Martin Falář
Translation Gwendolyn Albert
At the end of March 2009, an international conference took place in Prague on culture, creativity and the significance of both in contemporary society. Entitled “Forum for Creative Europe” and organized by the Czech Culture Ministry as part of the Czech EU Presidency, this conference was one of the main events of the European Year of Creativity and Innovation 2009.
The two-day forum brought working artists, business managers and economic theorists from Europe and North America to Prague. Thanks to presentations by hotshots such as economists Richard Florida (by video conference from Toronto) and Jeremy Rifkin, the forum was one of the most significant cultural/economic meetings of its kind in the European context.
The conference organizers avoided defining or restricting the terms “creativity” and “culture” (to a large extent very cleverly) and these concepts were frequently used by the speakers with a great deal of room for metaphor (which, after all, is a certain kind of creativity). Of course, the sequencing of often completely unrelated speeches on the widest possible variety of topics achieved a very synergistic effect. On aggregate, the presentations achieved a surprisingly integrated reflection of creativity and the possibilities it presents for contemporary Euro-American culture.
The opening speech of the conference was made by Václav Havel, the author, playwright and former president of Czechoslovakia and the Czech Republic. He began by asking why people need culture, and answered that culture is what makes us human. Even though he did not deny the economic dimension of culture, he indicated that its main benefit is the cultivation of the world and the establishment of human relationships. According to Havel, culture cannot be considered in economic terms, because economies do not define culture. Even though culture often has an economic effect, that is only a secondary phenomenon (Havel discussed the comparative situations of St Vitus Cathedral at Prague Castle, which in its day must have been a very uneconomical project, with the economic use it began to produce centuries later; irrespective of its economic utility, this edifice has always been one of the icons of Czech culture). Havel also pointed out that the culture of individual nations always takes a back seat to geopolitical data in EU documents, even though in his opinion it is culture that connects the nations of the EU and forms a basis for defining their characters. For quite some time, Havel’s contribution was the only voice calling for the concept of creativity to be appreciated for its own intrinsic value. It also cannot be denied that unlike many of the other speakers (who addressed much more specific topics), Havel’s philosophical discourse preserved a clarity and lucidity of thought which set a high standard for the entire meeting.
The main topic of the forum was the use of creativity - not in art, but in other disciplines, especially those where creativity (and often culture as well) turns up to a limited extent only, such as economics, industry, and unfortunately, according to some speakers, education. The practical side of this approach was presented by two groups of speakers, representatives of institutions supporting creative strategies in society (here we will mention William Calladin of the British Creative Economics Programme at the British Ministry of Culture, Media and Sport, which was the first ministry to systematically support creative industries in Great Britain starting in 2008) and representatives of firms using a creative approach in their marketing strategies (the External Relations Director of Škoda Auto, Radek Špicar, presented the mutually beneficial results of collaboration between Škoda Auto and students of the Academy of Arts, Architecture and Design Prague when introducing new Škoda products onto the market – Špicar was one of only a few presenters to give a truly apposite, comprehensible example of how the intentional use of creativity in business can mean economic profit). The most extreme attitude of this paradigm of support for creativity was demonstrated by the British education specialist Paul Collard, who gave the example of a progressive elementary school in Bucknall which gave children the opportunity to design the classroom of their dreams and then realized their idea (for 20 000 pounds sterling, some of which the school raised through sponsorship gifts and some of which came from its own resources, the school bought an airplane so the children could set up a schoolroom on board; the space was arranged by Howard Guy, a designer who works for David Beckham, among others). Collard said these children will forever have it permanently fixed in their minds that their creativity can be realized. Of course, the question which remains unanswered (and was not even asked) was how much it might cost to lead all European children towards such creativity, and whether the great artists of the past, such as Michelangelo or Beethoven, had similar options at their disposal for developing their creative potential.
The most significant contribution on this topic was an hour-long lecture by one of the most important participants in the forum, the economist Richard Florida, whose satellite broadcast presentation from Toronto was one of the high points of the conference. This creator of the theory of a creative class, which caused significant excitement in professional circles, emphasized in particular the need to promote the creative potential of every individual. Florida’s theory of creativity is not focused only on artists, but on all professions which require imagination in order to be fulfilled (from flower arrangers to college teachers, etc.). Florida gave examples of enterprises and firms that promote creativity among their employees (e.g., IKEA or Starbucks, even though he did not specify how creativity is used in these businesses and what for), as it is precisely this approach that he claims improves quality of life in general and helps us face the economic fluctuations of the current era. Florida also spoke about the current economic crisis, which requires a creative approach – he used the English term “reset” for this socioeconomic phenomenon.
Florida’s speech was then subjected to a sharp critique from the director of the European Cultural Foundation, Gottfried Wagner, who labeled the concept of creativity a “modern fetish” and who considers contemporary society to be overvalued in terms of creativity compared to the contributions of, for example, Ancient Greece or the European Renaissance and the transformations those eras brought about. According to Wagner, creativity is related to meaning, not to marketing, and its meaning must be evaluated separately for each individual instance. At the same time it is important for concepts such as “creativity” to bear a specific meaning (the word “reset” sounds good, but what is more important is what Richard Florida wants society to buy into when using this term, and how). Wagner was the only other speaker besides Havel to emphatically underline the content and meaning of creativity and culture per se, above and beyond their “retail” characteristics. Wagner also labeled Florida a modern prophet who offers only answers but poses no questions, and underscored the importance of collaboration and coordination during creative endeavors, as only this way can Euro-American culture defend its existence when faced with other world civilizations.
