Si la page ne s'affiche pas, cliquez ici !!!

Europe and the Middle Kingdom : Cooperation through Culture

Source : Culture Europe International (http://www.culture-europe-international.org)
01 49 40 72 46 - contact@culture-europe-international.org
2, rue de la Liberté, 93526 Saint-Denis cedex 02

Rubrique : Articles récents

Ellen Heyward rédacteur

du 20/12/2009 00:00 au 20/12/2015 00:00
Paris 75005 France (Ile-de-France)



Texte : By Ellen Heyward

In May 2009, the European Parliament's Directorate General for Internal Policies published a 126-page paper entitled "The Potential for Cultural Exchanges between the European Union and Third Countries: The Case of China". Divided into three parts, the study begins with an examination of China’s cultural sector, followed by an analysis of the existing cultural exchanges between China and the EU, finally culminating in three stages of proposed action: reinforcing EU political and diplomatic action in China; helping China to identify a “European Culture”; and supporting EU artists and brands in their efforts to enter the Chinese market.

From Cultural Revolution to Cultural Evolution

The authors begin by acknowledging that the Chinese culture is one of the oldest in the world, and that while it was mainly used as a political tool during the tumultuous 20th century, in 2006, the Communist Party’s 11th Five Year Plan consecrated culture as an economic sector, in the words of President Hu Jintao, giving it priority to “enhance national strength”. They cite figures from as recently as 2004, when the ratio of imported books against those exported was 10:1, noting the strong cultural influence that both Korea and the United States have wielded since the national “opening up” process that commenced in the 1980s.

The authors inform us that since 2006, when culture transitioned from a non-profit, prestige-oriented sector into an economically integrated one, the Communist Party has sought to “absorb and borrow the excellent cultural fruits of the rest of the world”, so that Chinese art troupes, publishing houses, movie studios, theatre, TV and film producers and cultural intermediary organisations might evolve into market oriented businesses. The Chinese Cultural and Creative industries’ market is expected to reach 30.7 billion USD in 2010. Whilst impressive in absolute terms, at just 3% of total GDP, this figure is still far behind the worldwide average of 6 to 7.3%.

As we know, evolution can be a quick ride for the Chinese, who emerged from their planned-economy chrysalis as a fully-fledged global power in a mere twenty years. The European Parliament’s study identifies the following as the main issues involved in China realising the potential of its Cultural Industries sector: a lack of qualified creators, intermediaries and skilled cultural managers; insufficient stimulation of growth amongst small and medium-size cultural enterprises through government investment and tax rebate mechanisms; and finally the need to lower development costs and increase reproduction costs if intellectual property rights are to be protected effectively.

EU-China Exchange

The above lacunae are all areas where European savoir-faire provides an interesting platform to dialogue with the Chinese. However, as the authors identify, there are a number of difficulties in working with China. The authors tell us that the EU as an entity is nearly absent from the Chinese cultural scene. China finds it difficult to shape a specific concept of the EU in cultural terms, as the EU is not a single, integrated entity. In addition, speaking Chinese is important, given that very few people speak English or any other foreign language. Moreover, it is vital to be introduced to relevant people and then to be physically present in order to successfully organise a cultural project. Finally, projects invariably take longer than they would be expected to in a Western context.

On top of this, whilst the EU creative and cultural landscape is dominated by small or medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), China is led by big organisations, which conceive their work primarily for large audiences, in contrast to EU audiences, which break down into smaller, more specialised groups of taste and interest. The authors state that Chinese artists see the EU as a good place to present their work and make money, but have trouble understanding the way Europeans work, particularly when there is a collaborative element involved. Cultural exchanges are rarely part of the Chinese system if they are not money-generating. The authors believe this goes some way to explaining the more successful US penetration of the Chinese market, which is more business and bottom-line oriented than the European system, and therefore better fitted to China’s operating principles.

