Demos Project : Cultural Diplomacy

Reactions to Cultural Interventions in Russia

samuel[dot]jones@demos[dot]co[dot]uk ( Sam Jones ) — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 10:36:39 -0100

In the wake of recent events involving the British Council's offices at Yekaterinburg and St Petersburg, it's interesting to see commentators once again pointing to the importance of culture in international relations, the theme of our Cultural Diplomacy pamphlet last year.

I thought it was worth posting a selection.

In last week's Guardian, Simon Jenkins argued that 'culture and lifestyle are the diplomacy of the 21st Century' - very much an echo of his earlier article in response to our pamphlet.

The BBC website featured an article by a recipient of a British Council scholarship, funded to spend 10 months in Russia in the 1970s. The author reminds readers that 'in the 1990s, the pro-Western Yeltsin years, the Russian government was delighted when the UK opened British Council branches in a whole series of provincial towns' and conludes that 'Cultural diplomacy is no longer a political backwater' , echoing David Miliband's warning that 'the only losers from any attack on the British Council are Russian Citizens'.

In The Times, Ben McIntyre suggests that 'if more effort had been made after the collapse of communism to win over future leaders to an appreciation of British Culture, then perhaps the current diplomatic explosion might have been avoided'.

On The Guardian's Comment is Free, Anna Matveeva takes a more realist approach to the crisis in Russia, suggesting that culture has been brought into the fray first as a medium in whihc to attack perceptions of current British values, and second out of care 'not to act in a way that would disrupt business interests', and in pursuit of 'symbolic targets'.

Rise of the Cultural Dragon - The PM woke him up

samuel[dot]jones@demos[dot]co[dot]uk ( Sam Jones ) — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 11:38:23 -0100

Today sees the opening of the First Emperor exhibition at the British Museum. As the newspapers and television reports imply, it features a selection of the terracotta warriors buried alongside China's first Emperor, Qin Shihuangdi, in the famous complex at Xi'an. It's also the largest number to have made the trip overseas - there are about 20 at the BM, 15 or so made a trip to Rome's Scuderie del Quirinale last year.

Even though they might soon have their own diplomatic bags - they are off to the US when the show finishes here in April - it's a rare experience to see them. In fact, they're not all warriors, some are civil servants, others acrobats and some are generals - there are even cranes and geese. All date from about 200 BC, the manufaturers used their ingenuity to mix and match moulds, enabling them to convey a sense of individuality by giving the warriors different facial types and characteristics. One bird even cocks an eye at the viewer, a dart of life amidst his more placid companions, reminding us that this, after all, was Qin's bid for immortality.

The exhibition was launched on Tuesday by Prime Minister Gordon Brown. However, this was no mere exercise in ribbon cutting. Throughout the preliminary speeches, you couldn't help but notice a dragon, slumbering on the steps of the British Museums' Great Court. Only when the UK's Premier painted his eyes did the Dragon dance the Terracotta Warriors into action, ready to greet the 140,000 who have already booked their tickets to see them.

It was an interesting moment, inspired in part by the importance of Sino-UK relations, and in part because of the growing importance of interaction between different cultures. The popularity of culture is clear - not least from the 140,000 advance tickets. The Terracotta Warriors have also been in the papers, both national and international and on TV. Prime Minister Brown painting the eyes on the Dragon featured on the BBC's 10 O'Clock News. .

In Cultural Diplomacy, we noted how significant it can be when politicians recognise the importance of culture by attending openings in this way. It's important not so much for the diplomatic moment, but because it reflects a growing awareness that cultural events of this kind have impact in terms of both popularity and memory. They are also important becuase they provide a means of getting to grips with different nations and their cultures that is not political. This wasn't so much Gordon Brown using culture, as a it was a recognition that culture has real impact on what he does.

Grills on Film and Cultural Dialogue

samuel[dot]jones@demos[dot]co[dot]uk ( Sam Jones ) — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:55:36 -0100

In the latest Pixar film, Ratatouille, a rat called Remy discovers in the process of his everyday scavenging that he has culinary gifts. The film tells the story of his bid to succeed as a chef, a rodent in a decidely anti-rodent world.

