Day 2 – Urban Laboratories & Cultural Capital and Institutional Change

Got Spaghetti, Waiting for the Sauce

Urban Laboratories Cultural Capital Bas van Heur Janicke Kernland Piet Menu Kate Oakley Michelle Teran

In this session the intention was to cover the themes discussed the day before, practical ideas on possible projects and, finally, organizational structures necessary for successful implementation of the ideas. As an overarching theme of ‘Urban Laboratories’ discussion, Bas van Heur indicated that there was a need to acknowledge the ways in which cultural practices are not simply representative – i.e. belonging to particular groups (ethnic, national, gendered, etc.) – but also innovative and involved in the production of newness. This demands a sensitivity towards and promotion of spaces of experimentation.

Another prominent theme was the tension between official and unofficial narratives surrounding cultural events. According to Michelle Teran, there is often an official story presented by advertising campaigns and mass media covering up possibly very different picture as perceived by participants or other involved. The task of critical thinkers in this case would be questioning the official language.

The most important opposition considered by the group ‘Cultural Capital and Institutional Change’ was between so called ‘official culture’ or institutions and community. Although ‘community culture’ is often deemed to be naturally good and liberating, this group agreed that both of the sides should be problematized. Other themes which deserved mentioning were internal and external rationales for becoming ECOC as well as the position of artists in such mega events. Finally, the importance of networking was stressed.

In any case, both groups seemed to have very hot topics, because the overview of themes brought them further into discussion. The most prominent one was about the narratives surrounding ECOC. One of the speakers very rightly noted that narratives are by definition exclusive: someone gets to decide who will be involved in the dialogue. According to Bas van Heur, the negative effects of this exclusionary moment can be minimized through reflection and awareness of this unavoidable exclusionary dimension of narratives. Janicke Kernland added to this that, on the one hand, exclusion can be seen as positive because it signals a choice or position and, on the other hand, exclusion can be easily unmasked by a counter narrative which, in turn, should be encouraged.

Unfortunately, it was more difficult to turn the discussion along more pragmatic lines than this. Although the task of people working on Maastricht ECOC is to set the base for those who will implement the project, inventing and adding institutions does not seem the best idea. According to Paul Lambrechts, Maastricht and surrounding cities already possess necessary institutional components to successfully implement such mega-events as ECOC. However, communication and cooperation of these separate bodies is of key importance. He compared the institutions to spaghetti, which without connecting material – sauce – are tasteless and therefore useless. We have the spaghetti, now let’s work on the sauce, suggested Paul.

Actually, my favorite idea came from the public (Ruth Benschop): in any narrative we talk about, the focus is on the future and the progress. Reflection on past and present is submerged in plans and dreams, if existent at all. Are we not losing something very precious in this way?

Text: Ruta Norvaisaite

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s