necessary for the creation and implementation of

Olympics and serve as the foundation for soft power and cultural diplomacy. I compare the world city status and management as inputs of Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 in order to identify if differences or similarities impact creation and implementation of the

Games.

Los Angeles and London as Comparable World Cities

Los Angeles and London are both regarded as world cities because of their cultural capacity for creation and dissemination. Friedman (1986) highlights London and Los

Angeles as cities with ideological penetration and control, as well as centres for disseminating information, news, entertainment, and other cultural artifacts. The ability to present and shape ideas through culture (Hollywood and Shakespeare) makes these cities unique. Also, the cities’ and regions’ cultural elements have international reach through productions and technology. For instance, the Royal Shakespeare Company states that 50% of the world reads Shakespeare’s works(Company, 2010) and American dominance of the audio-visual industry including franchising and joint ventures with overseas companies, especially in television production, is unmatched anywhere (De

Zoysa & Newman, 2002, p. 193). Although both cities are centers for culture, they differ because Shakespeare and his works are high culture and Hollywood is more popular culture. Differences in audiences and consumption could impact exercises in soft power.

181

These two cities have been explored and compared as world or global cities in the literature based on demographic size, interconnected through decision-making and finance, production and markets, destination for domestic and international migrants and advanced producer services(Beaverstock, 1999; Dogan, 2004; J. Friedmann, 1986; J. W.

G. Friedmann, 1982). Like their dominance in industry, Los Angeles and London have dominated as hosts of the Olympics because they both have hosted previous Games. The hosting of previous Games helped the cities gain the necessary capacity to manage facilities, tourists and media. In the context of the cultural programming of the

Olympics, Los Angeles and London are similar as world cities because they are both centers for cultural production and dissemination prior to the hosting of the Olympics.

Difference in Management Styles

Despite the similarities in world city status, there were major differences in the management styles for Los Angeles 1984, which was privately managed, and London

2012, which had strong IOC involvement. The differences in management style are indicative of the disparity in approaches over the course of modern day Olympic history.

The management of the Olympic Games is different for each host city as described in the

Analytical Framework: central management (Mexico 1968, Munich 1972, Seoul 1988 and Sydney 2000), decentralized management (Montreal 1976), private Los Angeles

(1984) and state-management (Moscow 1980). This chapter compares Los Angeles and

London management styles because it was the first time each management style had been

182

implemented during an Olympic Games and could impact exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy.

Los Angeles 1984 was the first privately managed Olympic Games, which provided autonomy with regard to finances and decision-making. This management approach supported the first profitable Olympic Games and became a model for future Games. This approach differs greatly from the International Olympic Committee’s involvement in

London 2012. The London 2012 model includes the International Olympic Committee’s

(IOC) support and coordination of activities through its Games Coordination Office

(GCO) which monitors and guides the OCOG during the Games and is chaired by the

IOC President. These two structures work closely together to ensure that the Games ran smoothly and that any issues that may arise were quickly resolved ("Close collaboration is key to delivering the Olympic Games," 2014).London 2012 was the first OCOG to integrate the International Olympic Committees (IOC) Games model and benefit IOC guidance and recommendations in every step of the Games preparation and delivery

(IOC, 2013). Although London 2012 employed this new method, it is unclear outside of the IOC’s laudatory perspective, how this method impacted image or value projection during the cultural programing.

The only similarity between management approaches is that both were new and unique.

Although there are differences in management, both Games created a cultural legacy. For instance, the Olympic Gateway stands as a symbol for the Los Angeles Games and the

183

Globe to Globe’s continued relationship with international theatre companies highlights the strength of the programming. Within the scope of this research, I have not found any relationship between the management style and the creation of a cultural legacy of the

Games. In future work, it would be beneficial to examine the host city’s relations with the state and the state and city’s relationship with the IOC to determine if certain cities are predisposed to having more IOC involvement than others.

Outputs

Outputs are the activities that are produced as a result of inputs and effect program outcomes. For the purposes of this dissertation, the outputs consist of the cultural programming of the Olympics which include the artistic program of the Opening

Ceremony and Shakespearean programming of the Arts Festival of the Los Angeles and

London Olympics. There are similar intentions in using the artistic programs to exercise soft power for both host cities and regions, but differences in exercises in cultural diplomacy with regard to Shakespearean programming during the Arts Festivals. A comparison of the cultural programming of Los Angeles 1984and London 2012 reveals a common intention and implementation with the artistic program during the Opening

Ceremonies and difference in cultural diplomacy implementation for the Shakespearean programming.

Artistic Programs-Los Angeles’ Majestic Approach and London’s Comedic

Approach

184

The Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 artistic programs had similar intentions and executions because both used culture, values, and policies to appeal to national and international audiences. They did this through a mix of high and popular culture to represent their nations’ histories and contemporary prowess to appeal to audiences. Los

Angeles used an 800 member marching bands to present the Americana Suite section included a medley of patriotic songs like “You’re a Grand Old Flag”, “This Land Is Your

Land” and “This is My Country” and a mash-up of music from “A Chorus Line” and

“Fame” during the artistic program. The inclusion of both styles of music highlighted deference to American history and demonstration of artistic contemporary success in an awe-inspiring presentation. While London 2012 focused on Mr. Bean, a silent comedic character known for getting himself into unusual situations, accompanying the London

Symphony performance of Chariots of Fire playing one note repeatedly. The combination of Mr. Bean and the London Symphony highlights the comedic tone the organizers used to combine both high and popular culture in order to appeal to audiences.

The inclusion of humor is a major difference between London and Los Angeles artistic program. London’s use of humor helped assist it in achieving its goal of no longer being considered ‘arrogant, stuffy, old-fashioned and cold’ (Grix & Houlihan, 2014, p. 583).

While humor in the Los Angeles context would have detracted from the attempt to present American history and culture in a majestic and appealing manner for Cold War context. The United States also did not have a long enough history in comparison to

London to parody. Although both ceremonies mixed high and popular culture, the inclusion of both served different purposes. For instance, Los Angeles did not include

185

any explicit performances that highlighted its connection to Hollywood. This lack reflects the need for the city to be taken seriously which is apparent in its inclusion of grand pianos instead popular movies like E.T. The opposite is true for London 2012. London as a city is known for high art like Shakespeare, decided to reach its political goals by including popular culture references like music from the Sex Pistols.

Another difference between the Los Angeles and London Opening ceremonies was the commentary during the broadcast. Los Angeles was broadcasted by ABC with Jim

McKay and Peter Jennings providing commentary on the artistic programming that reflected the cultural context of the Games. Specifically, the Soviet Union references that highlighted the Cold War context and exercises in soft power. They highlighted the reach and value of the opening ceremonies by explaining that the opening ceremony was not broadcasted in the Soviet Union and noting that individuals travelled north of Leningrad

(St. Petersburg) to watch it on Finnish television. In contrast, the International Olympic

Committee’s broadcast of the London 2012 artistic programming had limited commentary in general. When commentary is available it is generally descriptive in nature and lacks discussion of political context. This reflects the IOC claim that sports and politics do not mix. Commentary during the artistic program impacts soft power because it shapes the focus on specific elements of the program for spectators which affects attraction. Local and international spectators could find it appealing that people from the Soviet Union are travelling to witness the Los Angeles Opening Ceremony which could validate American values, culture, and policies.

186

Shakespearean programming-Differences Impact Exercises in Cultural Diplomacy

The Los Angeles and London Shakespearean programming were different in form, scale, and intention. The Shakespearean programming during the Los Angeles 1984 Olympics only consisted of six theatrical productions presented in repertoire during the Olympic

Arts Festival. While the London 2012 Shakespearean programming not only included productions but also a conference. Both theatrical productions included Shakespeare plays performed in foreign languages and attempted to challenge audiences with new work: Los Angeles- English, French and Italian and London 37 different languages including Urdu and Bangla. A major difference is the inclusion of non-theatrical programming like the Worlds Together Conference which focuses on education related to

Shakespeare. The diversity in London 2012 programming allowed for more options for individuals and potentially the ability to reach more people.

A comparison of the scale of the Los Angeles and London Shakespearean programming seem to differ but further analysis of the relative significance of the programming makes the two programs comparable. The Los Angeles Olympic Festival had limited

Shakespearean offering in comparison to London 2012 which had an entire festival committed to Shakespeare. The Los Angeles Olympic Arts Festival had six

Shakespearean productions, while the Globe to Globe program alone had thirty seven

Shakespearean productions and was only one theme out of nine for the entire World

Shakespeare Festival. Although the aggregate data reflects London 2012 as having

187

substantially more Shakespearean offerings, the Shakespearean programming for Los

Angeles is still noteworthy because of the relative significance it had to the overall programming. A variety of sources like the Official Final Report for the Los Angeles

Olympics and The Performing Arts Journal, highlight prevalence of Shakespearean works compared to other playwrights as significant(Rabkin, 1984; Ziffren, Ueberroth,

Usher, & Perelman, 1985). Further analysis of the Los Angeles theatrical programming highlights that Shakespearean programming made up approximately 16% of all of the theatrical programming. Although the scale of the Shakespearean programming during

Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 differ with regard to amount of offerings, upon further analysis the significance of Shakespearean works during both Arts Festivals is comparable.

The Shakespearean programming for Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 both used language that highlighted cultural diplomacy; but differed with regard to implementation.

For instance The Worlds Together International Education Conference for the London

2012 Games represented the mutual understanding component expressed by Cummings’ definition of cultural diplomacy because it “brought together education professionals, international artists and academics to share their practice and investigate learning through

Shakespeare and the arts” (Cutler & O'Hanlon, 2012). In Los Angeles’ Olympic Arts

Festival “Prelude to the Olympics: A Gala Concert” brochure Mayor Bradley hoped “that the legacies left by the Olympic Arts Festival will include…a permanent arts link between local arts groups and international troupes” (Bradley, 1984). This brochure intention of permanent links between local arts groups and international troupes

188

highlights a mutually beneficial relationship which reflects cultural diplomacy. Yet, according to Hope Schneider (Associate Director of the Olympic Arts Festival) the intention of the Olympic Arts Festival was to present a strong international festival and cultural diplomacy was not the intention and did not occur (Schneider, 2014). According to Hope Schneider, Associate Director of Olympic Arts Festival, the intent was to present an outstanding international festival, not to be culturally diplomatic or exercise soft power (Schneider, 2014). Conversely, the Shakespearean programming of London 2012 fulfilled the intention of cultural diplomacy in practice, while only the potential opportunity to exercise cultural diplomacy was demonstrated in Los Angeles 1984. For instance, collaboration between Globe to Globe audiences fostered mutual understanding.

This is due in part to the Globe’s efforts to recruit spectators from the language communities represented onstage, including large contingents of people who could speak the same language as the production languages of translation, and whose reactions to the dialogue made their group presence a visible and audible component of the performance event ("Shakespeare on the global stage : performance and festivity in the Olympic year,"

2015).The reactions of audiences members familiar with the language and the culture helped other audiences members understand the culturally sensitive materials and allowed for the collective audiences members to comprehend the productions.

Also, the Worlds Together Conference provided opportunities for exchange during discussions that occurred in the Tanks and panel discussions like Words Matter, a panel discussion that included Peggy O’Brien, CEO of the Great Teaching Project, and Cicely

189

Berry, Voice Director at the Royal Shakespeare Company that explored the power that lies in Shakespeare’s language and other panel discussions that allowed participants to choose from a range of presentations that explored innovative ways of working with

Shakespeare and young people with the explicit intention to discuss and exchange ideas and experiences (Cutler & O'Hanlon, 2012). Cultural diplomacy was the intention and ultimately implemented for London’s Shakespearean programming and not during the

Los Angeles Games because of differences in geopolitical context. For instance, a strong international festival whose reputation could have addressed the Cold War political needs more effectively than exchanges between individuals. International reputation/ image was important with regard to the sharing of values at that time. While, mutually beneficially exchanges supported the goals of the British Council which focused on shared understanding (Memis, 2012).

Conclusion

In conclusion, Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 have similar intentions in using the artistic programs to exercise soft power for both host cities and regions, but different exercises in cultural diplomacy with regard to Shakespearean programming during the

Arts Festivals. Both Los Angeles and London used culture, values, and policies during their artistic programs to influence spectators with the major difference being in the use of humor in London. There were also differences in the Shakespearean programming with regard to form, scale, and intention. For instance, the Los Angeles Arts Festival solely provided theatrical Shakespearean performances, while London 2012 provided other options like the Worlds Together Conference. London’s multiple Shakespearean

190

options provided more opportunities to engage with the works for individuals who may prefer other Shakespearean experiences besides theatrical. Although London 2012 had more options, Shakespearean programming in both London and Los Angeles are comparable because they were both significant relative to the other programming.

