Europe as a Prospect

The failure of the European Constitution, and the problems associated with the enlargement of the European Union, dramatically illustrated that politics alone is not (or no longer) in a position to communicate the idea of Europe. Many Europeans saw, and more than ever see, Brussels as a bureaucratic monster that may be capable of issuing Directives regarding the angle of curvature of bananas, but has completely lost touch with the people who eat those bananas. Not even the euphoria of the new Member States as regards Europe was able to put this fundamental annoyance into perspective.

Only the associated frustrations shifted the focus of political interest onto culture. Culture as an identity-forming element of the new Europe - this notion was not yet "burnt out". It was here that there was hope of being able to present and offer exemplary models that, despite all the existing cultural diversity, credibly pooled the unifying, visionary power of the "old Europe". The idea of the Cultural Capital of Europe and its reformation are gaining immense importance in this context: this year is the first time that two cities each from the old and the new Member States are being nominated. In addition, the European Commission has opened the EU borders to form a European cultural area. Now, even "fringe cities" like Stavanger, Istanbul or Kiev can apply as Cultural Capital of Europe.

Equally significant is the amendment of the application procedure. While, up to 2003, the Cultural Capitals were simply determined by the respective national government and confirmed by Brussels, a national competition for nomination has now asserted itself. The German model, with a preliminary round (in the Federal Länder), a main round (national) and a final round (a European jury selects one of two candidates as the winner), is regarded as exemplary and has since become the standard. The effect: the national preliminary competition not only accumulates interest, imagination and self-confidence, but also sets far more public funds in motion at the service of culture. In Germany, the United Kingdom and Finland, the positive consequences are still to be felt today, even in the "loser cities". And, the vision of a Europe "from the ground up" is emerging, developing from

the cities and regions themselves, and not prescribed by governments or commanded from Brussels.

Again a decisive factor here: grass-roots initiative. Up to roughly 2006, there was hardly any internal exchange between the current and future Cultural Capitals. The traditional network of former Cultural Capitals, the ECCM, was going through a crisis, like other official EU structures. The alternative: since last year, all confirmed Cultural Capitals up to 2011 meet regularly, several times per year, for discussions and an exchange of experience. The third working meeting was recently held in Essen. Another innovation became obvious in this context. The essential idea of the "Cultural Capital" is nowadays sustainability. It is no longer a matter of an attractive, glittering one-year event, a European municipal festival inflated to 12-month proportions. The aim is to reposition culture in urban society, it is a question of thinking about the role that the respective city or region would like to play in a common Europe through its cultural strength. With an eye to these larger contexts, culture becomes perceptible as an essential element on the map of Europe. Every Cultural Capital year is thus not only of local importance, but also promotes a European, and even global, dialogue. The Cultural Capitals can learn a lot from each other in this respect. Last, but not least: migration and the creative industries are new, future-oriented focuses. It is precisely in these areas that long-term economic changes are becoming apparent. Only if we in Europe learn to take the initiative on such key matters as the economy, globalisation and digitisation, will we also be able to create political credibility.

So, times have changed since Melina Mercouri and Jack Lang launched the idea of the Cultural Capital of Europe in 1985. While it was initially the classic European cultural centres that stood for the concept, such as Athens, Paris, Florence and Berlin, the self-image of the competition changed radically with the candidacy of Glasgow in 1990. There, the year of culture fundamentally and lastingly changed the image of the city and the awareness of its residents - the structures created at that time are still having a sustainable impact. Cities like Lille, Cork, Genoa, Porto and Rotterdam have taken up this vision, occasionally achieving great success.

The idea of the Cultural Capital of Europe has also become a model of success for the self-image of Europe because of its versatility. Signs of another major change are now emerging. We hope that the strength and inspiration arising from this new, close cooperation will give culture in Europe new impetus.

Hanns-Dietrich Schmidt is ambassador of the Cultural Capital Ruhr 2010, dramaturgist and Professor for Direction, Dramaturgy and Ensemble at Folkwang College in Essen.