Introduction by Hatto Fischer

The items of 'cultural evaluation' are sometimes more easily detectable, i.e. restored central market places as attraction for tourists, than what kind of 'cultural exchange' programmes the European Union ought to pursue. While the former is in its beginning stage, designated to review existing programmes like Kaleidoscope, the latter lacks cohesiveness both internally and externally speaking. For the old tendency of bilateral agreements between nation states still manifests itself in the work of the Goethe, French or British Council institutes, while there has been until now no major effort to follow-up the newly created Foreign Policy area by the Maastricht Treaty with a cultural policy for European activities abroad. Both reflect the deficit in understanding and appreciating within the European Union that 'culture' and the European 'cultural diversity' can bring about a momentum of growth, provided long-term thinking prevails.

Naturally, this means in reality that 'national styles' (Picht) continue to prevail, leaving wide open the question of Vangelis Kassos whether in fact 'national artists' can become European in and through their works? If organised in such a way, that even the Biennale in Venice is used only to reinforce the value of the artist's works at national level, then the numerous speculations on art have since First World War (at the time of which much money produced by war credits to finance the weapons industry went into purchases of art) become a part of very forceful institutions. This matter was touched upon at the Brugge seminar, insofar 'categories of cultural artefacts' not subject to be sold or to be traded were discussed in reference to the effort of the European Union to preserve 'cultural heritage'; i.e. Goya may be sold within Spain, but the painting cannot leave the country. The weakness of legislation in this matter was explained that houses like Christie's were indeed very powerful lobbies. This then affects a whole range of other possibilities by which the European Union could, but cannot do something about improving the situation of artists and 'cultural exchanges' going on between member states. This, in turn, leaves open the question why the European Union is only open to certain ideas, proposals, i.e. the idea of having a cultural capital every year, and not receptive to others. Indeed, anyone with practical experiences in this field of organising cultural activities and in trying to apply for funds from the European Union realises that many more specific conditions have to be met before having a real chance of gaining support. As was discussed in the First Plenary of the Fifth Seminar, not only are direct financial means limited, but in general the understanding of what the European Union can undertake is limited to paragraph 128.

What answers the workshop can give to this general debate will be of great interest. Vangelis Kassos, who has studied in Strasbourg and now not only lawyer, but also poet and editor of the Journal about Poetry, has pursued that question with great interest. As an advisor of the Greek ministry of Culture, he experiences daily the need to link national with European policy. In a small country like Greece known for lack of funds and continuous crisis in all of its cultural activities, the dependency upon the European Union is obviously there. Similar problems are faced by other small countries like Ireland or Portugal. One interesting aspect of getting to understand better the various attitudes and hence policies adopted by various Ministries of Culture is, therefore, the paper given by Melitta Gourtsoyanni in Workshop 1 on the topic "Are our Cultural Identities endangered?' For even if the answer is 'yes', the reasons given are most decisive as to what policies are adopted; i.e. if the enlarged European Union is blamed, then very conservative answers will dictate the cultural policy and thus contribute not at all to European integration process at cultural level. Instead national pride and status symbols will be combined in the wish to preserve a highly financed national 'elitist' art, leaving the public in general without any direct access to ongoing artistic activities below the spectacular or media-effective shows, i.e. Kounellis' sculpture exhibition in a freighter docked in the harbour of Piraeus under the slogan 'Odysseus came finally home', since this Greek artist left Greece for Italy due to the belief that he had no chance to reach the art market had he stayed home.