Another difference in the Los Angeles and London Shakespearean programming is the intention. London implemented culturally diplomatic programming, while Los Angeles focused on creating a strong international festival. It would be valuable to examine potential exchanges between non-American participating theatre companies due to Los

Angeles and London Shakespearean programming to garner a more comprehensive understanding of exercises in cultural diplomacy during the Games.

Outcomes

Introduction

Outcomes are changes that result from outputs which for the purposes of this dissertation are the cultural programming of the Los Angeles and London Olympics. The cultural programming of the Games were exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy. This section investigates the outcomes of these exercises. Image projection is an outcome of the Los Angeles Mural Project and London artistic programs which were exercises in soft power. The only explicit evidence of outcomes of cultural diplomacy (relationship building) developed from the Globe to Globe program. A comparison of the cultural programming outcomes of the Los Angeles and London Olympics reveals that different programs can have similar outcomes.

191

Soft Power- Diversity in Programming with similar Outcomes

Image projection was a soft power outcome for both Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 and reveals that differences in programming can develop similar outcomes. The Mural

Project, a project in partnership with the Brockman Gallery, functions as an intentional exercise in soft power because it was created to add credibility to Los Angeles. “The effort was a milestone in the city's art history, adding credibility to L.A.'s "mural capital of the world" claim while burnishing sheen on the careers of muralists in the city.(Jao,

2013). The international credibility lends itself to soft power due to the use of culture and values to influence and harkens to discussions of place branding. The distinction characteristics of cities allow for place branding. “For both place branding and public diplomacy, a key element is to build personal and institutional relationships and dialogue with foreign audiences by focusing on values, setting them apart from classical diplomacy, which primarily deals with issues.”(Ham, 2008, p. 135). By setting Los

Angeles apart as the mural capital of the world draws the attention away from issues and uses culture and values. Thus, exercising soft power by projecting a new image as the mural capital of the world. The artistic program of London’s opening ceremonies reflected a similar pursuit of rebranding the city. Grix and Houlihan’s (2014) review of the House of Common documentation highlighted Britain’s goal to develop London’s image through the Olympic Games by combating the ‘arrogant, stuffy, old-fashioned and cold’ images. International publications revealed the soft power impacts of the artistic program’s attempt to develop London’s image. The Sydney Herald highlighted the change in perception using terms like new and future. “When the Queen appeared as

192

herself in a film clip, with Daniel Craig, readying herself for a James Bond-style helicopter entrance to the stadium. That bit was fudged, of course. But even Britons in future might see their Queen in a new light, to wit, strobe”(Baum, 2012). While Zhuang

Chen, BBC Chinese Service, on Radio 4 explicitly used soft power language to describe the outcome of the artistic program. “The Chinese official Wang Ning, director of the

Beijing Olympics opening and closing ceremonies, said he would give 90 out of 100 marks to Britain, which is quite high. He liked the innovative ways to illustrate British culture, its influence and also its new image”("Media reaction to London 2012 Olympic opening ceremony," 2012). According to international media sources, the artistic program of the Opening Ceremony was an exercise in soft power that achieved its goal of changing Britain’s image. Although Los Angeles and London used different components of their cultural program to exercise soft power, they had same impact of image projection. Although differences in size and scale could affect which spectators can experience the programming and potential reach, the effect which is to project a new image is the same.

Cultural Diplomacy-Globe to Globe Stands Alone

In contrast, only the Globe to Globe program developed explicit cultural diplomacy impacts. Specifically, the program built long-lasting relationships with the organizations that presented productions during London 2012. The Globe Theatre invites productions from the Globe to Globe Festival during London 2012 to return to the Globe Theatre. The longevity and diversity of the partnerships highlights an outcome of cultural diplomacy.

193

Maintaining productions and touring and restaging the programs reflect outcomes of cultural diplomacy because that requires a continued relationship between the Globe

Theatre and partnering international theatres. For instance, Belarus Free Theatre's King

Lear returned to the Globe Theatre in the summer of 2013, after being staged during the

Globe to Globe program. Isango Ensemble , from Cape Town, returned to the Globe with their production of Venus & Adonis in 2013 and continued relationships by present

Mysteries in March and April 2015. Within the scope this dissertation, there were no explicit culturally diplomatic outcomes for Los Angeles 1984. The culturally diplomatic elements of the Globe to Globe reflect the political context of Britain. Specifically, the

British Council’s overall cultural relations approach of fostering mutual understanding

(Memis, 2012). One area of further investigation will be the Los Angeles Festival as an outcome for the Los Angeles artistic program and to determine if there were any elements of cultural diplomacy and/or cultural diplomacy outcomes.

Conclusion

In conclusion, cultural programming outcomes of the Los Angeles and London Olympics exemplify the various outcomes of soft power and cultural diplomacy. An examination of the Mural Project and London’s artistic program reveal that cities can impact their image despite a diversity in form and scale. The Mural Project was primary audience was local and international visitors in Los Angeles. In contrast, London’s artistic program was broadcasted for present and international spectators which allowed for a more global reach. Both initiatives impact the image of their cities, which is an outcome of an

194

exercise in soft power. The component of the cultural programming of the Los Angeles and London Olympics that had cultural diplomacy outcomes was the Globe to Globe program. The continued relationship between the Globe Theatre and other international theatre companies is exemplified through the encore Globe to Globe performances at the

Globe Theatre. The next steps for this research include an in-depth case study of the relationship between the Globe Theatre and Isango Ensemble over the course of five years to have a more comprehensive understanding of other components and alternative outcomes of cultural diplomacy.

Public Value

Introduction

The cultural programming of the Olympics demonstrates social, educational, cultural and economic benefits. These benefits exemplify public value because they affect individuals and communities. The Rand Corporation in their publication, Gifts of the Muse:

Reframing the Debate About the Benefits of the Arts, explore three ways in which arts benefits individuals and communities: 1) improvement of one’s life; 2) the spillover of individual’s benefits to improve the community; and 3) economic improvement and social capital (McCarthy, 2004, p.69). These three benefits in general, are similar outcomes of Olympic Games discussed within the literature, and more specifically, are exemplary of the Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 Games cultural outcomes explored in this dissertation. Rand Corporation also asserts, “The arts produce benefits—economic growth, education, and pro-social behavior…recognize as being of value” (1). Pro-social

195

behavior includes the ability to build relationships through the creation of social bonds, which is an essential element of cultural diplomacy. Culture, values, and policies are tools of soft power (Nye 2008) and are used during the cultural programming of the

Olympics to influence outcomes. The most useful element of Gifts of the Muse for this dissertation is the “Framework for Understanding the Benefits of the Arts”5 (see Figure

1) because it creates a spectrum of benefits that can be used to review instrumental, intrinsic, public, and private benefits of the cultural programming of the Olympics. It also functions as an analytical tool because it helps analyze and categorize the exercises of soft power and cultural diplomacy. Thus, examining Olympic cultural programming as exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy has benefits that reflect the public value of the Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 Games.

Los Angeles Olympics- Benefits of Exercises in Soft Power

The cultural programming of the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics is an exercise in soft power that has public value. Applying The Framework to the cultural programming highlights private, public, intrinsic, and instrumental benefits. First, the Shakespearean programming of the Los Angeles Games exemplify exercises in soft power and individual and collective benefits. The public value of Shakespearean programming is best reflected in the intrinsic and private benefits with public spillover section The

Framework. Captivation (holding one’s attention or interest) and pleasure (enjoyment or

5 From here on in The Framework.

196

satisfaction) were intrinsic and private benefits that occurred for audiences who witnessed the productions. Audiences also expanded their capacity for empathy through exposure to Shakespeare in different styles and languages because it challenged their performance expectations; thus, revealing private benefits with spillover and intrinsic benefits of Shakespearean programming. Robert Fitzpatrick explained that the risk taken with regard to the Shakespearean programming was worth it, even though the organizers were nervous. It was a pleasant surprise that audiences would sit through five hours of

Japanese-style Shakespeare in French (Beyette, 1985). This exercise in soft power highlights that audiences not only enjoyed the programming, but also were challenged which reflects intrinsic and private benefits. As well as private benefit with spillover because it was the audiences that experienced the production collectively. Enjoyment and empathy relate to soft power because they impact attraction to American culture, values, and policies that address political endeavors.

Public and intrinsic benefits reveal communal meaning that is expressed through

Shakespeare’s text due to the national and international familiarity of themes and plots.

“The festival strategy of choosing innovative productions of the classics made communicative sense: familiar texts and visual invention softened—if not completely eradicated—the foreign language barrier” (Rabkin, 1984, p. 45). These benefits are unique because fifty percent of the world reads and is familiar with Shakespeare’s works, which leads to communal meaning making that reveals public value. In addition to the intrinsic benefits, the public and instrumental benefits of the programming helped

197

develop social capital because it was a part of the entire Olympic Arts Festival, which assisted in raising the artistic profile of the arts community and networks in Los Angeles.

This exemplifies the stated goals of the Olympic Arts Festival which included celebrating the international brotherhood of the artist and showcasing cultural diversity and excellence (Ziffren et al., 1985). The focus on brotherhood and presentation sets the foundation for potential collaborations and attraction of other organizations and artists.

The benefits of the Shakespearean programming of the Los Angeles Games were captivation, pleasure, expanded capacity for empathy, and expressions of communal meaning which exemplify its public value. American policies could seem attractive due to these benefits and impact American soft power in the Cold War context.

Unlike the Shakespearean programming, the artistic program during the Los Angeles

Opening Ceremony only exhibited private and intrinsic benefits through captivation and pleasure. The benefits are examples of the public value of exercises in soft power because the captivation and pleasure occurred through the presentation of American culture, values, and policies. The spectacle of the artistic program ensured that audiences paid attention to the action transpiring within the stadium. Wolper highlighted the spectacular nature of the opening ceremonies (L. A. O. O. Committee, 1985), which manifested in elements like an 800 member marching band and Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue" with 85 grand pianos. The inclusion of popular culture served as the foundation for the private and intrinsic benefit of pleasure. Specifically, the popularity of Michael Jackson’s song

“Beat it” was appealing to the audience because Thriller was one of the bestselling albums of all time. The audience found pleasure in the music, dance, and fashion

198

presented because Michael Jackson was not only popular in the United States of America, but throughout the world.

The Olympic Murals and Gateway shared similar private benefits in comparison to the artistic programming during the Opening Ceremony. These aspects of the cultural programming of the Games are similar to the Shakespearean programming by being exercises in soft power. The Olympic Murals and Olympic Gateway were exercises in soft power because they presented American culture, values, and policies by presenting the universal nature of Olympic athletes and highlighting the positive elements of Los

Angeles diversity and car culture to influence local and international audiences.

Interestingly, they reveal private and intrinsic benefits through captivation and pleasure that are produced by cultural distinction and ambiguity. The intention of Olympic Murals and Olympic Gateway these pieces was to inspire and welcome visitors and locals for the

Games using culture and values. The Olympic murals reflected specifically Los Angeles car culture and diversity in Going to the Olympics and L.A. Freeway Kids through the depiction of Los Angeles traffic and multi-ethnic children playing. While the murals focused on distinct elements of Los Angeles culture, the Olympic Gateway represents that universal nature the Olympic values. The sculpture includes the headless torso of a man and woman athlete that could represent any athlete from any country. This embodies an expression of communal meaning because the piece symbolizes all athletes. The

Gateway serves as an explicit legacy of the Los Angeles Games and to be a reminder of the emotional impact the Games had upon the human spirit and the community (Ziffren et al., 1985). In contrast, the Olympic murals have a more checkered legacy that includes

199

legal, vandalism, and conservation issues (Dubin, 1987; Seiler, 1986). Although the

Olympic Murals focuses distinct expressions of Los Angeles culture, and the Olympic

Gateway serves as a universal representation of an Olympic athlete; they both have public value because they captivate and provide pleasure to spectators.

In conclusion, the cultural programming of the Los Angeles 1984 Olympics had public value that fulfilled all elements of the “Framework for Understanding the Benefits of the

Arts” except private instrumental benefits and instrumental and private benefits with public spillover. The exercises in soft power revealed public values like captivating audiences and the expression of communal meaning. Although, this investigation did not reveal any benefits like self-efficacy and health within this context. The next step for this dissertation would be to focus on the Los Angeles Festival as an outcome and to highlight potential opportunities for improved self-efficacy. The festival would function in a similar way as the Olympic Arts Festival without the same support of a local organizing committee and International Olympic Committee.