The session with presentations by artists struck a completely different note and brought the discussion back to the topic of creativity in the arts and in public sector work. The sharpest presenter, the Spanish multimedia artist Simona Levi, harshly condemned bureaucracies for their putative protection of artists’ interests when assigning copyright to artistic works. Levi said such steps only protect Mickey Mouse and the entertainment industry per se, but do not protect artists, as they often are not at all interested in such protection. On the other hand, copyright often prevents artists from acquiring material for their own work. The presentation by the Belarussian dissident theatrical producer Natalie Koliada actually demonstrated once again that creativity in a free society and creativity in a totalitarian society, such as in Belarus where art comes out of the underground movement, are two very different things with completely different goals. Koliada’s contribution became rather a political appeal to Europe from an unfree Belarus.
Paradoxically, the only artistic presentation during the entire conference was partly improvised and took place outside the framework of the original program, during the panel discussion between artists. Many of the speakers had expressed the wish to meet the Czech artist David Černý, who drew European attention to himself when his sculpture “Entropa” was installed at the Council of the EU building in Brussels. Černý presented a short puppet film at the Forum in which, accompanied by his own commentary, he expresses his personal view of the current Czech political scene. In the film, Czech National Gallery Director Milan Knížák spoon-feeds a (probably very dodgy) sort of porridge to Czech President Václav Klaus as the rock song “We are the Champions” plays in the background. Černý’s accompanying commentary calls Knížák the “former director of the National Gallery” and Klaus “a man who has not yet publicly acknowledged his own homosexuality but who has buried the best-performing Czech government since 1989“. Černý was the only person to use a creative artistic work as a form of communication at this conference on creativity; his performance also demonstrated one of the characteristics of contemporary art, namely, its context-dependence. Such works can only be comprehended by the enlightened or the prepared, which shows up the somewhat sad, continual transformation of art into a means for joining a club of selected connoisseurs (for many of the foreign participants in the conference, the subject and meaning of Černý’s performance remained a mystery, while the Czech “insiders” could be heard laughing).
The forum ended with an engrossing, dramaturgically very well-composed hour-long lecture by the president of the Washington-based Foundation on Economic Trends, Jeremy Rifkin. He named three crises of the contemporary world: The economic crisis, the crisis caused by the decline in the fossil fuel supply, and the climate crisis. Rifkin said contemporary society, which is standing on the brink of total collapse due to these threats, needs a strong narrative, a strong motivation for where to head and how. Previously such motivation was provided by the belief in redemption after death, or in the Enlightenment idea of progress. One after another, those narratives have lost their effectiveness, and one of the reasons for our current awkwardness and societal insecurity may be precisely the fact that there is a lack of a grand narrative about where humanity is heading. This grand narrative will not be created either by economists or ecologists, but by culture and its individual elements, namely, scholars, authors, teachers, and filmmakers who organize facts about the world into coherent forms. It is precisely culture that creates the metaphors that will tell humanity “which is more useful, medicine or exorcism”. According to Rifkin, this new narrative should mean a return to quality of life, quality of education, and appreciation of their inherent value.
After this conference on creativity in Europe, one might ask what European culture is, what the strength of European creativity consists of, and where its energy should be intentionally focused. As the Forum demonstrated, one of the strong aspects of European culture is the variety of inspirations it offers and the diversity of approaches it produces. We do not have to search far for an example in practice: The preparation for and operation of the Forum inspired many active protests through which Czech artists did their best to point out the Czech Culture Ministry’s unwillingness to face the question of grants and general financing for culture in the Czech Republic. That is to say, they creatively organized demonstrations and gathered in front of the Prague Museum of Music, where the grand opening of the conference was held, standing before the arriving members of the conference with banners asking why the Culture Ministry was holding a conference on creativity in Europe while simultaneously extirpating creativity at home.
The Forum deserves great credit for offering a real smorgasbord of analyses of the concept of creativity and approaches to it. While in one room the artist Levi was actively fulminating against Mickey Mouse and the Belarussian underground theatrical producer Koliada was calling for civic solidarity, in another managers of firms like Škoda and Google were priding themselves on their successful creative relationships with artists. From the speeches of the more or less creative speakers an observant listener could take away a plethora of ideas on how to use creativity or at least how to name it. Nevertheless, it can be seen from the experiences presented that creativity can be found only where someone really does their best to seek it out, whether forced by circumstances or simply by their own will. This finding could be the best measure for how to reform many of the state organizations (especially administrative ones) and private cultural organizations in the Czech Republic. The fruit of creativity can be viewed through the lens of the globalist Richard Florida – “creativity is good, it upgrades quality of life” –or through the subjectively focused Gottfried Wagner – “creativity is good when it brings us a better version of meaning“.
The fact that a domestic political crisis leading to the collapse of the government of the country presiding over the EU occurred at the same time as this conference shows that when creativity is unleashed without foresight, it can have unlimited results, some of which may not become clear until much later. Primarily, it was confirmed that creativity and an open mind, able to rapidly respond to the widest possible variety of inspiration, are necessary everywhere and always.
Martin Falář is an historian working for the nonprofit organization “Depresivní děti touží po penězích” (“Depressed Children Longing for Money”). He occasionally lectures on social history at the Philosophical Faculty of Charles University.