According to the Washington Post, Remy also has a different story to tell. In an article the other day, Remy is taken to represent a defence against perceptions in the US of French distaste for their cuisine which feeds off a wider rejection of recent politics. Remy learns to cook vegetables as young French chefs are taught in Parisian kitchens. One critic in the magazine, Telerama, writes of the film that 'what makes the difference is that it's a declaration of love to France, Paris -- and good food. People like it so much because Paris is depicted the way we would like it to be -- with kitsch references mixed with elements that are more contemporary'.

The importance of food has not gone unnoticed elsewhere. The Thai government, for instance, has recognised how significant Thai restaurants the world over are in spreading awareness of Thai culture. In 2003, it launched 'Global Thai', an initiative to support and boost Thai restaurants overseas with this in mind. From the point of view of the UK, it's worth remembering that when Asterix and Obelix visited Britiain, as well as meeting their cousins, they also met with insipid boiled food and warm beer. It's no news that food is important in national imagery.

Currently, we are thinking about food as a means of cultural dialogue. What makes Remy and Ratatouille interesting is the ease with which French critics and audiences have read national dialogue into it, and the speed with which journalists across the Atlantic have picked up on it as a means of redressing a shift of opinion away from the US.

Many to the Many

samuel[dot]jones@demos[dot]co[dot]uk ( Sam Jones ) — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 09:32:29 -0100

One of the themes of Cultural Diplomacy is the shift of focus in how nations and groups relate to each other. First, governments spoke behind closed doors - the few to the few. Then they came to realise the importance of speaking to wider publics - the few to the many. Now, it is imperative that we understand and accommodate the reality that global relations are dominated and by the communication of the many to the many.

In this light, it is nice to see that discussion of cultural diplomacy has been extended to the pages of Wikipedia. We are thankful to Simeon Adebolu, both for contributing to the discussion on Wikepedia, and for drawing it to our attention.

Cultural Diplomacy and the Venice Biennale

samuel[dot]jones@demos[dot]co[dot]uk ( Sam Jones ) — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 10:45:23 -0100

An article on Newsnight the other day discussed the role of art as providing a space for conversation between cultures. You can see it here.

Specifically, it talks about the Venice Biennale. This year, the director, Robert Storr has set out both to include countries who have never exhibited before and to provide a showcase for Islamic art.

300 and the Real World

samuel[dot]jones@demos[dot]co[dot]uk ( Sam Jones ) — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 15:05:01 -0100

In Cultural Diplomacy, we talk about the defining characteristics of a new era in which 'the ability of individuals to reap the benefits of globalisation and connect with other people on a truly global level'.

One recent example of the effects that this can have was the speed with which incidents in the UK's Big Brother house fuelled outrage on the streets of Indian cities, forcing a response from Chancellor Gordon Brown.

A similar situation is brewing this this week in relation to the film, 300. The film is about the battle of Thermopylae in which King Leonidas of Sparta led a force of 300 against Xerxes and his Persian army. However, it has led to a good deal of criticism from Iran, much of which is voiced on blogs. The film is also the subject of criticism in the Washington Post. Quoted on the BBC website, the journalist Omid Memarian has said of the film that 'Not only does it give the wrong outcomes to battles, it grossly misrepresents the Persians and their civilization ... It is unfortunate that very few curriculums in the US cover world history and it is very easy to misdirect the general public on historical facts'. He addresses his blog post (9/03/2007) 'to all Iranians, and all those who know and respect ancient Persian history and culture', adding a petition to boycott the movie. At the time of writing, there are some 12,792 signatures.

This is clear instance in which culture has a major influence on international affairs and in which individual voices are making themsleves heard in very public contexts. Still more interesting is the action taken by one Iranian blogger in Canada, campaigning against the film by trying to use Google rankings to divert searches for 300 to information about Iranian culture and history.

Not only is this a very 21st century means of protest, but it is also highly significant that the response to international misunderstanding and offence is to offer the opportunity to engage with, relate to and understand a nation's art, culture and history. Again, from the BBC website:

'Mr Yousefi, who is upset with the way ancient Persians have been depicted in 300, has called on Iranian cartoonists and artists to send him work that will help educate people about the Persian empire. A number of artists have obliged and some 600 Iranian blogs and websites have established permanent links to Mr Yousefi's site.'

