Category Archives: General

And the European Capital of Culture in 2034 is ?

Posted on by

The current European Capitals of Culture programme runs out in 2033. A host of conferences, reports and reviews are looking at its continuation, possibly into the 2040s. It’s strange to think that it is very doubtful if any of the decision makers (the CULT committee of the European parliament and the culture ministers of member states supported by the civil servants at the European Commission) will still be in the same positions in 2034. Current squabbles over the EU budget only take it to 2034 so any funding for a new ECOC programme is well into the long grass.

Here are some areas for debate. I wonder if any will actually be debated, let alone agreed.

Do Nothing. The standard option for every decision. In this case it means allowing the ECOC to end in 2033 with the final three ECOCs hosting a joyous and spectacular closing event (no speeches). Why stop when the ECOC is considered to be the most well known and successful cultural project of the EU? That says more about why the other cultural activities are not as well known after 40 years (honourable exception for the Media support for film makers). Competition between cities is passé; a view held by many and not just those on the far left of cultural policy. Collaboration is the way forward. Over 100 European cities are members of the various UNESCO Creative Cities networks; 52 have recently signed up to the Eurocities Lille Call to action on sustainable culture. A failure of the ECOC programme is the lack of a thriving network of mayors/directors of culture to share experiences, even decades after their year in the spotlight. The ECOC “family” is ad hoc and Culture Next a sound meeting place for candidates but neither work at the decision levels in cities. An aside: the University Network of European Capitals of Culture is very active, an often overlooked legacy.

Broaden the geographic scope. OK, so we continue with a programme. So who takes part? The inclusion of cities from candidate (etc) countries has been sound. But every three years is too limited. All candidate (etc) countries should be regular participants. From time to time others can be invited, Ukraine should have been invited earlier. Even the UK may be forgiven (insert preferred emoji).

Scrap the rota. Yes, it is simple to understand, it is “fair”, everyone gets a go… every 14 years or so. Some member states struggle to find candidates; the smaller ones have ever smaller candidates. None of the other seven European Capital titles run by the Commission has a rota, they manage.

ECOC twinning. The Nova Gorica/Gorica Borderless ECOC sets a good example. As the European Dimension is the prime criteria, cities should work in formal pairs. One single bid, bidbook and lead management team running a joint, not parallel, programme. Not the current often weak links with other ECOCs, but a single integrated effort. The city pairs should not to be from neighbouring countries nor in the same language family. We need to respond to this comment in the Economist:

But as Stefan Zweig acknowledged, a supranational club can never command the affection of citizens as a nation can. His own remedy—a rotating European capital with events and festivities to ape national spectacles—eventually came to pass, albeit in diluted form. But the European Capital of Culture, alas, has not yet lifted Europeans to the state of elevated consciousness Zweig hoped for. The enduring tug of national allegiance still provides the best means to mobilise Europeans to action. 

We need in these days of existential threats to mobilise as one Europe more than ever. There are national CoCs to promote a national interest. The ECOC thrives on the pan-national Europeaness.

Two tiers. Other European Capital titles have a two tier award; a large city and a smaller city. The European Green Capital for over 100,000 and the Green Leaf award for over 20,000. European Capital of Innovation (250,000+) and Rising Innovative Award (50,000 to 249,999). Why not ECOC? (two tier helps with the no rota option).

Focus the criteria. Reduce to just three:

A: what has the candidate city done for culture in the previous 2 years before the bid? Far more informative than a future cultural policy, many of which are written to tick box in the bid and little happens afterwards. Prevents cities “suddenly” deciding to bid at the last minute. A touch of evidence based rather than relying on promise about a “legacy”. Other EU Capital titles require evidence of action.

B: how will your programme highlight the European Dimension?

The European Dimension is the only rationale for the programme. Right from the start:

ln November 1983, the EC Ministers of Culture had met
for the first time and agreed to a proposal made by the Greek Minister, Melina
Mercouri, that, in order to present a warmer image of the Community, a city should
be designated each year as European City of Culture and its role in European
civilisation be highlighted.

The importance of culture in a city is now well documented and known, unlike in the 1980s. A veritable industry of consultants, academics, conferences, networks etc exists. Member States have their own Capitals of Culture, some even regional capitals. Each city will have its own local priorities, regeneration, audience development, social engineering, place making etc etc. At this polycrisis time, when the EU itself is under threat (culturally, politically, environmentally and militarily) from outside and within (here´s looking at you Hungary) the sole underpinning focus has to be the European Dimension.

C: do you have the governance, management and financial capacity to deliver?

No point for a candidate to fly in a governance and management team from outside only for them to disappear after the year. The financial requirement is also aimed at the ministry of Culture. Too often jobsworth civil servants at the ministry have impeded the distribution of money to the ECOC. A ministry must sign a contract with the Commission before the call to candidates is issued that it will provide funds in annual batches and not seek a project by project justification or other bureaucratic obstacles.

Simplify, Simplify, Simplify……..

Scrap the pre-selection meeting. The selection panel reviews the initial bidbooks and selects a shortlist of no more than 3, preferably just 2. No need for presentation etc. Italy manages its national Capital of Culture competition without one.

Cut the size of the bidbook. 30 pages is adequate. Current 80/100 pages carry far too much non essential bumf which does not influence decisions. 30 pages concentrates the mind.

Transparency and accountability. Publish the bids and monitoring reports from ECOCs; list all external consultants and advisers, require audited accounts every year from selection to the year after ECOC year. Require a report in last six months on funded and approved legacy activity. Return to external evaluation from a consultancy focussing on outcomes not just numbers of events etc.

What about digital and the climate emergency? Yes these are Commission priorities in the next few years but we are looking at 2034 and beyond. By then, if not sooner, bidbooks will be compiled using AI to a standard surpassing even those overseen by the best of ECOC consultancies. Digital culture will be the norm. If the planet is to reach its current targets then 2034 is too late to start. A candidate which has not reduced its emissions from its cultural sector will not qualify for the title.

Well there it is. A few ideas for discussion. I hope the various reviews will concentrate on outcomes and not the process. With a focus on the overriding European objective. My forecast is that the programme will continue, roughly as it is now with a few tweaks here and there but nothing too radical. The energy seems to be directed now to ensure the Creative Europe programme stays in the next budget round (and that it is funded). The EU has far bigger fish to fry at the moment.

I

39 Capitals of Culture: a flourishing global activity in 2025

Posted on by
Reply

Welcome to my ninth annual survey of Capitals of Culture around the world. We see new titles every year and it is getting harder to discover all of them! Let me know if you know of others! I´ve used more videos in this review as many cities are less well known. A bumper year with 39 cities, towns and villages holding titles. Several are repeating a title year with a different organiser (Sucre and Samarkand both held titles last year). Others have been serial title chasers (especially with Capitals of Sports and Youth).