Insular art markets are never conducive to great art; it is a constant theme, however, for cultural policy makers and administrators how to support local activities while keeping up with cultural developments elsewhere. For that reason several key people with experience in this area have been invited to join this workshop. Yvette Vaughan-Jones who was already at the Fourth Seminar in Brugge works for the Welsh Arts Council. She has knowledge what it takes for a small cultural region to be responsible to international exchange prospects, while promoting Welsh artists and culture in such a way that financial support and artistic enrichment is ensured. Here ideas about festivals within the frameworks as offered by the European Union go therefore in the more practical direction, as mentioned in the First Plenary session during the discussion, when Makis Potamianos from DG V of the European Commission suggested looking more into 'indirect' financing possibilities, i.e. programmes linked with 'job creations' or 'fighting long-term unemployment'. This idea was also taken up by Workshop 4 under the chairmanship of Peter Gut from the department for employment of the Senate of Berlin. However, this means immediately entering the realms of handicrafts, popular cultures, film and other festival ideas which are linked immediately with tourism and hence become a part of the 'cultural heritage industry'. Art organised in this way would make art itself into a means of having hotel beds and the restaurants filled; it would not ensure that there is a direct interest in the arts itself, something that Mr. Balodimos had asked to be considered in his interpretation of the Maastricht Treaty during the First Plenary Session of the Fifth Seminar. He reinforced this point when engaged in a debate with Makis Potamianos during the subsequent discussion in that opening session. That should set also a premise for discussion in this workshop and what kind of policy recommendations to be made in respect of this question, how are the arts and cultural activities to be financed in future. For the real problem remains to be one of political justification, so difficult when artists may take one year to think about a design and then do that design in less than a half a hour. Although that design will affect developments for years to come, politicians have difficulties to justify keeping the artist on the payroll over the entire year when it appears to the normal citizen that he is simply doing 'nothing'. Sensitivity on that point is asked for; it is something which Michael Longley reflects in his report about his work for the Belfast Arts Council. Unfortunately he could not come to the Fifth Seminar, but he is willing to make the extended version of the report available, if anyone is interested. Important about that report is another key concept for future cultural policy, namely that it is not only of interest to maintain 'cultural diversity' between regions, that is within the European Union, but fore mostly 'cultural diversity' within the region. This latter aspect is all too often forgotten and shows how important it is to take further the Brugge debate around the concept of 'cultural diversity', so that really 'cultural actions' can be undertaken which have both a meaning and a substance with regards to that term.

Michael Longley had been recommended by Joris Duytschaever; the chairperson for workshop 8 on 'Literature, Discourse and Identity', Conlin Wagner had written to him, but due to other commitments he could not come. Michael Longley's poetry is marked by both wisdom, hence balance and a warm tone of humanism. His report is an example of what it takes to develop really a convincing stand for the arts within the cultural administration.

Another person who had been asked to attend the Fifth Seminar and hence this workshop, is Prof. Janssens who is not only at home in studies of German literature, but as a direct advisor to the Minister of Culture in the Flemish government in a key position to judge how, for instance, political administrations ought to stand to projects like the Poetry House 'Seven Sleepers' with Eugen van Itterbeek, one of the main speakers of the Second Plenary Session of the Fifth Seminar (which was really the main introduction and to which he contributed by speaking about 'The Silence of Intellectuals', a general thesis which ties in with Vangelis Kassos' concern on how to give to intellectuals a role to play in the new 'public space' opening up after Maastricht), being its former General Secretary. For there have been many controversies surrounding his person and the role he has been playing at the Poetry House. Many poets attending the XVth European Poetry Festival held October 1993 in Brussels, Leuven, Antwerp and elsewhere were highly critical of his style of organising such an event, while Eugen van Itterbeek would emphasise what could he do in such a case when he has not the financial support needed to organise such large events. 'But', he would add smiling, 'we are fighters and we do not give up, for one day the Flemish government will see that we are following their policy of regionalisation of European cultures and then they will give us the money we need for good and practical projects with a long-term thinking behind them.' For that reason, he insisted that the poetess Donatella Bisutti (one of the poets who participated in the 'Myth and Poetry' Festival in Crete prior to the start of the Fifth Seminar) joins workshop 8 since she comes from 'Lombardi', one of the officially recognised cultural regions by the Flemish government, 'and Kris Rogiers would like that'. It is always dangerous to subjugate cultural events to political concepts.

Hence such statements have to be re-examined in the light of events which have followed 'afterwards' the XVIth European Poetry Festival and of which Eugen van Itterbeek was one of the participants, but out of which he drew conclusions which ignored completely the existence of the international poetry group 'Touch Stone' in Athens for future plans of networking various European poetry centres (see resolution presented by him in the context of workshop 8).