Cultural Diplomacy on the agenda

samuel[dot]jones@demos[dot]co[dot]uk ( Sam Jones ) — Wed, 07 Mar 2007 12:01:49 -0100

Cultural Diplomacy was debated in the House of Lords yesterday, there's a full transcript of the debate, here. It's great to see the work being dicussed in this context and it follows Tony Blair's comments yesterday that 'culture in a globalised world is an important form of diplomacy'.

We've copied the releant bits of the Lords debate below:

Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall asked Her Majesty’s Government: What is their response to the Demos publication Cultural Diplomacy on the value of culture in the United Kingdom’s international relations.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Triesman): My Lords, I welcome the report as a contribution to thinking on the role of culture in international relations. The work that I have been leading on implementation of the recommendations made by my noble friend Lord Carter of Coles in his review of United Kingdom public diplomacy has focused on better strategic planning and co-ordination. We have put in place new structures for planning and governance, including a Public Diplomacy Board. We are undertaking joint planning with key partners to address the major opportunities presented by the 2012 Olympic Games.

Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that encouraging reply. Does he agree with the Demos authors that this country’s arts and cultural institutions are widely respected and admired all around the world? Does he also agree that in the past decade the Government have invested in them significantly, helping to create new opportunities for international works, such as the British Museum’s Africa programme, which have contributed greatly to programmes of cultural diplomacy? Does he accept, however, that for the role of culture in international relations to develop, we need to maintain the investment that we are making in our arts and culture and should not allow them to fall victim to competing demands? I am thinking particularly of the forthcoming spending review.

Lord Triesman: My Lords, a number of cultural organisations make an extraordinary contribution to our diplomatic effort; even if it is not always identified as being a diplomatic effort, it has that impact. The DCMS has taken a pivotal role in co-ordinating many of those organisations. In the case of the FCO, we are working very hard through our new system and in particular through the British Council, which carries a huge burden for us in this respect, to make sure that the world knows about the cultural achievements and products of the United Kingdom. We will fight very hard to make sure that the funding remains in place.

Lord Chidgey: My Lords, the Minister may be aware that the Demos report, too, states:

‘The United Kingdom boasts a strong tradition of international cultural exchange through the British Council’s presence around the globe’.

It also makes the point that we cannot afford to rest on our laurels. In 2005-06, the British Council was considering closing teaching centres in Istanbul and four other cities where public diplomacy benefit was thought to be ‘not that considerable’. This year, the British Council will be closing several other regional offices because of the reduction in numbers of Government-funded overseas scholars coming to the UK. What assessment have the Government made of the effect of this withdrawal from locations around the globe in terms of the loss of benefit that their presence was and is bringing to the United Kingdom’s overall cultural policy?

Lord Triesman: My Lords, the report of my noble friend Lord Carter made it clear to all of us that we needed to have much clearer criteria when we established our priorities and that we needed to direct our resources to those priorities. That view has been shared by the British Council and other public diplomacy entities. The world moves, and the priorities will plainly move along with it. We now have greater coherence and are introducing, perhaps for the first time, methods of measuring whether we are beginning to achieve the things that we are setting out to achieve, rather than doing things and hoping that they will somehow work.

Lord Inglewood: My Lords, I declare an interest as chairman of the Reviewing Committee on the Export of Works of Art. Bearing in mind the widely expressed concerns about funding in all quarters of the cultural sector, does the Minister agree that it would make a major contribution towards relieving some of the problems that exist if financial mechanisms could be devised by his right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to encourage philanthropy from many of our fellow citizens who have made very large sums of money in recent years?

Lord Triesman: My Lords, I certainly acknowledge the role of philanthropy. There have been a number of other sources of funding, including very substantial ones from private businesses, which have supported exhibitions, musical tours through the British Council network, and so on. All these give us a greater capacity than if we were simply to rely on the Exchequer. We need to encourage all of that. There is a great benefit to everyone involved; philanthropists, of course, do it out of the goodness of their heart.