This year we see three innovations: two cities with a joint candidacy and programme. Bolivia celebrates its bicentenary so the former, Sucre, and current La Paz, capital cities will hold the Ibero-American Capital of Culture. In Africa neighbouring cities, but from different countries, Kinshasa and Brazzaville, will jointly hold the African Capital of Culture. The closest capital cities in the world, separated by a river and history. The third dual title holder is one of the European Capitals of Culture: Nova Gorica in Slovenia along with Gorica in Italy. “Nova” is the clue: a new town built after the division of the city after the Second World War. The wall (a fence) came down in 2007 and since 2011 the area has been administered under a trans border board. A new cross border project and good news for rail travellers. The theme of the ECOC is, not unsurprisingly, GO! A borderless European Capital of Culture.

Chemnitz shares the ECOC title. The bidbook: “Chemnitz is a place where the democratic culture of the last thirty years is visibly under pressure. Many were hurt by the brutality and the speed of change. The pain was overlooked, unseen. Chemnitz not only shares this fate with Eastern European cities, it is also an extreme example of an industrial society in transition.” Learn more in this Deutsche Welle news clip. 2025 marks 40 years since the first ECOC in Athens. Expect meetings and celebrations along with many proposals on what to do with the ECOC when the current programme ends in 2033.

In 2014 Italy pioneered the concept that unsuccessful candidates for the ECOC title could have their efforts rewarded with a national title. The subsequent Italian Capital of Culture has become the most hotly contested CoC title with over 20 medium sized cities bidding each year. In 2025 Agrigento in Sicily holds the title under the slogan: Let yourself be embraced by culture. Its remarkably un-diverse press launch highlighted the opportunities for the whole of Sicily; the programme is launched on 18 January. I wonder if it will go beyond heritage and tourism.

The UK City of Culture programme is unique in being held every four years. Bradford hosts the 2025 edition. Its opening night went well despite the cold! An earlier report sets the scene. Wandsworth is the London Borough of Culture with a strong health theme: Our London Borough of Culture programme will be a trailblazer for London becoming a Creative Health Capital City – a place where better health outcomes are achieved through the power of culture and the arts.

Cēsis, promised in its bid for the 2027 ECOC title that it would implement the cultural programme in the bidbook. The bid was unsuccessful but true to its promise the city will present the programme in 2025 as a Latvian Capital of Culture. A similar approach takes place in Valdichiana, an unsuccessful candidate for the Italian Capital of Culture. It is producing a programme under a Tuscan Capital of Culture label.

Lithuania was the first country to build on an ECOC to create a national Capital of Culture. Druskininkai is the 2025 title holder. The work of 19th century composer and artist, MK Čiurlionis, takes centre stage in the programme. It´s a holiday centre, check out the video! Lithuania also has a Small Cities of Culture programme with, in 2025, successful bids representing each ethnographic region: Žeimelis, Rudaminai, Kudirkos Naumiestis, Dreverna and Švėkšna. The winners of the Small Capitals of Culture selection will pay great attention to activities that will strengthen local cultural identity and partnerships, create new and nurture existing traditions, bring together people of different generations and experiences, make the town’s name and heritage famous, allow for the use of innovative forms, and commemorate community anniversaries. Ambitious.

Two cities in Portugal, less than an hour apart, have titles this year. Braga is the national title holder, awarded to the unsuccessful shortlisted candidates for the ECOC. Viano do Castelo is the Eixo Atlântico Capital of Culture.

The Union for the Mediterranean launches a new concept, a Mediterranean Capital of Culture and Dialogue. Tirana and Alexandria are the joint holders in 2025. Tirana’s themes are: The MediTIRANEan Bridges city programme will consist of cultural exploration, strengthening artistic creativity, digitization of cultural heritage, and sustainable cultural tourism. 

Warnings are raised for visitors to Narva in Estonia: mobile phones may be caught by the Russian networks just across the river. Narva is the Finno-Ugric Capital of Culture. The link has an informative review of this title. The river separates Estonia from Russia, certainly not a borderless city.

Zrenjanin takes the Serbian title. It opens in March with the theme “Meanders of the City – Flows of Culture”. A quick tour.

Regional titles come and go. The Valencian title seems to have been a casualty of the new right wing regional government and the effects of the floods in October 2024. The closing date for the fifth Venetian City of Culture was only in mid December; no news yet on the successful candidate. The Polish region of Mazovia has run a title under my radar for at least five years. Zwoleń succeeded in the 2025 competition. Another quick tour. Salou takes the Catalan title. This American video seems straight out of the 1950s/1960s Pathé tourism newsreels! (and Peter Seller´s famous Balham, Gateway to the South).

Time to leave Europe and see what´s happening in the rest of the world. The Culture City of East Asia goes from strength to strength. This year´s four cities are Macao, a mix of Portuguese and Chinese history, and Huzhou in China known as ” five mountains, one water and four parts of farmland” , Anseong, South Korea and Kamakura in Japan, a coastal retreat just one hour from Tokyo. ASEAN have nominated Melaka in Malaysia as their Capital of Culture for the 2024-2026 period. The video gives a good overview.

Kuwait takes the Arab Capital of Culture whilst Samarkand is the Cultural Capital of the Islamic World (a programme with problems of cities dropping out in recent years, now settling down). Aktau in Kazakhstan holds the Cultural Capital of the Turkic World. Fantastic landscape. The city only started in 1958 as an uranium mining location. Since 2007 it has been developed as a tourist city. San Luis Potosi (known as SLP locally) in Mexico is the American title holder, continuing the Mexico-centred holders of the title (let alone Spanish language countries).

I don´t like to promote war mongering Russia so will simply record that Grozny is the Russian Capital of Culture and Bogotol is the Krasnoysk regional capital. Lachin in Azerbaijan is the Commonwealth of Independent States title holder and Ivanovo holds the title in Belarus.

An “ECOC is for life” is a well worn cliché. Avignon, one of the nine ECOCs in 2000 is organising a celebration ” Terre de Culture” . Cork looks back on its 2005 year. Liverpool, Mons and others, have never stopped looking back and forward! Sometimes plans put forward in bidbooks never take place and in some cases they eventually come to fruition. The empty shell of the Kosmos cinema in Plovdiv is a good example. Highlighted in the bidbook in 2014 for the successful 2019 ECOC it looks like, finally, the renovation will take place.

Looking forward to 2026 we will see new Polish and Swiss Capitals of Culture and Italy introduces a Capital of Contemporary Art. In the meantime reduce your carbon emissions, quit Twitter for BlueSky, stop the rise of the far right and boycott genocidal countries. And start thinking on how you would change the ECOC title from 2034. Enjoy.

Culture wars in the cultural committee?

Posted on by

“This committee shapes Europe´s future”, the challenging words by Sabine Verheyen, the outgoing chair of the culture and education committee of the European Parliament (EP) .

The committee rarely hits the headlines, or even the inner pages. One of the smallest committees (only 30 MEPs) it covers culture and education, youth, audio-visual, media, multilingualism and sport. This disparate portfolio has one important glue: the EU has no “competence” in these areas. They remain steadfastly under national member state authority. The committee can advise, comment and publish its views. Its Activity review for 2019 to 2024 is here. Its main practical focus is on the EU´s own programmes of which Erasmus+ and the European capitals of culture (ECOC) are the most well known. In the EU jargon the committee is aptly known as CULT.