In other words, politics of a still unknown dimension entered the relationships between artists living in Athens and potentially threatens to disrupt future plans of the group 'Touch Stone' (see here reflections by Hatto Fischer as to his experiences in organising both the Fifth Seminar and the XVIth European Poetry Festival) or even spoiled some of the positive outcomes of the festival itself. The hardness of reality even in cultural fields, the difficulties encountered when organising events (from obtaining funds to facing ingratitude's) - Martin Jay calls them 'force fields' - need not only to be understood, but also be explained and dealt with before they can create severe damages. Michael Longley would say many good 'cultural ideas' are aborted by these kinds of political intrigues and only a small 'rational thought', that is a clear wish to be personally informed as to what is true, what is not, can be a way out of a potential crisis or scandal. However, the best answer to the actions of Eugen van Itterbeek is not to let him use his voice to silence others, i.e. he took over the chair position of workshop 8 and reported himself, not the chairperson Conlin Wagner, to the final plenary session for evaluation of proposals made in the various workshops.

Bruno Berghs-Beeldens may be in a position to rectify some of these mistakes once he takes over the position of General Secretary of the Poetry House in Leuven. He may outline in the workshop some ideas on how to bring back the Poetry House on a sound financial footing and see to it that the 'moral commitment' to the idea of promoting poetry is fulfilled in future by the 'Seven Sleepers' initiative: an effort to truly network European Poetry centres according to the conditions posed by the European Union, that is as truly partners and not one centre being the sole determinant of future European Poetry Festivals. For networking at European level requires reaching partnership between various centres (see here also the conditions of applications to the Kaleidoscope programme), thus it becomes crucial what efforts can be made in that direction to include other centres such as 'Poetry Ireland' in Dublin, Ireland or 'Krautgarten' as represented by Bruno Kartheuser (workshop 1 as representative of the German speaking minority in Belgium and one of the poets who participated in Crete with an excellent article called 'An Undefeatable Summer').

Linked to this problem of 'political interests' wishing to influence 'cultural events' in such a way as to make them become advertising forms or even 'cultural ambassadors' (see here the initiative of the Flemish government and its Festival Idea), there are the difficulties Antwerp '93 encountered: local versus international interests. Aside from having its former director, Eric Antonis, chairing the workshop, there is along with him Michael Uytterhoeven who was during that year when Antwerp was the cultural capital of Europe co-ordinator for dance, theatre and opera. In a special report Bart Verschaffel, himself co-ordinator for literature at Antwerp '93, reflects upon the role these co-ordinators had once Eric Antonis had taken over as director, for they were given the 'artistic freedom' Eric Antonis had attained as precondition of his acceptance. That is important to reflect for it focuses not only on a particular Flemish concern or interest, but indicates what moderate role the Flemish culture can play within a larger Europe. This need not to over demand the others by viewing oneself in a larger context can be a clue to some necessary solutions at European level with regards to future cultural actions and policies.

In the preparatory meeting held in February 1994, Vangelis Kassos expressed serious doubts whether or not artists are willing to go international, to open themselves up to 'foreign fields'. Instead, by not finding a role in the new 'public space' of Europe, they have become the 'post garde' of national identity cultivation tendencies! For instance, when trying to organise a sculpture workshop with international artists, two Greek artists demanded that the organiser speaks Greek, for otherwise they would not want to communicate, that is participate.

This position of exclusion underlines always the wish to elongate protective forms converted into claims of uniqueness; national sovereignty in the arts is not easy to be dealt with. By the same token, developments surrounding the 'New Wild Ones', can be taken as clever usage of marketing principles: by becoming first wildly acclaimed abroad, that is in New York, they overcame scepticism back home and overrode doubts of the more serious art critics pointing out that their language was based on a juxtaposition of wildness to tameness in the city: a mere reoccurrence of Franz Marc's claim nature is better than man. Thus, they would only reinforce the irrational position that 'uncultivated emotions are higher than reason or rationality'. In short, there are serious doubts to break out when they merely reinforce the most irrational stream existing in German culture. It is equally a question whether they are an authentic representation of German art or whether international recognition of them follows but a subtle 'cultural policy' wishing to reinforce nationalistic styles as a marketing strategy for art products, i.e. servant to consumer interests wishing to identify trends in modern art and hence willing to simplify by using overt etiquette's not really based on sound knowledge of the arts.

