Culture and the 'electronic challenge'

Conference Report

The EU-conference "Cultural Competence", which took place beginning of october in Linz (Austria), was dedicated to the context of new technologies and the changes in cultural production and distribution. A crucial question was, which aspects of cultural policy with an European dimension are evolving here. To be a topic at all, it was decided to sell 'culture' to the policy-makers on the level of work and employment. However, not much could be noticed in Linz of the attempted dialogue between the arts, industry and politics - the commercial pacemakers of media enterprises were not taking part, cultural policy makers were rare, and most of the announced members from the European Commission sent their substitutes.

Plans are requested for the implementation of the political tasks of the European Council, which put a special emphasis on the new information technologies, to highlight the cultural potential of innovations besides the restrictions of technology policy. Culture is not only that what is left after business hours. With all the emphasis on 'competition', the core buzzword for European Union politicians, it should only be appropriate to remember the role of culture for the economy, as well as the fact that a lot of business acitivities depend on culture and the arts. ("Culture, the culture industries and employment" - EU Commission Working document of the European Commission, DG V und DG X, Brussels, May 1998)

But it seems odd that culture now is of value under the condition of its employment factor only (Data on employment in the cultural sector in Germany see www.kulturpolitik.de). One might suspect that policy prefer a concept of culture as in 'culture industries', which includes not much besides the employees of the big opera houses, theaters and such.

Georg Franck, Professor at Vienna University (Wien):

This approach was chosen by Keynote-Speaker Georg Franck, who stated the fact that culture as a topic at a EU-conference is a certain innovation, not unmotivated though within the dominating economic subjects: culture is an economic category, the production and distribution of cultural 'content' being one of the dominating commerce topics. Depending on the chosen perspective, even the cultural view from within tends towards economics, the struggle for attention being the core business of culture. For value added economics, 'high' culture then becomes a problem compared with commercialism, because it cannot be fully subsidised any longer. Hence, a change in economy is due. Because of a lack in theoretical basics however, the immaterial economy of cultural production is not yet recognized. The measurable immaterial profits like respect and attention are the driving forces in postmodern societies. While there is no problem to follow the differentiated diagnosis of a long since functioning 'economy of attention', it is irritating though how Franck's approach is willing to see only high-brow cultural production (with the example of let us say, Arnold Schönberg) as the general problem, as well as solely the financing of the elitist sector of culture.

This illustrates a basic attitude, which revealed itself in some much less elegant contributions to the conference; the tenor being one of traditionally having culture in Europe, as an advantage over America, and thus the obligation to do something for the cultural heritage. The conservationists attitude forgets that new forms of culture are now in the making. These cannot be grasped with the labour market argumentation either.

Focussing mainly on economic aspects, the European Commission in its long term strategy (electronic commerce and multimedia content - cf. the 'Agenda 2000') puts an emphasis on the development of cultural and industrial capital. Therefore, financing depends on specific means, while cultural initiatives and projects hardly are sponsored for their own sake - unless they follow transnational interests like the political-economical cohesion of Europe. Some contradictions are evolving though, since the new technologies are not fully recognized in their role to support an environment where the free circulation of goods and services are to be ensured. This concerns the complex questions of copyright and new media, as well as intellectual property and authorship as a core question in cultural production and distribution. Industrial interests are quite well considered so far, and especially concerning the so-called 'value added services' (EU-slang for communication) the policies are aimed only at securing investments and profits. Identifying high-brow culture as the problematic sector at one hand, while pushing the European culture industry on the other, fits well into the Commission's ideology of competition, while a basic fact is overruled: that it is especially the new media technologies which tend to cancel such simplistic dualisms.

It seems only logical therefore to include culture initiatives and artists, who concentrate on media technologies in this conference. To quote but one example: Viennese composer Karlheinz Essl demonstrated from his own practice how conditions of contemporary creative process fundamentally changed through the use of new communication technologies, whereas the dualism of high and low culture simply became obsolete through different contextualisation. These new technologies enable a range of small scale project works to establish a 'culture' of their own beyond any commercial imperativs: new cultural practice in electronic networks. Different 'subcultural' network projects introduced themselves at the conference, all of which - according to various EU position papers on art and culture and the Internet - should be strengthened through structural policy. Most of them however, do not experience any effect of that policy, while the common cultural manager, who is concerned with covering the rent and labour costs, can not disregard such responsibilities in the name of an immaterial economy of attention.

Pit Schultz, artist and net-critic (Berlin):

The fact that the practicians of electronic networks represent a different culture than the one which fits the mentality of EU-bureaucrats, needs no further explanation. And yet, a 'clash of cultures' which might have been an intention of the organizers did not happen, simply because the political policy makers were scarce, while the hermetic academic discourse of the opening panel did not allow much of a follow-up. So with their 'best practices'-models, the 'digital culture'-clientele once again stayed amongst themselves. Also, not much new insight was offered through the accompanying 'ambient lecture surfing' (on the browser: Pit Schultz): a website-supported struggle for credibilities in the fight against the 'system', the track down for new media structures, and a vague critique of the Bangemann-propaganda - all issues well known and quite well exercised already, but while strategical concepts are missing, a vague sweeping attack against 'Microsoft' once again is not enough. Instead of analyzing transnational project plans, which are designed to extend the information infrastructure and increase the bandwidth, on their social compatibility and the actual needs aside from pure commercial applications, the addiction for images exploited by multimedia industry was being ridiculed with protestant moralistic undertones.

This caused a minor emotional explosion by member of the EU-governing board Nathalie Labourdette, who herself has some career experience in the creative sector. Instead of complacent criticising, she argued, one should learn how to appropriately articulate one's needs in a given context. Without cynicism it was stated that the EU-programmes are not designed as the reconciliation with a wicked world, but as an augmentation for industrial enterprise.

Derrick De Kerckhove (McLuhan programme for culture & technology, Toronto):

The applications of new information and commication technologies for the means of cultural diversity in a European context is on the agenda of the European Council. As a work in progress, a declaration for a coordination of all the national cultural policies is in the making. It should be expected from the responsible persons and institutions, that they design a cultural policy beyond the stereotypes like the "challenges" of the information society and the "chances" of the digital revolution. This can also not be limited in re-defining a European culture through an anti-american attitude.

Beyond all proclamations not only technology changes, but also the social situation of 'cultural workers' (read: taxpayers in non-typical work situations). A nomenclatura of officials from curators to culture managers, experts and counselors already took over key functions in the field of cultural production and distribution. The prominent issue of employment tends to focus on their personal interests. How much the reality of the explicit culture industrialists and the one of the 'informal knowledge workers' fundamentally differ is unwillingly demonstrated with conferences like this one. There are not only incompatible concepts of culture, it also seems that cultural workers have come to an arrangement with structural deficits. All too willingly the romantic role of a supporting cast of creatives is played, powerless in the face of migty institutions like the European Commission. All hope abandoned to have their culture subsidised, a concept of culture to become the luxury good for a few is reinforced. And likely, that meta-institutions like the EU develop an interest for culture beyond its representative function for elites on the one hand, and its subsidy as an industrial factor on the other. Despite all political rhetorics, culture policy will not change then, from what it already is: a subsidised residuum of emancipatory yearnings for the one, a sponsored public good as a turnover factor for the other.

Further texts by Frank Hartmann:

ACADEMIC PAPER TIGERS: Scientific publication rituals and the media revolution - will electronic publishing become a realistic option beyond printed books and journals? .

Speaking Signs: Web-Publishing and the Viennese Method of Visual Education.