There is a new committee following the June 2024 election of a new parliament. For the first time the centre–left to centre-right groups have to contend with three far-right groups who hold 187 of the 720 seats. Far less than the doom-mongers were forecasting but still a sizeable bunch. Committee membership, for the next 30 months, reflects the political groups.

So what is the make up of the new CULT? 19 women and 11 men. Italy (5) Greece and France (4 each), Germany and Hungary with 3 each. The 2004/7 accession states contribute 10. In addition there are 30 substitutes who can attend and speak but only vote if a group member is absent. 12 women and 18 men. Germany and France have 4, Spain and Italy 3. There are no members or substitutes from Ireland, Estonia, Lithuania, Malta, Luxembourg, Slovakia, Sweden, Denmark or Czechia.

The European People´s Party (EPP) leads with 8 seats followed by 6 from the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D). The centrist Renew has 3 and the Greens 2. That makes 19 from groups which supported the re-election of Ursula von der Leyen as Commission president (although not all group members voted for her). Two from the Left leaves 9 from the far-right groups: 4 seats for Orban´s so-called “Patriots for Europe”. Meloni´s European Conservatives and Reformists have 3 and the AfD led “Europe of Sovereign Nations” has one seat. There is a single seat for the “Non-Attached group, for the time being assume he is on the far right. So a third of the committee are from far right parties.

The first action of the committee was to elect its chair. The Patriots sought the chair and put forward Malika Sorel from Marine le Pen´s party. The Greens put forward Nela Riehl who won 18-11 (one abstention). A secret vote so we have to wait for post meeting comments to see how people voted. The four vice-chairs were elected by “acclamation”: EPP, S&D, Renew and the Greens each picking up a post. The cordon sanitaire to keep the far right out of posts held up.

The election of the chair was itself a breakthrough . Nela Riehl: ” I was born and raised in Hamburg as a working-class child with roots in Germany and Ghana. As a child, I waited at barriers to cross borders within Europe, so I am deeply aware that only a united Europe is our future.” How will she get on with her opponent, Malika Sorel? Proposed by Marine le Pen´s former assistant, Sorel, whose parents were Algerian, has long been on the right. “She has written several essays on immigration and what she calls the “decomposition of France”, accusing “a part” of immigrants of “turning against the host country”. Malika Sorel-Sutter today highlights her “fear of a Lebanonization of France”, with a “migratory, security and educational chaos.”

Predictably the Patriots of Europe (a misnamed group if there ever was one) members make their views known. The Wikipedia entry for Afroditi Latinopoulou, is blunt: She is against abortion rights, opposes LGBTQ+ rights, and has expressed homophobic, transphobic, and anti-immigrant views, repeatedly calling for the borders to be closed. She has also supported the Great Replacement conspiracy theory. In June 2024, she called for Pride Parade to be dissolved, saying, “It is a celebration of vulgarity, emphasising the sexuality of sadomasochists and other various abnormalities in public view. She has also described homosexuality as “unnatural” and claimed it contradicts religious beliefs. Similar views from from Bulgarian Ivan Valchev. “ITN (his party) does not find it appropriate to give teenagers any access to propaganda that includes non-traditional practices that do not fit into the traditional Bulgarian values of gender and family”.

Some members actually have relevant experience. Of course there are many lawyers and several career politicians at mayoral, regional and national level. The education remit benefits from teachers and a former headmistress and university academics ranging from historians, speech therapists, special needs children and economists. I can´t find anyone who admits to being an Erasmus alumni.

Sport has several members. Latinopoulou may have far right views but was a professional tennis player in younger days. Lara Magoni (ECF Italy) was an Olympic skier. One of the substitutes, Carolina Morace (The Left, Italy) has 105 caps for the Italian national team and is an international football coach and member of UEFA´s Football Board. “My wife Nicola is Australian, we lived in Australia and Great Britain and now we live in Rome. In civilized countries, same-sex marriage is the norm. It is only a taboo in Italy and in countries where democracy practically does not exist, like Russia.“

The youth portfolio (let´s be generous and say under 30 years old) has three who have moved from studying straight into political roles. Zala Tomašič  (EPP Slovenia) who “will fight for the Slovenes to be in the first place in Slovenia, for everyday values ​​to be “God, family and homeland” and for “life in a world where there are only two sexes”.  Sabrina Repp (S&D Germany) takes a different view “strengthening democracy also includes protecting vulnerable groups such as women, children, LGBTQI* or migrants. Anti-democratic tendencies primarily threaten their living environment. Emma Rafowicz (S&D France) takes a similar view: “Racism, anti -Semitism , LGBTphobia exist and are eating away at the cohesion of our society. All the texts that help us understand and combat it better must be studied. Denying them on principle would be a mistake“.

Being a familiar face on TV clearly helps with political recognition. Two members and two substitutes made their names on TV (2 EPP and 2 S&D) whilst another 4 members were journalists.

Turning to the culture remit we see two Polish government ministers, one a minister of culture 2007-14 (EPP) and Joanna Izabela Scheuring-Wielgus, a recent state secretary (S6D). She was a cultural manager before entering the national parliament. A former minister of culture in Spain is among the EPP substitutes. The four vice-chairs have varying degrees of cultural experience. Hristo Petrov (Renew) is an hip-hop musician. Diana Riba i Giner (Greens) ran a bookshop specialising in children’s and youth books and was previously a cultural programmer; Emma Rafowicz (S&D) was until the elections the deputy mayor for culture, crafts and heritage, in the 11th arrondissement in Paris. Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (EPP) was in his younger days a commercial photographer. Among the substitutes we find two more photographers and architect and an award winning novelist, Sibylle Berg.

Perhaps the member with the most immediate relevance to culture on the committee is the S&D member from Austria Hannes Heide. A member since 2019 he was the mayor of Bad Ischl, he now chairs the Board of one of the 2024 European Capitals of Culture Bad Ischl-Salzkammergut. “I am convinced that the EU must move closer to the people again and become tangible for them in order to regain acceptance. It is precisely the regions outside of urban centres that need to be strengthened, because that is where EU scepticism and nationalism are most pronounced.”. and “the New European Bauhaus is an opportunity and has real potential to become a cultural movement like its historical model and to create new awareness. But it will only be successful if it reaches the people of Europe, if it does not become an elitist project, if Europeans can imagine what it means, if there is no contrast between urban centres and rural areas, if access is social, fair and inclusive“.

So what can we expect from the new committee? There are obvious and distinct differences of approach to life between members. The traditional political and economic differences between members from the centre right to centre left now have to contend with views on culture in the broadest sense. Some oppose the LGBTI+ rights and same-sex marriage which impinge directly on some other members. Racism, hiding often behind calls for immigration controls, is a touchstone. Will there the strengthened right seek to reduce the role of common EU interventions citing subsidiarity or outright Euroscepticism? Will the far right seek to cut out references to “woke” concepts in criteria for EU programmes? Will we see more votes which require members to attend meetings (the previous CULT was not known for full attendances).