Lord Howarth of Newport: My Lords, does my noble friend recall that, when Nelson Mandela gave a talk at the British Museum, he said how proud he was that some of the most beautiful artefacts ever created on the continent of Africa were in the museum’s collection? Equally, was it not helpful when the British Museum’s exhibition of classical Persian art and archaeology was jointly opened by our Foreign Secretary and the Vice-President of Iran? Will the Government consider how we can more systematically enable our culture to support our diplomacy and our diplomacy to support our culture? I declare an interest as a trustee of the Foundation for International Cultural Diplomacy.

Lord Triesman: My Lords, that is an excellent organisation. Of course, that is exactly what we must do, which is why I emphasise the work of the new Public Diplomacy Board in achieving that focus, making sure that we deliver it and that we can give good account of the public money that we spend; there is other money, as I have said. But the DCMS also does an outstanding job with the arts and cultural organisations to ensure that their international contribution is considerable. We have a new architecture and I genuinely believe that it is beginning to show the results that the House would wish.

Lord Howell of Guildford: My Lords, does the Minister agree that one of the best avenues for cultural diplomacy is the Commonwealth network? Does he share my dismay that the last annual report of the Foreign Office’s activities and priorities did not mention the Commonwealth at all, except on the front cover, where it could not avoid it? Secondly, he said a moment ago that he was fighting hard to preserve the cultural diplomacy budgets of the British Council and the World Service and so on. Who is he fighting and what is the problem?

Lord Triesman: My Lords, in the lead-up to every Comprehensive Spending Review, a large number of people compete for funds, and I am not afraid or ashamed to say that I compete along with them. That is the nature of the work that we do, and I am doing it. The last report, to which the noble Lord has drawn our attention on one or two occasions, was constructed around thematic priorities and therefore probably did not refer to international organisations or individual countries by name. However, I wholly share his view about the importance of the Commonwealth. At the last CHOGM meeting, I was able to see some of that work in Malta and, happily, large numbers of people from Malta going to see it.

We're all diplomats now...

samuel[dot]jones@demos[dot]co[dot]uk ( Sam Jones ) — Wed, 28 Feb 2007 16:20:37 -0100

Today, we launched Cultural Diplomacy at the V&A Museum in South Kensington. You can look at photos of the event here.

The pamphlet argues that cultural understanding is vital to the way that we relate to each other in the world today. By this, we mean not only an understanding of other cultures, but also an understanding of the growing significance that cultural interaction has. As well as providing a medium through which we can relate to one another, culture is emerging a space in which those relations can be conducted.

Happily, the pamphlet seems to have got people talking. In the Guardian, Martin Kettle wrote 'In Praise of ... cultural diplomacy'. Others write that we 'need history lessons' - perhaps of the kind that George W Bush skipped when he failed to visit the Taj Mahal, ignoring the praise accorded to Bill Clinton on his visit, raising eyebrows as he did so?

Well, as today's debate proved and as the pamphlet argues, there's a real need to update our opinions of not just how culture relates to international relations, but also what we mean and understand by culture. Culture isn't just what we see on stage at the theatre or music hall, nor is it simply what we see in cabinets in our museums. Instead, it is what these cultural forms represent. As a result, it's also about how other people respond to them.

The record execs who promoted the Back Street Boys, for instance, couldn't for a moment have imagined that, a decade on, they'd be spoofed by two Chinese students who would reach an audience more global than the US originals.

As Kirsten pointed out in her article, in the past, foreigners saw the UK as it was projected through largely official lenses, 'increasingly they can learn about it through direct encounters with Brits abroad, or through virtual encounters on websites like MySpace and YouTube. We are all diplomats now.'

The different coloured maps of political geography are no longer so comprehensively descriptive of political reality as they once were. There is a new playing field - culture. But it doesn't exist as some sort of rarefied sphere above and beyond everyday life and the messy business of politics. To claim that it should be detached from those realities fails to do justice to culture's importance and its relevance to our everyday lives. The role of cultural professionals and institutions is to help us to make the most of this importance.

