The 3rd Intentional Eastern Partnership Culture Congress: Mission of Culture During Crises will take place under the auspices of Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Poland, Ministry of Culture of Poland, Ministry of Culture of Georgia, Ministry of Culture of Moldova, Ministry of Culture of Ukraine and Ministry of Education of Ukraine.
The uniqueness of the Eastern Partnership Culture Congress is in its structure, which departs from scientific-conference model and offers its participants a concept of coequal workshops and seminars, which will provide enough open space for the discussions. Participants of the Congress will not be restricted by a closed programme, that will insist on debating on specifically defined theses, but conversely – conclusions made during the Congress will be the result of joint efforts of all members.
A comprehensive programme of events will be published soon. Thematic directions suggested below will be supplemented and extended by selected curators and published here. Stay tuned for the updates!
Crisis of European Values.
Do declared and real European values coincide? When we talk about the idea of Europe, we think metaphysically, when it comes, for instance, a EQF competition, we have to think bureaucratically: cities outside the EU are not entitled to apply. The borders of Europe and EU borders differ, and despite being uncomfortable the question needs to be discussed. How cultural environments actually cooperate if their circulation is limited by bureaucracy, visa regime and income statements? Is the programme of Eastern Partnership an effective if it unifies such dissimilar countries into one category? What trials of local identities are predetermined by integration, and are they helpful?
Fear in Culture/Culture of Fear.
The feelings of threat and uncertainty are familiar to any culture: the fear of destabilisation, economic crises, crises of creative ideas, the loss of funding, finally, as we all now know, even in the twentieth century there is the fear of a new war in Europe. And fear to reveal ourselves, to demonstrate an external viewer too critical, plain cultural product. What are cultures afraid of outside and within? Was the fear of the Other overcome in modern Europe by tolerance? Are cultural fears salutary? Can they be productive?
Art as a Provocateur of Change.
Contemporary art, which has passed through the modern and postmodern ideas of the last century, has swayed from the format of production of purely aesthetic experience. One of its main objectives is the ability of socio-political problematisation, of trying on the role of an independent external critic or a particularly sensitive peace of litmus paper. In addition, art has always been a kind of playground where the existing social and political constraints (to some extent) are removed and a real possibility of modelling, searching for new forms and approaches appears. How effective and influential can these features of contemporary art be? What specifically loses a society in which there is no demand for such experiments and problematisation?
Cultural Policies and Economics of Culture.
None true cultural practices do exist independently of other spheres of human activity. In particular, props, restrictions and external incentives are always present inside of culture. State inevitably considers culture as a subordinate territory and attempts to influence it by the means of various cultural policies. Similarly, a separate logic is being implemented in the sphere of culture by economic factors. Such external factors sometimes so deeply grow into the objects of their influence that become perceived as purely cultural appearances, become internal players. Which drawbacks and advantages can be hiding in this? Which configurations of mutual relations correspond to modern times? Is a culture possible without a cultural policy, and politics without a sufficient level of culture? Where the competence of central government ends and of the local government begins? Can a policy change cultural paradigm? How can we evaluate culture in economic terms? Investing in culture: ways of attractions and prospects. Creative industries, urban development, social entrepreneurship. The economic crisis as an opportunity for innovative business solutions in the culture.
Communications of Culture.
The term “information war” has firmly entrenched itself in the daily lexicon of Ukrainians. The question of the difference between manipulation and persuasion gained existential sharpness, because considering whether the “pure” (unbiased) culture is possible, is no longer a topic of armchair scientists exclusively. So can culture be used to influence society? If so, how? And what is the difference between propaganda and informing? Can we consider the works of propaganda cultural heritage? Do we wait for the “quality propaganda” – or vice versa, resist by all means even to powerful, but one-sided cultural products? What is the responsibility of people of culture? Can propaganda be useful and culture irresponsible?