The EU conference over "Cultural competence" reveals more confusion as cultural policy strategies
The EU conference "Culture as competence", The one of the 1. to 3. October in Linz took place, dedicated to the context of new technologies and the changes of cultural production and distribution. A central question is what aspects of a cultural policy with Europe’s dimension develop here. She tried to make the policy-maker’s culture tasty at the level of procurement policy to be superimpicated. From the targeted dialogue between art, industry and politics was in Linz but nothing to traces – the commercial pacemakers gross media companies lacked all the whole, cultural politicians were barely there and the Commissioners love to be represented.
For the implementation of the political task of the Council of Europe, in which a special consideration of the new information technologies is required, is searched for concepts, which indicate in addition to the technology policy the cultural potential of innovation. Culture is not only something that is operated on the end of work. With all the emphasis "Competitiveness" As the most prominent conceptual impact of the European politicians, the reference is appropriate that the cultural sector in the EU plays economically as socially a significant role and that numerous economic activities depend directly on art and culture. ("Culture, cultural economy and employment" – Commission services, EU Commission, DG V and DG X, Brussel, May 1998 URL)
But he is just cheap, since culture is not a value in itself when the ’employment factor’ (data on the procurement potential of the cultural sector in Germany) must be taken. The suspicion is suggested that the policy here is forcing a concept of culture, which is subject to the industrial exploitation aspect and maybe remain the employees of opera houses and theater companies, but for a long time nothing more.
Georg Franck, University Sprofessor (Vienna)
The classical cultural operation still works as the high-performance middle-class sector in the intangible economy. Who did not understand their laws, is at least not competent to culture and cultural policy, where it is about high quality.
This entry elected Keynote-Speaker Georg Franck by saying that culture as a topic of an EU conference of some dubbing a novelion, but in the discourse dominant economic topics, however, it is quite right to claim: Culture is an economic category, production and distribution of cultural "contents" One of the leading economic topics. It depends only on the angle, then even the cultural internal perspective becomes the economic, belonging to the fight for attention to the core corporation of culture. From the point of view of the monetic value chip, the "high culture" Together the commerce, of course, the problem area, as it is no longer really affordable. Here, the economy changed, due to a lack of basic theory, the intangible economy of cultural production is so far recognized inadequately.
The intangible profit such as attention and attention is a driving force of postmodern society. He is also to be tableable, and not imagine the gain of industrial production achieved by increasing the impact of the energy generated. If there is no difficulty to follow this diagnosis of a different and ancient-functioning economy, so irritated in the approach of Franck’s readiness, solely the "High culture" (as an example of MUB the composer Arnold Schonberg serve) to see as a problem area and thus alone the question of their financing considered relevant.
Thus, a fundamentation of the conference is addressed, which in many other contribution has also been far less elegant than that of Franck. The tenor: Should we have in Europe yes "Culture", in contrast to the Americans, for example, to make something to the preservation. This can not shock itself in the much summoned preservation of the tradition of a cultural heritage, but to incorporate new cultural forms. But this does not only work on the workplace rail.
The European Commission first focuses on economic interests, lays down in its long-term strategy ("The focus of change is the electronic trade and the multimedia content" – Agenda 2000) But value on the development of spiritual and economic capital. It awards funds for very specific purposes without calling for initiatives and projects in the true sense – unless they are of transnational interest as the political economic cohases of Europe. But here are the contradictions to build – the new technologies will find hardly consideration in the guidelines that the appropriate environment should be true for free circulation of goods and services in the European room. This concerns, among other things, the difficult question of the Copyright under conditions of the new media, or. copyright protection for the creative. Industrial interests are very well perceived, and especially in the field of so-called "Value-added services" (EU Jargon) are put to the political course to secure investments and encourage profits.
The identification of the "High culture" as a problem area on the one hand, the protection of the interests of a European "Cultural industry" On the other hand, an ideology correspond to the competitive strength, which awards: That it is precisely the new technologies that leave this dualism behind.
