Negative value

Chapter 6, section 3 presented a number of individual and societal issues having the potential to be linked to negative facets of cultural value. This possibility has so far been overlooked in the literature in this field, and this is likely due to two fundamental reasons. The first and perhaps more simple is of a semantic nature, with the instinctive linguistic association between the words “value” and “culture”, and positive connotations. In the case of the first, as described in chapter 2, this is partly the result of the modern interchangeable use of “value” and “price” or “worth”. In this sense, investigations aiming at analysing the value of cultural resources have focussed on the benefits or the utility that derive from them. Similarly, the very Latin root of the word culture is based around the idea of growth and self-cultivation, developed in the German idea of Bildung. Consistently, at the base of the notion of culture was the principle of improvement, be it of the self or of society as a whole. This perception was not unchallenged, with a rich philosophical tradition traceable through over two millennia and pointing to the potential pernicious results of “cultural engagement”. These ideas can be followed back to Plato and his Republica (Burnyeat, 1997; Due’, 2003), and characterised much of medieval and, indeed, modern Cristian philosophy (Barish, 1981). However, the potential pitfalls associated with culture and cultural participation cease to be considered after the Second World War (Bianchini,

176

1993). There are, of course, important exceptions. In Sociology and Psychology, a considerable body of work has been produced over the past thirty years to investigate the so-called “copycat behaviour”, or the replication of violence witnesses in films and the popular media (Bokey and Walter, 2002). Yet, the focus of the attention has gradually moved towards the more romantic notions of culture, typical of the ideas of Bildung and of the French Enlightenment (Belfiore, 2007). Crucially, this vision of the role of culture in individual and social advancement is also particularly significant in the theoretical elaboration of the main rationales for state involvement in the arts and contemporary cultural policy.

Thus, the first, perhaps more unintended semantic misconception has been compounded by a more deliberate choice to focus on positive connotations of value in order to advance specific interests. The vast majority of studies in the field of cultural valuation stemmed either from the attempt on the part of policy-makers to obtain a clearer and more applicable valuation of the cultural sector for funding purposes, or as a result of the resistance to this effort. On the one hand, policy-oriented studies ventured in search of as many observable and measurable benefits stemming from cultural activities in order to justify investment, while other research aimed at demonstrating how the value of culture goes above and beyond its measurable impacts. In both cases, the positive connotation of value in relation to cultural resources was assumed and accepted a priori.

Conversely, an investigation on the value of culture, interpreted as its importance, should be open to consider potential negative facets as well as positive ones. This thesis presented a few instances emerged during the focus groups in both cities in which specific cultural resources or the perceived lack of access to them were seen to have a negative impact on individuals and communities.

Examples of this were given in chapter 6, and included issues of accessibility through excessive cost and distance or through lack of information, problems of self-exclusion and social stigma. One interviewee explained how, despite wanting to bring his children to the newly opened swimming pool, he could not afford to do so. He also mentioned that, even with lower ticket prices, he still could not have afforded the cost of transport for himself and his children. Significantly, this participant reported how, given this situation, the continuous health campaigns promoting exercise and fitness, especially for children, made him feel excluded and angry, as they reinforced how certain resources were placed out with his grasp. Although these

177

obstacles were directly reported during the focus groups in both cities, the potential exists for numerous other forms of negative value in relation to cultural resources.

Crucially, negative facets of value are not simply a marginal and negligible appendage. The more frequent emergence of these accounts in the focus groups organised in areas characterised by high indexes of multiple deprivation shows how negative value has the potential to counteract the benefits associated with cultural activity. The issues described above could indeed be considered as the main factors determining the relatively lower engagement with culture in deprived communities.

These findings resonate with a growing body of work investigating links between inequality and culture, whether in terms of access and consumption (Chan and Goldthorpe 2007, Bennett et al 2009, Miles and Sullivan 2012, Friedman 2012), in terms of status and the reinforcement of class positions (Essex and Chalkey, 2003, p.12, Savage et al 2005; Goldthorpe 2007; Bennett et al 2009), or in issues of control and indirect influence (DuGay et al, 1996). Other contributions to the growing body of knowledge on the possible negative connotations of cultural value include the work of Zukin (2005) and Selwood (2002) and Belfiore (2007) on the gradual substitution of the “genuine”, “real” culture in municipal localities with a globalised and “synthetic” version. As such, the inclusion of negative forms of worth in a widely accepted typology of cultural value appears of crucial importance for further progress in the field. As mentioned previously in this chapter and earlier still in chapter 2, the graphic representation of the different types of value presented in figure 2.1 is by no means universally accepted in the cultural valuation literature. However, its graphic simplicity and the fact that, having been developed in relation to green space, it includes a wide array of less tangible and non-use related facets of value, suggested its adoption and adaptation to the cultural sector. Following the insight presented in chapter 6 and in this section, a further adaptation of the typology to include negative aspects would make it an even better tool to conceptualise and operationalise cultural value.

178

Table 7.1: The forms of value identified by Choumert and Salanie’, adapted to the cultural sector and including potential negative aspects.

Value

Use Values

Direct Use Values – observable direct impacts of

a resource

Positive: benefits on cultural investment Negative: forgone benefits of other investments Indirect Use Values – impacts derived from the

functions of a resource, but removed in terms of time or space

Positive: urban regeneration

Negative: gentrification, displacement Option Value – value derived from the potential

for future use

Positive: potential for future enjoyment Negative: feelings of lack of access

Non- Use Values

Bequest Value – preservation of a resource for

future generations

Positive: culture as a vehicle for transmitting morals and values Negative: globalisation and disappearance of local culture Existence Value –the value of simply know a

resource exists, irrespective of potential use

Positive: awareness diversity and of the multi-cultural nature of modern society Negative: resentment for the perceived gradual loss of the original native heritage Nostalgic Value – value derived from past use

and indirect association with the past

Positive: nostalgia and positive associations

Negative: negative associations with feelings of exclusion and lack of access in the past

Philanthropy – the importance of a resource

being there for others and/or wider society

Positive: awareness of the important role that local cultural activities play in deprived

communities

Negative: feelings of injustice and resentment stemming from other’s access to resources that

are precluded to us

Intrinsic value

---

Positive: culture underpins the very existence of human civilisation Negative: “cultures” are responsible for injustice, or even atrocities

179

As graphically evidenced in table 7.1, there is theoretical scope for the association of negative aspects to all elements of cultural value. This does not mean that culture should be seen as a force for evil, or as a dangerous resource. What this thesis advocates is a more balances and open approach to the valuation of cultural resources. In such approach, the potential pernicious impacts of a given cultural investment or programme should be taken into consideration as much as the now ubiquitous “multipliers”, used to inflate the positive economic spill overs of large infrastructural projects like the Bilbao Guggenheim (Barber, 2008).