London Olympics-Benefits of Exercises in Cultural Diplomacy and Soft Power

Similar to the cultural programming of the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics, the 2012 London

Olympic cultural programming highlights private, public, intrinsic, and instrumental benefits. The Globe to Globe program was an exercise in cultural diplomacy that fostered mutual understanding that resulted in relationship building between individuals and organizations. The Globe to Globe program had public value because there were benefits to the individual and collective audiences. For instance, audience members received

200

private and intrinsic benefits of captivation and pleasure while viewing the Shakespeare’s plays in 37 different languages. The Globe selected languages that are widely spoken in

London, and in turn attracted speakers of those languages to the Globe for the Festival

(Shakespeare Beyond English, 2013). The common languages between productions and communities set the stage for captivation and pleasure. The productions caught audience attention through language and created pleasure through shared cultural understanding, which was not always available for London audiences. The benefits of the programming

For instance a Dutch spectator’s experience during Richard II performed by Ashtar, a

Palestinian theatre company, revealed an example of public value:

The audience, with Palestinian flags, reacting to the Welsh uprising, and

screaming “Free Palestine” after the performance demonstrate the political reality.

The moment with the flag, and the audience’s reaction to it, was really captivating

and I felt like suddenly I understood the context a lot better. ("Shakespeare on the

global stage : performance and festivity in the Olympic year," 2015)

Individual audience members that identified with aspects of the performance collaborated in meaning making with other audience members who were not aware of some cultural instances. Some audience members adopted the role of experts and assisted others by explaining the performance ("Shakespeare on the global stage : performance and festivity in the Olympic year," 2015).

Like the Shakespearean programming during Los Angeles 1984, London 2012 had intrinsic and private benefits with public spillover. The diversity in the audience allowed for an expanded capacity for empathy. For instance, the audience members who were not

201

familiar with the language and cultural references knew when it was appropriate to laugh because they followed other audience members’ lead during the production and through discussion post production. Through these exchanges audience members had the opportunity to recognize and understand each other’s’ perspectives. The Globe to Globe program, I argue, exhibited the strongest example of public and instrumental benefits because of their intentional exercises in cultural diplomacy. Collaborating theatre companies developed social capital because these organizations continued relationships with the Globe. For example, Isango Ensemble returned to the Globe Theatre in Summer

2013 with their production of Venus & Adonis, which they had performed during the

London 2012 Olympics ("Venus and Adonis,"). This relationship continued even beyond

Summer 2013when Isango Ensemble returned the Globe Theatre to present Mysteries in

March and April 2015. The Globe also built social capital in a similar way by presenting a diverse festival that new audiences could identify with and potentially become permanent audience members. Shared experiences by audience members, community members, international theatre companies, and the Globe theatre reflect the development of communal meaning which are public and intrinsic benefits. These experiences provide a common ground to foster understanding between the United Kingdom and those attending the Olympics, thus exemplifying cultural diplomacy. The Globe to Globe program’s public value was apparent across the spectrum, while the Worlds Together

Conference had limited benefits.

The Worlds Together Conference was an exercise in cultural diplomacy that fostered mutual understanding through the exchange of knowledge. The conference “brought

202

together education professionals, international artists and academics to share their practice and investigate learning through Shakespeare and the arts” (Cutler & O'Hanlon,

2012). The Worlds Together Conference’s public value was apparent in the instrumental and private benefits as well as intrinsic benefit with private benefit spillover. Instrumental and private benefits with spillover highlight improved learning skills for attendees. The

Worlds Together Conference was the only program explored in this dissertation that improved learning skills, as opposed to the other cultural programming during the Los

Angeles and London Olympics. There were debates and discussions in the Tank Room, an open space for attendees to review topics, and professional panels, like Words Matter, that improved skills because the form and scale of the exchanges were dependent on the individual who might have to alter their communication skills or presentation approaches to explain their perspective. Thus, the exchanges provided opportunities to discuss and learn in different ways, causing participants to develop their ability to learn. In addition to instrumental benefits, the Worlds Together Conference had intrinsic and private benefits with spillover through individuals who developed as educators and Shakespeare enthusiasts because of the knowledge they gained through attending the conference.

They attempted to take stock and reflect, explore the importance and value of the place of art in young people’s learning. Why might the arts be central to their lives – from

Shakespeare to the digital realm (Cutler & O'Hanlon, 2012)? The public value was manifested through the conference by challenging Shakespearean education and techniques.

203

Similar to the Los Angeles Games, the London Opening Ceremony was an exercise in soft power because it used culture, values, and polices to influences spectators.

Captivation and pleasure reflect private and intrinsic benefits for the cultural programming of the Games. The inclusion of popular and iconic symbols of British culture during the artistic program caught spectator attention. For instance villains of

British literature represented by as massive figures highlighted Britain’s artistic prowess and creativity. The focus of villains from British children’s literature was also a unique idea because the organizers could have easily used heroic characters instead villains from books like Chitty Chitty Bang Bang ( Childcatcher), 101 Dalmatians(Cruela Deville) and

Harry Potter (Voldemort) who represented 100 years of British literature. Pleasure occurred through comical combination of popular and high culture. For instance, Queen

Elizabeth II of England and James Bond skydived into the Stadium and Mr. Bean played with the London Symphony ("Dazzling opening ceremony launches 30th Olympic

Games," 2012). The combination of Queen Elizabeth II and James Bond and Mr. Bean and the London Symphony highlights the comedic tone the organizers used to appeal to audiences. By appealing to audiences through comedy the artistic program helps London reject its image of being ‘arrogant, stuffy, old-fashioned and cold’ (Grix & Houlihan,

2014, p. 583). These moments were presented in a comical and engaging manner that juxtaposed high culture and popular culture for the amusement of spectators.

Conclusion

The cultural programming of the Los Angeles 1984 and London Olympics 2012 are examples of public value due to the individual and collective benefits. The benefits range

204

from pleasure to expressions of communal meaning. For instance, the Los Angeles artistic program was pleasurable for national and international audience because it included Michael Jackson’s world renowned song Beat It and highlights the shared attraction to Jackson’s music, fashion, and dance. The World’s Together Conference provided a unique opportunity for attendees to develop learning skills by engaging informally and formally with each other during debates and discussions. This dissertation is distinct because it does not address economic growth as a benefit because the field tends to rely heavily on financial impacts as a source for validation. It also highlights different ways of examining the cultural programming of the Olympics and potential benefits. The non-economic benefits validate the inclusion and implementation of the cultural programming of the Games and highlights potential benefits of exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy. Future Olympic organizers can review these benefits and sanction specific programming because they not only benefit local audiences, but also international audiences, as well as community members, political figures, and potential funders.

Conclusion

A comparison of Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 cultural programming reflect similarities with regard to exercises in soft power and difference in exercises of cultural diplomacy. The political contexts of the both Games support the use of soft power. The political nature and foreign policy initiatives of United States and Soviet Union and the

Los Angeles 1984 Games following the Moscow 1980 Games provided the foundation

205

for exercises in soft power through cultural programming. The capitalist, nongovernmental, private sector Games of the western bloc superpower was the antithesis of Soviet socialists, government-centered and government controlled Games of the superpower of the eastern bloc lends to the question: Who hosts a stronger Olympics?

(D'Agati, 2013). Although London was not in the midst of the Cold War in 2012, it did use the cultural programming to support policy. House of Common documentation highlighted Britain’s goal to develop London’s image through the Olympic Games.

Britain’s overall worldwide reputation was strong because the United Kingdom was seen as fair, innovative, diverse, conﬁdent and stylish, but also arrogant, stuffy, old-fashioned and cold (Grix & Houlihan, 2014, p. 583). Despite, differences in era and vehicles for exercises in soft power (i.e. Los Angeles-Artistic Program/Mural Project and London-

Artistic Program), both cities used their cultural programming affect others to obtain the outcomes through attraction. London Olympic cultural programming, not Los Angeles, explicitly fulfilled Milton Cumming’s definition of cultural diplomacy. “The exchange of ideas, information, art and other aspects of culture among nations and their peoples in order to foster mutual understanding”(Cummings, 2003). The exchange in cultural diplomacy indicates that both parties have and share their culture. London 2012

Shakespearean programming, Globe to Globe and Worlds Together Conference, exemplified mutually beneficial experiences for audiences, educators, and artists. The pursuits were reflective of the current understanding and context of cultural diplomacy.

In 2011 Sir Vernon Ellis, Chairman of the British Council (United Kingdom’s international organization for cultural relations and educational opportunities) explained:

206

It is clear that states continue to play a pivotal role in global affairs, but

increasingly the voices of their people are being heard on the world stage. It is

essential for the UK, and the people of the UK, to build connections directly with

a newly empowered generations across the globe. This requires contact, dialogue

and shared understanding. This is cultural relations in action. This is the business

of the British Council.” (Memis, 2012)

Chairman Ellis’ explanation of shared understanding explicitly relates to Cummings’ idea of exchange and London’s Shakespearean programming. In contrast, the cultural programming of the Los Angeles Olympics lacked the exchange component present in

London’s programming. Although the United States had supported cultural and educational exchange through programs like the Fulbright Program since the Smith

Mundt Act of 1948, Cummings did not coin the applied term used in this dissertation until 2003. This could help clarify why there is little explicit discussion and implementation of cultural diplomacy for Los Angeles 1984.

207

Chapter 8: Conclusion

This dissertation addressed the overarching question: Is the cultural programming of the

Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 Olympics an exercise in soft power and cultural diplomacy? The cultural programming of both Games fulfilled Nye’s (2008) framework of using culture, values, and policies to influence the artistic program of the Opening

Ceremonies and Arts Festivals. London’s Shakespearean programming was the only instance of explicit exercise in cultural diplomacy because it satisfies Cummings (2003) need for exchange during the Globe to Globe Festival and the Worlds Together

Conference. Using a logic model to analyze the Games answers the other research question: What are the cultural impacts of the cultural aspects of the Olympics? The logic model categorizes and examines inputs, outputs, and outcomes of both Games. The inputs include management and interurban competition for both Games. The artistic program during the opening ceremonies and Shakespearean programming were examined as outputs. The outcomes of the cultural programming like changes in international image and relationship development between arts institutions, are specific impacts and exemplify Olympic legacy.

The last question and sub-question this dissertation addresses are how do the outcomes of the cultural aspects of the Olympics relate to public value and which factors may

208

constitute an effective framework for the evaluation of long-term impact and public value? The cultural programming of the Olympics demonstrates social, educational, cultural and economic benefits. These benefits exemplify public value because they affect individuals and communities. The “Framework for Understanding the Benefits of the

Arts” creates a spectrum of benefits that I used to analyze instrumental, intrinsic, public, and private benefits of the cultural programming of the Olympics that include benefits like captivation, pleasure, cognitive growth, and creation of social bonds. A logic model provided an effective framework to investigate the impact and public value of the cultural programming of the Olympics through an identification and analysis of the resources necessary to organize and implement the Games, activities of the cultural programming, and Olympic outcomes.

The responses to the research questions revealed a central theme within my work: How has cultural diplomacy evolved when comparing Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012.

Unlike cultural diplomacy, exercises in soft power remained constant in Los Angeles

1984 and London 2012. Both Games highlighted changes in images as a desired outcome of the cultural program. The artistic programming during the Opening Ceremonies used culture, values, and policies to influence spectators; thus fulfilling the soft power framework. The Los Angeles 1984 artistic program focused on presenting the United

States in a majestic and appealing manner. This artistic program revealed the Cold War context of the Games because it allowed United States’ culture, which includes democracy and capitalism, to be compared to communist Soviet Union, which had hosted

209

the Moscow Games in 1980. D’Agati explained the tension “[i]f the Los Angeles

Olympics have less positive and more negative moments, the Soviet Union is handed the perfect comparison between the East and the West (D'Agati, 2013, p. 150). London 2012 also used culture, values, and policies to change the regions image during the artistic program. The inclusion of humor allowed audiences to engage the long history and culture of Britain through parody. This addresses the House of Commons’ goal to develop Britain’s overall worldwide reputation as strong because the United Kingdom was seen as fair, innovative, diverse, conﬁdent and stylish, but also arrogant, stuffy, old- fashioned and cold (Grix & Houlihan, 2014, p. 583). Although both Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 used their artistic program to exercise soft power, both Games did not have explicit exercises in cultural diplomacy.