To paraphrase Dr Strangelove: no culture wars here, this is the culture committee.

The Wisden Writing Competition 2024

Posted on by

Another year, another entry, another fail. I’ve reached double figures! It’s the tenth time I’ve failed to win the Wisden Writing Competition. Only three others have failed more often. Not even a lucky loser. Clearly I am failing to hit a soft spot in the anonymous judging panel. Perhaps indicating the Editor might use AI for his Notes was a little over the top. Will I try again for the 2025 edition? Why not?

First a word of congratulations to the 2024 winner, Sohan Maheshwar. In keeping with tradition (after 12 editions the competition surely can have traditions; after 20 it acquires heritage status) it was his debut entry. That´s 10 out of 12 first time winners. It´s also the third winner with a touching father/son memory but the piece does break two new grounds. The first by a winner based in EU27 (Amsterdam) and the first to mention women´s cricket (the 2017 World Cup final at Lord´s).

The game itself is in turmoil. Long standing rhythms are being upended especially in England. The sudden rise (by cricketing standards) of franchised T20 tournaments around the world, many backed by billionaire businesses from India, are eating into the very fabric of the warm beer and village greens of nostalgic memory. The upcoming privatization of the new “Hundred” competition in England is causing explosions of angst amongst many county members (well at least those on social media if not attending actual meetings) to match those potential investors rubbing their hands with glee. Even MCC, that bastion of privilege and conformity is seriously thinking of having a franchised team. As an aside its Annual Report is far more informative than county reports; its long list of obituaries of members illustrates just how privileged the club is.

The 161st edition of Wisden reflects many of these changes. This year the focus is on the politicisation of Indian cricket, “bazball”, and the Independent Commission for Equity in Cricket. A fascinating survey of Jewish cricketers around the world stops short of discussing why none has appeared for England men´s team or if any are currently in county cricket.

The Writing Competition tends to avoid this turmoil. Last year’s winner, a polemic against Melbourne Cricket Ground, recognised change but hopes that this was the start of a trend are on hold. It remains a haven of normality, of cricket lovers remembering those cherished moments cricket brings them. Will I enter for the 2025 edition? I suppose a piece less than fondly recalling a day spent under an umbrella, dodging showers, paying for over-priced and under-tasted burgers and chips and seeing ten overs in the day´s play might be in order. Or perhaps the most blatant breaches of the “spirit of cricket” seen in a local village cricket match. Or jumping between tabs on YouTube watching county and Caribbean cricket streams. As a wild card, perhaps a full throated shout out for the T20 format and welcoming the gradual demise of interminable low attendance red ball county cricket (but KP has already bagged that one).

Returning to the 2024 competition, a quick review, my fifth. Only 81 entrants this time around, the lowest of the 12 editions. A long way down from the 2021 peak of 193. A wide global distribution it seems but still a low entry from women (less than 10 I guess).

Now onwards to the 2025 entry.

Placemaking: the Capitals way

Posted on by

Valencia is the European Green Capital for 2024. In 2022 it was both one of the two European Capitals of Smart Tourism and the World Design Capital (which led in 2023 to entry into UNESCO´s 350 strong Creative Cities network). This collecting of titles is not unusual. The emergence of “Capital of….” titles has been growing almost exponentially in recent years. In this short review I´ll focus on “European” titles but I recognise there are many other national, regional and worldwide titles (far too many to record; I tried but gave up).

Along with the Green title, 2024 sees, in Europe, titles in Innovation, Smart Tourism, Youth, Volunteering, Democracy, Sport, Christmas, Inclusion and Diversity, Access and Cycling. Some of these have a secondary title or one for larger cities and one for smaller. And let´s not forget the most well-known and longest running title: the European Capital of Culture (ECOC) with three title holders this year. What distinguishes almost of these titles is the competitive nature rather a marketing-led self proclamation. Their proliferation seems to have crept up by stealth.

I´ll look at the titles from three points of view: of the organisers; the cities (winners and candidates) and the impact/ legacy etc. I´ll end with a list of the current title holders.

Who runs the titles and competitions?

Although the titles use “European” they come from different stables. Often reviewers treat the titles as if they are of the same provenance. Most do follow a standard template: a call for candidates, set criteria, candidates submitting bidbooks, a selection panel to evaluate bids, perhaps a shortlisting and then a final winner is announced. Detailed processes vary, especially on geographic and city eligibility. Few have a financial prize ( the main ones are Culture €1.5m, Innovation €1m). Geographically most candidates have to be within the EU and EEA but there are exceptions: the Youth short list included networks in Georgia, Moldova and Lviv in Ukraine. Cities in Brexit UK could enter for the Innovation title (but haven´t yet).

Organisers fall into three categories. The EU leads the way through the various directorates-general of the Commission; secondly two European networks supported by the EU and thirdly a mixed group of private not for profit organisations.

The EU has few opportunities to engage directly with cities and clearly has seen from the Culture experience that a “Capitals” approach enables them to bypass governments to showcase and promote their objectives at a local level. Unlike the Culture title most of the new competitions recognise recent, rather than projected, performance in the relevant sector. Valencia submitted an incredibly detailed 290 page bidbook for the Green title recording, with evidence, their environmental credentials. Here are two typical introductory statements:

“The European Capitals of Inclusion and Diversity Award is granted to local authorities that exemplify outstanding dedication to creating safe, inclusive spaces where all feel that they belong and can flourish. The winning local authorities transform the ideal of inclusion and diversity into tangible deliverables. This serves to inspire others. I thank these European capitals for taking the Union of Equality to citizens at the local level.”

“In 2024, we are celebrating the 10th anniversary of the European Capital of Innovation Awards (iCapital).  The competition rewards those European cities that are courageous enough to open their governance practices to experimentation and push the boundaries of technology for the benefit of their citizens.”  

Smart Tourism, Green and Access City complete the European Union titles. The EU´s Union of the Mediterranean recently launched its award. Tirana and Alexandria have been selected for the first Mediterranean Capitals of Culture and Dialogue for 2025.

Youth and Volunteering capitals fall into the second category. Both are organised by European umbrella networks, supported by grants from the EU.

The third category is varied, a key feature being a not for profit basis. The longest running, since 2001, is Sport; recent examples include Democracy, Christmas and Cycling. A new title and organiser emerges in 2025: a European Capital of Local Retail (Barcelona is already selected as the idea originated there!). They all seem to have been the initiative of an enthusiast who has managed to attract funding and launch the programme. The degree of transparency varies considerably for titles in this category (eg details of candidates, names of evaluation panel, selection criteria and panel reports).

ACES Europe, who run the Sport and Cycling titles, now awards 18 different Capital of Sport titles, including World, African and Winter. It is the only title to require a registration fee (currently €12,000) for candidates. In addition to the European Capital of Sport title it also awards, in 2024, 13 other cities with the title of European City of Sport. It is also the least transparent on its website with no information on whether there are actual competitions, the criteria and who is on the selection panel. A case study in over-reach perhaps or an example of the demand for any title, from cities?

