Content uploaded by Bernadette Quinn
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Bernadette Quinn on Aug 19, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
Dublin Institute of Technology
ARROW@DIT
Articles School of Hospitality Management and Tourism
5-1-2005
Arts Festivals and the City
Bernadette Quinn
Dublin Institute of Technology, bernadette.quinn@dit.ie
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of
Hospitality Management and Tourism at ARROW@DIT. It has been
accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of
ARROW@DIT. For more information, please contact
yvonne.desmond@dit.ie.
Recommended Citation
Quinn, Bernadette: Arts Festivals and the City. Urban Studies, Vol. 42, No. 5-6, 927-943 (2005).
1
Arts Festivals and the City
Bernadette Quinn
School of Hospitality Management and Tourism
Dublin Institute of Technology
Cathal Brugha Street
Dublin 1.
Tel: 00-353-(0)1-4027557
Fax: 00-353-(0)1-8788721
Bernadette.Quinn@dit.ie
2
Abstract
There has been a remarkable rise in the number of urban arts festivals in recent
decades. The outcomes of cities’ engagement with arts festivals, however, remains little
understood, particularly in social and cultural terms. This article reviews existing
literature on urban festivals and argues that city authorities tend to disregard the social
value of festivals and to construe them simply as vehicles of economic generation or as
‘quick fix’ solutions to city image problems. While such an approach renders certain
benefits, it is ultimately quite limiting. If arts festivals are to achieve their undoubted
potential in animating communities, celebrating diversity and improving quality of life,
then they must be conceived of in a more holistic way by urban managers. Currently, the
tasks of conceptualizing the problems at issue and devising appropriate policies are
hampered by the scarcity of empirical research conducted in the area.
3
‘’What is a festival? It’s something exceptional, something out of
the ordinary....something that must create a special atmosphere
which stems not only from the quality of the art and the
production, but from the countryside, the ambience of a city and
the traditions ...of a region’ (Author’s translation). (de Rougement,
quoted in Isar, 1976: 131)1
1. Introduction
The last fifteen years or so have seen a remarkable rise in the number of arts festivals in
cities throughout Europe and elsewhere. Their growth has been such that it is now
difficult to accurately determine the number of festivals in existence. Reasons explaining
this proliferation lie in a series of inter-related factors that include changing approaches
to urban management, structural changes in economic production, the use of culture as
a means of restructuring wealth and job creation, and the unsettling effects of
globalisation. All of these factors, in combination, have prompted a re-conceptualisation
of the festival as a useful strategy for the contemporary city to adopt in the attempt to
reposition and differentiate itself in an increasingly competitive world. As Paddison
(1993) explains, a city in pursuit of internal investment will compete with other cities
through urban entrepreneurial displays. Festivals and events, as forms of
1 ‘C’est quoi une festival?...C’est d’abord une fête. C’est quelque chose d’exceptionnel, qui sort de
la routine...et qui doit créer une atmosphère spéciale, à laquelle contribuent non seulement la
qualité des oeuvres et de leur exécution, mais le paysage, l’ambiance d’une cité et la tradition ....
d’une région.
4
entrepreneurial display, have come to be construed as vital elements in acquiring the
investment needed for restructuring and regeneration (Robertson and Wardrop 2004).
While the reasons explaining this recent proliferation are clear, the outcomes of cities’
involvement with festivals are far less so. A number of researchers (Evans, 2001,
Hannigan 2003, Gibson and Stephenson 2004, Richards and Wilson 2004,) have argued
that while cities use festivals and events with the intention of marketing themselves and
creating place distinctiveness, the strategy may be counter-productive. Urban events, it
is argued, run the risk of suffering from ‘serial reproduction’ (Richards and Wilson 2004:
1932), of becoming formulaic (Evans 2001) and hence devoid of any real connections
with place. Yet, while the literature identifies in urban festivals the potentially
homogenizing effects of globalisation, other perspectives on culture-led urban
regeneration argue that the reproduction of sameness need not be the outcome. Bailey
et al. (2004), for example, argue that homogenisation is not inevitable, but is attributable
to urban management approaches that fail to understand how local particuliarities could
be cultivated to counter the globalising influences of cultural production in city arenas.
More generally, some have questioned the prevailing ‘just add culture and stir’ approach
to urban regeneration (Gibson and Stevenson 2004: 1), querying the extent to which it
usefully serves public interests either in the short or the long term. A similar question
could be asked of the role that festivals play in urban areas. Currently, the literature is
very uncertain about their contribution. While there has been a lot of hype about the
theoretically catalytic effect that festivals can have in terms of attracting visitors,
spearheading the regeneration of derelict city districts and reclaiming public time and
space for communal celebrations, hard evidence is in short supply. Evans (2001: 236)
warns that the contemporary festival should be viewed as problematic if ‘their purpose
5
and sustainability is of concern beyond the calendar cycle of ever-growing cultural
feasts’. This problem provides the focus for this article. It seeks to review the current
state of knowledge about how festivals contribute to shaping the functioning of urban
areas. It reviews existing literature on festivals and raises critical issues concerning the
outcomes, particularly the non-economic outcomes, identifiable in the use of festivals in
urban contexts. In suggesting ways of addressing emerging problems, the article
suggests dialoguing with other literatures that have long sought to theorise the meanings
historically associated with festivals and festivity.
2. Festival meanings – historical perspectives
According to Turner (1982: 11), people in all cultures recognize the need to set aside
certain times and spaces for communal creativity and celebration, and festivals have
long constituted a vehicle for expressing the close relationship between identity and
place. Ekman (1999), writing in a Swedish context, for example, described festivals as
occasions for expressing collective belonging to a group or a place. In creating
opportunities for drawing on shared histories, shared cultural practices and ideals, as
well as creating settings for social interactions, festivals engender local continuity. They
constitute arenas where local knowledge is produced and reproduced, where the history,
cultural inheritance and social structures, which distinguish one place from another, are
revised, rejected or recreated. To borrow Geertz’s terminology, they can be said to
represent an example of a ‘cultural text’ (Geertz 1993), one of the many ensembles of
texts that comprise a people’s culture. Historically, interrogating festival settings has
yielded insights into how a people’s sense of their own identity is closely bound up with
their attachment to place. In a European context, for example, Muir (1997) has written
about the important function that public festivities played in towns across western
6
Europe between the 12th and 18th centuries, those centuries during which civic
consciousness, or the identification of individuals with their home town, came to be one
of the distinguishing characteristics of European civilization. Particularly in independent
city-states, such as Venice2, public rituals and festivities were critical in consolidating
civic identities in the face of internal division and external threats. Furthermore, such
powerful city states used festivities to exert control over their territories. Muir (1997)
explains that Venice constructed and represented its colonial dominion through ritual,
forcing subject cities to celebrate the feast days of St. Mark, the patron saint of Venice.
His analysis echoes Bonnemaison’s comment on the ‘hallmark event’, which he says
‘functions like a monument, supporting and reinforcing the image of established power,
whether religious or secular (Bonnemaison 1990: 25 quoted in Hall 1992: 89). Both
authors’ implicitly highlight the central role that power relations play in the reproduction
of meanings in festival sites. This serves as a reminder that the construction of festival
practices is intimately bound up with the cultural and social divisions that structure
human population groups.
As important cultural practices, festivals have a long established association with cities.