The Los Angeles Olympic Arts Festival did not explicitly support cultural diplomacy because that was not the intention of the Arts Festival. According to my evaluation of the cultural programming of the Los Angeles Games, there were no opportunities for cultural diplomacy. Hope Schneider, Associate Director of Los Angeles Olympic Arts Festival, corroborates this claim in this statement :the intent was to present an outstanding international festival, not to be culturally diplomatic or exercise soft power(Schneider,

2014). The Shakespearean program presented productions in repertoire without formal opportunities for audience, artistic, and organizational exchange. In contrast, London

2012 encouraged cultural diplomacy from a governmental level to programmatic level.

Sir Vernon Ellis, Chairman of the British Council highlighted that it was essential for the

210

UK, and the people of the UK, to build connections directly with a newly empowered generations across the globe. This requires contact, dialogue and shared understanding.

This is cultural relations in action. This is the business of the British Council”(Memis,

2012). The differences in geopolitical context during each Games reveal varying strategies of cultural diplomacy implementation that have historical and future implications.

History of Cultural Diplomacy

Using a Milton Cummings definition for cultural diplomacy as a framework for this dissertation highlights a North American perspective with regard to the inclusion of culture and values for international policy purposes. Although I review cultural diplomacy in 1984 and 2012, the act of cultural exchanges preceded the 1984 Olympic

Games. In the United States policy, there have been specific policies and programs that have demonstrated this shift overtime. Specifically reviewing the creation and disbandment of USIA, the Smith Mundt Act of 1948, and Millennium Council from

1999-2000; these have been government sanctioned and supported opportunities to share and exchange for political purposes. Individuals or organizations have been the vehicle for these endeavors that help prevent the acts from seeming like propaganda. In the Cold

War context, exchanges were happening via the Fulbright program that explicitly reflected Cold War pursuits with a distinct awareness of potential nuclear action. During the Los Angeles Olympic cultural programming, there were no explicit opportunities for exchange in the Olympic context and the focus of the cultural programming centered on

211

featuring Los Angeles and the United States in an appealing manner. Although the United

States Government did not support the Games financially and with very limited with political presence the Games were still dripping with political atmosphere with the majority of the Eastern Bloc boycotting the Games. The opportunity for fostering mural understanding through exchange wasn’t there. The Los Angeles cultural programming reflected the needs of the time thus expressing contextual intelligence. The political needs required the United States to present the Games in a strong, regal manner because it would be compared to the Soviet Union. London 2012 represents a different geopolitical context than Los Angeles 1984 because it was not in the midst of a Cold War. As the Los

Angeles Games were organized and then implemented within the Cold War context, opportunities to foster mutual understanding were replaced with the need to appear powerful. Given the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the United States used democratic and liberal ideals to support a boycott the 1980 Moscow Olympic Games.

An analysis of cultural diplomacy exercises during Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012, reveals differences due to geopolitical context and that lends itself Nye’s discussion of contextual intelligence, which highlights an effective approach to combining hard and soft power. Contextual intelligence is a strategy developed by Nye when implementing smart power ( i.e complementing military and economic might with soft power). “Smart power" is a term to counter the misperception that soft power alone can produce effective foreign policy.(J. S. Nye, Jr., 2009, p. 160). Figuring out how to combine the resources of both hard and soft power into smart-power strategies requires contextual intelligence is the intuitive diagnostic skill that helps policymakers align tactics with objectives (J. S.

212

Nye, Jr., 2009). The Los Angeles Olympic cultural programming in combination with the militaristic and economic pursuits by the United States against the Soviet Union exemplify an exercise in smart power, which based on contextual intelligence, would more effectively address political needs than cultural diplomacy.

Other Olympics Games

The geopolitical context of Olympic Games effects the possibility and implementation of cultural diplomacy. An examination of Moscow 1980, Sochi 2014, and Atlanta 1996 reveals how context impacts the opportunities for soft power and cultural diplomacy.

These cases exemplify relevant issues that relate to Los Angeles 1980 and London 2012 with regard to time, geography, and ideology.

Moscow 1980 preceded the Los Angeles Olympics and provided the foundation for

Eastern and Western Bloc Olympic boycotts. The Cold War context, was exemplified in the media and lack of participation by the United States and other allies. The 1980 Games shaped the Los Angeles Games because it set the standard for how the Eastern and

Western blocs could behave during the “second cold war.” However, if the United States were to participate athletically and culturally, it might night have made a difference with regard to meeting international political aims. The potential nuclear war and invasion limited opportunities for cultural diplomacy because it would not appropriately achieve the political goals of the United States. Person to person exchanges via artistic expression

213

would not effectively meet the needs of swaying the international perception of the

United State capitalist endeavors.

An examination of Sochi 2014, is a unique case because it highlights how the former

Soviet Union presently engages with smart power. It was the next Games to be presented in Russia after Moscow 1980 and also directly follows London 2012, which highlights how other games in a similar era use context intelligence to address affect political needs.

For instance, Sochi used the Olympics to address both international image and security concerns. “The Kremlin wishes not only to prove Russia’s ability to meet the highest international standards for organizing megaevents but also for the country to be recognized as equal to other world powers”(Gronskaya & Makarychev, 2014, p. 47). The security concerns for Sochi 2014 stemmed from other territories “…not only Georgia has for years been depicted by Moscow as a source of security threats and a supporter of vocal Circassian groups militating against the Olympic Games in Sochi” (Gronskaya &

Makarychev, 2014, p. 52). Sochi 2014, was a site for smart power and contextual intelligence like Los Angeles 1984 because of international image and security concerns.

The next American city to host the Summer Games was Atlanta in 1996. These Games highlights smart power because it addressed terrorist attacks as well as international image. Atlanta was a fairly well-known Southern city that dreamed of rising to international prominence(Glanton, 2009). The games did have to respond to a terrorist attack that wounded 111 people and killed one woman. Investment in security as measured by the cost per athlete was broadly stable from 1984 to 1996, after which it accelerated rapidly because of the bomb that exploded in Centennial Park during the

214

Atlanta Games”(Houlihan & Giulianotti, 2012, p. 50). The securitization to prevent and address terrorist attacks and the intention to impact image highlights the combination of soft and hard power using contextual intelligence. A review of the potential exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy highlight the need for context specific strategies for the cultural programming of the upcoming Brazil Olympics.

Future Work- Los Angeles Festival and Isango Ensemble

This dissertation has set the foundation for future works that include an analysis of the

Los Angeles Festival and an exploration of a participating theatre from Globe to Globe program. The Los Angeles Festival is a direct outcome of the Olympic Arts Festival that was produced by the same individuals who created the Olympic Arts Festival in 1984 is an appropriate next step for my scholarly pursuits of examining soft power and cultural diplomacy. As an outcome of the Los Angeles Olympic Arts Festival it maintained a similar structure, which makes it an appealing site for investigation. Its longevity as an international festival allows for more investigation into opportunities for relationship building and exchange because of the cultural programming of the Olympics. The examination of local and international impacts can expand the field by highlighting how cultural programming has cultural outcomes that reveal public value. The ability to identify the cultural programming as long-term outcomes uncovers more opportunities for framework development. An in-depth analysis of the Globe Theatre’s relationship with a single theatre company will provide a more nuanced and detailed investigation of the mutually beneficial nature of cultural diplomacy. Examining the creation, implementation and maintenance of cultural diplomacy could reveal the intricate

215

workings of relationship building. Specifically, the Isango Ensemble will provide insight into their history before the London 2012 Games and also illustrate how they as an individual case have created and maintained the relationship that includes international travel, audience participation, and mutually beneficial outcomes.

Conclusion

This dissertation identified the cultural programming (artistic program during the

Opening Ceremonies and Shakespearean programming) of the Los Angeles 1984 and

London 2012 Olympic Games as exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy using a logic model as an analytic tool. The outcomes of the programming includes enjoyment and relationship building which reveal that the cultural programming does have public value. London 2012 engaged in cultural diplomacy, while Los Angeles 1984 used contextual intelligence as a smart power strategy that addressed the Cold War political needs. This investigation revealed how smart power, not solely soft power, has become a significant strategy for the Games because of issues like securitization will be necessary to support the cultural programming of the Olympic Games.

216

References

Adler, E. (1997). Seizing the Middle Ground:: Constructivism in World Politics. European Journal of International Relations, 3(3), 319-363. doi: 10.1177/1354066197003003003 Andranovich, G., & Burbank, M. J. (2011). CONTEXTUALIZING OLYMPIC LEGACIES. Urban Geography, 32(6), 823-844. doi: 10.2747/0272-3638.32.6.823 Andranovich, G., Burbank, M. J., & Heying, C. H. (2001). Olympic cities: lessons learned from mega-event politics. Journal of Urban Affairs, 23(2), 113-131. doi: 10.1111/0735- 2166.00079 Baum, G. (2012). Memorable start to Games as Boyle gets the balance right, The Sydney Morning Herald Retrieved from http://www.smh.com.au/olympics/off-the- field/memorable-start-to-games-as-boyle-gets-the-balance-right-20120728- 231wm.html Beaverstock, J. V. S. R. G. T. P. J. (1999). A roster of world cities. Cities Cities, 16(6), 445-458. Benington, J., & Moore, M. H. (2011). Public value : theory and practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Beyette, B. (1985, August 4, 1985). Los Angeles Reflects on the Legacy of the Olympics, Los Angeles Times Blandy, D., & Bolin, P. E. (2012). Looking at, Engaging More: Approaches for Investigating Material Culture. Art Education, 65(4), 40-46. Board, C. O. (2013). Reflections on the Cultural Olympiad and London 2012 Festival. Bolin, D. B. a. P. (2012). Looking At, Engaging More:Approaches for Investigating Material Culture. Art Education, 40-46. Bolin, P. E., & Blandy, D. (2003). Beyond Visual Culture: Seven Statements of Support for Material Culture Studies in Art Education. Studies in Art Education: A Jounal of Issues and Research, 44(3). Bradley, T. (1984). A Message from Tom Bradley Prelude to the Olympics: A Gala Concert Brown, A. (2006). An Architecture of Value. Grantmakers in the Arts Reader, 17(1). Brown, J. (2009). Arts Diplomacy:The Neglected Aspect of Cultural Diplomacy In N. a. T. Snow, Philip M. (Ed.), Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy (pp. 57-63). 2009: Routledge. Carr, E. H. (1946). The Twenty Years' Crisis 1919-1939: An introduction to the study of International Relations Centre, T. R. (2012). 2012’s strong overseas impact for the UK: Ipsos Mori. Cherbo, J. M. (2007). On Valuing The Arts. The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 170-172. Cherbo, J. M., & Wyszomirski, M. J. (2000). The public life of the arts in America. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press.

217

Close collaboration is key to delivering the Olympic Games. (2014). Retrieved March 13, 2015, from http://www.olympic.org/news/close-collaboration-is-key-to-delivering-the- olympic-games/224758 Committee, I. O. (2013). Final Report oF the IOC Coordination Commission. Lausanne, Switzerland: International Olympic Committee. Committee, L. A. O. O. (1985). The Offical Report of the Games of XXIIIrd Olympiad Los Angeles, 1984 (Vol. 2). Company, R. S. (2010). Survey results - Teaching Shakespeare around the world Retrieved March 29, 2014, 2014 Coveney, M. S., Marc. (2013). Independent Evaluations of London 2012 Festival Cox, R. (1983). Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations : An Essay in Method. Millennium, 12(2), 162-175. Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Cultural Olympiad and London 2012 Festival. Retrieved March 29, 2015, from http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/what-we-do/arts-council-initiatives/cultural-olympiad/ Cummings, J., Milton C. . (2003). Cultural Diplomacy and the United States Government: A Survey. Washington, D.C: Center for Arts and Culture. Cutler, A., & O'Hanlon. (2012). Tate/RSC Worlds Together Conference Handbook Red Stone. D'Agati, P. A. (2013). The Cold War and the 1984 Olympic Games a Soviet-American surrogate war. from http://site.ebrary.com/id/10729202 Dazzling opening ceremony launches 30th Olympic Games. (2012, March 29, 2015). Online Article The Times of India Retrieved from http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/london-olympics-2012/news/Dazzling- opening-ceremony-launches-30th-Olympic-Games/articleshow/15220673.cms De Zoysa, R., & Newman, O. (2002). Globalization, soft power and the challenge of Hollywood. Contemporary Politics, 8(3), 185-202. doi: 10.1080/1356977022000025678 Diplomacy, S. D. A. C. o. C. (2005). Cultural Diplomacy: The Linchpin of Public Diplomacy report to the U.S. Department of State (pp. 28). Dogan, M. (2004). Four hundred giant cities atop the world. ISSJ International Social Science Journal, 56(181), 347-360. Doran, R. K. (1980). Dubin, Z. (1987, 1987 Jan 22). FREEWAY MURAL: A LADY IS WAITING, Los Angeles Times (1923- Current File), p. 2. Retrieved from http://proxy.lib.ohio- state.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/814684185?accountid=9783 http://nf4hr2ve4v.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88- 2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF- 8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ahnplatimes&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.ge nre=article&rft.jtitle=Los+Angeles+Times+%281923- Current+File%29&rft.atitle=FREEWAY+MURAL%3A+A+LADY+IS+WAITING&rft.au=Dubin %2C+Zan&rft.aulast=Dubin&rft.aufirst=Zan&rft.date=1987-01- 22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=OCB3&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Los+Angeles +Times+%281923-Current+File%29&rft.issn=04583035&rft_id=info:doi/

