|
 Creating Cultural Capitals Panelists: Michael Craig-Martin, Thomas Crow, Rosa de la Cruz and Lisa Dennison Moderated by Susan J. Arbetter The following white paper is drawn from the remarks of the panelists and moderator for this session, along with the questions and responses from members of the audience. This document is intended to reflect the variety of viewpoints offered during the discussion, and to frame broadly the issues discussed; it should not be taken as a formal statement of opinion by the panelists. At a time when significant resources worldwide are devoted to economic development projects centered on cultural institutions and infrastructure for cultural tourism, it is important to investigate the nature of cultural capitals. As sites of artistic production and consumption, cultural capitals must be discussed from two perspectives, with a view as to what is essential both for the creation of artworks and for their appreciation and distribution. In considering cultural capitals we tend to think first of institutions of reception. With regard to visual art, this suggests taking great museums as essential, and from this angle the global program of the Guggenheim Museum is an important case in point. Here the Guggenheim Bilbao provides an admittedly miraculous model of cultural investment as economic engine, its success a consequence of the special circumstances of its location, substantial investment by local government, and the role of innovative architecture as a cultural attractor. The impressively ambitious proposal for a cultural district in Abu Dhabi—involving two of the world's greatest museums and some of the most important international architects, with the Guggenheim playing a central advisory role—offers a spectacular application of something like this model, supported by a government with immense resources and offering a virtually blank slate for the planning process. But it is not clear that something more than a capital of cultural tourism can be manufactured in this way, apart from a more organic development process taking place within an active cultural ecology. Such an ecology involves more than institutions of display, and a vital cultural capital must be populated by those who make the art, along with those engaged in conversation about it. Here we are talking about a capital of contemporary culture, not merely a preserve of historical artifacts but a place that connects the past to present artistic work. Artists are at the center of such cultural capitals, communities of artists whose discussions and interactions feed into their studio and post-studio production. And one important factor in creating and maintaining communities of artists is the existence of art schools, which attract and train new artists and constitute early networks of artistic exchange. Centers of art education are a notable element of the infrastructure of centers of culture, places where substantial numbers of artists live and work. Yet it is important to distinguish between a cultural capital and that more ephemeral entity, a cultural scene. For a city to qualify as a cultural capital also requires an engaged audience for art, as well as being a locus of artistic production, discussion, and criticism. London was one of the world's great cities long before it became a cultural capital in this sense, the change presaged in the late 1990s by the rising status of younger British artists. But it was only with the creation of Tate Modern that contemporary art came to interest a larger public, catalyzed by media attention around the Turner Prize. The stories that revisit such events in the life of a cultural center also are important features of such places, for cultural capitals are characterized by a density of narrative, chronicles and anecdotes connecting current participants with happenings and players of the past. Another factor in the formation of a cultural capital is the market, for cultural capitals are places where art is bought and sold, and where those who do the buying and selling congregate. Miami is a city that aspires to the status of a cultural capital, and whose aspirations in this regard are in large part generated by those who collect contemporary art. In this city of few museums, collectors have created impressive museum-like spaces that are open to the public. Questions of sustainability shadow these facilities, and as Miami's public museums develop there also is concern about patronage in a city where potential benefactors are significantly committed to their own foundations. But Miami presents an exciting example of a developing cultural center, a bilingual city whose gaze is directed as much toward Latin America as it is to the north. As we move into the twenty-first century, talk of developing cultural capitals focuses outside of Europe and North America. Here China naturally is garnering the greatest attention. With a huge and rapidly growing economy, one that holds a substantial portion of the U.S. debt, its major cities of Shanghai and Beijing are quickly developing into international centers of cultural production and display. With active and expanding groups of artists, dealers, and collectors, and ambitious plans for hundreds of new museums, China is rapidly becoming a center of art world activity. The manner in which culture and cultural capitals will develop in cities outside of the historical Western centers is one of the great unknowns, and one of the most exciting prospects, of the new century. For citation, please reference: http://berkshireconference.org/content/2007-creating-cultural-capitals.cfm
|