The role such etiquette's as 'Impressionists, Romanticists, Wild Ones etc.' play in European cultures must, therefore, be re-examined by the workshop, for cultural policy is not only a matter of recognising who is a good artist, but it is also a means of bringing forth artists and art. It is like the saying of the philosopher Kant, that the ability to ask good questions precludes the answers given. In that role of selecting participants and shaping programmes, Doina Popescu has seen herself in over the past eleven years as cultural co-ordinator of the Goethe Institute in Toronto, Canada. She has organised aside from that many film festivals and will present to the workshop her ideas about future cultural programming, in order to take more into account the multi-cultural dimension.

Undoubtedly any cultural manager wants to have a successful exhibition, i.e. massive attendance, but this should surely not be the sole reason of success. There are other demands upon both the arts and cultural institutions, as is the focus of workshop 6, for what 'human values' and 'values of Western Civilisation' are being conveyed, that matters as well. Indeed, as the absence of Beuys shows, many 'objects' he used in his numerous 'cultural actions', i.e. slates and one stand for a blackboard like set-up, have become almost meaningless without his person. Subject and object have become negatively intertwined (see here, for example, Martin Jay, "Force Fields: Abjection Overruled" in Salmagundi, Nr. 103, Summer 1994, with the following remark: "One result (of art without subject) has been a palpable weakening of faith in the collective projects that were presumably to emerge from the realisation of subjective intention, the collaborative exercise of power that Hannah Arendt like to call 'acting in concert'. / Any attempts to nurture integral forms of solidarity seems suspect in some quarters because integrity is bought at the necessary cost of excluding others. For theorists like Jean-François Lyotard, a dissent is preferable to consensus because it preserves the radical incommensurability of the positions prior to the attempt to reconcile them." P. 235-6). It lets the collective 'we' go underground and identities of subjects become mere traces of theoretical reflections in a vague maze of memory tracks afraid to shed much light on actions undertaken.

Such reflections give much to think about especially when the European Union depends for its 'cultural policy' upon consensus building measures, that is, 'cultural actions' not based on exclusion and exclusivity to gain a fictitious integrity, but still brought about by those who risk their integrity for the sake of the arts. As the saying goes in Greece, '99 % of the attempts trying to realise a project end in failure and the 1% which is successful is immediately doubted whether it has been attained by honourable means - there is no way of winning in such a social game'.

At the same time, it seems as if artists have lost many initiatives by being not engaged, for instance, in dialogues with reality. They have become more specialists, than even scientists or people interested only in that, what they are doing at the moment. Thus their creativity processes have been marked by a reduction of artistic language to even mono-typical forms of expressions that depend upon overt symbols to cover up many empty spaces. Again, the workshop may have to deal with this old question, whether there is an artistic void mainly due to market forces having affected so much in a negative manner the definition of art, or else the artists themselves have been unable to fill the void they created themselves? What answers can be given to that? If the case that too much emptiness determines presently artistic language, then this would make already two consequences visible: first, learning from artists, as hoped by Mr. Lenssen (who made at the Fourth Seminar held in Brugge the statement that management can learn from artists on how to deal with 'uncertainty') reduces itself at times to overcoming extreme forms of egoism's and egocentric behaviours destroying not only freedom of artistic expression (Martin Jay ask why so many of them are so eager to participate in that destruction?), but also every kind of reciprocal relationships based on appreciation, fairness and recognition; secondly, culture will not be as dynamic and innovative, because egoistic motives override the need to work together. Indeed, many contemporary artists appear to forget what Vincent van Gogh said, namely that 'greatness is recognised in seeing the greatness of others'.