218

Dyreson, M., & Llewellyn, M. . (2010). Los Angeles is the Olympic City: Legacies of the 1932 and 1984 Olympics Games. In Mangan, J. & M. Dyreson (Eds.), Olympic Legacies: Intended and Unintended (pp. 108-135). New York: Taylor and Francis. Feldman, M., Bell, J., & Berger, M. T. (2003). Gaining Access for Interviewing Gaining Access (pp. 75-97). New York: Altamira Press. Ferguson, N. (2003). POWER. Foreign Policy(134), 18. Fitzpatrick, J. L., Sanders, J. R., & Worthen, B. R. (2004). Program Evaluation: Alternative Approaches and Practical Guidelines (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. . Fowler, F. J. (2009). Survey research methods Retrieved from /z-wcorg/ database Frankel, C. (1969a). The "Cultural Contest". Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, 29(3), 139-155. Frankel, C. (1969b). The "Cultural Contest". Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, 139- 155. Friedman, M., Powell, K. E., Hutwagner, L., Graham, L. M., & Teague, W. G. (2001). Impact of changes in transportation and commuting behaviors during the 1996 Summer Olympic Games in Atlanta on air quality and childhood asthma. JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association, 285(7), 897-905. doi: 10.1001/jama.285.7.897 Friedmann, J. (1986). The World City Hypothesis. DECH Development and Change, 17(1), 69-83. Friedmann, J. W. G. (1982). World city formation: an agenda for research and action. IJUR International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 6(3), 309-344. Garcia, B. (2008). One hundred years of cultural programming within the Olympic Games (1912- 2012): origins, evolution and projections. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 14(4), 361-376. Garcia, B. (2011). Sydney 2000. In J. R. Gold & M. M. G. Gold (Eds.), Olympic Cities: City Agendas, Planning,and World's Games, 1896-2016 (pp. 287-314). New York Routledge. García, B. (2008). One hundred years of cultural programming within the Olympic Games(1912– 2012): origins, evolution and projections. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 361– 376. Garcia, B., Melville, R., & Cox, T. (2010). Creating an impact: Liverpool’s experience as European Capital of Culture (pp. 68): University of Liverpool

Liverpool City Council

Liverpool John Moores University Garcia, B. C., Tamsin. (2013). London 2012 Cultural Olympiad Evaluation Final Report. Gelt, J. (2014). L.A. again carries a torch for 1984 Olympic murals, their artists. Retrieved 10/07/2014 http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/la-et-cm-la-olympic-murals- 20140820-story.html Getz, D. (2008). Event tourism: Deﬁnition, evolution, and research. Tourism Management, 403- 428. Gilmore, A. (2012). Counting eyeballs, soundbites and ‘plings’: arts participation, strategic instrumentalism and the London 2012 Cultural Olympiad. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 18(2), 151-167. doi: 10.1080/10286632.2011.577283

219

Glanton, D. (2009). Olympics' impact on Atlanta still subject to debate, Chicago Tribune. Retrieved from http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-09- 21/news/0909200352_1_centennial-olympic-games-billy-payne-atlanta-committee Glesne, C. (2006). Becoming qualitative researchers : an introduction. Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon. Gold, J. R., & Gold, M. M. (2011). Cultural Olympiad: Reviving the Pangeyris Planning and the World Games, 1896-2016 (pp. . 80-107). New York: Routledge. Gold, J. R., & Gold, M. M. (2011). The Cultural Olympiad: Reviving the Pangeyris Olympic Cities City Agenda, Planning and the World Games, 1896-2016 (pp. 80-107). New York Routledge. Gold, J. R., & Gold, M. M. G. (2011). From A to B: The Summer Olympics, 1986-2008 Olympic Cities: City Agendas, Planning,and World's Games, 1896-2016 (2nd ed., pp. 17-55). New York: Routledge. Gold, J. R. G., Margaret M. (2011). Olympic Cities:City Agendas, Planning, and the World's Games, 1896-2016. New York: Routledge. Gold, M. (2011). Athens 2004. In J. R. Gold & M. M. G. Gold (Eds.), Olympic Cities: City Agendas, Planning,and World's Games, 1896-2016

(2nd ed., pp. 315-339). New York Routledge. Goldsmith, B. E., & Horiuchi, Y. (2012). In Search of Soft Power: Does Foreign Public Opinion Matter for US Foreign Policy? World Politics, 64(3), 555-585. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0043887112000123 Graham, R. (1984). The Olympic Gateway Grix, J., & Houlihan, B. (2014). Sports Mega-Events as Part of a Nation's Soft Power Strategy: The Cases of Germany (2006) and the UK (2012). British Journal of Politics & International Relations, 16(4), 572-596. Gronskaya, N., & Makarychev, A. (2014). The 2014 Sochi Olympics and "Sovereign Power". Problems of Post-Communism, 61(1), 41-51. doi: 10.2753/PPC1075-8216610103 Gubrium, J. F. H. J. A. (2002). Handbook of interview research. Hall, C. M. (2006). Urban entrepreneurship, corporate interests and sports mega-events: the thin policies of competitiveness within the hard outcomes of neoliberalism. Sociological Review, 54, 59-70. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-954X.2006.00653.x Hall, P. (1966). World Cities (First Edition ed.). New York McGraw-Hill. Ham, P. v. (2008). Place Branding: The State of the Art. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 126-149. Hammer, A. (1983). Harvey, D. (1989). From Managerialism to Entrepreneurialism: The Transformation in Urban Governance in Late Capitalism. Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, 71(1), 3-17. doi: 10.2307/490503 Hill, C. R. (1999). THE COLD WAR AND THE OLYMPIC MOVEMENT. History Today, 49(19). Hiller, H. (2000). Mega-events, urban boosterism and growth strategies: An analysis of the objectives and legitimations of the Cape Town 2004 Olympic bid. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research.

220

Houlihan, B., & Giulianotti, R. (2012). Politics and the London 2012 Olympics: the (in)security Games. International Affairs, 88(4), 701-717. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2346.2012.01097.x Inglis, D. (2008). Culture agonistes: social differentiation, cultural policy and Cultural Olympiads. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 14(4), 463-477. IOC. (2013). Final Report of the International Olympic Commitee : Coordination Comission International Olympic Committee. Jao, C. (2013). Uncovered Olympic Glories: Murals Restoration on the 101 Freeway. Retrieved 10/07/2014, from KCet http://www.kcet.org/arts/artbound/counties/los- angeles/mural-restoration-101-freeway.html Jorgensen, T. B., & Bozeman, B. (2007). Public values: an inventory.(application of social theory to analyze research work on social values). Administration & Society, 39(3). Jørgensen, T. B., & Bozeman, B. (2007). Public Values An Inventory. Administration & Society, 354-381. Knight, T., & Ruscoe, S. (2012). London 2012 Olympic & Paraolympic Games: The Official Commemorative Book West Sussex: John Wiley and Sons Kumar, K. (1980). Transnationalism enterprises :impacts on third world cultures and their socieites Boulder, Colorado Westview Press. Layne, C. (2010). The Unbearable Lightness of Soft Pwer Soft Power and Foreign Policy Lock, E. (2010). Soft Power and Strategy:Developing a 'Strategic' Concept of Power. In I. P. a. M. Cox (Ed.), Soft Power and US Foreign Policy (pp. 32-50). New York Routledge. MacAloon, J. J. (1984). Olympic Games and the Theory of Spectacle in Modern Societies. In J. J. MacAloon (Ed.), Rite, Drama, Fesstival, Spectacle: Rehearsals Toward a Thoery of Cultural Performance (pp. 241-280). Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Institute for the Study of Human Issues, Inc. . Magnay, J. (2012, 1/27 / 2012). London 2012 Olympics: Shakespeare theme to lead 'Isles of Wonder' Olympic opening ceremony, The Telegraph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/9043917/London-2012-Olympics- Shakespeare-theme-to-lead-Isles-of-Wonder-Olympic-opening-ceremony.html Mattelart, A. (1979). Multinational corporations and control of culture: the ideological aparatus of imperialism New Jersey Humanities Press. Mattern, J. (2005). Why `Soft Power' Isn't So Soft: Representational Force and the Sociolinguistic Construction of Attraction in World Politics. Millennium - Journal of International Studies, 33(3), 583-612. McCarthy, K. F. (2004). Gifts of the muse : reframing the debate about the benefits of the arts. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Research in the Arts. McClory, J. (2010). The New Persuaders:An International Ranking of Soft Power. London: Institute for Government. Media reaction to London 2012 Olympic opening ceremony. (2012). Retrieved March 29, 2015, from BBC http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-19025686 Memis, S. (2012). Positioning Toward Partnerships:

Modern Evolutions in UK Cultural Relations. Paper presented at the Barnett Symposium, Columbus, Ohio

221

Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Metcalf, E. J. (1996). The 1984 Los Angeles Olympic ArtsFestival and the 1996 Atlanta Cultural Olympiad: Two Grand Expressions of Post-Modern America (Master of Arts), Columbia University Milton C. Cummings, J. (2003). Cultural Diplomacy and the United States Government: A Survey. Washington, D.C: Center for Arts and Culture. Moore, G. W., & Moore, M. H. (2005). Creating Public Value Through State Arts Agencies. from http://www.issuelab.org/permalink/resource/8884 Moragas Spa, M. d., Rivenburgh, N. K., & Larson, J. F. (1995). Television in the Olympics. London: J. Libbey. Morrow, L. (1980). The Boycott That Might Rescue The Games. Time 115, 72. Newman, P. (2007). “BACK THE BID”: THE 2012 SUMMER OLYMPICS AND THE GOVERNANCE OF LONDON. Journal of Urban Affairs, 29(3), 255-267. doi: 10.1111/j.1467- 9906.2007.00342.x Nye, J. (1990a). Bound to lead : the changing nature of American power. New York: Basic Books. Nye, J. (1990b). SOFT POWER. Foreign Policy(80), 153-171. doi: 10.2307/1148580 Nye, J. (2000). Asia's first globalizer. Washington Quarterly, 23(4), 121-+. Nye, J. (2002). The paradox of American power : why the world's only superpower can't go it alone. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press. Nye, J. (2004). Soft power : the means to success in world politics. New York: Public Affairs. Nye, J. (2008). Public diplomacy and soft power.(Section One: Theorizing Public Diplomacy)(Author abstract)(Report). The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616, 94-109. Nye, J. (2008). Recovering American leadership. Survival, 50(1), 55-+. doi: 10.1080/00396330801899447 Nye, J. (2010). Responding to my critics and concluding thoughts. In I. Parmar & M. Cox (Eds.), Soft Power and US Foreign Policy (pp. 215-227). New York Routledge. Nye Jr, J. S. (2014). The Information Revolution and Power. Current History, 113(759), 19-22. Nye, J. S. (2008). Public Diplomacy and Soft Power. The Annals of the American Academy, 94- 109. Nye, J. S., Jr. (2009). Get Smart Combining Hard and Soft Power Response. Foreign Affairs, 88(4), 160-163. O'Hanlon, J. (2015). Royal Shakespeare Company Perspective. In T. Lewis (Ed.). Olympic ceremonies : historical continuity and cultural exchange : International Symposium on Olympic Ceremonies, Barcelona - Lausanne, 1995. (1996). Lausanne; Bellaterra, Spain. Olympic.org. (2013, October 21). Olympic.org. Retrieved from http://www.olympic.org/ Organizations, U. R. A. (2009). Global Positioning Strategy for the Arts:Recomitting America to International Cultural Exchange A Report to the Obama Administration from the U.S. Regional Arts Organizations: Arts Midwest, Minneapolis; Mid-America Arts Alliance, Kansas City; Mid Atlantic Arts Foundation, Baltimore; New England Foundation for the Arts, Boston; Southern Arts Federation, Atlanta; Western States Arts Federation, Denver.

