The document explores the dynamics of culture and social capital, emphasizing the role of individuals and institutions in cultural transformation, while highlighting the challenges posed by globalization and instrumentalized culture. It argues for a more democratic engagement with art and culture, encouraging active public participation and recognizing the need for equitable access to cultural resources. The future of art is questioned in light of neoliberal policies and the impact of technology and commerce on cultural practices.

1. democratising culture
a designer‐curator’s view

2. cultural change
• individuals, institutions, the environment and chance—all
participate in and contribute to the transformation of culture
• it is not always organic, benign or inclusive
– colonization, globalization, ‘knowledge economics’, etc.
• the state, institutions and industry & commerce are the
empowered authors & engineers of (cultural) change…
– leaving very little room for the public except as subjects/recipients

3. massive & pervasive subversion
• there is less and less that the public (the non‐producers of
culture, the marginalised majority) can actively do, except try
to resist and re‐appropriate the dominant, imposed culture
via “everyday acts of subversion”
– reading, talking/narrating, playing, using, walking, wearing, dwelling,
cooking…
• we should not underestimate its contribution to cultural
transformation
• however, we must ask if this strengthens society on the whole
or not…
• …and if it is truly democratic or not
DE CERTEAU, 1988

4. what is ‘social capital’?
• that in life which tends to… count for most in the daily lives of
people… goodwill, fellowship, mutual sympathy and social
intercourse (HANIFAN, 1913)
• connections among individuals… and the norms of reciprocity
and trustworthiness that arise from them (PUTNAM, 2000)

5. the state and social capital
• modernists believed that informal systems (of organization
and management) need to be replaced with formal ones.
– rational bureaucracy constitutes the essence of modernity (WEBER)
• however, informal coordination persists—and has become
even more important as economic activity becomes more
complex and technologically sophisticated.
• social capital (an aggregate of informal coordinations) is a
byproduct of (many) factors outside the control of
governments.
– like religion, shared histories, social systems, tradition, etc.
• unlike economic policies & institutions, social capital cannot
be easily created or shaped by public policy.
FUKUYAMA, 2000

6. how can states nurture social capital?
• governments best produce social capital via education.
• they can indirectly nurture it by providing vital public goods
and ensuring property rights and public safety.
• they can have a serious negative impact on social capital
when they start to undertake activities better left to private
sector or civil society.
FUKUYAMA, 2000

7. ideas for enhancing social capital
• family ties
• (socialisation through) education
• community participation & volunteering
• urban & housing design
• community facilities/assets (galleries, museums, libraries,
history/heritage, sports)
• internet & telecom
• csr
• citizen participation in governance
PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION OF AUSTRALIA, 2003

8. • where is culture? where are the arts?
– the arts offer a unique means of connecting us to our common humanity.
(HAVEL)
• we need better explorations and understandings of the
dynamics between arts & culture and social capital

9. culture = institutions & artefacts
• January 16, 2010
• Prime Minister Manmohan Singh termed as ‘unfortunate’ the
failure of four premier cultural institutions in Kolkata to fully
utilise a special allocation of Rs.90 crore (=SEK 150 million)
given for modernisation.
– “Each of these institutions is a cultural icon in the country.
Unfortunately, these institutions have not been able to fully utilise this
grant in the first year…”
– “I do hope that these four institutions will work harder to use the
allocated funds to introduce state-of-the-art systems of preservation,
display and storage of their priceless antiquities, paintings and
manuscripts…”

10. • where is the public?
– in enshrining art within ... ‘temples of culture’ … we may have lost touch with
the spirit of art: its direct relevance to our lives … art became something that
we watch other people do … rather than something we do ourselves. (NEA,
1997)
• …alternatively, are we (the ‘high priests’) failing to notice,
appreciate and celebrate the ‘art’ of ordinary people?
• …what are we doing?

11. Regime Culture and Instrumentalized Art
• in the age of globalization, leaders of the state produce a specific kind of culture, called
“regime culture”—which reinforces the power of the existing regime
• it features
– patriotism
– values financial success
– a narrow definition of family values
– a culture of fear limiting civil liberties
– reinterprets the past
– legitimates the status quo, and
– tolerates racism
• culture has been increasingly used in a specific direction: instrumentalized culture
• a contributor to economic development, fostering the growth of an economically
productive “creative class”
• its critical and transcendent potential has been eviscerated
• instrumentalization may help artists in the short run, it poses a danger to the ultimate
social role of the arts
• policies generated around the of a “creative class”, and the use of the arts as a tool of
economic development, are becoming the norm
• globalization accentuates each of these tendencies
MARCUSE, 2007