There seems to be a serious doubt whether artists by themselves can realise what the almost unexpected high rise of commercial art has brought in its wake? There is an inevitable collapse of the idea, that the arts can still bring about and maintain 'cultural identity'. Once McDonalds and other professional catering businesses begin to serve streams of tourism, self-sustainable economies become pitfalls for authentic cultures. It seems as if only a stereotypical image of society reproduces itself: the stronger has the say while others move away and live in the shade of economic glory. There are, of course, other reasons why encounters in a restaurant located in the traditional centre of a city can become important. Not only the fact that many working with 'high tech' in sterile surroundings explains the need for a 'low touch', but the entire quest for identity, that is not only values, has come into doubt. There is no restraint, and no certainty as to the outcome. The problem of life elongation possibilities is reversibly reflected by life long unemployment or rather deployment, if not then boredom due to lack of interaction. Once ‘quality of life’ is made to appear as depending upon technical means when often life is down graded in reality, the scales of adjustment, culturally speaking, are then only inverse possibilities of life. It puts real strains on everything with people complaining fore mostly that they have no time. Everything becomes hectic. Rather then experiencing 'cultural participation', something takes shape as if the outcome of a terrible twist of fate. Once lost out on entrance to university, the cheaper jobs are by necessity the only choices. They are taken under much regret. The outcome is always more dissatisfaction especially in light of the general cynicism. Here the girl acting as an attractive addition at a car exhibition, there the reality: once the door is closed behind, the shoes thrown off and a tired body thrown onto the couch, the only remainder is some quick food or rather drink and a switch on of the television. The images offered are equally boring. They have not the cultural taste anymore that even Charlie Chaplin could still maintain. Like everything else, things become repetitive, once caught in a sterile circulation between wishing to do something and yet not finding the time for a creative outburst.

Of course, this sameness cannot be maintained all the time. There are human differences and talents which make radio and television show look alive. Often such features go hand in hand with the uncertainty of those in power as to what is going on down below. These then are interesting times. In such times, even talk shows take on a certain language which many can understand because the problems formulated are not as of yet accusations nor quick solutions, but true insights into reality. This was, for instance, the case as long as German unification was not as of yet certain; different voices could be heard as part of reality. Once the underlying conflicts have been decided in favour of a certain power, that is approach to things, everything quietens down immediately. The superficial level of 'normality' is restored in the sense that public opinion experiences itself as being excluded; only certain ideas are advanced and argued about, not the position of articulation itself. The most cynical description of that had been given by the former chancellor H. Schmidt of Germany when he said democracy is but making already made decisions acceptable. The participation of artists in the democratisation of culture should be different to such trends.

It is quite something else when Neo-Fascists enter the radio station as it is now taking place in Italy. There was already in Germany after the war a similar case that made the literary director of the Third Programme Ernst Schnabbel resign after only three years of work because, as he said, people moving in talked no longer about 'building up' anew the radio station, but wished merely to 'rebuild' it - the difference implying that nothing was learned out of the past. If it was going to be rebuild, then in the former anti-democratic style which had led to German Fascism. Schabbel said that if they were allowed again to have a say in the programming of radio and television programmes, then he would have to sign for things, he did not know anything about and yet be held responsible for. This being kept in the dark as to real interests fighting behind the scenes to influence the 'media' has become a particular worry since Berlusconi's ascend to power in Italy. Democracy has something to do with these cultural instruments of power remaining open, pluralistic and not tailor suited to fit specific political needs. Naturally, in a consumption oriented society, politicians have not only realised the power of the media, but also the usefulness of having the media under control so as to be able to sell their policies in a most effective manner. Marketing and political advertising strategies reinforce this conviction that not by reason people are to be convinced, but by gimmicks or 'negative advertising' transforming the spill-over of the disappointed or the ones turned sour into a political force without being political itself, at least, in their illusion of themselves. In that sense workshop 6 and workshop 10 would have many common points to discuss, especially if the role of the media is set against the many artists who claim themselves to be artists by the very fact that they are against politics: an expression of the anti-political forces suited for politicians who wish to have success, but not come under pressure by having to face unfulfilled demands by the electorate going a step further than merely voting by wishing to take things into its own hands.