The Democracy title introduced a new form of selection: an expert panel reviews the bids and produces a shortlist. Final selection is by an online poll of over 4,000 self selecting people in a “Citizen’s Jury”. Voters cannot vote for cities in their own country.

The increasing race to win a title

Cities have not been slow to bid for these titles. Over 80 cities put forward bids for the European titles in 2024. Smart Tourism led the way with 30 bids for the main title and a further 11 for its smaller city awards.

Cities are often serial candidates. Genoa, for example, bid for both the Smart Tourism and Sport titles. Former ECOCs are very active in seeking new titles. I remember the then mayor of Riga saying that cities of that size need a title every few years. It keeps the momentum of change alive, rotates into different sectors of city life and builds an international awareness and “brand” for tourism and inward investment. The Mayor of Tirana, host of the new Mediterranean title highlighted this strategy of collecting titles: “We have a fantastic experience with Tirana’s reputation as the capital of Sport, the capital of Youth.“. (Youth in 2022 and Sport in 2023).

The budgets and programmes for the titles look relatively small, considerably smaller than ECOCs. As the awards are based on achievement there is less emphasis on kick starting a new legacy than with the Culture title. Most programmes have a few new conferences and workshops, some new public activities but mainly rely on repurposing existing activities and events. The finances are difficult to find out, there is a definite focus on secrecy and non investigative journalism! Bristol´s Green title in 2025 had a £12.6m budget. In contrast Ljubljana in the following year allocated €600,000. Valencia´s budget for the World Design Capital was €5.5m.

That awkward question: any legacy?

The Culture title has, since 1985, generated a vast library of reports, books, articles, theses and evaluations. The newer titles have not yet reached that level of review. The Green capital seems the most likely to generate interest. It encompasses urban planning, climate emergency, environmental concerns. This 2019 article looks at Lisbon 2019 and Oslo 2020 Green Capitals and seeks:

to determine its (the Green Capital) utility as a policy instrument to catalyse the substantive urban transition to sustainability that the much sought after label seeks to recognize, highlight and honour.

Several Green capitals have produced reports on their year. Most have been self congratulatory rather like many ECOC evaluations. An exception is the very informative report 36 page report on Bristol´s Green year Perhaps its most important finding was the discrepancy between the European Commission’s objectives and those of the city. A common issue with ECOCs.

Ljubljana issued a both report on its year as Green capital in 2016 and a “5 years later” review. (I´ll write a more detailed post on the Green capital). Smart Tourism prompted this survey from China. A feature of some of the titles is a formal network of past winners to share ideas and developments.

What next?

I think we will see even more competitions emerging. Clearly there is a demand both from cities, and a willingness on new organisers to administer. The topics are almost endless! The titles will gain more visibility the longer they continue. The lack of a financial award does not seem to be an obstacle.

There is scope for more analysis, especially of a cross sectoral basis, exploring the effectiveness of these placemaking initiatives: do they meet the objectives of the organiser (especially the EU); do residents respond? Are cities on a roller coaster of bidding? Is the continual bidding worth it? Are many of them little more than a PR opportunity for a city with little programming depth?

The current arrangements for the ECOC run until 2033. Soon the Commission will presumably start a review of both the process and performance of ECOCs to guide any decisions on continuing the programme beyond 2033. There are many lessons to be learnt from these newer competitions (yes, another post is in the offing).

There will be a a new European Commission and European Parliament later in 2024. City mayors, recently through Eurocities, seek to be round the table for EU decisions and policies. In their manifesto for the upcoming elections they call for an Urban Envoy in the Commission to coordinate all EU policies aimed at cities. Time for a working conference involving all the Capital programmes?

Many titles need to become more transparent, both in the selection process and, importantly, by title holders reporting publicly on their activity and legacy.

And the 2024 title holders:

Capitals of Culture in 2024; A title held by 25 (now 26) cities worldwide

Posted on by

Welcome to my 8th annual review of Capitals and Cities of Culture around the world. As usual I only include those where the title has been awarded by an external organisation rather than a self promoted marketing slogan.

The main news this year is Russia´s first Capital of Culture. Despite destroying Ukraine´s cultural infrastructure and killing thousands of Ukrainians in its illegal war of aggression Russia attempts to show “business as usual”. The competition was open to cities over 250,000. Selection has a novel twist: an online public vote, followed by a public presentation to an expert panel. The general criteria were: “Experts assessed the preservation of historical and cultural heritage, the level of development of the urban environment, theatres, museums and archives, education and enlightenment, the introduction of innovations and creative industries.” Nineteen cities put in bids leading to a shortlist of eight: Grozny, Kaliningrad, Nizhny Novgorod, Novosibirsk, Samara, Tomsk, Cheboksary and Chita. Nizhny Novgorod topped the poll with 189,151 votes, 2,000 ahead of Samara. The city is preparing a programme of around 150 events (well worth a read). Unexpectedly, Grozny the Chechen capital, was appointed as the 2025 title holder by the president of the organisers (a member of the Duma and under Western sanctions). It was a very controversial announcement. Several of the other shortlisted cities vented their surprise and anger at this impromptu decision. With the war continuing both Nizhny Novgorod and Grozny are to be boycotted. (No normal activity in an abnormal situation). The long standing regional Capital of Culture in Krasnoyarsk goes to Uzhursky.

The Cultural Cities of East Asia programme gains strength every year. Despite the frequent political differences between the three countries (China, South Korea and Japan) this cultural programme thrives. The 2024 title-holders are Weifang and Dalian in China, Ishikawa in Japan and Gimhae City in South Korea. Weifang is in the UNESCO Creative Cities network for crafts and folk art. Dalian stands out for its 30,000 cherry trees and their blossom. Ishikawa was hit by the earthquake on New Years day. The Korean title holders have formed a network. At their second meeting in September the five previous title holders and Gimhae held a workshop and “shared practical challenges of the current CCEA project and debated on diverse ways to overcome such limitations“.

The Cultural Capital of the Turkic World goes to Änew in Turkmenistan whilst the Commonwealth of Independent States selected Samarkand in Turkmenistan. Änew has important archaeological ruins from the 15th century and an impressive White Wheat Museum whilst Samarkand is a UNESCO World Heritage site.

Tripoli in Lebanon hosts the Cultural Capital of the Arab World. The original plan was to hold the title in 2023. It seems a combination of COVID19 and lack of preparations led to a postponement. Marrakesh In Morocco and Shushi in Azerbaijan are the two Cultural Capitals of the Islamic World. Let´s hope they have better luck than Benghazi who had to forgo their programme in 2023 due to the effects of Storm Daniel.

Another UNESCO World Heritage site becomes the Capital of Ibero-American Culture: Sucre in Bolivia. Designated by UCCI and known as the La Cuidad Blanca, reflecting the white painted colonial era houses. The State of Nayarit (Mexico) is the American Capital of Culture continuing the Spanish only nature of this NGO run title.

Time now to look at the 12 Capitals of Culture in Europe.