12. The future of art in postcultural democracy
• Has the future of art fallen irredeemably into the grip of the ‘creative
industries’ directed by a consortium of public and private cultural
entrepreneurs?
• Is democracy the natural guardian of artistic independence?
• Or has the cultural policy agenda of neoliberal democracy solidified into
a managerial instrumentalization of art geared to the functions of the
market and the state?
• The authors are independent curators operating from dissident research
groups whose aim is to challenge the dominant neoliberal model of
cultural enterprise and offer viable alternatives to it.
APPIGNANESI, 2007

13. • state attitudes about arts and culture tend to be biased,
dogmatic and instrumentalist
– elitist, modernist, nationalist, economic…
• even when they are openly debated, the resulting policies are
rarely democratic – in the sense of being conceptualised
around people’s cultural needs, aspirations and practices

14. the economic pyramid
purchasing power
population

15. the culture pyramid
states,
institutions,
industry &
commerce
population
power
people

16. • we need a rich, vibrant and seamless ecosystem of arts &
culture entities, spaces and opportunities, that places people
at its centre (as producers) and also the periphery
• remaining alert to:
– the hijacking of culture and cultural innovation by any elite and/or the
bureaucracy
– an imposition of ‘regime culture’
– instrumentalization of the arts & culture for economic or other agenda
– adoption of uncritical populism as the sole criterion, and rejecting other
perspectives on quality and value

17. towards a ‘cultural democracy’?
• the right to culture for everyone
– right to PRODUCE and PRACTICE, not just CONSUME or CONSERVE
• active participation in cultural life
– celebrating and respecting all forms (HIGH/LOW, etc.)
– recognizing & valuing participation
• participation in policy decisions
– LISTENING to people
• fair and equitable access to cultural resources and support
– creating CONDITIONS and STRUCTURES for universal ACCESS (particularly
for the MARGINAL)
• however, even these can easily turn into a patronage system if
culture were to be separated from other activity
INSTITUTE FOR CULTURAL DEMOCRACY, 1995/98

18. • current progressive thinking almost exclusively targets the
internet as the new ‘public sphere’ and as the new site for
cultural creativity, citizenship and democracy
– the values and intentions are indisputable, but the forms are dangerous
• perhaps true and applicable to wealthy nations, it aggravates
the crisis of poorer nations
– pushes us harder on the prescribed vector of development and quality of life
(when we really need to pause, reflect and maybe even reverse forward)
– accelerates the obsolescence of daily architectures of living (and their
replacement with global products, services and aesthetics – rather than their
validation and strengthening) and their repackaging as exotic (and premium)
cultural commodities

19. so…
• let us never forget…
– culture is not development
– culture is not business
– culture is not institutions
– it is not a bounded field or area, nor even a vector
– it is not a discipline or theory
– it is above and beyond, it is our everyday practice
• culture is our interface between inner/spiritual and
outer/material worlds
• art is the technology of culture

20. • can we return artistry and culture to the people?
• in forms by which it strengthens social capital…
• …and prevent it from becoming a commodity?

21. visual thesis
the case of india
NOTE: all images used here are downloaded from the internet and are somebody
else’s creativity and property. i am indebted to them for sharing them online.

40. some possible principles…
• people are cultural innovators
– living culture is about people; not only some people but all people
– it is what they can and want to do, not what we want them to do
– we must create the best possible conditions for this
– left to themselves, they do very well – and generate massive social capital
• rules and laws
– accept the defeat of modernist and globalist utopias
– have rules & laws, but accept their limitations
– intrinsic (organised around inner order) vs. extrinsic (organised around external order)
• commerce and technology
– can be highly empowering for culture, but also severely crippling
– encourage them, but don’t accord them superior status
– retain space for everyone, particularly the marginalised
– retain free access to knowledge and cultural resources, discourage commodification and
ownership

41. a possible ecosystem…
• we can direct art & design to serve and strengthen people’s creativity—and
thereby fuel cultural innovation at the ‘bottom of the pyramid’ as well…
– 1. propositions
• art works and visions (i.e. expositions, publications)
• products (i.e. business)
– 2. services
• architecture
• masonry
• carpentry
• tailoring
• surface decoration
• …
– 3. tools
• inspirations and ideas (i.e. publications)
• tool‐products (i.e. business)
– 4. spaces
• training (i.e. education)
• infrastructures & systems
• platforms & opportunities

42. many (im)possible ideas…
• (most of these will not materialize)
– playgrounds of culture
– culture & identity curriculum
– design serves craft
– reverse ethnography
– art@center (for the 2011 indian art summit)
– future india report/conference on wheels
– a.ha = architecture of happiness
– ngo 2.0
– srishti center for contemporary arts
– srishti regional arts & culture center
– …

43. “culture is too precious to be left
in the hands of experts…”