Genealogy of
Post-Transformation Institutions
I would like to start with a fairly obvious statement that is repeated
unanimously and again and again by all critiques of post-socialist
institutions: the inherited cultural infrastructure remained completely
retained in our post-socialist situation, as though the transformation process
did not even touch cultural institutions. These cultural institutions, however,
are completely apathetic, their logic is a logic of total passivity – yet these
are gigantic institutions with a great number of employees and a corresponding
infrastructure, which are entirely dependent on public funding.
However, it is not that these institutions have not yet been
(sufficiently) liberalized; because the systematic neglect of these once
socialist institutions is already a consequence of neoliberal hegemony. The
transformation process thus slowly and irrevocably suspended every structural
function of art and cultural institutions as a site of social criticism.
On the other hand, a scene formed after the overthrow of communism and
the beginning of the capitalist transformation in the 1990s, with new actors in
the socio-cultural field, that of the non-governmental organization. At that
time the NGOs were the (very often only perceptible) opposition to the
nationalistic discourse of the authorities; what these institutions involved
was a (very marginalized) critical public of the actors in anti-nationalistic and
anti-war activism. These organizations
were funded by the Soros Open Society Institute, for which reason they were
often stigmatized as “foreign mercenaries” and “leaders of imperialistic
politics” in their country and systematically neglected by the state support
policies.
After the international foundations had been the only investors and
financial supporters for years, thus helping the NGOs to achieve social
significance, these foundations (such as Soros) withdrew from the region in
2000. This did not result in a collapse of the NGO scene in Zagreb, however. On
the contrary: the dynamic remained and was even intensified. A law was passed
providing for the founding of cultural councils, which were to be composed of
politically independent experts and decide on proposed programs called for at
regular intervals – this development also had an impact at the level of the
city of Zagreb. The new funding schemata now do equal justice to the
non-institutional actors. In this way the NGOs are taking a different, new
place on the socio-cultural map – and this changed positions requires their
stabilization and professionalization.
Under such altered circumstances the local NGOs present themselves as
legitimate actors in the cultural field; they take an active position and
insist on the change and deregulation of the system. The new networking
strategies that have prevailed in the NGO scene could thus be regarded as
actually shaping political fronts. Unlike membership networks, whose main role
often consists of fostering mutual acquaintance and an exchange of information
among members, the new forms of networking (primarily at the local level of the
Zagreb scene) involve intensive collaborative platforms (or so-called tactical
networks). Their main characteristics are the expansion of the field of
cultural action and the development of new, collaborative production models.
Let’s take a closer look at two of the best functioning networks and the
chronology of the actions they have suggested and/or carried out.
The network Clubture was
founded in 2002 with the idea of introducing a program exchange among the
members and thus a decentralization of cultural production. In this way, Clubture is a new, participatory
and especially dynamic model (membership in the network is tied to active
participation in the program exchange). Who can be a member of Clubture? Every organization that
actively participates in the program exchange can be a member of Clubture, so that every member
organization can in turn introduce new members into the the network through
their collaboration. In the five years of its existence the network has brought
together more than eighty organizations and initiatives from all over Croatia
in this way, thus opening up new possibilities of collaboration among the
different disciplines and suggesting new models of collective work, leading to
more solidarity within the Croatian cultural scene. In addition, Clubture has led to a greater
recognition for cultural initiatives among a wider audience, thus supporting
the network members in building up their financial structures and activating
official cultural policies.
By organizing training seminars, from the beginning, but most
intensively since 2005, Clubture has
impelled an organization and stabilization of the entire scene. For the newly
created networks this is the crucial development tendency and their most
important field of activity after successful networking: on the one hand they
convey to the member organizations the basic features of cultural policies and
introduce them to non-commercial cultural management. (First and foremost, they
attempt to forestall instability by means of professionalization by
transferring the Anglo-Saxon model of cultural management that operates with
methods of strategic planning and organizational development.)
In one of the founding documents of this collaborative platform, it
says: “In the context of the transformation processes, cultural capital
realizes the question of social action. If this transformation process has two
meanings, subjecting oneself to the market on the one hand and abandoning
social projects – or rather regarding society as a project – on the other, then
the most conspicuous effect is that private interests participating in the
shaping of the public sphere elude control and are no longer transparent. The
obvious lack of social legitimation is evident in the wasting of public
funding. Our fossilized institutional culture and its accompanying system of
public funding make it clear that maintaining the status quo can only succeed
by taking the lead in the aforementioned transition process. And
whereas the only dynamic of change in the relationship between state and
state-funded institutions – despite differently stated strategies in terms of
cultural development – is currently the dynamic of individual interests, actors
that are independent – in the societal sense and in the sense of development –
are especially important, as they understand cultural activities as social
action and social activities as critical culture.”
In response to this, Cultural Kapital offers intensive
collaborations (the platform was initiated by four organizations that are
outstanding in the independent cultural scene of Zagreb; four more organizations
joined at their invitation later). Several interdisciplinary projects have been
realized since 2003, which deal with collective strategies and new forms of
working. The projects investigated the changes in the social conditions of
cultural production and in the predominant regimes of cultural representation.