222

Peter Ueberroth, R. L., and Amy Quinn. (1985). Made in America: His Own Story (Vol. 1). New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc. Preuss, H. (2004). The economics of staging the Olympics : a comparison of the games, 1972- 2008. Cheltenham, UK; Northampton, MA: E. Elgar. Rabkin, G. (1984). The Olympic Arts Festival: "We're Not Number One" Performing Arts Journal, 8(3), 43-58 Rachael Maxwell. (2008). The place of arts and culture in Canadian foreign policy. Raco, M. (2014). Delivering Flagship Projects in an Era of Regulatory Capitalism: State-led Privatization and the London Olympics 2012. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 38(1), 176-197. doi: 10.1111/1468-2427.12025 Reich, K. (1984). LAOOC-Ken Reich Interviews Reich, K. (1986). Making It Happen Santa Barbara, CA: Capra Press. . Retrospective: Olympic Arts Festival Los Angeles June 1-August 12, 1984. (1984). In J. Hirsch (Ed.). Uknown Roche, M. (2000). Mega-Events & Modernity Olympics and Expos in the Growth of Global Culture. New York: Routledge. Rojas- Williams, I. (2014). Cultural Programming of the Olympics. In T. Lewis (Ed.). Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2011). Listening, Hearing, and Sharing Social Experiences Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data (Vol. 3, pp. 1-17). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc. Saldana , J. (2009). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc. . Sarantakes, N. E. (2009). Moscow versus Los Angeles: the Nixon White House wages Cold War in the Olympic selection process. Cold War History, 9(1), 135-157. doi: 10.1080/14682740802573508 Schiller, H. I. (1976). Communication and Cultural Domination White Plains, New York M. E. Sharp Schneider, H. (2014). Cultural Programming of the Los Angeles Olympics. In T. Lewis (Ed.). Schwandt, T. A. (2007). The SAGE dictionary of qualitative inquiry. Los Angeles, Calif.: Sage Publications. Scott-Smith, G. (2010). Soft Power in the Era of US Decline Soft Power and US Foreign Policy (pp. 165-181). New York: Routledge Scott, C. (2006). Museums: Impact and value. Cultural Trends, 15(1), 45-75. Seiler, M. (1986, 1986 Feb 26). Crew Works to Undo Vandalism, Los Angeles Times (1923-Current File), p. 2. Retrieved from http://proxy.lib.ohio- state.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/154584684?accountid=9783 http://nf4hr2ve4v.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88- 2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF- 8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ahnplatimes&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.ge nre=article&rft.jtitle=Los+Angeles+Times+%281923- Current+File%29&rft.atitle=Crew+Works+to+Undo+Vandalism%3A+Tossing+a+Protectiv e+Coat+on+2+Olympic+Murals&rft.au=Seiler%2C+Michael&rft.aulast=Seiler&rft.aufirst= Michael&rft.date=1986-02-

223

26&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=B1&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Los+Angeles+Ti mes+%281923-Current+File%29&rft.issn=04583035&rft_id=info:doi/ Servaes, J. (2012). Soft power and public diplomacy: The new frontier for public relations and international communication between the US and China. Public Relations Review, 38(5), 643-651. Shakespeare Beyond English2013). S. C. Bennett, Christie (Ed.) A Global Experiment Shakespeare on the global stage : performance and festivity in the Olympic year. (2015). Retrieved 3/13/2015, from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk& AN=885734 Short, J. R., & Kim, Y.-H. (1999). Globalization and the City New York Addison Wesley Longman Inc. Snow, N., & Taylor, P. M. (2009). Routledge handbook of public diplomacy. New York: Routledge. Soviet Text Cites 'Rude Violations'. (1984, 1984 May 09). The Washington Post (1974-Current file), p. 1. Retrieved from http://proxy.lib.ohio- state.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/138330788?accountid=9783 http://nf4hr2ve4v.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88- 2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF- 8&rfr_id=info:sid/ProQ%3Ahnpwashingtonpost&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journ al&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=The+Washington+Post+%281974- Current+file%29&rft.atitle=Soviet+Text+Cites+%27Rude+Violations%27&rft.au=&rft.aul ast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=1984-05- 09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=A28&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=The+Washingt on+Post+%281974-Current+file%29&rft.issn=01908286&rft_id=info:doi/ Spiritof84 (Producer). ( 2014, 4/15/2015). Los Angeles 1984 Olympic Opening Ceremony Complete. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glAu9xxlMJ8 Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications Inc. . Stake, R. E. (1998). Case Studies In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 86-109). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications. Streets, D. G., Fu, J. S., Jang, C. J., Hao, J. M., He, K. B., Tang, X. Y., . . . Yu, C. (2007). Air quality during the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. Atmospheric Environment, 41(3), 480-492. doi: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2006.08.046 Tate. Worlds Together. Retrieved March 3, 2015, from http://www.tate.org.uk/whats- on/tanks-tate-modern/conference/worlds-together Vanwynsberghe, R., Surborg, B., & Wyly, E. (2013). When the Games Come to Town: Neoliberalism, Mega-Events and Social Inclusion in the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic Games. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(6), 2074-2093. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.2012.01105.x Venus and Adonis. Retrieved March 29, 2015, from http://www.shakespearesglobe.com/discovery-space/previous-productions/venus- adonis-2

224

Wallach, R. (2010). Selected Murals in Downtown Los Angeles, Environs of USC, and the South Central Area. Retrieved 10/07/2014, from USC Libraries http://www.publicartinla.com/LA_murals/USC/ Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics. Boston, Mass.: McGraw-Hill. Yin, R. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (4th Edition ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc. Yin, R. K. (2011). Qualitative research from start to finish. New York: Guilford Press. Zahran, G., & Ramos, L. (2010). From Hegemony to Soft Power:Implications of a Conceptual Change Soft Power and US Foreign Policy (pp. 12-31). New York Routledge. Ziffren, P., Ueberroth, P. V., Usher, H. S., & Perelman, R. B. (1985). Officail Report of the Games of the XXIIIrd Olympiad Los Angeles, 1984.

225

Appendix: Data Collection Materials

Opening Ceremonies and Arts Festivals: Olympic Exercises in Soft Power Tiffany Lewis The Ohio State University Arts Policy and Administration Program

You are invited to participate in a research project as part of a Doctoral dissertation conducted by Tiffany Lewis from The Ohio State University’s Arts Policy and Administration program. The purpose of this is to research investigate cultural outcomes of the cultural programming of the Olympics.

I’m investigating the cultural programming of the Olympics is an exercise in soft power and cultural diplomacy. “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”(Nye, 2008, p.94). While cultural diplomacy is the exchange of ideas, information, art and other aspects of culture among nations and their peoples in order to foster mutual understanding and influence others (as cited in Fullman, 2011). For the purposes of this inquiry I review Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 as cases for examining the long-term cultural impacts like sharing of values, changes in international perception, collaboration between arts institutions or increased cultural tourism in the host city and relations between nations as exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy. You were selected to participate in this study because of your experience and expertise in the area of at < ORGANIZATION>, which impacted the implementation of the cultural programming of the Olympics. If you decide to participate in this research project, you will be asked to provide relevant organizational materials and participate in a semi-structured interview during 2014-2015. Interviews will last approximately 45 minutes and take place at your convenience, in person, via Skype internet phone or via email. If you wish, interview questions will be provided beforehand for your consideration. In addition to taking handwritten notes, with your permission, I will use an audio recorder for transcription and validation purposes. You may also be asked to provide follow-up information through phone calls or email.

226

Your participation is voluntary. You may stop at any time, or refuse to participate, without penalty of loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. We will work to make sure that no one sees your responses without approval. But, because we are using the Internet, there is a chance that someone could access your online responses without permission. In some cases, this information could be used to identify you. Your data will be protected with a code to reduce the risk that other people can view the responses.

Through this investigation, I will address the lack of explicit discussion of the cultural programming of the Olympics being exercises in soft power or cultural diplomacy. I hope to fill this gap with my inquiry and identify potential cultural outcomes of the Olympic in order to raise awareness about the impact of the Olympic opening ceremonies and arts festivals.

If you have any questions or feel you have been harmed by study participation, please feel free to contact me at(816)914-6776 or [email protected] or Dr. Margaret J. Wyszomirski at [email protected]. For questions about your rights as a participant in this study or to discuss other study-related concerns or complains with someone who is not part of the research team, you may contact Sandra Meadows in the Office of Responsible Research Practices at 1-800-678-6251. Thank you in advance for your interest and consideration. I will contact you shortly to speak about your potential involvement in this study. Sincerely, Tiffany Lewis

227

Date

Name Address City, State,Zip

Dear

I’m investigating the cultural programming of the Olympics is an exercise in soft power and cultural diplomacy. “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” (Nye, 2008, p. 94). While cultural diplomacy is the exchange of ideas, information, art and other aspects of culture among nations and their peoples in order to foster mutual understanding and influence others (as cited in Fullman, 2011). For the purposes of this inquiry I review Los Angeles 1984 and London 2012 as cases for examining the long-term cultural impacts like sharing of values, changes in international perception, collaboration between arts institutions or increased cultural tourism in the host city and relations between nations as exercises in soft power and cultural diplomacy. You were selected to participate in this study because of your experience and expertise in the area of at < ORGANIZATION>, which impacted the implementation of the cultural programming of the Olympics. If you decide to participate in this research project, you will be asked to provide relevant organizational materials and participate in a semi-structured interview during 2014-2015. Interviews will last approximately 45 minutes and take place at your convenience, in person, via Skype internet phone or via email. If you wish, interview questions will be provided beforehand for your consideration. In addition to taking handwritten notes, with your permission, I will use an audio recorder for transcription and validation purposes. You may also be asked to provide follow-up information through phone calls or email. Your participation is voluntary. You may stop at any time, or refuse to participate, without penalty of loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. We will work to make sure that no one sees your responses without approval. But, because we are using

228

the Internet, there is a chance that someone could access your online responses without permission. In some cases, this information could be used to identify you. Your data will be protected with a code to reduce the risk that other people can view the responses.

If you have any questions or feel you have been harmed by study participation, please feel free to contact me at (816)914-6776 or [email protected] or Dr. Margaret J. Wyszomirski at [email protected]. For questions about your rights as a participant in this study or to discuss other study-related concerns or complains with someone who is not part of the research team, you may contact Sandra Meadows in the Office of Responsible Research Practices at 1-800-678-6251. Please read and initial each of the following statements to indicate you consent: ___ I consent to use of audio recording and note taking during my interview. ___ I consent to my identification as a participant in this study. ___ I consent to the potential use of quotations from the interview. ___ I consent to the use of information I provide regarding the organization with which I am associated.

Thank you in advance for your interest and consideration. I will contact you shortly to speak about your potential involvement in this study. Sincerely, Tiffany Lewis

229

Los Angeles 1984 Dissertation Semi-Structured Interview Protocol

Opening Ceremony 1. What was the purpose of the Los Angeles opening ceremony? a. Who was involved in making this decision? b. How was the purpose decided? 2. Why was the marching band used to create rings? (LA) a. What was the significance of this choice? 3. What was the significance of the “Americana Suite” section (800 member marching band)? 4. What was the significance of the “Pioneer Spirit” section (410 person ballet - moving west in covered wagons, forming a town with movable props)? 5. What was the significance of the “"Dixieland Jamboree” section (300 member Gospel choir and Etta James)? 6. What was the significance of the "Urban Rhapsody" section ( 84 black grands and 1 white, with orchestra and 200 dancers, perform Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue")? 7. What was the significance of the "The World is a Stage" (1940's big band with 1,500 dancers) 8. What was the significance of the "Finale" section (Cast forms map of the US). 9. Did the creation/production of the opening ceremony reflect any local, national, international policy initiatives? If so, what policy? a. How was it presented? b. What impact did the opening ceremony have on the policy initiatives? 10. What were the cultural outcomes of the opening ceremony? Arts Festival 11. What was the purpose of the Los Angeles arts festival? a. Who was involved in making this decision? b. How was the purpose decided? 12. How were the arts groups and organizations selected for the arts festival? 13. Why was Shakespearean programming selected for the arts festival? a. Why do you believe there were so many Shakespearean options? b. What did the Shakespearean program consist of? c. Were there collaborations or partnerships between international institutions? If yes, who partnered and collaborated?