It is thought that the first festival took place in Athens as long ago as 534 BC, in honour
of the God Dionysos, the patron of wine, feast and dance (HOLND FSTVL 2002). Then,
as in all subsequent centuries up to the present era, festivals have played important
social roles both in public and private, religious and secular spheres. The forerunners of
contemporary urban arts festivals can be traced back to the 19th century, to the Bayreuth
Festival in 1876 and the Salzburger Festspiele in 1920. During the 19th century, as
Bassett (1993) discusses in a UK context, the interest in cultural development was
closely linked to both the growth of cities and to the rise of urban elites. The festivals that
2 Venice remained an independent city-republic until 1797.
7
emerged during this period tended to present programmes of high quality classical
works, interpreted by renowned performers within famous theatres or concert halls for
the benefit of arts connoisseurs. There was no question but that the cultural forms and
infrastructures promoted at this time were unambiguously concerned with the ‘high arts’.
Indeed, as Bassett (1993: 1774) argues, support for the arts was implicit in the efforts
made by social elites to exert their dominance and demarcate social boundaries
between themselves and the population at large. Festivals like those at Bayreuth and
Salzburg contributed to the process of re-affirming the civilising and educational values
of ‘high’ culture.
The postwar period witnessed an upsurge in the number of festivals being established.
In an era where the drive towards reconstruction, political stability and the forging of
international linkages through trade (including through a fledging tourism industry) set
the tenor for economic and social advancement, the emergence of such nationally
important festivals as at Avignon (France), Edinburgh (Scotland), Amsterdam (the
Netherlands), Wexford (Ireland) and Spoleto (Italy) were important contributions to
Europe’s cultural infrastructure. While many of the leading arts festivals were based in
major cities, several were not. In fact, sometimes, a more peripheral location, away from
the culturally well endowed capital city functioned as a liberating stimulus for festival
development. Frey (1994) has argued that in countries with highly developed cultural
policies (like Germany, Austria and Italy), festivals sometimes emerged as reactionary
attempts to overcome the restrictions and inflexibility associated with established cultural
institutions. This seems to have been the case at Avignon, where a desire to work away
from the ‘confines’ of Paris was important for its festival’s founder, the theatre director
Jean Vilar (Isar 1976). In other cases, festival initiatives have shown themselves to be
highly reflective, as well as constitutive, of the resources, circumstances and people
8
existing in particular places. They emerged in response to artistic needs lacking within
that place and crystallized the key resources available there. Very often the human
resource was of critical importance, with many festivals owing their existence to the
commitment and vision of one or several key individuals.
Irrespective of location, these festivals introduced vibrancy at a time when much of
continental Europe’s cultural resources and architectural heritage lay in ruins. They often
had international programming dimensions and international ambitions, with Edinburgh,
for example, aspiring to be the ‘Athens of the North’ (Jamieson 2004: 66) and Wexford
seeking to position itself on the world stage (Quinn 1998). The preoccupation was still
with the ‘high’ arts and there was as yet little sign of any oppositional culture, although in
southern France, the Avignon festival founded by Vilar in 1947 was re-thinking the arts
festival concept in an attempt to promote inclusiveness, accessibility and new forms of
interaction between audience, artists and place. However, it was a pioneering initiative
and its approach was as yet unorthodox. The challenge to dominant arts paradigms
began to emerge more strongly in the 1960s and 1970s, when international student
festivals at places like Zagreb and Nancy started experimenting with new artistic ideas
and pushing out the boundaries of what was acceptable in terms of artistic production
and performance (HOLND FSTVL 2002). Festivals during these decades grappled with
definitions of culture, challenging accepted definitions of ‘high’ and ‘low’ arts and
gradually breaking down distinctions between the two. Festivals like those at Avignon
and the Fringe at Edinburgh now operationalised this radical re-thinking in their
programming, their use of venues and in the ways in which they tried to engage
audiences.
9
The forces exerting pressure for change among festivals, as in cultural arenas more
generally, were part of a much broader movement seeking social change in tandem with
the widespread economic restructuring being experienced throughout the Western world
during the late 1960s and 1970s. These decades witnessed the emergence of
grassroots social movements promoting a variety of causes such as anti-war, feminism,
environmentalism and gay rights. They were driven by young people who shared a
common interest in challenging prevailing norms and the existing social order. As
Bianchini (1996: 4) has pointed out, these movements were often closely associated
with ‘alternative’ forms of cultural production and distribution comprising, among others,
free festivals, visual arts exhibitions in non-traditional venues, and experimental theatre
groups. To the fore in using festival production to achieve social aims was the Avignon
festival in southern France. Under the innovative direction of Vilar, the concept of the
festival here was being developed as something to be enacted with and through local
and visiting populations, as opposed to something simply presented to them (Isar, 1976).
The intention was was that local residents, organisers, directors and performers would
effortlessly interact with each other and with their place, bringing it alive to the sounds
and sights of music, dancing and art, in a spirit of festivity. To this end, festival events
were housed not only in conventional venues but in the open-air, on streets and in
squares as well as in cafes and restaurants. Events were programmed to happen at all
times of the day and night. While the directorship of Vilar was not unique it was certainly
ground-breaking and inspirational for festival directors across Europe. It privileged the
communal, participative dimension so central to the original concept of the ‘festival’, a
word which derives from the classical Latin word festum meaning feast (Isar 1976). As
such, it signaled a move away from earlier attempts to use the arts festival, and the arts
more generally, as a means of defining and maintaining social distinctions.
10
3. Festivals and urban policy – evolving recent approaches
By the beginning of the 1980s, the national and international contexts shaping the role of
cultural production in society was changing radically. Patterns of cultural consumption
had evolved radically in recent decades with huge expansions in the consumption of
mass media products in the home and a corresponding rise in diverse patterns of culture
as well as leisure and tourism. Cities, as Zukin (1991) noted, were no longer functioning
as landscapes of production but as landscapes of consumption. The collapse of the
industrial base in numerous cities had prompted a serious search for alternatives and a
shift towards the service economy. Many cities were beginning to see the logic in
developing the kinds of cultural facilities needed to attract the skilled workers who would
make up the new service class (Bassett 1993: 1777). Simultaneous with this ‘cultural
turn’ in the advanced industrial societies emerged a corresponding inflation of ‘image
production’ (Zukin 1998). ‘Image production’ or city marketing in the post-industrial era
was as Ward (1998) stresses, an American invention, which in a European context
tended to sit uneasily with a more intervensionist approach to urban governance
(Ashworth and Voogt 1994)
The dramatic expansion of festivals in urban areas since the late 1980s is explainable in
respect of these changing circumstances. Their growth represents cities’ attempts to use
consumer oriented, cultural forms to differentiate themselves in a highly competitive,
increasingly global market-place. As Waitt (2004:403) reminds us, the concept of
constructing festivals with the intention of drawing international attention to cities is not
new. As long ago as 1859, the Handel Centenary Festival held in London’s Crystal
Palace, was marketed as a tourist attraction, with the organizers distributing some
50,000 prospectuses in the European offices of the railway companies serving the
Crystal Palace (Adams, 1986: 18). The Holland Festival established in 1947 was
11
designed to promote economic development in the Netherlands, while in 1953 the Irish
Ministry for Industry and Commerce established ‘An Tóstal’, a cultural festival specifically
constructed to attract tourists. Festivals have, however, taken on a new significance in
the context of globalisation. They are now construed as entrepreneurial displays, as
image creators capable of attracting significant flows of increasingly mobile capital,
people and services. Major events are seen as being particularly effective in that they
ally tourism objectives with urban planning (Roche 1994), while simultaneously providing
a means through which political and urban elites can refashion collective feelings of
identity, emotion and consciousness (Cox and Wood 1994). This civic boosterism line of
thinking argues that major events generate in citizens a sense of pride and self-esteem
(Mueller and Fenton 1989: 275). This sense derives in large part from the external
affirmation that the event bestows on the city and the belief that through the event, the
city is increasing its stature on the world stage. Accordingly, in spite of the increasing
tendency for festivals to be constructed for consumption by privileged audiences, e.g.