Since 1945 and the process of European integration, the entire sequence of events becomes a logic leading up to something no one really expects and yet everyone does expect because of cynical reasoning having turned sinister. Media coverage is a powerful tool; certainly many find or do not find some confirmation in what they think privately in what is being said while on the 'air'. Night shows, or the newscasters of CNN, they do not abandon principles of informing, but they are cast within a salesman like venture to sell news as quickly and as efficiently as it occurs, by the hour and if necessary by the minute. The result is this unresolved juxtaposition, there the violence on the television screen and here the beer drinking couple sitting on the couch. Passivity has been privatised, not, however, the enjoyment of the crime that gets away with it. In that sense it appeals to the secret longing everyone has overtly or not to be a thief not only during the night, but during day time as well. Some festivals in Napoli cannot be understood without this hindsight. There are rules, and those who break the rules, in order to get somewhere, that marks the difference between 'rule by law' and 'rule by fear'. The German poet Enzensberger reflected upon this strange phenomena that the Mafia in the South lets a couple get married only to shoot the groom at the dinner table. That is the kind of symbolic message the Mafia likes to establish amongst its people, and even if they do not agree with it, this fiction has to be maintained: it is never too late. In that sense the strength of the Mafia recruits itself out of an effective counter philosophy to cynicism and resignation. On a larger scale people are driven towards accepting dictatorship, if only to find a strong hand amidst all of this 'ordered' chaos. Finally, there is someone not giving in to all pessimism. This paves the way for a perversion of culture, one which is not about redemption, but about vindictiveness and an illusionary escape out of the feeling all others are getting away with it, only oneself does not have a chance. The aim of gaining economic wealth and hence a life above the average, that is an age old fettered dream of the many who starve or who face uncertainties in their income.

The 'cultural industry' contributes to that suggestion that there is an escape from this daily worry, daily struggle; the real movie stars with their glamorous houses in Hollywood and high salaries keep this illusion personally alive. Thus, it comes as no surprise that in America, for instance, a newspaper claiming to sell only 'positive news' has become a sales hit. After all, culture is about the uplift of spirits, even if it is only for the night, during a wild round of beers and songs. There is much energy put into escaping misery. Yet there is a vast difference between true optimism and fake solutions. Van Gogh painted it really in strong colours when he converted the 'Night Cafe' into a situation where the waiter dressed in white appeared suddenly to be a butcher of time. Since then, only Samuel Beckett could reveal the agony of the waiting people in his play 'Waiting for Godot'. The German philosopher Adorno said about Beckett and his plays, that bourgeoisie society only experiences the enjoyment of pride when all pride, that is human dignity has been lost due to the abandoned principles on the way to becoming someone.

If that is a literary figure of speech, it may well be also a tune to whistle or just a fleeting thought while looking out of the window during a bus ride with other participants to a festival. This is not about 'Rolling Stones' or a habitual voyage to the 'Waldbuehne' in Berlin, in order to seek and to find some crazy notion of culture to be experienced alive. The magnitude of experience does depend after all upon sensibility and applicability. Cultural forms do not norm the kind of understanding needed. Yet this is exactly what the cultural industries (Adorno) are trying to do. However, the propagated norms through typical stories never were understandable to people seeking a way out of such a system and situation.

After all, culture is more than just a friend; it is the source of information about alternatives and the expectancy of other ideas, ways of looking at things, while engaged in the foremost feeling of belonging somewhere to this family of feelings broken up by challenges of even further truths outside those confinements. After all it is a matter of not ignoring dexterity, when the slogan is put out, by returning to one's roots one would secure individual identity, all in the belief that he or she can share then personal values with those of others! Rather transformations within culture take place under the premise 'as if': as if the eyes were still operating. It is seeing and not believing; like a swift answer at the back of the car, before returning home, but the consequences thereafter speak quite another language once really home, alone, in the room and no one to call as a true friend.

Adorno and Horkheimer spoke about forces hostile to culture as being an anti-democratic because not determined by a 'will for freedom'. There is a need to reconsider cultural evaluation along these critical philosophical lines, in order to facilitate 'rational communication' and mutual respect. It cannot be brought about by political and economic forces abusing culture for their own purposes, namely to come to and to stay in power. As Jose Luis Reina Palazon, poet and translator from German to Spanish, stated during the Poetry Festival in Crete, 'writing a poem has nothing to do with seeking power; if so the case, then power over others can be gained only by having power over oneself, and both would lead merely to destruction and self-destruction'. Here he follows the interpretation Adorno and Horkheimer gave to the ancient figure of Odysseus who managed to survive by absolute self-control; when Odysseus returned home, he was disguised as a beggar and even when he saw how the suitors were mistreating his servants and family, he had to hold back his anger, for otherwise he would have revealed his true identity too early and would have been perhaps unable to oust all suitors out of the house. Since then, Western Civilisation is marked by true identities having been submerged in an ocean of the unknown.