230

i. What did those relationships consist of? ii. How were their relationships managed? iii. How long did they last? iv. Did anyone or institution benefit from the partnerships/collaborations? If so, how? 14. Did the creation/production of the opening ceremony reflect any local, national, international policy initiatives? If so, what policy? a. How was it presented? b. What impact did the Arts Festival in general have on the policy initiatives? 15. What were the cultural outcomes of the Shakespearean programming?

231

Jacqui O’Hanlon

2/25/15

1. The conference was originated by the RSC and Tate. Anna Cutler, Director of Learning at Tate, and I were discussing our respective plans for 2016 and realised we both wanted to do a major international conference that explored the place of the arts in the lives of young people. We then invited the National Theatre and the British Museum to work with us. The RSC and Tate led on conference design and management. National Theatre and British Museum supported with advice and ideas for panel discussions and keynotes. The roles were maintained through a formal Steering Committee structure that met on a regular basis in the run up to the conference.

2. To clarify – Tanks is simply a name for the venue at Tate Modern that the conference took place in. It has quite an industrial feel with large open spaces that can accommodate 400 attendees listening to a keynote. We also used many break-out spaces across Tate Modern. The research question underpinned all activities irrespective of where it happened and was about looking at the past, present and future of the arts in learning and in the lives of young people.

3. The Shakespeare strand, presenters and topics were chosen by a working group at the RSC comprising me, Miles Tandy and Tracy Irish. We were keen to hear from presenters working in different countries and contexts who had interesting stories to tell about the connections the children they were working with had made with Shakespeare’s text. A similar process happened for the contemporary arts strand and this was led by Tate.

4. We are not aware of any collaborations or partnerships that developed as part of the conference although the four collaborating institutions have continued to maintain a strong relationship with each other. For example, we are currently working with Tate on a longitudinal research study looking at the impact of our teachers development work on young people.

232

Interview Notes

Isabel Rojas-Williams

11/16/2014

Time 11:30pm

1. What was the goal of the murals in 1984? a. recognition as a cultural destination b. promote the city internationally i. artists weren’t told what to paint ii. future/hope iii. optimism iv. attention to who we are, v. No comparison to others…focus was on LA projecting itself out c. Most visible and important element of the Arts Festival because it showed the history and culture of Los Angeles 2. What is the purpose of them now? a. LA could not legally paint murals in the 11 years the ….from the 1990’s the murals were questioned. The artists were not able t paint legally so they mural conservancy brought the voice to city to sing city ordinance to make it legal to create murals on private property. We are working on making LA a cultural designation ( ethnic diversity). People reinvent themselves and it’s an avant garde ….(fashion) Now there are many New Yorkers coming to live here. The importance is the same. the murals tell the history of who they are and the city. It is such a young city in comparison to Italy and….The murals are the cultural bridge between the streets and the arts institutions. They are open air museums. One does not need to have higher education to understand the murals. It could spur interest….educational tools of empowerment. They are no different than

233

other painting from thousands of years ago. LA used to be the mural capital of the world and are quickly regaining that title. How we are moving into the future is reflected on our walls. We hope by having these murals people will look at these murals and have understanding who are. 3. Who is the audience? a. international and national 4. What prompted the restoration effects? 5. How were the artists selected? 6. How were they cared for over the years 7. June 2014….

234

You are invited to participate in a survey as part of a Doctoral dissertation conducted by Tiffany Lewis from The Ohio State University’s Arts Policy and Administration program. The purpose of this research is to investigate cultural outcomes of the cultural programming of the Olympics as exercises in soft power. We are seeking input from any individual (18 years old or older) who participated in or attended a London 2012 Arts Festival event. The survey will take approximately 20 minutes to complete. Your participation is voluntary. You may stop at any time, or refuse to participate, without penalty of loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled.

We will work to make sure that no one sees your survey responses without approval. But, because we are using the Internet, there is a chance that someone could access your online responses without permission. In some cases, this information could be used to identify you. Your data will be protected with a code to reduce the risk that other people can view the responses. By continuing you are giving your consent to participate in the survey.

Q1. Did you take part in any of the Arts Festival events during London 2012 Olympics? Yes No (2)

If yes, please list the event.

Q2. Why did you take part in the Arts Festival events during London 2012 Olympics?

235

Q3. Did you do anything new in London during the 2012 Olympic Arts Festival? (i.e visit a cultural venue you had never been to before or attend a different type of event?)

Yes No (2)

If yes, please describe.

Q4. Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Strongly Don’t Agree 1 2 3 4 Disagree Know 5 8 Everyone in London gained from the Arts Festival I think money was wasted on the production of the London Arts Festival The city is a much better place after the London 2012 Olympics The Arts Festival didn’t make any difference to my neighborhood The Arts Festival gave people outside of the city a more

236

positive impression of London London is mostly presented in negative ways by the national media

Q5. As a result of the London Olympic Arts Festival, are you more likely to visit the London?

Yes No (2)

Q6. In your own words, what was the purpose of the London Olympic Arts Festival?

Q7. Did the London Olympic Arts Festival fulfill its purpose? Why or why not?

Q8. Did anyone benefit from the London Olympic Arts Festival? If yes, who?

Q9. Did anyone suffer due to the London Olympic Arts Festival? If yes, who?

Q10.Please share any other comments you may have about the London Olympic Arts Festival:

Thank you for sharing your insights

237

You are invited to participate in a survey as part of a Doctoral dissertation conducted by Tiffany Lewis from The Ohio State University’s Arts Policy and Administration program. The purpose of this research is to investigate cultural outcomes of the cultural programming of the Olympics as exercises in soft power. We are seeking input from any individual (18 years old or older) who participated in or attended a Los Angeles 1984 Arts Festival events. The survey will take approximately 20 minutes to complete. Your participation is voluntary. You may stop at any time, or refuse to participate, without penalty of loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled.

238

Q1. Did you take part in any of the Arts Festival events during Los Angeles 1984 Olympics? Yes No (2)

If yes, please list the event?

Q2. Why did you take part in the Arts Festival events during Los Angeles 1984 Olympics?

Q3. Did you do anything new in Los Angeles during the 1984 Olympic Arts Festival? (i.e visit a cultural venue you had never been to before or attend a different type of event?)

Yes No (2)

If yes, please describe?

Q4. Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 Agree 5 Everyone in Los Angeles gained from the Arts Festival I think money was wasted on the production of the Los Angeles Arts Festival The city is a much better place after the

239

Los Angeles 1984 Olympics The Arts Festival didn’t make any difference to my neighborhood The Arts Festival gave people outside of the city a more positive impression of Los Angeles Due to the 1984 Olympics, Los Angeles is mostly presented in negative ways by the national media

Q5. As a result of the Los Angeles Olympic Arts Festival, are you more likely to visit the Los

Angeles?

Yes No (2)

Q6. In your own words, what was the purpose of the Los Angeles Olympic Arts Festival?

Q7. Did the Los Angeles Olympic Arts Festival fulfill its purpose? Why or why not?

Q8. Did anyone benefit from the Los Angeles Olympic Arts Festival? If yes, who?

Q9. Did anyone suffer due to the Los Angeles Olympic Arts Festival? If yes, who?

Q10.Please share any other comments you may have about the Los Angeles Olympic Arts

Festival:

240

Thank you for sharing your insights

Field Research-The Olympic Gateway Observation Date: 8/30/2014 Time: 2:40pm A. Denotation( material), Connotation(meaning), and Connection i. cast bronze, gold leaf, zinc, 25 feet above ground, 20,000 pounds, cement, bird droppings, cracks in cement, representation of male and female muscular bodies without heads on top of the structure, torsos sculpted into each pedestal ii. Strength, Olympic spirit, Unity iii. Connection to Urban Life- Welcome, International prestige B. The following approach to artifact study proposed by E. McClung Fleming (1974) focuses on an artifact's history, material, construction, design, and function" i. History. Where and when the object was made, by whom and for whom and why successive changes in ownership, condition, and function. 1. Located in entrance of the Memorial Coliseum in Los Angeles, California and June 1, 1984

241

2. The Olympic Gateway was commissioned by the LAOOC, created by Robert Graham, sponsored by the Times Mirror Company 3. Condition-The cement structure has old gum and dirt. It is similar to the amount of gum and dirt in the surrounding area. The mount was chipped along the corners. Bird droppings on the bodies of male and female. 4. Function-Permanent memorial to the 1984 Games ii. Material. What the object is made of—wood, fibers, ceramics, metals, glass, and so on. 1. cast bronze, gold leaf, zinc, 25 feet above ground, 20,000 pounds, cement, 25x15x5 feet iii. Construction. This has to do with the techniques of manufacture employed, workmanship, and the way parts are organized to bring about the object's function. 1. The torsos were modeled in clay at 27 inches in height and the scale was enlarged to 3-times its size with the use of a pantograph, a pointing machine. Sixteen individual clay reliefs of male and female torsos in motion were molded in clay. Each element was constructed of bronze plate and patinaed. On each column, line drawings of torsos in athletic movements were inlaid in zinc, and the base of each cone was gold-leafed. All the work was completed at the Robert Graham Studio in Venice, California.

iv. Design. This includes the structure, form, style, ornament, and iconography of the object. 1. Lasting monumental artwork for the 1984 Olympic game site. The torsos of a male and female figure were modeled from a water-polo player and a sprinter who both took part in the Games.

v. Function. This embraces both the uses (intended functions) and the roles (unintended functions) of the object in its culture, including utility, delight, and communication, (p. 156) 1. Intended function: Beacon to welcome, meeting place, international symbol for Olympic unity due to the faceless bodies 2. Unintended function: Place for shade and respite C. Notes

242

i. The site was observed during the tailgate time before the USC and Fresno State football game. There were no crowds or barricades that prevented access to the space. Just a scaffold that was placed next to the structure. At the time of observation. It did not serve a functional purpose accept as shade for individuals.

Field Research-Olympic Mural Project Date: 9/1/2014 Time: 6:00pm D. Denotation( material), Connotation(meaning), and Connection i. Cement painted with acrylic and silicate that is over 90ft by 90ft ii. Welcome to LA, Olympic spirit, Unity iii. Connection to Urban Life- Welcome, International prestige E. The following approach to artifact study proposed by E. McClung Fleming (1974) focuses on an artifact's history, material, construction, design, and function" i. History. Where and when the object was made, by whom and for whom and why successive changes in ownership, condition, and function. 1. Located along the Harbor Fwy/101 Fwy/110 Fwy approaching the Los Angeles, Coliseum.“ n July 1983, the LAOOC, in partnership with the Brockman Gallery, commissioned ten Los Angeles mural artists to create original works adjacent to or on sites along the Harbor and Santa Ana freeway corridors leading to downtown Los Angeles. The ten mural artists included: Alonza Davis, Judith Francisca Baca, Glenna Boltuch, William Franklyn Herron Ill, Frank Romero, Terry Schoonhoven, Roderick Sykes, Kent Twitchell, John Wehrle and Richard A. Wyatt, Jr. As with the fine art poster series, the muralists were given great latitude to create any image they wished. A diversity

243

of murals wasproduced, most depicting the athletes.” It organized by Alonso Davis. “Layer upon layer of graffiti piled up, and three murals were destroyed by highway construction or the elements. Beginning in 2007, Caltrans started covering the murals with gray paint to prevent further damage.” “Commissioned in 1984, these murals are part of ten pieces created during the Olympic Arts Festival in commemoration of the city hosting the Summer Games. The effort was a milestone in the city's art history, adding credibility to L.A.'s "mural capital of the world" claim while burnishing sheen on the careers of muralists in the city.

2. Condition-The murals were visible without graffiti and with vibrant colors, which is indicative of being recently restored. True focus on care and preservation.

a. L.A. Freeway Kids: Glenna Boltuch Avila i. South Side of the Hollywood Freeway, between the Los Angeles and Main Street overpasses. The mural was completed in 1984, in celebration of the Los Angeles Olympics of that year. In the mural, large figures between 18' and 22' tall represent a racial and ethnic cross section of city children. The caption on the mural reads: Artist/Designer - Glenna Boltuch. Assistants: Jesse Avila, Alan Boltuch, Jan Cook, Margaret Garcia, Mary Suarez, Eloy Torrez, John Valdez. Special thanks to Rod Sakai/Los Angeles Murals Program, Bob Goodell/CalTrans. b. Luchas del Mundo (Struggles of the World) by

Willie Herron

i. Before 1984. Hollywood Freeway (101) at

Alameda. Acrylic, 25' x 90'. Mural features

Olympic monograms, competing wrestlers,

and a helicopter hovering over La Placita.

ii. NOW-not viewable covered with paint

c. Going to the Olympics by Frank Romero i. 1984. Hollywood Freeway (101) at Alameda. Acrylic, 22' x 103'. A tribute to LA's car culture.