visiting tourists or affluent locals, people in general tend not to radically oppose
prevailing meanings amidst the ‘showcase effect’ of the event (Hiller 1998). Meanwhile,
the demand from growing numbers of increasingly mobile, experienced tourists
continues to rise. No longer content simply to gaze (Urry 1990), the search for
experiential holidays supports the widespread orientation towards a greater consumption
of cultural goods and experiences, including festivals (Heinrich 1988 quoted in Hall
1992: 27).
12
4. Critical perspectives on the role of festivals in urban policies
Fully aware of these evolving trends, several cities have invested heavily in festivals as
part of their urban regeneration and city marketing strategies. As García (2004) points
out, the level of investment in arts events does not rival that accounted for by major
sports events (like the Olympics or the World Cup) or by major business showcase
events (like Expos and World Fairs). Nevertheless, as part of the broader phenomenon
that has seen an increasing use of the arts in urban regeneration processes, the rise of
the urban festival has been very significant. The question specifically posed here is:
what has this actually meant for the cities and city populations concerned? What roles
has the arts festival played in advancing urban policy, contributing to urban life and
facilitating the expression of cultural identities? Answering these questions is hampered
by a profound lack of empirical research in the area. There has been a marked growth in
the literature on festivals but this has tended to concentrate on economic outcomes and
operational issues (Robinson, Picard and Long 2004, Richards and Wilson 2004). In this
context, it is difficult not to concur with Bailey et al (2004) who suggest that the long-term
social impact of culture-led urban regeneration remains something of a mystery. While a
number of researchers have been interested in how the rise of the urban festival has
impacted on the cities concerned, few if any comprehensive studies analyzing festivals’
contribution to urban policy have been undertaken. However, a number of researchers
have written about the experiences of cities including Glasgow, Edinburgh, Galway,
Barcelona and Sydney, and this literature has revealed a number of themes that further
our understanding of the relationship between festivals and cities. These themes are
discussed below.
13
4.1 The festival as image maker
Any attempt to analyse the role that festivals play in cities rapidly uncovers the very
narrow manner in which cities tend to construe festivals. Above all else, city
management’s need to construct them as key elements of the city’s place-marketing
strategy predominates. Raising the city’s international profile and attracting visitors
seems to have become the raison d’être of the city festival. The emphasis is very much
on the spectacular as opposed to any real consideration of process. It seems more a
matter of style than of substance. As Evans (2003: 417) put it ‘hard branding the city
through cultural flagships and festivals has created a form of karaoke architecture where
it is not important how well you can sing but that you do it with verve and gusto’. Even
when the festival or cultural event has been strongly culturally orientated at the outset,
the city marketing impetus seems to overwhelm the process and crowd out any other
potentially driving force underpinning the use of festivals in urban arenas. The European
Cultural Capital event (established in 1985) arguably illustrates this point. Its original
aims were purely cultural, being concerned with achieving cultural expression,
celebrating cultural diversity while simultaneously promoting unity among Europeans
Richards and Wilson (2004: 1936). However, over time, individual cities have used the
event to achieve different aims and often have used non-cultural measurements to
calculate the event’s effectiveness. Typically, it is the change in visitor numbers that is
used to demonstrate success, as in the cases of Copenhagen (Fridberg and Koch-
Nielsen 1997) and Antwerp (Richards 2000) or to predict success, as in Cork (Roche,
2004) and Liverpool (http://news.bbc.co.uk, 06/04/2003)
While the concept of city marketing can be interpreted holistically to include social,
cultural as well as economic aspirations (van den Berg et al 1980), in practice the
application of the concept in the US and in the UK has usually been limited to economic
14
ideals (Paddison 1993). Furthermore, by definition, city marketing strategies are duty
bound to emphasise the attractive elements of place while simultaneously down-playing
or diverting attention from less salubrious features. The festival, with its connotations of
sociability, playfulness, joviality and community provides a ready-made set of positive
images on which to base a reconstruction of a less than perfect city image. Add the ‘arts’
dimension to the festival, and another series of positive images are available for
manipulating according to the positioning requirements of the city. It is not surprising,
therefore, that many cities have seen in festivals a sort of ‘quick-fix’ solution to their
image problems.
Of the cities discussed in the arts-led urban regeneration literature, Glasgow has
received particular attention. Designated as European Cultural Capital in 1990, the city is
credited with using the event to overhaul its image as a depressed, problem-ridden post-
industrial city into an attractive and culturally interesting service-driven contemporary
city. While this particular cultural event is held to have been critical in Glasgow’s image
revolution, the city already had a history of involvement with festival events since the
previous decade. It supported the Mayfest festival in the early 1980s and progressed to
involvement with a jazz festival in 1986 and the Garden Festival in 1988 (García 2004).
The bid for the European Cultural Capital therefore grew out of a context of commitment
to cultural events and a belief in their ability to contribute to turning around a city’s
fortunes. Whether or not the 1990 Cultural Capital designation had sustaining effects on
the city’s image remains a subject for debate. While the city’s image was boosted during
the year itself, a study conducted by Myerscough in 1991 suggested that it was not
being maintained. A somewhat similar finding was reported in the case of the North of
England’s designation as ‘Year of the Visual Arts’ in 1996. The Arts Council of England
(1997) reported that while the Year had succeeded in raising awareness of the arts in
15
the region, a more sustained arts programme would be needed if longer term attitudinal
change was to be achieved. Nevertheless, in the Glasgow case, media commentary
(Ryan 2002) and local tourism agencies (GGCVTB, 2002) continue to applaud the
positive image transformation.
4.2 The festival as tourist attraction
Glasgow, with greater certainty, can point to the increase in visitor arrivals that the 1990
designation stimulated. The year before Glasgow made its bid in 1983, visitors to the city
numbered 700,000. By 1990 they numbered 3 million, of whom 600,000 were
attributable to the event (Paddison 1993). By 2002 they numbered four million annually,
by which time the city had become Europe’s fastest growing conference destination
(Ryan 2002). Undoubtedly, the ambition of generating large-scale tourist flows is a
priority for many of the cities that use festivals as part of their urban regeneration / city
marketing strategies. The European City of Culture examples cited earlier are cases in
point. There is now an extensive tourism literature treating the rise of festivals as tourist
attractions. The use of the term ‘festival tourism’ is increasing among tourism
researchers, the vast majority of whom conceive of the festival primarily in terms of its
economic potential. Increasing numbers of empirical studies capture the growing reality
of city managers devising/re-constructing festivals as economic catalysts and report
gains in terms of numbers of visitors attracted, revenue generated, extension to the
tourist season and columns of media inches generated. Far fewer studies hint at, much
less problematise, the narrowness of vision inherent in such approaches. Some
researchers acknowledge that several of the festivals currently functioning as key city
marketing strategies initially evolved from a more rooted connection with either place,
community, tradition and / or art form. Yet while this has many implications (Hughes
2000), these are rarely treated in the literature. Robertson and Wardrop (2004: 123) for
16
example, point to the importance of acknowledging that the Edinburgh festival was not
established with tourism objectives in mind yet fail to elaborate on this point. They go on
to suggest that some involved in festivals and events have historically held that applying
strategic frameworks to festivals and events serves only to stifle entrepreneurship and
creativity. However, this comment is left without further development.