It was therefore consistent to involve cultural initiatives served with media technologies and individual artists in this conference. To access a Besipiel: The Viennese composer Karlheinz ESSL demonstrated on the basis of his own practice on how the conditions of the possibility of contemporary creative creative creates have changed fundamentally through the use of communication technologies. What the dualism prolonged by some experts was easily guided by a different practice ad absurdum. The new technologies also allow small projects to realize their own culture beyond the imperative from market success: cultural practice in electronic networks.
Different and successfully operating subcultural networking companies successfully operated after their mabs were allowed to introduce themselves that it is to be bought in accordance with EU position papers on art and culture on the Internet – by structural-political measures. Of these, these are usually not very much to traces, as well as the average cultural manager then, when it comes to paying rent and labor costs, he actually committed to an economy of attention.
Pit Schultz, Artists and Network Critics (Berlin)
Electronic Cultures are the basis of numerous riched social or technical innovations, they are needed to develop a language that goes beyond the programming language or the press articles spread on the Internet.
That the practitioners of electronic networks reprint a different culture than the one who corresponds to the Mental Tentatat Brusseler Burokraten, a little closely welcomed. The ‘Clash of Cultures’, which this Kulturkongb had probably intended, did not take place because the political decision-makers were manally represented and the professoral discourses of the open-end pane actually did not offer any connection. So you were with the ‘best practices’ models of a clientele of alternative ‘digital culture’ initiatives again pretty much. Also at the accompanying ‘Ambient Lecture Surfing’ (at the browser: Pit Schultz) there was little new to learn: The website-trimmed rings for plausibilitate in the fight against ‘the system’, the traces of new media structures, the vague criticism of the Bangemann propaganda – All this has already been passed through, strategic ideas were missing and instead has been there and there a mude anti-Microsoft club. Instead of analyzing the transnational project planes, which are designed to expand the infrastructure and increasing the bandwidth, to their social contractness and actual needs beyond commercial applications, one laughs with moralizing-Protestant subtons that exploited by the multimedia industry looking for pictures.
However, this is a small emotional explosion of the EU Board Nathalie Labourdette coming from the creative field: instead of self-evident in everything, MOGE is finally learning to articulate its needs better. Without cynicism, it should be noted that the EU programs are not created to rescue a bose world, but to the start of the industry.
Derrick de Kerckhove (McLuhan program for culture Technology, Toronto)
There are expert centers and media laboratories exploring the impact of new technologies on European culture?
Derrick de Kerckhove
So far so good. There is a political mission of the Council of Europe to ensure the application of the new information technologies in the European context in the sense of a culture of variety. At a corresponding explanation is currently being worked on the instruments of cultural policy should be tailored to it. Now a cultural policy beyond the usual cliches to be expected, with which forever from the "challenge" the information society or from the "chances and risks" a digital revolution is the speech. She will not shrink in it to redefine the European culture anti-American.
Beyond all proclamations, not only the technology, but the social practice of the meanwhile to ‘cultural workers’ (say: taxpayer with atypical work restrictions), mutated creatives the cultural landscape. In parallel, a new functional layer of the curators and cultural managers, the policy expert and special consultant is created in parallel. The impulses of the procurement policy threaten to focus on their interests. The realitat of so-called cultural economists and those of the ‘Informal Knowledge Workers’ pretty different from demonstrating events like this. Not only are different, ultimately unsettable ideas of the concept of culture, it also seems that one has learned to live with the structural deficits of cultural work on all sides. The romantic role of little creatives is likely to be perpetuated, which persists the rough, supermacient organization as the EU Commission.
Thus, the hope would have to be buried that culture differently than one "Subsidy" understood, as a luxury, which one can do one’s to make. And also that with Meta institutions such as the EU, an interest in culture beyond its representative function for elites, on the one hand, and a demand of the production conditions of industrial mass culture on the other. At the culture, however, despite all change rhetoric, nothing from what it is already: a subsidized residuum of the emancipation sight for the one, one as a publicly well-called sales factor for the others.