244

d. 7th Street Altarpiece by Kent Twitchell

i. 1983-1984, 7th Street underpass at 110 Freeway. Relocated in 2004? Photograph, showing the portrait of Lita Albuquerque (north side) 18' x 97', taken in 1984 by Michael Several. The close-up is from the Kent Twitchell file in the Robin Dunitz murals collection at USC. The portrait of Jim Morphesis was taken by Michael Several in 1984. ii. Not viewed/unaware of location e.

i. 1983. Hollywood Freeway (101), Spring St. Silicate on concrete, 24' x 207'. ii. iii. Text provided by Text provided courtesy of Michael Several, Los Angeles, April 1999 “ 1984, John Wehrle. 207' x 24-1/2(west), 19-1/2"(east). 101 Freeway. Typical of Wehrle's juxtaposition of unusual figures, objects and scenery, is his large mural for the Olympics on the north retaining wall between Spring Street and Broadway. Relating to Los Angeles as both a center of high technology and the home of the 1984 summer Olympics, it depicts fragments of classical Greek buildings and statuary floating in space. Integral to the surrealistic fantasy is a sculptural piece shaped like a finger, pointing to an astronaut on Jupiter's left. It recalls Michelangelo's "Creation." The design is a development of an unexecuted mural Wehrle called the "Ruins of Babel." It depicted a mythical tower, designed to reach the heavens, actually in the heavens. Continuing its same premise--"the visual absurdity of metaphor made concrete"--Wehrle adapted the work to the Olympics by replacing the original Roman architecture with remnants of a Greek temple and adding the Olympic motto, "Citius, Altius, Fortius" (Swifter, Higher, Stronger) to the architectural pieces.The title responds to the Olympics. Galileo was the first person to use a telescope to view Jupiter, who was the Roman counterpart of Zeus and the father of both the Olympics and the god Apollo. This may have been the first Los Angeles mural to use Keim paint. Developed in Germany nearly a century ago, this special silicate paint binds directly with the cement, giving the mural as long a life as the wall itself.”

245

iv. Viewed f. Function-Permanent memorial to the 1984 Games i. Material. What the object is made of—wood, fibers, ceramics, metals, glass, and so on. 1. Concrete, silicate and acrylic ii. Construction. This has to do with the techniques of manufacture employed, workmanship, and the way parts are organized to bring about the object's function.

iii. Design. This includes the structure, form, style, ornament, and iconography of the object. 1. Lasting cultural icon for the 1984 Olympic Games represent Los Angeles culture as well as the Olympic legacy of the Games. By placing the murals along the freeways thousands of Los Angelenos and visitors view them daily. It is unclear whether the general public recognize it as an Olympic legacy. iv. Function. This embraces both the uses (intended functions) and the roles (unintended functions) of the object in its culture, including utility, delight, and communication, 1. Intended function: Beacon to welcome, lasting cultural reminder of the Olympics 2. Unintended function: Representation of the fluid appreciation for public art and Olympics because some may not be aware of the Olympic connection. b. Notes i. The necessary renovation of the surviving murals indicates the deterioration and rebirth of the legacy.

London Opening Ceremony- Olympic Youtube Channel

Commentator- Julian Clark

Atmosphere- It was rainy day with spectators using umbrellas and wearing ponchos.

Beginning

246

Time Theme Description Analysis Notes 5:25 Covering of seats with blue fabrics Light boxes between seats to create light effect through fabric 13:20 Bradley Wiggins rings Olympic Bell 14:30 Industrial Revolution Reviews all commonwealths in Britain ( Ireland etc.) with children singing

18:00 Uses lines “Dream He is a Again” from The recurring Tempest Izabnard character in Kingdom Runell this section the innovator of the Industrial revolution. 20:00 Iconic  Removal of Use of woman the tree and drumming drummer ( rapid without deaf) growth language  Individuals with 18th century garb spill onto the arena  Remove the greenery and reveal machines and industrial elements

247

Time Theme Description Analysis Notes 23:24 Columbus and 4 large chimneys that are at least 10 stories tall with smoke 24:30 Women’s Ichabd is a still a Suffrage recurring character/guide 26:00 WW!? Zoom in on flower and men in uniform with a still stage 27:15 Follow a group of men who also act as guides bringing focus to different elements of the stage 28:00 Beatles and Music and West Indies commentary about Immigration this stage 29:20 Liquified metal ( **** Foundry bright orange) is released flows down the hill to create a ring 31:30 Ring Rings come Used video Creation together above the to tie in stage and burst sections with fireworks 36:00 Daniel Bond visits Queen Used the most Music by Craig/James at Buckingham recent James Hertz? Bond palace and escorts Bond for her to a helicopter mass appeal where they fly past iconic spaces in Used humor London like Big to present one Ben of the most refined women

248

Time Theme Description Analysis Notes 38:00 Bond and Queen skydive from helicopter 40:00- Introductions 44:00 + National Anthem 44:00 British Literature + Health Service Peter Pan Language “ Second from the right…straight on till morning” video film with the words/commentator said the words 44:30 National Health Service with a spotlight on individuals from Great Alman St. Hospital ( Children’s hospital) on the hill Mike Oldfield accompanies the action on stage with the guitar Image of baby face created on arena floor Dancing children in pajamas with nurses and doctors in uniform with lit hospital beds 48:00 Crescent Moon 48:50 Literature J.K. Rowling reads lines from Peter

249

Time Theme Description Analysis Notes Pan about fear and children Camera zooms in on child reading peterpan under the covers of a hospital bed with a black and white drawing of Captain Hook 50:00 Villains of Chitty Chitty Bang Why villains? British Bang ( Less cheesy? Literature Childcatcher?) Create Cruela Deville conflict? Voldemort

Are massive figures that are over 10 stories high that come from the ground like blow up dolls with exaggerated facial features

There are other dark figures that are similar to the monkeys from the Wiz rolling around on skates 51:54 A bevy of Mary Poppins’ float down to the arena floor via lit umbrellas to save the children from the villains 53:00 A carol is sung -Dancing MP and sick children

250

Time Theme Description Analysis Notes -Consistently children bouncing on hospital beds

54:00 Nurses+ MP tuck children back into hospital beds

A large baby head with it’s body covered with blankets models the same behavior 56:00 Film Sir Simon Rattle Need to with the LSO plays review the “Chariots of Fire” significance to rounds of applause at the announcement 56:00 Mr. Bean -Reflecting accompanies the the popular LSO on a keyboard selfie and takes photo - Homage to with cellphone his impact -Sneezes and -mix of high reaches for tissue and mass but can not reach culture his bag. Uses an umbrella to continue playing his one note and wipe his nose 59:00 British male Identify the athletic team race significance with Mr. Bean of the man with the Dog There is an image with a man son and dog

251

Time Theme Description Analysis Notes

The commentator highlights that Chariots of fire is playing in London at the time 1:01 Music and Technology is Begins with Pop culture a theme a throughout videogame this section motif?

1:03 Smart phone used Highlighting as props and tv the diversity clips projected on of London house that highlights

The family is multi-racial African descent and European 1:04 Youth and technology

Girl loses phone and boy finds it…they go on a journey to find each other via text message and the history of music 1:06 Songs

“Underground”

Focus on youth in love

252

Time Theme Description Analysis Notes “Talking About my generation”

“Satisfaction”

Image of peace sign created by performers 1:07 “Lollipop” “Girl I want to be” “Love you Yeah” Beatles 1:08 70’s Punk Clip from Jules? Performers create image of a star

1:09 David Bowie “Jet Back”

Queen- “Galileo” Shows clip from Movie

Youth from ambiguous time period come and enjoy the music 1:10 Individuals on stilts that jump with mohawks and large heads with exaggerated features

Music by the Sex Pistols 1:12 “Relax” “Back to Life” “Sweet Dreams”

253

Time Theme Description Analysis Notes Performers in neon costumes 1:13 “I’m a fire starter” With large flames blown into the sky 1:14 Boy and girl find Not all of the each other via text kiss clips are from solely Clip shown of British films? “notting hill”? Maybe these Kids kiss in front of films had an clips from famous impact on the kisses British audience 1:15 1990’s nd Rap song “Nothing There is an I have no 2000’s crazy about me..” island feel to idea who Music??? the music the rapper is…. 1:16 Amy Whinehouse song “They will be victorious” Artist unknown 1:17 House lifts and Highlights the exposes Sir Tim emphasis on Berners- Lee the technology inventor of the used world wide web. throughout…. I would never Lights across the consider audience “This is London as a for everyone” tech capital

Sir Lee’s name was written in text for television viewers. The LOCOG

254

Time Theme Description Analysis Notes wanted this to be known 1:23 Memorial Images of families Did not and frineds who recognize any have passed of the individuals or how they were connected to the Olympic movement 1:24 Dance Akram Khan dance company combined Indian and classical European dance 1:25 Rhythmic and Changed the haunting movment tempo of the with a focus on a program….it single male dancer slowed it down

Bare stage with only markings on Need to figure the floor out why the used this to Father and son end the artistic “in Life and death program. oh lord abide in me” Which began Emily Sunday was very jovial the singer and humorous to serious.

255

Field Research-LA Opening Ceremony Date: 9/1/2014 Time: 6:00pm F. Denotation( material), Connotation(meaning), and Connection i. Cement painted with acrylic and silicate that is over 90ft by 90ft ii. Welcome to LA, Olympic spirit, Unity iii. Connection to Urban Life- Welcome, International prestige G. The following approach to artifact study proposed by E. McClung Fleming (1974) focuses on an artifact's history, material, construction, design, and function" i. History. Where and when the object was made, by whom and for whom and why successive changes in ownership, condition, and function. 1. “The planners of the Opening Ceremonies were given an important goal to accomplish: get the Games started on a positive, emotional and thrilling note and lay the groundwork for a successful Olympic Games”

2. “If the Opening Ceremonies were poorly done, negative opinions could spill over into the competition phase of the Games; moreover, the lasting impression of Los Angeles could be a negative one if the Closing Ceremonies were bad. To add to the challenge of the ceremonies staff, worldwide expectations for spectacular shows were high since the Games were being held in Los Angeles, long heralded as the entertainment capital of the world”.

3. After Disney could not guarantee costs at half of their projected budget the LAOC decided on David L. Wolper, an internationally respected filmmaker and a member of the seven-person committee that was instrumental in bringing the Games to Los Angeles, was asked by senior management to take responsibility for the Ceremonies Department as commissioner and producer.

4. Intention 5. “The staff wanted to present Opening Ceremonies that were emotional, majestic and inspirational. Wolper, who had attended six previous Olympic Games, understood the importance of the Opening Ceremonies and also understood that if they were not spectacular, Hollywood’s entertainment industry in particular and the United States in general might be subject to severe criticism”

6. “At one point, more than 35 entertainers had offered to sing the United States’ national anthem. However, it was decided that although considerable well-known talent was available for use in the Opening Ceremonies, none would be used. It was feared that by using established stars, the audience would take a passive attitude and wait to be entertained. By using youths from the Los Angeles area, the ceremonies staff hoped to encourage a sentimental, positive response from the audience for the youths to do a good job” . 7. Although there is a rich heritage of music in the United States, there were certain events within the Opening Ceremonies for which no suitable music could be found. When Disney began its preparations for the Opening Ceremonies, composer John Williams was asked to write a theme for the Los Angeles Games. Williams was asked to continue writing the theme after the LAOOC took responsibility for planning the ceremonies.

256

8. Condition-The murals were visible without graffiti and with vibrant colors, which is indicative of being recently restored. True focus on care and preservation.

a. Function-Permanent memorial to the 1984 Games ii. Material. What the object is made of—wood, fibers, ceramics, metals, glass, and so on. 1. Concrete, silicate and acrylic iii. Construction. This has to do with the techniques of manufacture employed, workmanship, and the way parts are organized to bring about the object's function.

iv. Design. This includes the structure, form, style, ornament, and iconography of the object. 1. Artistic Program “Music of America” during Americana Suite a. Marching Band-800 Members i. Brass (Tubas, Trombones, Trumpets) ii. Drumline (Snares, Bass drums, quads, cymbals) iii. Drum Major iv. Flags (Red flags with white star Olympics logo) v. Uniforms ( White long sleeved tops and bottoms with capes) 2. Artistic Program Concentric circles v. Function. This embraces both the uses (intended functions) and the roles (unintended functions) of the object in its culture, including utility, delight, and communication, 1. Intended function 2. Unintended function c. Notes

257