A contrasting set of perspectives can, however, be found among researchers who locate
their enquiries within different domains. A well established line of social science enquiry
into festive practices has paid considerable attention to commodification, authenticity
and cultural identity issues. Here, the extent to which the presence of tourists negatively
affects festival processes is a key question (Boissevain 1996, Sampath 1997, Hitchcock
1999). There has been a school of thought that associates tourism with the inevitable
debasement of cultural meanings (e.g. Greenwood 1976, 1989), with Greenwood (1976:
141) arguing that it is ‘only the local people who have learned about the ‘costs’ of
tourism. The outside investors and the government have been reaping huge profits and
are well satisfied’. However, this view is countered by the assertion that change is
inevitable, and has always been integral to the reproduction of festivities. Cohen (1988),
for example, argues that through commoditization, cultural entities can assume new
meanings for the producers. This more nuanced interpretation suggests that ‘rituals that
may have been meaningful in the past for an internal public can evolve, under the
influence of tourism, to become a culturally significant self-representation before an
external public’ (Cohen 1988: 382). Theoretically, an important argument implicit here is
that local residents, as producers and as established audiences, can engage
meaningfully in festivals in ways that address both their own needs as well as those of
visitors at the same time. Empirically, however, evidence to support this theoretical
17
position is scarce, and from artistic and broader cultural perspectives, the merits of
engaging with tourism remain highly debatable.
A symposium of festival producers, policy-makers and directors in the Netherlands
(HOLND FSTVL 2002), for example, spoke of festivals leading to a ‘tourist invasion’, as
at Oerol (Netherlands) and Avignon (France), where places come to ‘look more like a
holiday resort than an arts festival’ (HOLND FSTVL 2002: 11). Landry el al (1996) argue
that when a festival focuses on external audiences, a result can be to limit the ability of
the artists to question, challenge and criticize. At such points in the festival’s evolution,
critical questions as to its ability to retain artistic autonomy, to maintain the quality of
experience in the face of increasing pressures to commercialise arise. Such questions
are debated in Quinn’s (2005) analysis of the Galway Arts Festival. Set in the Western
seaboard city of Galway (population of 67,000, Central Statistics Office 2001), this
combined arts festival was established to celebrate and promote appreciation of the arts
in the region in 1978. Informed initially by socially inspired objectives, the festival has
expanded greatly from modest beginnings to become one of the largest and most
popular festivals in the Republic of Ireland. The festival’s growing popularity as a tourist
attraction for both national and international audiences and its growing commercialism
has created a series of dilemmas for the festival. Since the mid 1990s, it has been
grappling with the tensions posed by trying to balance deep-rooted, socially aligned
artistic goals on the one hand with often conflicting economic imperatives on the other.
Adapting to changing circumstances is not an easy process. The Galway Arts Festival
remains committed to serving local needs but the city’s rapidly changing social and
economic contexts mean that both production and consumption contexts have changed.
Developments in the city’s cultural infrastructure, partially achieved through the efforts of
the festival, have facilitated a more commercial approach to arts production, for
18
example. Meanwhile the city’s rapidly growing population, in both residential and tourist
terms, is creating an unprecedented breadth and diversity of artistic needs.
For local people these changes are all too evident, and survey data gathered among city
residents demonstrated clear concerns that the festival was losing its meaning for local
people in the face of pressures to internationalise both its programme and its audiences
from such gatekeepers as the national media, the state tourism agency and major
sponsors. There was a clear sense that the festival’s growing commercialism is
problematic for local people. Increasing professionalism and the growing stature of the
festival both as commercial enterprise and as tourist attraction underpinned a perception
that the festival is becoming increasingly exclusive and inaccessible.
Yet, it is the very possibility of involvement and participation, and the potential to
challenge, re-order, subvert and disrupt, that social scientists and others have held to be
inherent in the concept of festivity (Willems-Braun 1994, Ozouf 1988). Social theorists
have construed festivals as liminal, ‘time out of time’ spaces (Bahktin 1984), replete with
possibilities for challenging social conventions, social order and authority, and inverting
society’s cultural norms. Cultural commentators conceive of festivals as risk-takers, as
opportunities to challenge the status quo and push out boundaries. Within the prevailing
conceptualization of arts festivals as city marketing strategies, festivals are permitted
little scope for unlocking such potential, potential that would seem to be unlimited. Of
even greater concern is the possibility that conceived of as such, festivals may be both
compounding the social difficulties that necessitate renewal and regeneration
programmes in the first place, and heightening tensions in already contested arenas. In
the light of existing research knowledge about urban arts festivals it does not seem
unreasonable to ask whether city authorities have even begun to exploit the potential of
19
arts festivals? The use of culture only for marketing purposes is limiting (Landry et al
1996) and the broad-ranging conceptualizations of festivity evident in the literature
contrast sharply with the tangible but narrow construction of festivals merely as
economic generators.
4.3 The festival as community
As Landry et al. (1996) argue, the crude interests of the local economy and of the city as
a whole do not always coincide. There is often a failure to appreciate that image
campaigns with little grounding in local needs and aspirations can backfire. This is
because genuine festivals must be ‘rooted on society, in real life’ (Isar 1976: 126), while
arts festivals, if they are to be ‘artistically responsible festivals’ (Degreef 1994: 18) must
respond and evolve in tandem with the changing artistic needs felt by diverse resident
and visitor community groups within a place. These concepts can become lost in the
face of increasingly persuasive city branding. Hannigan (2003) recently introduced a
series of articles that highlight the rising influence of commercial marketing strategies in
the shaping of the contemporary city. His comments emphasized growing concerns
about consumer democracy, the integrity of public space and the cultural diversity of the
metropolis. In theory, festivals could have a role to play in countering the social crises
faced by cities in the context of globalisation. Hughes (1999) suggests that the growing
interest in festivity in the 1990s is linked to its use as a social strategy to combat the
growing alienation and insecurity felt in public space. Indeed, festivals have been
historically construed as mechanisms through which place-based communities express
identities, celebrate communally held values and strengthen communal bonds (Jackson
1988, Marston 1989, Smith 1996). In reality, however, how do these functions fare under
the prevailing entrepreneurial approaches to urban management? (Putnam 2001, Waitt
2004). According to Zukin (1998) strategies of urban redevelopment based on
20
consumption focus on visual attractions that make people spend money. Festivals as
visual attractions require willing participants in the guise of spectators as well as
consumers. Yet, what of more participative, communal engagement? Nurse (1999)
argues that the Caribbean carnivals, now found in almost every city in North America
and Britain, represent good examples of festivity in action. Spread along diasporic
networks to globally disparate communities with Caribbean kinship ties, these carnivals
constitute the largest event in terms of attendance and economic activity generated in
their respective host cities (Nurse 1999). Yet, the substantial tourism and economic
activity dimensions don’t overshadow the profound social meanings of these festivities.