Propositions and recommendations

Promisingly, on the 22nd October 2007, Jan Figel, Commissioner for Education, Training, Culture and Youth and Sun Jiazheng, Chinese Minister of Culture, signed a Joint Declaration regarding their wish to reinforce cooperation in the field of culture. The authors note that so far, however, nothing has been done on the basis of this joint statement. Nonetheless, ten projects selected for EU funding through the 2007 EU Culture Programme’s focus on China indicate otherwise. A total of €1,647,148.5 was spent on EU projects carried out in China in the fields of the performing arts, cultural heritage, new media technologies, library books and reading, architecture, design and art.

By addressing the issues they identify, the authors believe that the EU can position itself as an accessible and exciting partner for China. Some suggestions are EU-labelled residencies in Europe for Chinese artists and cultural managers; joint doctorate programmes to be developed by EU-China academic consortia in the framework of the Erasmus Mundus II, and a logo (e.g. ‘European Cultural Product’) to be etched on books, posters, concerts’ advertisements and to be inserted in the end credits of EU films.

Although the authors advise highlighting commonalities between Member States’ cultures and civilisations rather than their individual traits, bilateral cultural exchanges between China and EU Member States that are already operational can be built on. Examples included are “Germany & China Moving Ahead Together”, in which German companies used futuristic pavilions to present their solutions to urban challenges; the French “Croisements”, an annual three-month festival of “dialogue and cultural discovery” born from the 2005 Cultural Year of France in China; and the British “China - UK: Connections through Culture” (CTC) programme, which supports cultural organisations in both countries in their efforts to build an understanding of, and links with, partner organisations. These national efforts provide the Chinese with tangible and dynamic pieces to the European cultural puzzle, paving the way for more integrated approaches.

A promising example of EU cultural action in China discussed in the paper is the European Film Festival, a joint operation between the European Commission delegation to China (under French presidency) and the French Embassy in China. From the 1st to the 20th of December 2008, twenty-four films from twenty-four different EU countries were screened in four locations around Beijing (including the French Cultural Centre, the Cervantes Institute and the Italian Cultural Centre.) Both partners contributed equal shares of €60,000, and though there was no Chinese contribution (in fact authorities would not allow the Festival to be held in commercial theatres), after the great success of the event, the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television contacted the EC delegation about future cooperation. This event is a marker of the possibility of things to come.

Europe may be a stalwart on the global stage, but in order to remain an attractive and interesting partner for countries such as China, European officials should not underestimate the importance of soft diplomacy. Cultural exchange presents a prime opportunity for Europe to consolidate its logic as a unified entity and reinforce its relevance in contemporary global relations. Article 151 of the Treaty of Maastricht, the 2005 UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, and the 2007 European Agenda for Culture in a Globalising World are all important reminders that the EU has committed itself to developing a more active role for culture in its international relations. This study shows that the European Parliament is aware of the challenges and prepared to dedicate time and resources to facing them.

Source: The Potential for Cultural Exchanges between the European Union and Third Countries: The Case of China, Directorate General for Internal Policies – Policy Department B: Structural and Cohesion Policies (Culture and Education), http://ec.europa.eu/culture/news/news2187_en.htm

Date de publication : 20/12/2009


Période traitée : 2009-12-20
Mots-clés : Ellen Heyward, China, Directorate General for Internal Policies, cultural exchange, European Parliament, Third Countries, Chinese cultural sector, European culture, Chinese cultural and creative industries, Chinese art troupes, Chinese publishing houses, Chinese movie studios, Chinese theatre, Chinese TV, Chinese film producers, Chinese cultural intermediary organisations, Jan Figel, Commissioner for Education, Training, Culture and Youth, Sun Jiazheng, Chinese Minister of Culture, Joint Declaration, EU China relations, Germany & China Moving Ahead Together, Croisements, China - UK: Connections through Culture, CTC, European Film Festival in China, State Administration of Radio, Film and Television,
Inséré le : 20/12/2009 14:59