Yvonne P. Doderer

Office for Transdisciplinary Research and Cultural Production, Stuttgart

Art & Culture Uncut

In light of the current discussion surrounding art and culture politics, I recall the perhaps first demonstration of this kind in Germany, the »Art Parade« with nearly 2,000 participants that took place in the center of Stuttgart on November 19, 2009 and in which over ninety art and cultural institutions were involved. The catalyst for this demonstration were the planned cuts in the cultural budget of the state capital Stuttgart, which in particular affected the multifaceted scene comprising larger and smaller institutions such as the Württembergischer Kunstverein, the Oberwelt e. V., and the Künstlerhaus Stuttgart, whose budgets had, in addition, also not been increased for many years. The cuts in Stuttgart are only one example of the noticeably worsening situation in the municipal sponsorship of art and culture in many municipalities in Germany. Even if the situation differs to a great extent in the details,1 what remains clear is the fact that city governments believe that it is easiest to make cuts in budgets for art and culture. This also affects indirect cuts in the form of the sponsoring of pure »beacon projects,« which prevent existing structures from being supported in a sustainable manner. Budgets for art and culture in Germany are also under discussion on a national level.2 In the meantime, the situation in other countries such as Italy, Hungary, and the Netherlands, for example, has shown itself to be even more dramatic, since art and culture there have become the plaything of a nationalistic and right-wing conservative populism, and art is considered to be a »leftist hobby that no one needs« (Geert Wilders).3 Thus supposedly legitimized, drastic cuts that ultimately mean the end for many institutions such as the Jan van Eyck Academie in Maastricht4 are made. Even if the most recent cuts have meanwhile been revoked in Italy, when considered from a pan-European perspective, art and culture again and again become the plaything of political interests within the context of economization in society as a whole, whereby supposed financial crises resulting from increasingly worsening inequalities are also used to further advance neoliberal-oriented policies of cuts and privatization. In light of these developments, art and cultural producers have only one chance, namely to come to an comprehensive understanding with one other and to organize in solidarity in order to then take a forceful approach to the public and civil society. This, however, also means that artists and cultural producers have to become more clearly aware than up to now of the socio-political role of art and culture and become active. Herbert Marcuse already made reference to the fact that art and cultural production can choose: between »the beautiful« or becoming »a political factor.«5 Taking a position here is that much more urgently necessary not only in light of how one is effected oneself locally but also in light of the current global situation and developments—ultimately also because the art field is not only a space of possibilities but may also be one of the few spaces for productive critique that still remains.

1 See Bernd Wagner, »Nothaushalte und wachsende Kulturetats: Umfrage zur Situation der kommunalen Kulturfinanzierung,« in: Kulturpolitische Mitteilungen, No. 131, IV / 2010, pp. 29–33.

2 See http://www.tagesspiegel.de/kultur/widerstand-gegen-westerwelles-kulturpolitik/1973608.html (accessed July 28, 2011).

3 Simon van den Berg, »Mit dem Rücken zum Publikum?«, http://www.nachtkritik.de (accessed July 28, 2011).

4 See http://www.an-online.de/artikel/1730861 (accessed July 28, 2011).

5 Herbert Marcuse, »Art in the One-Dimensional Society,« in: Douglas Kellner (ed.), Herbert Marcuse: Art and Liberation (New York, 2007), pp. 122 ff.

Source: P/Act for Art: Berlin Biennale Zeitung