For diverse groups living within and attracted to these carnival cities, the carnival
maintains its status as a hybrid site (Bhaba 1994) where cultural identities, notions of
belonging and values systems are celebrated, contested and negotiated. Evans (1993
quoted in Evans 2001) concurs, arguing that large-scale cultural events such as the
carnival Mas in Trinidad and their diasporic reproductions in Toronto (Caribana) and
London (Notting Hill) still retain indigenous involvement and strong shades of their
original purpose. There is nothing inevitable about this sort of rooted cultural
reproduction. Rather, it reveals the nurturing of specific broad-based objectives and
deliberate efforts to achieve certain outcomes. As Owusu and Ross (1988) discuss, such
carnivals actively seek to combine local, participant and tourist, and belie months of
planning, workshops, craft production and rehearsal before the events themselves take
place.
In general, however, there is often little sense of collective or social responsibility evident
in the contemporary promulgation of festivals in urban areas. Garcia (2004: 108) argues
that two widely criticised aspects of Glasgow’s 1990 European Year of Culture event
were its failure to assist widening the access and involvement of geographically
21
peripheral and socially deprived communities in arts activity, and its inability to act as a
platform for representing local cultures. According to McLay (1990), Glasgow’s Year of
Culture acted as a ‘superficial make-over’, focusing on the privileged few while ‘covering
up’ the real concerns of the city’s working-class majority. Paddison (1993) similarly asks
whether the ‘new Glasgow’ emerging through this cultural reconstruction process had
any relevance for those experiencing poverty on the city’s margins. Somewhat relatedly,
Jamieson’s (2004) research offers critical perspectives on the Edinburgh Festival.
‘Edinburgh, the Festival City’, with its numerous annual and contiguous summer
festivals, is widely accredited with stimulating large scale tourist flows (Scotinform 1991),
generating some £125 million expenditure, sustaining nearly 4,000 jobs across Scotland
(Edinburgh International Festival 2001) and creating a strong city image (Prentice and
Andersen 2003). Jamieson moves beyond the economic indicators to reveal a festival
city that is spatially structured in a way that privileges visiting festival audiences and
contains them within parts of the city deemed ‘appropriate’ for cultural consumption.
Meanwhile, according to Jamieson (2004) the city’s outskirts, where Edinburgh’s socially
deprived reside, remain relatively free of festival activity. This structuring of the festival,
she argues, serves both to reassure cultural tourists of a safe encounter with the city and
to marginalize those Edinburgh residents living in its peripheral housing estates. In
consequence, there is little possibility of the festival engaging in ‘processes that might
disrupt the social construction of the festival or challenge the dominant social meanings
being reproduced therein’ (Jamieson 2004: 72). It is tempting to argue that the type of
festival landscape discussed by Jamieson is associated only with ‘high art’ festivals.
Waterman (1998: 66) asserts that high-brow festivals still explicitly prefer to present
themselves as elitist, citing the case of the Israel Festival as one that is unashamedly
elitist, directing itself at the few who can afford to attend and believing that it should not
be denigrated for this. However, the reproduction of difference through festival practices
22
can equally characterize festivals more commonly perceived to be populist and
accessible. Quinn (1998), for example, found that in the case of the Galway Arts
Festival, the inclusive image of the festival belied a more complex agenda underpinning
the construction of the festival. In this case, high art forms like classical music and more
traditional forms of theatre involving the Irish language, and their devotees, were
marginalized in favour of the more popular music, film and street theatre events that
have become the festival’s hallmarks. Similarly, the reproduction of difference,
irrespective of the power dynamics at play, will in all likelihood encounter strategies of
opposition or resistence (however passive) from those groupings who feel themselves to
be excluded from the key decision-making processes (Quinn 2003). It is such processes
that at least partially account for the emergence of fringe / unofficial / alternative festival
offerings in places like Wexford, Edinburgh and Avignon.
More generally, however, the implication in the literature is that what is often consumed
and experienced in festival settings is an idealized, sanitized version of the city where
real opportunities for genuine engagement with the culture and multiple realities of the
place, for both local and visiting populations remain sidelined. The examples cited above
echo Judd’s (1999) critique of Disneyfied ‘Latin Quarters’ and their associated festivals
as ‘islands of pure consumption’ for visiting populations. Such ‘islands’ are more likely to
contribute to racial, ethnic and class tensions than to an impulse towards local
community’ (Judd 1999: 53). The centuries-old Lenten carnival celebrations in Venice,
revitalized in the late 1980s with a tourism remit, provide an insight into this problem. In
tourism terms, the contemporary Venice carnival is a magnet attraction, attracting some
900,000 visitors to the city over a 12 day period (Busolin 2002). During peak carnival
periods, it is no exaggeration to say that the city becomes overwhelmed. Bridge closures
and one-way pedestrian systems are often needed to maintain mobility, and many
23
citizens in this ageing city choose to stay at home because they cannot negotiate the
crowds. If mere visitor numbers were indicators of success, the Venice carnival would be
impressive. However, while it extends the city’s tourist season into the early part of the
year (the carnival typically takes place in early February) and thus achieves one of its
core revitalization objectives, it is arguable whether the carnival contributes anything to
reducing the city’s detrimental over-reliance on the excursionist market. Meanwhile, from
a local resident’s perspective it is clear that the carnival is not meeting local needs. Even
the 2002 carnival director, Fabio Momo, accepted that ‘the people of Venice cannot
stand the carnival anymore’. He elaborated further by saying ‘the local becomes a
spectator and isn’t a participant anymore. But the carnival is a party and you cannot be a
spectator in a party, you have to participate’ (Momo 2001). Data derived from surveys
undertaken among a representative sample of the local population during the 2002
carnival revealed widespread dissatisfaction with the current reproduction of carnival and
suggestions for change revolved around three key areas: more spontaneity in the
programming, including more events in outdoor public spaces, increased participation for
locals, and tighter controls on the presence and movements of visitors in the city during
carnival (Quinn 2004). The ‘Friends of the Venice Carnival Association’ founded in 1987
and chaired by Guido Rossato is very aware of declining local participation. In an
attempt to counter the problem it organizes courses, free of charge, where local people
can learn how to make inexpensive carnival costumes and be encouraged to take part in
Carnival activities in greater numbers. At the same time, however, local people’s
declining participation in, and negative attitudes towards the contemporary carnival in no
way imply a disinterest in this deep-rooted cultural practice. On the contrary, survey data
identified a deep attachment to, and recognition of, the historic tradition of civic ritual that
has been such a signifier of Venice for centuries.
24
In considering ways in which to re-ignite collective endeavour and restore civic
engagement, Putnam (2001) asks that we consider increasing participation in, rather
than consumption and appreciation of, cultural activities. He also suggests that we
‘discover new ways to use the arts as a vehicle for convening diverse groups of fellow
citizens (Putnam 2001: 411). This is easier said than done. Local respondents
interviewed as part of the Venice study could easily point to solutions. However, these
are unlikely to be implemented or even made known to the carnival organizers because
of the conflicts of interest at issue. As mentioned before, festivals are not natural
occurrences, they are social constructions that bear heavy signs of authorship. In the
case of the Venice carnival, tourism-dominated business interests prevail.
