UP - logo
Univerza na Primorskem Univerzitetna knjižnica - vsi oddelki (UPUK)
  • Birokratska instrumentalizacija kulture [Elektronski vir]
    Čopič, Vesna, 1956-
    In the beginning of the 1990s, democratic expectations in Slovenia were great, so much that the cultural circles failed to see at that time transpiring fundamental changes in democratic policy ... models. The ideal of the artistic freedom did not fade out, however, the cultural policy set to support art for the 'art's sake' and recognise the art's length principle stirred by cultural autonomy lost its political legitimacy. This vanishing ideal was precisely what the socialist artists expected. The paradigmatic changes may be described with the term 'posticisms', such as: post-welfare era in which the welfare cultural policy was no longer possible, post-modern era in which the cultural autonomy was replaced by the economic and social instrumentalisation of culture, and post-national era in which culture could no longer relay on the nation-state. The changes were not introduced by cultural policy, but by government policies and general reforms in the light of spending cuts in state budgets, New Public Management and decentralisation/regionalisation. The consequences of processes that altered the very foundations of the European phenomenon of cultural policy occurred without any deeper cultural policy reflection, as something purely technical and not at all substantial. Western cultural policies started to speak mercantile language and invented a camouflage at first under cultural and later creative industries to maintain or even improve public financing of arts in the new circumstances. However, it was working out only until 2009, obviously, when this pragmatic manoeuvre lost its stamina. Similar pragmatism and yet of different kind occurred in the Slovenian cultural transition. As soon as cultural elites comprehended the level of indifference on the part of politicians to arts and culture within the new democratic order, they consented to become public servants organised in a highly bureaucratic public sector under social protection by strong trade unions. In the same manner the extensive administrative burden was imposed on independent cultural production when applying for public funds. The bureaucratic instrumentalisation of culture did, however, protect culture from the processes that transpired in the West; nonetheless, it also marginalised the independent cultural production and kidnapped the public interest for culture itself by expelling new models, new actors and new generations from taking their part. The bureaucratic coup did not originate from culture, still, the cultural circles failed to contest it. Is it not time at last to instigate the cultural policy that serves public interest for the culture itself and not its clients? Or even a more fundamental question: Is it possible to preserve culture as a public good with this pragmatic behaviour, be it in old or new democracies? Is it not at long last time to readdress the public value of arts and culture in the Western civilization in the times of its confrontation with the rearranging world?
    Vir: Menadžment dramskih umetnosti i medija - izazovi XXI veka [Elektronski vir] : zbornik radova sa naučnog skupa, Beograd, [10. i 11. decembar 2013] (2014, Str. 181-193)
    Vrsta gradiva - prispevek na konferenci
    Leto - 2014
    Jezik - srbski
    COBISS.SI-ID - 1536537796

Vnos na polico