To shed some light on these difficult questions of 'cultural policy', some other people have been asked to participate in this workshop. Baptiste Marray, poet of equally true and critical words, has been recommended by P. Peonides from Cyprus. He was worked until two years ago for the French Ministry of Culture and has many experiences in trying to establish even at the level of French villages a cohesive whole in cultural terms. His presence along with the other French poet Jean Michel Maulpoix can be an answer to the worries of the Flemish government that Europe in future will be dominated only by the French language, as expressed by Kris Rogiers and entailed in the main speech of Minister President van de Brande to the Fifth Seminar (read in his absence by his cabinet advisor Kris Rogiers Saturday evening when the official reception was held for participants of the Fifth Seminar at the History Museum of Athens University). Rather Jean Baptiste Marray expresses in turn worries that the 'cultural diversity' of Europe will be lost if only the English language dominates as the main communication linkage between all European member states and citizens.

The other person asked to participate was recommended by Bart Verschaffel, namely David Lesage from the Belgium Royal Academy of Science, Letters and the Arts which has just set up recently a new Centre for European Culture of which he has become its secretary. This reflects a turning point in the policies of such academies; by including elements of the 'Europe of Cultures', a new focus of interest in cultural matters is to be expected in the next few years. Whether or not they are sufficient to cover interests which would make 'culture' into a true building stone of Europe, that remains to be seen. For there are the migrant problems which were referred to in his final remarks to the Fourth Seminar by the Dean of the 'College of Europe', Gabriele Fragniere, namely that today in Europe migrants form across different borders a majority over and beyond such communities like the Flemish one. In order to take that into consideration for future cultural policy, Debbie Valencia has been asked to join the workshop. She can bring in her ideas on how to network practically and culturally the migrant workers of Europe. It is an ongoing idea that Europe will emerge out of its multi-cultural complexity then positively, if not only tolerant to differences, but also alive in the sense of making it become possible that over time new identities are created by culturally determined synergetic energies. As Gabriel Fragniere stated in his introduction to the Fourth Seminar, "the new cultural paradigm of Europe is thus both an intellectual and political challenge." He added that this "calls upon our capacity to invent new ways of 'thinking about Europe' as well as to imagine new processes for implementing its progress." (Leonce Bekemans ed., Culture: Building Stone for Europe 2002, Brussels, 1994, p. 9 - 10.)

There was also the attempt made to place this question of what kind of cultural exchange programmes should be pursued in future into an international framework. Therefore, the workshop met already informally at the house of the secretary of the embassy of Israel, Eli Ben Toura, to discuss really 'cultural diplomacy' and the new ideas needed to approach the question of multi-cultural exchange needs (Doina Popescu). That was followed up in the workshop by the secretary of the Polish Embassy, Pawen Krupka, himself poet and translator in his spare time, that is when free from administrative obligations. The obligations of cultural treaties, as signed by nation states, bind these cultural attaches to bilateral agreements. With limited funds, in need of making sure that their respective countries are culturally represented, the cultural exchange programmes leave little room to work together at an international level and to have really the financial support from all sides. It seems at times that these ideas reach farther than what can be promised and even kept word due to the severe restrictions to be faced when cultural implementations would mean really mutual understanding and respect for the other. It seems that the European Union is somewhere in-between those outdated diplomatic moves and not as of yet up to a conscious level of cultural policy. The workshop has the task of outlining at least a first framework for cultural evaluation, in order to come to other, that is more convincing ideas about cultural exchanges and means of making possible 'culture' in Europe. In that sense, the question of how to bring together the different European cultures links this workshop especially to workshop 6 of the Fifth Seminar.

^ Top

« Workshop 10: "Cultural Evaluation and Cultural Exchange" | The Position of Artists and Intellectuals in the Post-Maastricht Era by Vangelis Kassos »

Ποιειν Και Πραττειν - create and do

Navigation

Introduction by Hatto Fischer