4.0 International Festivals and Capital (s) of Culture

themselves’ (Zolov, 2004:169). The awarding of the 1968 Games to Mexico City was not an uncontroversial decision. Domestically questions were raised about the appropriateness of spending

significant sums of money on staging the Olympics in a country with ‘pressing rural and urban development needs’ (Zolov, 2004:168). While the Games were impacted by ongoing political and social unrest, the authorities nevertheless succeeded in leveraging the event as a cultural showcase

for a ‘new’ Mexico and, in so doing, shifting the international narrative surrounding the country away from the ‘mañana’ discourse and towards one of ‘a fundamental confidence in the nation’s material accomplishments and sense of cosmopolitan belonging’ (Zolov, 2004:2). The Cultural

Olympiad helped to achieve this, utilising ‘bright, psychedelic colours [to] recast perceptions of the Olympic organisation in a more forgiving light’ (Zolov, 2004:181). The Op Art inspired Olympic logo symbolised this intent, ‘invok[ing] the nations indigenous cultural heritage while epitomising

Mexico’s cosmopolitan aspirations’ (Zolov, 2004:172). Further, a number of elements considered as

important for the success of the Cultural Olympiad are identified:

The iconic use of the peace dove and other references to Mexico’s self-described role as a

‘peace maker in international affairs’ Elaboration and dissemination of an official logo that conveyed a cosmopolitan ‘forward-

looking’ sensibility via an op art aesthetic Highlighted presence of women in central aspects of Olympic promotion

Elaborate staging of folkloric performances […] highlighting Mexico’s cultural ‘authenticity’ while underscoring […] unique commitment to racial and ethnic harmony Liberal use of bright colours in general, thus reinforcing a popular association with Mexico

as a ‘festive and exotic’ land (Zolov, 2004:169-70)

These foci demonstrate a context specific – and ultimately very effective – amalgamation of national

interest with the platform and presentational opportunity provided by the occasion on the Olympic

Games. Thus, while many more recent Cultural Olympiads have struggled to strike a balance

between these interests, the Mexican case offers an example of the successful negotiation of this

conundrum, with the result that the global perception of the country as significantly recast.

Another sphere of activity that can be included within the domain of showcasing is the European

(and now UK) Capital of Culture initiative. Begun in 1985, this competition was introduced to

highlight the richness and diversity of culture in Europe; celebrate the cultural features that

Europeans share; increase European citizens’ sense of belonging to a common cultural area and, foster the contribution of culture to the development of cities (Creative Europe, 2018 [online]).

Though initially the title ‘European Capital of Culture’ was an open competition for cities across

Europe, in recent years designated countries have been identified and the competition has been

between candidate cities within those nations. There are significant differences in content, scale and

purpose between the European Capital of Culture and – for example – the UK City of Culture. The UK

City of Culture has greater flexibility, which allows smaller cities and large towns to be considered,

where their small size and accompanying lack of infrastructure and profile leaves them unable to mount a credible bid for European Capital of Culture. Thus, the European designation/competition

tends to attract larger cities with the economic and infrastructural frameworks which enable the

showcase of events associated with the title already largely in place. Alongside the growth of the

European Capital of Culture, the EU Creative Europe Fund was established and ran from 2007-2013,

offering a platform for artists and cultural programmers to work together but with results impacting on policy and industry (see https://bit.ly/1z9D2UY for more details). The results of this programme

have continued to benefit artists and industry with partnerships continuing and the host website still

a live resource for artists and policy makers to us. The success of programmes such as the European

Capital of Culture is often identified in the achievements of Liverpool 08’s model and the research based approach to the cultural programme that was adopted. This research programme ran

alongside the cultural programme and provided an evidence base for investment and focus for

future cultural offerings in the City. For example, the Year attracted ‘9.7m visitors to the city, an

increase of 34%, and generated £753.8m for the economy, with 85% of its residents saying it was a

better place to live than previously’ (Carter, 2010). Although Garcia (2004), cautions that these

events are often poorly leveraged noting that ‘arts programming has yet to achieve a position that

allows it to be perceived as a relevant contributor to the success of major events and their potential

regeneration legacy’ (Garcia, 2004:104) expectations of local residents, politicians and policy makers

around such investments and outcomes must tempered accordingly.

International Arts Festivals take many forms, and offer a world-wide opportunity for showcasing of

culture through many forms and in many languages. Film Festivals present a unique opportunity to

stage a festival associated with a place, year on year. Established in 1932, Venice is the oldest film

festival in the world, Cannes was founded in 1946 and Berlin, in 1951. This trio is also known as The

Big Three. Each festival is depicted by a colour having become synonymous with the work of director

Krzysztof Kieślowski. The Berlin Film Festival is widely known for not shying away from political films

and creating a platform for debate and discussion. Many others have followed suit; today the

Toronto Film Festival (est. 1972), the Sundance Film Festival (est. 1978) and Edinburgh International