Stop the Press!

rachel_a_briggs@hotmail.co.uk ( Rachel Briggs ) — Sun, 15 Oct 2006 14:36:57 -0100

While we've been in China, a lot of people have made veiled references to the censorship of the press. Mostly, they either assume you know how the system works, or prefer not to get drawn on the subject. Once or twice, interviewees have clearly been worried that we are western press, so we've had to reassure them of our (lack of) credentials.

Tonight, however, Sam and I finally got to sit down and have dinner with a journalist (who will remain nameless) who was very generous with her time and honest about the situation for the press here.

She told us that, after a period of relative press freedom during the late 1990s, the Party has cracked down again on the press in recent years. The Sars crisis and its coverage by Chinese and foreign press was an important moment, as it was a stark reminder to the Party of the damage they could suffer at the hands of a free press. Previously, our dinner companion had became well known for her investigative reporting of corruption, but she has now been banned from writing this kind of thing. She told us that when the North Korea nuclear story broke the other day, the editors of the main newspapers received a call from the Propaganda Department explicitly telling them not to publish any stories; all coverage would go through the official channels.

Reluctant to move into the 'safer' areas of journalism, such as financial reporting, she is resigned to (but not happy) writing harmless stories that will not provoke the anger of the Party machine. Recently, for example, the lead story of her newspaper (kind of Independent meets New Statesman) was a special report on Chinese tea specialities. Not exactly cutting edge stuff.

It's funny, but the longer we're in China, the more we're understanding about the people and the culture. But equally, it's becoming clearer that the deeper you dig, the more you realise that there are some differences between our countries that are so profound that it sometimes feels almost impossible to find a common point of reference.

Life thru a lens

rachel_a_briggs@hotmail.co.uk ( Rachel Briggs ) — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 06:20:46 -0100

Shan Song is an underground film maker in Beijing. By day he writes scripts for government-produced TV dramas, by night he makes films through a collective he set up after film school called 22Film. Sam and I met him yesterday to talk about the ways in which independent film making is bringing about social change in China.

The advent of digital cameras and the internet has enabled a generation of young people to make films about themselves, how they live and where they want China to go. They go by the name of '6th generation' film makers. Film is the new poetry, it seems; a way to express yourself and make a statement, although very few of these films ever gets properly produced. This is radical stuff in a country like China, where identity is very centrally 'produced' and where people don't tend to feel too comfortable expressing themselves in public.

But while sites such as YouTube have made this trend widespread in the West, the majority of Chinese still live in rural areas so have very limited access to digital technology or the internet. This technologically-dependent form of cultural expression is therefore leading to disjointed social change and a widening of the gap between urban and rural.

This is important; most of the people we have spoken to so far say that one of the biggest risks to China's development is a stand-off between the cities and the countryside. If rural China does not feel it is benefiting from the country's meteoric rise, there is a danger it will rebel, as it has in the past.

As we left, Shan introduced us to two of 22Film's members, who were editing a film made in an area a few hundred kilometres outside of Beijing. The contrast with the massive, busy and loud city we are staying in couldn't have been starker. A timely reminder of the other face of China.

Cultural Diplomacy and Hip Hop

samuel[dot]jones@demos[dot]co[dot]uk ( Sam Jones ) — Tue, 01 Aug 2006 14:31:10 -0100

Following our trip to the US for the Cultural Diplomacy project, it's interesting to see today's announcement on the State Department website.

The musician - and U.S. Hip Hop Ambassador - Toni Blackman, is working with USINFO to explain the values and origins of Hip Hop as an original American artform to an international audience. In her capacity as cultural ambassador, she has also performed at the Field Museum in Chicago, one of the institutions to whom we spoke whenb we were there. Amongst other things, this demonstrates the role that major cultural institutions can play as logical environments for learning about new cultures alongside their more direct role as the agents of that comunication.

'Since 2001', reads a State Department press release, 'Blackman has taken her hip-hop road show on behalf of the United States to Senegal, Ghana, Botswana, Swaziland and Poland, among other places. In Indonesia, where Blackman performed with traditional Javanese musicians, Blackman remembers the electricity of her collaboration with a traditional Indonesian orchestra using traditional instruments.'