It is “welcome back” to the Portugal CoC. This lasted for just two editions in 2003 (Coimbra) and 2005 (Faro) before a change of government closed the programme. The restored title follows the example of Italy: the three unsuccessful shortlisted candidates for the European Capital of Culture 2027 are recompensed by holding a national title. In 2024 Aveiro takes the honours followed by Braga and Ponta Delgada before Évora holds the European title.

Pesaro holds the Italy title. A key takeaway from the handover from the 2023 holders, Bergamo/Brescia: In the coming years, at least 200-300 million new tourists are estimated in the world, strongly attracted by the beauty and culture of Italy. The problem is that the ‘historic’ art cities, therefore Rome, Venice, Florence, are already overbooked. For this reason, a network of medium-sized cities is needed, such as Pesaro, Mantua, Parma, Matera and Bergamo and Brescia themselves, to serve the country to increase its competitiveness and attractiveness “. No wonder 26 cities have sent in bids for the 2026 title, now reduced to a shortlist of 10, with decision in March.

The second Serbian title goes to Užice after bids from 12 cities. Kaišiadorys becomes the Lithuanian CoC. There was no Slovakian title holder last year. Humenné beat off competition from Brezno and Šaľa to take the 2024 title.

In the folk-art/traditions group the Finno-Ugric title has not yet been announced. Belarus has selected Belynichi from five candidates.

Regional Capitals of Culture in Spain continue with Sabadell taking the Catalan title and Monóvar (for places over 5,000) and Bicorp (under 5,000) the two Valencian titles. The latter has spectacular cave paintings, (another UNESCO Heritage site)..

And finally: the three European Capitals of Culture: Tartu (Estonia) and Bad Ischl/Salzkammergut (Austria) are joined by Bodø (Norway). The three are probably the smallest trio of ECOCs since the title started in 1985. All three are including rural communities to widen their appeal. The gap between national CoCs and the European title narrows. Bad Ischl is the first “inner Alpine” title holder and Bodø the most northerly. Bodø opens (with memories of Galway) on “On February 3, we’ll gather in a circle around the marina – regardless of the weather – and enjoy a spectacular show before moving inside and continuing the party in town.” All three cities appear in the Guardian´s top ten cultural destinations for 2024.

You may have noticed some missing CoCs. Several titles with 2 to 4 year cycles are in their “off–year” so no UK, Eixo Atlântico, London or Africa title holders. I´ve also dropped the cities which become a CoC on the basis of the location of the summit meeting of an inter-governmental organisation (eg ASEAN and Portuguese Speaking Countries). Has anyone heard if a regional CoC in the Veneto region of Italy exists?

And I missed the French Capital of Culture!!!! It is Pays de Montbéliard Agglomération, a joint venture of 72 communes.

25 and now 26 Cultural Capitals for 2024! Enjoy.

Sportswashing: the Wisden writing competition gets serious

Posted on by

Wisden Cricketers´ Almanack has made its annual appearance, number 160. 1616 pages, ultra small print, thin paper and the familiar yellow dust jacket. The Writing Competition is now in its 11th appearance and the winning entry is a new departure. Previous winners have focused on reflections of the past, sometimes nostalgic, occasionally humorous. A Duncan Hamilton approach. It´s taken an Australian (predictably?) to buck the trend. Dan Crowley (tweets at @dancrowley99) goes behind the scenes and brings some ethical thoughts into the global game:

Gone are the days when sport ads target actual consumers, flogging products we can buy at a shop. Now it´s an exercise in sportswashing, using the exposure of a major sporting event to target abstract concepts such as legitimacy, authenticity and trust.

His particular gripe is with Aramco, the Saudi Arabian fossil fuel company (as well as alcohol and betting companies), a sponsor of the ICC and IPL. He applauds Pat Cummins´ refusal to take part in ads for Atlinta, a major carbon emitter and sponsor of Australia’s Test shirts, as it conflicted with his activism on climate change. Crowley concludes:

Hopefully this is the way of the future, and more players, fans and administrators will have the courage to call out cricket´s unethical sponsorship deals.

This is the first time the competition winner has tackled a current topic. He certainly hit a nerve. Lawrence Booth (@BoothCricket) in his Editors´ Notes writes ” Despite its monstrous carbon footprint, international cricket has behaved as if the climate emergency is someone else´s problem“. Tanja Aldred has a full article on cricket and the environment (predictably the Daily Torygraph dismisses this: “if you crave the woke, about the game and climate change”). Crowley would have written before the competition closing date of October 2022: He was not to foresee the news (and neither did Booth or Aldred) that Saudi Arabia is bringing its sportswashing to cricket nor that Yorkshire is seeking Saudi money to stave off bankruptcy (or even worse the return of Graves).

As an aside it looks like the majority of first class counties in England and Wales have local shirt sponsors with only one stand out (Gloucestershire have the Cayman Islands). And England have a used car company.

As for the competition itself, Crowley wins with his debut entry. That makes 9 out of 11 first-time winners. Nonetheless some doggedly plough on. The three “always present” entrants remain: Paul Caswell, David Fraser and David Potter. Five more have tried unsuccessfully 9 or more times. This year 109 entered with 8 using the full allowance of two entries.Two-thirds are first timers. The entry level is down on the bumper (COVID) year of 2020 with 193 entries. Only three first timers from that year have played every time since.

The competition still attracts fewer entries than the parallel photographic competition (almost 500 entries). But its first prize of £1,000 is financially more attractive. The writing competition now offers a credit of £250 to spend at www.wisdenauction.com. Crowley´s winning entry this year opens the doors for more to tackle contemporary topics, perhaps even controversial. You have until the end of October 2023 to send in your 480 words!

Can ChatGPT help European Capital of Culture candidates?

Posted on by

ChatGPT is all the rage, instilling joy and fear in equal measures. I gave it a try. I asked it to write some advice to a city mayor considering bidding for the European Capital of Culture. In 350 words. Note: bidding, not winning the selection process.

What happened? In seconds, yes seconds, it came up with a plausible letter. And then a few seconds later it came up with another plausible letter. I say “plausible”. If a mayor is asking for advice on whether to enter the competition they normally want some high level, general points: the big picture. Many of the essential boxes were ticked in a general way. It´s not the time to get bogged down in the tactics of preparing a bid let alone gaming the selection panel. There are plenty of consultants out there to do that. My next Chat request will see if it can put them out of business! (joke)

Here is the opening paragraph:

If you’re considering a bid for European Capital of Culture in 2031, congratulations! This is a unique opportunity for your city to showcase its cultural richness and diversity, attract international attention, and boost your local economy. However, winning the title requires careful planning, strong commitment, and effective communication.

Not a bad start. Culture, diversity, local attention and economy tick boxes. And practical matters to the fore. Onwards:

Start early: Preparing a bid for European Capital of Culture takes time, resources, and collaboration with various stakeholders. Ideally, you should start planning at least five years before the application deadline, which is usually in the middle of the previous decade. This will give you enough time to identify your cultural strengths and weaknesses, engage with the local community, and develop a comprehensive bid book.

