|
Melentie PANDILOVSKI (Macedonia)
The Position of Culture in Southeast Europe
CURRENT SITUATION IN THE FIELD OF ARTS AND CULTURE IN THE REGION OF SOUTHEAST EUROPE
When speaking of cultural issues for the region of South East Europe it is absolutely necessary to include the differentiated approach to universalities or to different approaches towards the culture of the individual countries, the issues of direct or indirect control of cultural production, hence the issues addressing the desired public and artistic forms.
This results from the fact that when defining of what we believe are the most relevant categories of cultural policies we are very often tempted to neglect the subjectivity and history of a certain culture in favour of a more global model. This of course has sometimes its advantages especially taking into consideration the miss-use of culture in the last decade of this century during the Yugoslav dissolution, where culture has being used by the political elite as one of the major vehicles for the spread of nationalistic ideas and very often even quite uncovered forms of chauvinism.
Additionally, the region has witnessed in the past decade a grand transformation of the appreciated values, following the change of the political and economic framework, which has of course on its side influenced gravely the social structures. A fragmenting of the entire region has occurred. The political elites on the Balkans have found them selves today trapped in a situation where they are unable to redefine their societies and solve the problems derived from the shift of systems such as low rates of production, high rates of unemployment, emigration of intellectuals. The education policies have remained stiffened and unable to follow the international standards. The freedom of the press has been attacked in some cases even directly by shutting down of opposition printed or electronic media.
The role of culture may luckily be directed to the opposite side of the pendulum, in articulated supplying of creative responses to social issues and promoting civil cohesion, regardless of the confrontations on the axis between the cultural analysis and cultural praxis. This is of course largely aided by the fact that, even though shyly in the beginning, the concept of civil society has been penetrating in the last decade of the twentieth century in former socialist countries of Central and Eastern Europe, including the Balkan countries as well. South East Europe has witnessed during the nineties an increasing role of non-governmental organisations in comparison to the state and private sectors. This has in the beginning of the last decade of the twentieth century been largely assisted by the Open Society Institutes, but this concept was later picked up by organizations such as the European Cultural Foundation, European programs such as PHARE, and even by governmental agencies such as the Swiss Pro Helvetia and the Austrian KulturKontakt which have by the end of the decade expanded their programs to the region.
As much as new important players have appeared such as different Foundations, and as much as the NGO sector has strengthened, it is quite evident that the relationship between the NGOs, and governmental sectors has been, in many cases, at least problematic. However, once we have opened up the corpus of questions attached to the civil society we will quickly arrive to the questions of its development in South-East Europe. Questions that are being imposed on us touch the issue of whether this new thinking is able to reflect the changing political and economic realities. Further on they are expanded to the idea whether civil society is able to assist in a thoughtful reorganization of the Balkans where cultures interact one with another constructing thus a new socio-economic system.
Finally, questions are opened up regarding the assisting in building alternative positions and identities in culture. The principle issue stays put whether alternative forms of subjectivity may be created, and legitimised,
in South East Europe? We must often be asking ourselves questions about consistent ideologies and alternative forms of subjectivity, as they are essential in the fight for alteration. Even though we are abandoning universalities in theory yet in practise they might assist the changes in the cultural situation of the region, as they have a mutual code based on a permanent cultural revolution, of which we become witnesses through the use of simultaneous reflexive connections.
We must reflect about this issue, as two views will determine its outcome. The view within (the policies with-in the states and with-in the region) and the view from the outside (or the policy of the international community toward the region). The recurrent connection between the two would be characterised by the cultural policies towards marginalized groups
with-in our region, and the marginalization of the region itself. It is my firm belief that should dialogue on this line be established, our domicile cultures would have the possibility to transform.
OBJECTIVES AND PRACTICES IN THE REGION OF SOUTHEAST EUROPE
In analysing the strategic objectives of the cultural policies of the countries in the region of South East Europe one cannot speak of systematic and coherent cultural policies of the now independent countries but rather of different approaches to the complex problems facing the region. As a general standpoint we may commence from the ascertainment that the place of culture today, despite of the fact that culture has been highly supportive of the nationalistic regimes in the Balkans during the conflict, stands far lower than in the eighties. For example even the most developed country in the region, the Republic of Slovenia, has reduced its investment in culture from 1.02 per cent in 1989, to 0.72 per cent in 1992, even though in 1992 the Ministry of Culture issued a strategic development programme of cultural policy in which it is clearly stated that the Republic undertakes to spend 1.50 per cent of its gross national product for culture. In the Republic of Bulgaria, we can also see a drastic fall of the expenses for culture in the gross domestic product. Actually the decline of investment in culture is even more drastic as Bulgaria reduced its investment in culture from 1.28 per cent in 1988, to 0.56 per cent in 1995.
