‘‘Capital of Culture - you must be having a laugh!” Challenging the official rhetoric of Liverpool as the 2008 European cultural capital’

Major cultural events are increasingly seen by local stakeholders as important opportunities to stimulate urban regeneration, city branding and economic development. The European Capital of Culture programme is a prominent example. Since 1985 over thirty cities have hosted the title and today it remains a highly sought-after prize. This paper analyses competing interpretations of the success of Liverpool's hosting of the European Capital of Culture in 2008. It unpacks contrasting views of Liverpool08, from the official triumphant message of urban regeneration and economic renaissance to more critical analyses that problematise important elements of the event and its social and spatial impacts. In so doing, it challenges the hyperbole of culture-led transformation to reveal different geographies of culture, different cultural experiences and different socio-economic realities; it also offers an additional cultural reading of Liverpool in 2008. Through the example of Liverpool this paper shows how local culture is politicised, manipulated and sanitised in order to stimulate urban regeneration and construct a spatial re-branding of the city.

De grands événements culturels sont de plus en plus perçus par les rentiers locaux comme des opportunités importantes pour stimuler la régénération urbaine, produire la devise des villes et le développement économique. L'initiative La Capitale Européenne de la Culture est un exemple proéminent. Depuis 1985, plus de trente villes ont accueilli le titre et maintenant il reste un prix largement recherché. Cet article analyse des interprétations en concurrence du succès de l'accueil de Liverpool de la Capitale Européenne de la Culture en 2008. Il déballe des vues contrastées de Liverpool08, du message officiel et triomphal de la régénération urbaine et de la renaissance économique à des analyses plus critiques qui problématisent des éléments importants de l'événement et ses impacts sociaux et spatiaux. De cette façon, il conteste l'hyperbole de la transformation menée par la culture pour révéler des géographies différentes de la culture, des expériences différentes de la culture et des réalités socioéconomiques différentes; il offre aussi une interprétation culturelle différente de Liverpool en 2008. Au travers de l'exemple de Liverpool cet article montre comment la culture locale est politisée, manipulée et aseptisée pour stimuler la régénération urbaine et construire un relookage spatial de la ville.

Cada vez más, los inversores locales vean a los eventos culturales como oportunidades importantes para estimular regeneración urbana, el desarollo económico y la branding a una ciudad. El Capital Europeo de Cultura es un ejemplo prominente. Desde 1985, más que treinta ciudades han presentado el título y hoy sigue siendo un premio deseable. Este papel se analiza interpretaciones competitivos del éxito del Capital Europea de Cultura 2008 en Liverpool. Se deshace las perspectivas opuestas del Liverpool08, del mensaje triunfante de regeneración urbana y renacimiento económico, a analices críticos que problematizan elementos importantes del evento y sus impactos sociales y espaciales. Al hacer esto, se cuestiona el hipérbole de la transformación cultural para revelar geografías diferentes de cultura, experiencias culturales diferentes y realidades diferentes socio-económicas; también ofrece un entendimiento cultural adicional de Liverpool en el 2008. Através el ejemplo de Liverpool, este papel demuestra como la cultura local está politizada, manipulada, y desinfectado para estimular regeneración urbana y construir una nueva branding de la ciudad.

Charabanc, cultural capital and the men of recognised credit

This paper compares the cultural legacy of the all-female Charabanc with that of Field Day, its fellow counterpart in the Irish Theatre touring movement in the 1980s. It suggests that a conscious awareness amongst the all-male Field Day board of successful writers and directors of what Bourdieu has called 'cultural capital' is implicated in the enduring authority of the work of that company within the history of Irish theatre. Conversely the paper considers if the populist Charabanc, in its steadfast refusal to engage with the hierarchies of academia and publishing, was too neglectful of the cultural capital which it accrued in its heyday and has thus been party to its own occlusion from that same history.

Reflecting on Habitus, Field and Capital: Towards a Culturally Sensitive Social Work

Summary: This article argues that the notion of the knowledge base as a central aspect of professional activity is flawed, and that it is more useful to see social work as in a continuous process of constructing and reconstructing professional knowledge. Findings: Culture is an area that has attracted widespread attention in academia and the social professions. However, there has been little examination of culturally sensitive social work practice from a realist perspective, or one that starts from the view that oppressive structures, as encoded within social class, are essential determinants of cultural experience. Following a critique of postmodern perspectives on culture, the work of Pierre Bourdieu on culture and power is explored. Applications: Three of Bourdieu's key constructs - habitus, field and capital - are utilized to develop a model for culturally sensitive social work practice that attends to the interplay of agency and structure in reproducing inequalities within the social world.

Fiddling for Outcomes: Traditional Music, Social Capital, and Arts Policy in Northern Ireland

Arts development policies increasingly tie funding to the potential of arts organisations to effectively deliver an array of extra-artistic social outcomes. This paper reports on the difficulties of this work in Northern Ireland, where the arts sector, and in particular the so-called 'traditional arts', have been drawn into a politically ambiguous discourse centered on the concepts of 'mutual understanding' and, more recently, 'social capital.' The paper traces the recent history of these policies and the difficulties in evaluating the social outcomes of arts programs. The use of the term 'social capital' in the work of Putnam and Bourdieu is considered. The paper argues, through a rereading of Bourdieu's articulation of the 'forms' of capital and Eagleton's 'ideology of the aesthetic,' the concept of social capital can be released from its current neoliberal trappings by imagining a reconnection of the concepts of 'capital' and 'the aesthetic.'