4.4 Globalisation and local diversity
Despite the role of agency and the politics inherently involved in the negotiating and
challenging of meanings reproduced in festival settings (Jackson 1988, Marston 1988) a
recurring charge in the literature is that originality is often replaced by imitation. Far from
adding to place distinctiveness, the proliferation of festivals is at least partially explained
by a formulaic approach to duplicating festivals found to have been ‘successful’ in
particular city contexts. This is part of the phenomenon identified by Scott (2000), who
writes about a deepening tension between culture as something grounded in place, and
culture as a pattern of non-place globalised events and experiences. In response, arts
commentators have been prompted to deplore the dilution of quality, originality and
difference. Clark (2004: 34) is not alone in arguing that ‘the modern festival…is a sort of
supermarket where the paying public is persuaded to bulk-buy processed culture’ and
that ‘such events quickly start to look the same’.
25
Any assessment of the role played by globalization processes in reproducing sameness
should consider that festivals have long had an outward orientation. They have been
always characterized by ‘interrelations’ rather than ‘autonomy of place’, to use Hannerz’s
(1988) terminology. From a purely artistic perspective they serve as forum for
exchanging and comparing experiences and ideas, and for prompting collaboration with
other arts festivals and practitioners. From a broader social perspective they serve as
vehicles through which cultural meanings are expressed for interpretation both by the
place-based communities themselves and by the outside world. Thus, current problems
concerning the dilution of originality and difference are not inevitable. Rather, as the
performing arts literature would argue, they result from a failure to acknowledge that
while festivals are in part produced by and through globalisation processes, they can
simultaneously respond to the challenges posed therein (Klaic et al. undated: 30). From
a purely artistic perspective, this requires a finely balanced approach. The danger facing
internationally oriented festivals is that they may neglect their local resources and
cultural needs in the process. Building relationships with artists, audiences, with the
local artistic environment, as well as with business, external audiences, and with the
media is critical to the effective functioning of an arts festival (HOLND FSTVL). Festivals
‘have to augment the existing supply and the local infrastructure. They have to add
something ….. that would not exist without the festival’ (HOLND FSTVL: 18).
The Symposium organized by the Holland Festival in 2002 offers the LIFT festival in
London as an example of a festival that reflects on its own role, on its contribution to
local cultural supply and reconfigures itself accordingly (HOLND FSTVL 2002). This
degree of self-analysis, also evident in the Galway Arts Festival (Quinn 2005) is
necessary if festivals are to maintain integrity and continue to contribute in a meaningful
way to the social and cultural contexts in which they operate. Another festival offered
26
as an example of one that manages to balance the needs of different stakeholders is the
Malta Festival in Poznan, Poland. This festival attracts people from the area in addition
to domestic visitors from elsewhere in Poland and professionals from abroad. A key part
of its success is its programming to attract different audience groups simultaneously
(HOLND FSTVL 2002).
More fundamentally, structuring festivals such that they connect with, but are not
overwhelmed by, globalisation processes requires a much deeper consideration of the
social and cultural particularities of the cities in question. Bailey et al (2004) argue that
the future could lie in viewing cultural planning as being about engaging with the lives of
those people who live in the city rather than being about regenerating the city itself. In
their view, cultural forms of consumption can actively enhance and enliven communities.
They do so ‘because culture matters for its own sake and not merely as a means to an
economic end’ (Bailey et al 2004: 64). According to Zukin (1998:836) cities have begun
to view the increasing multi-ethnicity of urban populations as a source of cultural vitality
and economic renewal. The diversity afforded by multiple cultural practices and value
systems are construed as a series of opportunities that can be cultivated to strengthen
the city’s overall appeal and distinctiveness. However, cities must move beyond a
preoccupation with image making. Landry et al (1996) highlight the case of Bradford city
as one which has successfully involved local ethnic communities. The Bradford
Community Festival was started in 1987 by the Economic Development Unit of the City
Council and runs over 3 weeks. Its objectives were that the whole community
irrespective of origin, geography or interests, would be involved and would find a voice
through the festival. The Mela was launched as part of the festival programme in 1988
Since then the popularity of the Mela has increased such that by 1996 it had
approximately 140,000 visitors. Landry et al (1996: 42) concluded that while the Mela
27
has an undoubted impact on tourism in Bradford its greatest value is the fact that it has
succeeded in stimulating significant involvement among the local Asian community. In
contrast, Garcia (2004), in an analysis of the Olympic Arts programme hosted in Sydney
in 2000, reported a series of criticisms from local arts groups representing cultural
minorities regarding the event’s failure to capture the diversity of contemporary Australia.
She concluded that the Olympic Arts Festivals were not able to provide authentic cultural
experiences, but rather exotic commodities for the enjoyment of visitors and white locals’
(Garcia: 110).
5. 3 Conclusion
Now it’s festivals, festivals everywhere. Big ones, small ones, wild ones, silly
ones, dutiful ones, pretentious ones, phony ones. Many have lost purpose and
direction, not to mention individual profile. Place a potted plant near the box
office, double the ticket prices and – whoopee – we have a festival’ (Bernheimer
2003)
As Bailey et al (2004) argue, cultural forms of consumption can actively enhance and
enliven local communities. However, there is a strong sense in the literature that
festivals, as examples of cultural forms of consumption, are not managing to achieve this
end. The crux of the problem appears to lie in the failure of cities to acknowledge the
critical importance of understanding and responding to the needs of local places, and of
closely linking city marketing and urban regeneration strategies with the specificities of
particular city contexts. Arts festivals are conceived of in far too narrow a vein. City
authorities seem to misunderstand the social value of festivals and construe them simply
as vehicles of economic generation or as ‘quick fix’ solutions to city image problems.
However, the tasks of conceptualizing the problems at issue and devising appropriate
28
policies are hampered by the scarcity of empirical research conducted in the area. The
literature is replete with passing references to the social and cultural value of arts
festivals, but there is a real shortage of in-depth, empirically grounded analyses of the
issues involved.
Could not urban policy makers be persuaded to conceive of arts festivals in terms of
quality of life, cultural and social outcomes and not simply in terms of their economic and
image creation outcomes? Such a shift would of course require a more long-term,
holistic approach to city management. It would also require a much more integrated,
consultative approach. Garcia (2004) has already identified a lack of coordination
between event organizers, tourism bodies, city planners and the arts community as a
key difficulty. An obvious void in the literature is the absence of any sort of dialogue
between those who theorise about arts festivals within performing arts and theatre
studies domains and those who strategise around them in urban planning contexts. It is
insightful to note how the same subject is conceived of in completely different ways. The
way of thinking and even the language used in these different literatures is starkly
contrasting. Central ideas in the arts literature on festivals include: that festivals be
‘artistically responsible’ (Degreef 1994:18), that they respond to specific artistic needs
genuinely felt within their place; that they be conscious of the need to add to the regular
supply of arts provision existing on a year-round basis; that they dialogue with their
diverse constituents and reflect on their social and cultural functions. Klaic et al
(undated: 48) infer a strong recognition that festivals are not simply artistic entities, but
that they can be implicit in local development and urban regeneration processes. They
suggest that a festival ‘enables the residents to create a new vision, a way of looking at
the place where they live from another point of view. It can improve the quality of
communication among the residents and enhance the mutual understanding of social,
29
ethnic, age and cultural groups’. All of this helps to create / reinforce the self confidence
of residents and change the perception of the area within and outside the community.