So far so good. Engage with local community is up there and the “bidbook” makes an appearance. “At least five years” hints at a longer preparation time.

Focus on your unique identity: One of the key criteria for selecting a European Capital of Culture is the city’s cultural and artistic identity. Therefore, it’s important to showcase what makes your city unique and different from others. This could be your historical heritage, contemporary art scene, traditional music, culinary traditions, or any other cultural asset that reflects your city’s identity and diversity.

Goes off on a tangent here. But it is clearly picking up from the countless media articles about an ECOC which, for the most part, regardless of country, fail to understand the central aspect of an ECOC being the future proposed programme rather than the existing offer. A weakness evident: ChatGPT may not be able to prioritise rather than look for the majority sources.

Involve the local community: A successful bid for European Capital of Culture should be rooted in the local community and reflect its aspirations and needs. Therefore, it’s crucial to involve various stakeholders, including artists, cultural institutions, business leaders, civil society organizations, and ordinary citizens, in the bid preparation process. This will ensure that the bid is inclusive, participatory, and relevant to the local context.

Not much wrong with that but misses the international aspect.

Think beyond the year of the title: Winning the European Capital of Culture title is not only about organizing a year-long cultural program but also about leaving a lasting legacy for your city and its citizens. Therefore, it’s important to plan for the post-title period and think about how the cultural infrastructure, networks, and partnerships developed during the bidding and hosting process can benefit the city’s cultural and economic development in the long run.

Legacy, post-title, networks etc again good points, even if it uses the American “program”.

Communicate effectively: A successful bid for European Capital of Culture requires effective communication and promotion both within and outside the city. Therefore, it’s important to develop a strong branding and marketing strategy that highlights your city’s cultural strengths, engages with various audiences, and builds a positive image of your city as a vibrant and creative place to live, work, and visit.

Obvious but well said. Aimed at the post selection period but awareness needed at the start.

And finally a rather bland ending:

In summary, preparing a bid for European Capital of Culture requires a combination of creativity, collaboration, and strategic thinking. By following these pieces of advice and engaging with various stakeholders, you can increase your chances of winning the title and leaving a positive legacy for your city and its citizens. Good luck!

The second attempt was along the same lines but with this improved opener:

Develop a clear and compelling vision: One of the most important elements of a successful ECOC bid is having a strong vision for what you want to achieve. Your vision should reflect the unique cultural identity of your city and demonstrate how it can contribute to the wider European cultural scene. It should be creative, ambitious, and inclusive, highlighting your city’s strengths while also addressing its weaknesses.

At last the “European ” gets a mention. Until that point the advice could apply to any of the increasing number of national capitals of culture. With so many alternatives the European aspect of an ECOC stands out even more as the critical criteria. ChatGPT doesn´t quite understand it but perhaps after a few more attempts will get there.

Summary: Not good enough to send as it is. Covers many of the key points but not quite there. It is a good enough draft for anyone writing that opening letter to the mayor and wondering how to start. It needs a more tweaks. There is no overt reference to tourism which mayors often get hung up on. Some comment on the money side (both costs of the bid/ECOC and the expected return to the city; there are plenty of studies) would be useful as well as more Europeaness. Marks out of 10: 6 or 7.

Will robots take over? Yes in many things, can we stop them, no, should we, no. This blog was written by a human.

My Awards of the Year for Capitals and Cities of Culture around the world in 2023

Posted on by

Welcome to my sixth annual preview of cities with a title of Capital or City of Culture (CoC). This year I´m introducing my Awards of the Year.

The Solidarity Award goes to Comrat which was due to be the Commonwealth of Independent States CoC. But Moldova withdrew from the CIS because of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. So no CIS CoC for Comrat. Principles, and survival, come first.

The Never Give Up Award goes to Leeds. Brexit spoilt their bid to be an ECOC in 2023. Not to give up Leeds 2023 is a year long programme of “explosive creativity”. A role model for unsuccessful candidates. (and a late award to Volterra which was pronounced Tuscan capital of culture in 2022, after being unsuccessful in the Italian CoC for 2021. over 300 events in 2022).

The Blink and You Miss It Award goes to Luanda. The Community of Portuguese Speaking Countries give their CoC to the host of the annual summit (as do several others). Luanda managed their programme in just one week in 2022. No news on the 2023 title holder. No news either of the ASEAN CoC, another which rotates with the chair of the organisation. Indonesia this year.

The Under the Radar Award goes to the Valencian Community. A CoC programme since 2018 managed to escape my notice (and just about everyone else´s). Two title holders (below and above 5,000). In 2023 Geldo (population 700) and Guardamar del Segura (pop 15,000). Who needs PR and marketing?

The It was good whilst it lasted Award goes to the South Asia Association of Regional Cooperation. SAARC is on ice because of regional political differences so no more CoCs.

The Welcome to the Club Award goes to Čačak, the first holder of the Serbian CoC. The programme starts in the Spring ” through four sub-themes that together create one whole: “On Freedom”, “On Morava”, “On the crossroads”, “On the cobblestones””.

The Award for Let´s remember you were the first, and hardest, cities in Europe hit by COVID-19 The Italian Capital of Culture has, exceptionally, two cities this year with no competition. The Italian culture ministry chose Bergamo and Brescia in recognition that the two cities were at the forefront of COVID-19 when it first appeared in Europe. The two have a joint programme BGBC2023 with over 100 projects and 500 initiatives.

The Award for Let´s hope they actually do something is shared by the Arab CoC and the three Islamic CoCs. Tripoli (Lebanon) is the Cultural Capital of the Arab World, organised by ALECSO. The three Capitals of Islamic Culture, organised by ISESCO, are Abidjan (Cote d´Ivoire), Selangor (Malaysia) and Benghazi (Libya). The title holders in these two programmes vary from doing not very much (most of them) to a full programme of arts and conferences (rarely).

The Award for We may have serious financial problems but we will carry on goes to Croydon, the fourth holder of the London Borough of Culture title. The programme starts in the spring so little information so far. A major concern surrounds the programme as the council is deep in debt and has applied for significant central government funding.

The Award for Second Time Around is shared. St Helens holds the 2023 title of Liverpool City Region Borough of Culture, five years after holding the original title. The title rotates between 5 of the 6 districts of the region (omitting Liverpool). San Jose in Costa Rica held the Ibero American Capital of Culture in 2006 and repeats in 2023.

The Award for We are far more than Roman Walls goes to Lugo in Galicia. The only city with its Roman walls intact (2km, 71 towers, 10m+high). It is the Eixo Atlántico CoC (EU Interreg project covering northern Portugal and Galicia in Spain). The programme opens in late February and runs until November.

The Award for Let´s split the programme over two years goes to two cities. Both run their programmes until May. Rabat as the first African Capital of Culture and Revúca in Slovakia.

The Award for Supporting traditional culture without threatening contemporary culture goes to Kuhmo, the first time a Finnish municipality has held the Finno-Ugric title.