It is characteristic for the region in general that there is uncertainty about the financial capacity of the government (state and local), and governmental agencies to cover cultural budgets, as well as by the decrease of funds provided to the culture by the non-governmental organisations and foundations (one such example are the Open Society Institutes as the biggest independent benefactor in the region). Additionally, the cultural institutions, being over-sized and unable to adjust to the novel times, function with only a low performance of their programs, due to the already mentioned crisis in financing, as well as in organisation.
This has resulted in a very low level of artistic production and underestimated role of arts and culture in the development of society is a general characteristic for all countries in the region.
NEEDS IN THE FIELD OF ARTS AND CULTURE IN THE REGION OF SOUTHEAST EUROPE
The situation requires an essentially new definition of the position of culture and the arts in the region, a new approach to the issues of cultural policy and model of cultural organisation (decision-making, administration, and management), as well as a new legislation in the cultural sphere.
Such a systematic approach to the possibilities and difficulties in culture is a pre-requisite for the development of the region. For example the legislation and fiscal policy in the field of culture should be adapted to European standards, stimulating thus the cultural production.
Perhaps the most important need is the re-defining of our vision regarding the thoughtful reorganization of the Balkans where cultures will interact beneficially one with another. The re-establishing of cultural ties within the South-East Europe, as well as the development of the Balkan cultural profile by improving the awareness for common problems as well as resources is a precondition for the reconstruction of the region. Further on one could say that there is a great feeling of isolation present so that it would be quite meaningful if the process of communication to the European cultural scenes and resources were raised to a higher level. As a specific of the artists in the region it is worth pointing out that there is no functioning art market so that the establishing of conditions for it (financial, infrastructure) would only be greeted.
The utilisation of the lacking Information Technology could assist thoughtfully in establishing and maintaining the highest possible synergy between cultural subjects in the region, hence increasing the contribution to the Balkan societies. IT would be of assistance in the communication networks linking the region by constant data transfer between the interested culture workers and institutions.
Finally, it is no secret that the region needs a greater support for the culture by the international community.
STRATEGY OF ADDRESSING THE NEEDS
In order to devise a strategy of common mechanisms that will function in reality methodology models that benefit the cultural, educational, civil, media, and development systems, should be put into practice.
- The independent cultural institutions together with the Ministries for Culture of the region should form a joint Culture Board that has to carry the responsibility for the implementation of the transformation platform.
- The Culture Board should take the responsibility of defining common actions towards European funding bodies for a long-term support of culture in South East Europe (The more developed countries should be aware that the dream of creating a unified Europe, in which people are still exploring the possibilities of a community that transcends national borders, could to a relatively high point be supported by means of developing the Balkans).
- The network principle should be implemented to the highest possible extent. By this I mean the actual creation of functional and independent Networks that will facilitate communication, opportunities, exchange and sharing of information and resources among artists, researchers, curators, and institutions. The goals of this Network should be the identifying of common Balkan concerns and strengthening the ties among the individuals sharing their diverse experiences in responding to the complex challenges. The Networks are to serve for the public awareness of shared issues in the social, political, economic and cultural transition in society by providing a creative space for discussion and debate in a regional context. This synergy will be accomplished by formal and informal kind of linking of cultural agencies or institutions through different computerized systems e.g. Internet systems, common databases, protocols, etc.
- The Board should find ways to firmly position the idea of civil society in culture and education.
- The viewpoint of society should be focused into understanding complexities. If we succeed in this then we will succeed into creating a balance between the different cultures on the Balkans.
- The place of culture industries will have to be elevated with the purpose of benefiting to the reconstruction process. In this respect the interested Balkan cultural industries should be engaged with the launching of such Pan-Balkan systems, which will on its side become a medium attracting multinational business.
- The governments in South-East Europe should be pressured by the domestic and international community for a greater public funding of culture and for a greater co-operation with the NGOs.
|