This, they argue is ‘an essential step in any process of urban regeneration’ (Klaic et al
undated: 48).
The strong emphasis on understanding the place and the communities who live within
that place is striking, and is mirrored in reverse measure by the extent to which it is often
absent within the city marketing literature. Bakhtin’s (1984) theories on carnival, as well
as depicting ambivalence, challenging binary oppositions and circumventing regular
social structures also posit the people involved as both actors and spectators. Festivity
depends on multiple forms of engagement. Too often contemporary urban arts festivals
envisage only spectating roles for local residents and this strongly dilutes the cultural
meanings that could be promulgated. Too often also, they fail to acknowledge the
multiple realities and conflicting meanings that can be hidden beneath their image
conscious ‘stage-managed’ veneers.
In conclusion, given the store of empirically-grounded literature currently available on
arts festivals in city contexts, it is difficult not to agree with Bailey et al’s (2004: 47)
assertion that when the democratization of culture and the empowerment of local
communities are cited as outcomes of culture-led regeneration, the rhetoric is drawing
on mere assumptions. Urban policy-makers need more than assumptions to inform
decision-making. If arts festivals are to achieve their undoubted potential in animating
communities, celebrating diversity and improving quality of life, then they must be
conceived of in a more holistic way by urban managers. Researchers have a role to play
in investigating the multiple ways in which festivals realize such potential. Ultimately, as
Landry et al. (1996) stress, cultural investment can only do so much. Equally, arts
30
festivals can only achieve so much. However, it seems abundantly clear that the growing
investment evident in urban arts festivals in recent times is not yielding optimal returns.
Until prevailing conceptualizations of festivals acknowledge their latent social and
cultural potential, this will remain the case.
31
References
Adams, R. (1986) A Book of British Music Festivals. UK: Robert Royce Ltd.
Arts Council of England (1997) Visual Arts UK: Public Attitudes Towards and Awareness
of the Year of Visual Arts in the North of England (Summary) ACE Research Report No.
15 (December).
Ashworth, G. and Voogt, H. (1994) Marketing and place promotion. In J. Gold and S.
Ward (eds), Place Promotion: The Use of Publicity and Marketing to Sell Towns and
Regions. Chichester: Wiley.
Bahktin, M. (1984) Rabelais and his world (trans H. Iswolsky). Indiana University Press.
Bloomington.
Bailey, C., S. Miles and P. Stark (2004) Culture-led urban regeneration and the
revitalization of identities in Newcastle, Gateshead and the North East of England,
International Journal of Cultural Policy, 10 (1), pp.47-65.
Bassett, K. (1993) Urban cultural strategies and urban regeneration: a case study and
critique Environment and Planning A, 25 pp.1773-1788.
BBC News (2003) Liverpool named capital of culture (http://news.bbc.co.uk, 06/04/2003)
32
Bernheimer, M. (2003) Beyond the Big Three, Financial Times, London W21.
Bhaba, H. (1994) The Location of Culture. London: Routledge.
Bianchini, F. (1996) Culture, economic development and the locality: concepts, issues
and ideas from European debates, in, Hardy, S. et al (eds) The Role of Art and Sport in
Local and Regional Economic Development. Proceedings of the Regional Studies
Association Annual Conference, November 1986. Regional Studies Association UK 2-
10.
Boissevain, J. (Ed.) (1992) Revitalizing European Rituals. London: Routledge.
Busolin, E. (2002) Comune di Venezia. Personal Interview.
Bonnemaison, S. (1990) City politics and cyclical events, in Celebrations: Urban Spaces
Transforemd, Design Quarterly 147. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
for the Walker Art Center
Central Statistics Office (2001) Census of Ireland. Dublin: Central Statistics Office.
Clark, A. (2004) High Brow, Low Blows, Financial Times Magazine, June 19, pp. 34-37.
Cohen, E. (1988) Authenticity and commoditization in tourism, Annals of Tourism
Research 15, pp.371-386.
33
Cox, K. and Wood, A. (1994) Local government and local economic development in the
United States, Regional Studies 28, pp. 640-645.
Degreef, H. (1994) European festivals: confrontations of cultural establishment and
popular feast, Carnet 2, pp. 16-22.
Edinburgh International Festival (2001) Annual Report. Edinburgh International Festival:
Edinburgh.
Ekman, A. K. (1999) The revival of cultural celebrations in regional Sweden. Aspects of
tradition and transition, Sociologia Ruralis 39 (3), pp. 280-293.
Evans, G. (2003) Hard-branding the cultural city-from Prado to Prada, International
Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27 (2), pp.417-440.
Evans, G. (2001) Cultural Planning: an Urban Renaissance, Routledge: London.
Frey, B. S. (1994) The economics of music festivals, Journal of Cultural Economics, 18
pp. 29-39.
Fridberg, T. and Koch-Nielsen, I. (1997) Cultural Capital of Europe, Copenhagen 96
(Konsekvensanalyse af Kulturby 96). Copenhagen: Danish National Institute of Socil
Research.
34
García, B. (2004) Urban regeneration, arts programming and major events: lasgow
1990, Sydney 2000, Barcelona 2004, International Journal of Cultural Policy, 10 (1) pp.
103-118.
Geertz, C. (1993) The Interpretation of Cultures. London: Fontana Press.
GGCVTB (2002) Greater Glasgow and Clyde Valley Tourist Board, Facts and Figures:
Value and Volume of Tourism. www.seeglasgow.com.
Gibson, L. and Stevenson, D. (2004) Urban space and the uses of culture, International
Journal of Cultural Policy, 10 (1) pp. 1-4.
Gomez, M. V. (1998) Reflective images: the case of urban regeneration in Glasgow and
Bilbao, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 22, (1) pp. 1-16.
Greenwood, D. J. (1989) Culture by the pound: an anthropological perspective on
tourism as cultural commoditization, in Smith, V. (ed.) Hosts and Guests. The
Anthropology of Tourism, 2nd ed. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.
Greenwood, D. J. (1976) Tourism as an agent of change: a Spanish Basque Case,
Annals of Tourism Research 3, pp.128-142.
Hall, P (1988) Cities of Tomorrow. Oxford: Blackwell.
35
Hall, C. M. (1992) Hallmark Tourist Events: Impacts, Management and Planning.
Belhaven Press: London
Hannerz, V. (1988) The world system of culture: the international flow of meaning and its
local management. Manuscript.
Hannigan, J. (2003) Symposium on branding, the entertainment economy and urban
place building: introduction. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27
(2) pp. 352-60.
Harvie, J. (2003) Cultural effects of the Edinburgh International Fesival: elitism,
identities, industries, Contemporary Theatre Review 13 (4) pp. 12-26.
Heinrich, N. (1988) The Pompidou Centre and its public: the limits of a utopian site, in R.
Lumley (ed.) The Museum Time Machine: Putting Cultures on Display, pp.199-212,
London and New York: Routledge.
Hiller, H. (1998) Assessing the impact of mega events: a linkage model, Current Issues
in Tourism, 1(1) pp.47-57.
Hitchcock, M. (1999) Tourism and ethnicity: situational perspectives, International
Journal of Tourism Research, 1, pp.17-32.
HOLND FSTVL (2002) Future of Festival Formulae. Amsterdam: Holland Festival.