The Award for Supporting traditional culture whilst imprisoning hundreds of creative workers goes to Slutsk, the Belarus title holder. There are still many cultural workers in prison and artistic freedom is not possible in the country.

The Award for Not Noticing French and English speaking countries goes to the American Capital of Culture “aimed at all the countries of the Americas” which after 24 editions still has not picked a city in the 20 French or English speaking American countries. There is no title this year. The same organisation (Xavier Tudela) has arranged for Lloret de Mar to be the Catalan title holder. Package holiday makers will enjoy a change from the beach.

The Award for Optimistic Budgeting goes to Tauragė the Lithuanian Capital of Culture for 2023. A municipality of 21,000, it will receive €100,000 from the culture ministry and aims for around €500,000 for a full programme.

The Award for Upgrading goes to Shusha. Already nominated by the Azerbaijani government as the cultural capital of the country in 2021, the city gets an upgrade as the Cultural Capital of the Turkic World. At the handover from Bursa “the speakers especially noted that this event was hopeful, proud, and very important.”

The Award for Most Over-looked Cities of Culture is shared by the Cultural Cities of East Asia. Two from China, Chengdu and Meizhou; Shizuoka Prefecture in Japan and Jeonju in South Korea. The cultural ministers met, virtually, in September to formally appoint the cities; good to see the ministers meeting – the heads of government summits have not taken place since 2019. 11 cities competed for the China nomination. There is an interesting review of the Chinese selections since 2013 here. Jeonju (a UNESCO Creative City in Gastronomy) has the largest collection of traditional Hanok houses. It plans 4 major events and 17 projects, mostly festivals. Shizuoka outlines its programme.

The Award for Hey, There are Three of Them Again goes to the European Capital of Culture with three title holders again this year, a consequence of the impact of COVID-19 in 2020 on the programme. Three last year, three next year. Elefsina (or Eleusis) in Greece opens its programme on 4 February under the three themes of “People | Society, Environment, Labour”. Chris Baldwin, fresh from his success at Kaunas, directs the opening event. Timișoara  opens over the weekend of 17-19 February. The year long theme “Shine your light – Light up your city! is the motto that reflects the journey from individual to conscious and involved European citizen, in which community values and passion are rooted.” The third title holder is Veszprém-Balaton in Hungary. It opens on 21-22 January with a distinctly national focus on the Hungarian national anthem and the day of Hungarian culture. Very Orbán.

The Award for Let´s Not Forget Mariupol. Readers of my review for 2022 will recall I mentioned the first Ukrainian City of Culture, Mariupol, in 2021. The destruction of the city, its iconic theatre, the mass murder of its citizens, the looting of heritage and arts, the torture, the forced migration of children, all horrors of the Russian invasion. There have been calls for both Kyiv and Kharkiv to be awarded an ECOC title. The Ukrainian Institute, the organisers of the Ukrainian CoC (and now an associate member of EUNIC, the network of cultural relations institutes of the EU and UK), has asked for a boycott of Russian cultural organisations. Accordingly I am simply recording that Yeniseisk is the Krasnoyarsk Region title holder; where the railway was sabotaged this week. Russia has announced its own Capital of Culture programme for 2024. It is unlikely to improve Russia´s international reputation, one of its aims.

I hope these are most of the 2023 CoCs. I suspect there are more lurking unseen in Google in various languages*. More smaller cities/municipalities. CoC programmes are centred on arts events and festivals; few venture into social issues or creative industries and tourism is the main driver for many. Last year saw exceptional CoCs in Procida, Coventry, Kaunas and the first French CoC Villeurbanne. Good to see the emphasis on evaluation in Coventry. Few CoCs get beyond reporting the numbers of events/audiences/tourists. No doubt CoCs, and candidates, will soon be using ChatGPT software to write evaluations and bid books!

Have an enjoyable year!

  • I knew it! The Veneto region in Italy has its own CoC. Now in its third edition. Applications are now open for the 2023 title holder, closing date 15 February.

The future of Mastodon?

Posted on by

Most twitter users had not heard of Mastodon until a week or so ago. What they did know was that Elon Musk had bought Twitter, turned it into a private dictatorship and was throwing out an eclectic range of changes and ideas of what he wanted to do with the site. For multiple reasons the Twitterati sought an alternative and Mastodon became the chosen one.

Mastodon is a decentralized federation of “instances” or servers. It has been around since 2016 and had a few hundred thousand users. Until last week! It has been overwhelmed by hundreds of thousands of users fleeing from Twitter, or at least creating a back up social media presence in case the worst fears of a Musk-run Twitter arrived. By 7 November it had over one million active users and is growing fast.

This massive increase in users has not been universally welcomed by existing Mastodon users. Hugh Rundle outlined many of the concerns in this article. “I struggled to understand what I was feeling, or the word to describe it. I finally realised on Monday that the word I was looking for was “traumatic”. Overnight almost Mastodon transformed from a platform for relatively small scale interactions based on small scale IT set ups to a fledgling mass operations.

In many cases the instances/servers couldn´t cope and closed themselves to new entrants. Others need considerable technical upgrades. the core programming language is possibly not suited to a fast, large scale, environment.

So what happens? Some thoughts.

Traditional Mastodon users will continue as before. Small user numbers, focussed around their interest, not accepting many, if any, new members. They will continue with small IT capacity, seeking ad hoc funding via Patreon. A few, like mine, which has 11,000 members and has closed to new ones, will ask for a small subscription.

Many new users will develop their own small, closed, instances: family and friends, clubs, NGOs etc. This may mean users need more than one address.

New users will upset the historic members, by default, until either they adapt to the new environment or new servers develop more suited to their aspirations.

The 500 word toot limit will mean more “mini blogs” appearing with regular author building a readership and discussions.

The very idea of decentralisation should mean a faster roll out of new server areas.

Larger, and very large, new instances/servers will appear. Well funded with more than adequate IT systems to cope. Some may be specialised (eg by a sport, or politics or cooking, cities etc) and will emerge as the general mastodon leading servers. A few may even, in time, accept sponsorship from selected organisations but not link users information to those sponsors. These will become the norm for most users in 2023/2024; general media, NGOs, politicians, political organisations, etc.

Some will be as argumentative as twitter as the “wrong type of twitter user” migrates. Mastodon servers can block other servers as well as individuals. Instance owners will need to be vigilant. The difficulty in finding other users is irritating. The idea of joining servers by invitation of an existing member (memories of the original LinkedIn) will enable small groups to continue.

The Home, Local and Federated streams needs tweaking. Federated is far too busy and large. As there is no algorithm the chronological order overwhelms any attempt at use. The local was fine if the server it applies to is a small relatively coherent group. Home, i.e. those you follow can be augmented by lists. (I see the use of lists expanding considerably)

There will be an increase in tools (eg languages translation, better handling of videos). Mastodon does appear USA centred at the moment and will need to adapt to a more global user base.

One major weakness is the lack of a Mastodon link on the “Share This” systems and on media articles etc. Given there is no single Mastodon account to link to not sure how this can be resolved.

Perhaps more to follow….. comments to @stevegreen@mastodon.green