The platform supported and intensified collaborations that had already long
existed in the independent cultural scene by bringing together organizations
from various disciplines and fields of interest, which were all experimenting
with different models of production and representation. The cultural-political
activities of the platform were directed primarily to the reform of
institutional structures to foster the presence and the possibilities of
independent culture and its means of production.
The most important research themes of Cultural Kapital were: new group dynamics, new collective
strategies, new forms of working in cultural production, copyright legislation,
control of productivity, and protection of public property against increasing
privatization, etc. The most important concerns, however, were the battle over
spaces and the battle for recognition of the platform as a relevant social
actor. Particularly these very pragmatic demands strongly influenced the
platform and all its activities and consequently overshadowed all the other
themes.
Recognizing the Political
Potential. And the Political Achievements?
The network Clubture achieved its greatest success in 2004, when
the Croatian Ministry of Culture wanted to change the existing law on cultural
councils in a very traditional direction following the change of power. There
were plans to dissolve the council, which had been responsible for new forms of
cultural production. The network reacted very quickly by assembling a critical
mass of protesters from all over the country in front of the parliament
building in Zagreb, and by organizing a public discussion to develop a
counter-proposal to the government plans. The protest was successful; the
cultural council in question remained part of the new structure of the
ministry. In addition, prominent members of NGOs are now involved in the work
of this council and take responsibility in the process of defining tasks and
criteria for evaluation.
The aforementioned battle for space came to a peak in 2005, when local
(Zagreb) art and cultural organizations agreed on the demand for a solution to
their space problems, since the majority of these organizations had neither
working nor presentation spaces or were working in unsuitable spaces. For this
reason, the decision was made within the framework of the network to demand the
founding of an independent cultural center for young people. Demanding space
was not all, however. The requisite financial infrastructure was also to be
provided at the same time, specifically through the establishment of a special
foundation for independent culture. The members of the network thus entered
into negotiations with the city authorities. In September of the same year, 26
organizations and initiatives from the independent cultural scene “occupied”
abandoned and vacant spaces of the factory complex Badel-Gorica. The
occupation, which became known as Operacija:grad
(Operation:City), lasted for ten days; during this time an intensive and
broadly developed program – the product of joint programming by all the
participating organizations and initiatives – was offered, which was used in
the negotiations with the city authorities as the main argument for the demand
for spaces and financial infrastructure. Important elements of the argument
were the quantity and quality of productions, the numbers of visitors and the
organization of collective programming. The promises of the city authorities –
like the symbolic “opening” of the occupation with a speech by the mayor and
the cultural chairman of the city of Zagreb – remained no more than promises,
however. The factory space itself was leased to a commercial enterprise in
record time, so that the critical objection could be raised that the occupation
had merely raised the visibility and attractiveness of the area and thus saved
it from demolition.
However, these goals – increasing the visibility of non-institutional
cultural production and negotiations with the city authorities about founding
an independent center – were the only interpretation of the events of September
2005. General questions about public space or tactics for producing cracks in
standardized urban spaces or even questions about organizational models and the
openness of these organizations were left aside and completely neglected in
favor of a highly pragmatic way of thinking.
The development and the consequences of the Operation:City
brought new dynamics into the scene, leading to an expansion of the battle field.
In 2006 the initiative Pravo na grad
(The Right to the City) was
launched. In addition to the aforementioned organizations in the cultural field
that were already active, this initiative also brings together many inhabitants
of the city, who are not satisfied with the work of the city authorities and
the predominant political programs. Pravo
na grad also stimulated new networks, since the initiative entered into a
partnership with the largest environmental protection organization – Zelena
akcija (Green Action) – and with the prominent organization GONG, which
encourages citizens to actively take part in political processes. Several
actions were carried within the framework of the initiative, which had a strong
presence in the media and resulted in a strong public echo. The largest and
longest lasting action was the protest against the building of exclusive flats
and businesses in the protected city center; over 50,000 signatures were
collected for the petition “End the Destruction of Cvjetni trg (Flower Square)
and the Lower City”.
Unlike Cultural Kapital, which
makes use of the language of cultural production by organizing conferences, art
festivals, exhibitions, workshops, lectures and publication, the actions by the
initiative Pravo na grad are usually accompanied
by elaborate advertising campaigns, which have become the most common forms of
political action in the last two years. The actions by the initiative Pravo na grad use the methods of
classical marketing (flyers, posters, postcards, etc.) and have a strong media
impact, because the conduct spectacular installations in public space, guerilla
actions, etc.
Consequently there is great public interest in the
initiative, which has lead to a large number of city district initiatives and
disgruntled residents joining together in the fight against city politics. Yet
one cannot yet speak of real “achievements”, because despite the large number
of signatures collected for the petition, it has already been announced that
construction will soon begin in the square Cvjetni trg. |
|