36
Hughes, G. (1999) Urban revitalization: the use of festival time strategies, Leisure
Studies 18 (2), 119-135.
Hughes, H. (2000) Arts, Entertainment and Tourism. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
Isar, R. F. (1976) Culture and the arts festival of the twentieth century Cultures 3, pp.
125-45
Jackson, P. (1988) Street life: the politics of carnival, Environment and Planning D:
Society and Space 6, pp. 213-227.
Jamieson, K. (2004) Edinburgh: the festival gaze and its boundaries, Space and Culture,
7(1), pp.64-75.
Judd, D. (1999) Constructing the tourist bubble, in: D. Judd and S. Fainstein (Eds) The
Tourist City, pp.35-53. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Klaic, D., Bollo, A. and Bacchella, U. (undated) Festivals: Challenges of Growth,
Distinction, Support Base and Internationalization. Department of Culture, Tartu City
Government, Estonia.
Landry, C.; Greene, L,.; Matarasso, F.; Bianchini, F. (1996) The art of regeneration.
Urban renewal through cultural activity. Stroud, Glos: Comedia.
37
Marston. S. (1989) Public Rituals and Community Power: St. Patrick’s Parades in
Lowell, Massachusetts 1841-1874, Political Geography Quarterly 8(3). pp. 255-269.
McLay, F. (1990) The Reckoning: Public Loss, Private Gain (Beyond the Culture City Rip
Off). Glasgow: Clydeside Press.
Momo, F. (2001) Director of Carnevale di Venezia,. Personal Interview.
Mueller, W. and D. Fenton, (1989) Psychological and community issues, in G. Syme, B.
Shaw, D. Fenton and W. Mueller (eds) The Planning and Evaluation of Hallmark Events,
pp. 92-102. Aldershot: Avebury.
Muir, E. (1997) Ritual in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Mysercough, J. (1991) Monitoring Glasgow 1990. Report prepared for Glasgow City
Council, Strathclyde Regional Council and Scottish Enterprise.
Nurse, K. (1999) Globalization and Trinidad carnival: diaspora, hybridity and identity in
global culture, Cultural Studies, 13 (4) pp. 661-690.
Owusu, K. and Ross, J. (1988) Behind the Masquerade: The Story of the Notting Hill
Carnival, London: Arts Media Group.
Ozouf, M. (1988) Festivals and the French Revolution. Cambridge, Massachusetts:
Harvard University Press.
38
Paddison, R. (1993) City marketing. Image reconstruction and urban regeneration,
Urban Studies, 30 (2), pp.339-350.
Prentice, R. and Andersen, V. (2003) Festival as creative destination, Annals of Tourism
Research, 30 (1), pp.7-30.
Putnam, R. D. (2001) Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community.
New York: Simon & Schuster.
Quinn, B. (2005) Changing festival places: insights from Galway, Social and Cultural
Geography, 6(2)
Quinn, B. (2004) Making space for festivity – Venetians’ views on Carnevale. Paper
presented at the IGU Commission on Tourism, Leisure and Global Change, Pre-IGU
Congress meeting, 13 – 14th August 2004, Drymen, Scotland.
Quinn, B. (2003) Symbols, practices and myth-making: cultural perspectives on the
Wexford Festival Opera, Tourism Geographies 5 (3), 329-349.
Quinn, B. (1998) Authoring Landscapes, Shaping Places. Case Studies of the Wexford
Festival Opera (1951-1997) and the Galway Arts Festival (1978-1997). Unpublished
PhD thesis, University College Dublin.
Richards, G. (2000) The European cultural capital event: strategic weapon in the cultural
arms race? Cultural Policy, 6 (2), pp.159-181.
39
Richards, G. and Wilson, J. (2004) The impact of cultural events on city image:
Rotterdam, Cultural Capital of Europe 2001, Urban Studies, 41 (10), pp.1931-1951.
Ritchie, J. R. (1984) Assessing the impact of hallmark events: conceptual and research
issues, Journal of Travel Research, 23, pp. 2 – 11.
Robertson, M and Wardrop, K. (2004) Events and the destination dynamic: Edinburgh
festivals, entrepreneurship and strategic marketing in (eds) Yeoman, I. Robertson, M.,
Ali-Kight, J., Drummond, S. and McMahon-Beattie, U. Festivals and Events
Management: an International Arts and Culture Perspective, pp.115-129, Oxford:
Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
Robinson, M., Picard, D. and Long, P. (2004) Introduction. Festival tourism: Producing,
translating an consuming expressions of culture(s), Event Management, 8, pp.187-189.
Roche, M. (1994) Mega events and urban policy, Annals of Tourism Research, 21, pp.1-
19.
Roche, B. (2004) Cork presents programme for its year as capital of culture. Irish Times
8/10/2004.
Ryan, M. (2002) Culture win gave Glasgow boost, BBC News Online.
http://news.bbc.co.uk.
40
Sampath, N. (1997) Mas’ identity: tourism and local and global aspects of Trinidad
carnival, in Abram, S.; Waldren, J. and MacLeod, D. V. L. (eds.) Tourists and Tourism:
Identifying with People and Places. Oxford: Berg, pp.149-172.
Scotinform (1991) Edinburgh Festivals Study 1990/91. Visitor Survey and Economic
Impact Assessment. Report to Scottish Tourist Board, Lothian and Edinburgh Enterprise
Limited, City of Edinburgh District Council, and Lothian Regional Council. Edinburgh:
Scotinform.
Scott, A. J. (2000) The Cultural Economy of Cities. London: Sage.
Smith, M. P. (1991) City, State and Market. The Political Economy of Urban Society,
Oxford: Blackwell.
Smith, S. J. (1996) Bounding the Borders: claiming space and making place in rural
Scotland, Transactions, Institute of British Geographers 18, 291-308.
Turner, V. (1982) Celebration: Studies in Festivity and Ritual. Washington DC:
Smithsonian Institution Press.
Urry, J. (1990) The Tourist Gaze. London: Sage
Van den Berg, L.; Klaassen, L. H. and Van Der Meer, J. (1980) Marketing Metropolitan
Regions. Rotterdam: European Institute for Comparative Urban Research.
41
Waitt, G. (2003) Social impacts of the Sydney Olympics, Annals of Tourism Research 30
(1) pp.194-215.
Waitt, G. (2004) A critical examination of Sydney’s 2000 Olympic Games in Festivals
and Events Management: an International Arts and Culture Perspective in (eds)
Yeoman, I. Robertson, M., Ali-Kight, J., Drummond, S. and McMahon-Beattie, U.
Festivals and Events Management: an International Arts and Culture Perspective,
pp.391-408, Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
Ward, S. (1998) Selling Places: the Marketing and Selling of Towns and Cities 1850-
2000. London: Spon.
Waterman, S. (1998) Carnivals for elites? The cultural politics of music festivals,
Progress in Human Geography 22(1) pp. 54-75.
Willems-Braun, B. (1994) Situating cultural politics: fringe festivals and the production of
spaces of intersubjectivity, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 12, pp. 75-
104.
Zukin, S. (1998) Urban lifestyles: diversity and standardization in spaces of
consumption, Urban Studies, 35 (5/6) pp. 825-839.
Zukin, S. (1991) Landscapes of Power: From Detroit to Disney World. Berkeley and Los
Angeles: University of California Press.
