guardian.co.uk: Paris has three times the number of cinemas as London, twice as many public libraries, far more bookshops, theatres and music venues while London has more museums, restaurants, night clubs and green spaces. The figures emerge from the World Cities Culture Report 2012 published on Wednesday - an international survey which is the biggest of its kind examining in number crunching detail the cultural offerings of 12 cities, although the authors stress that it is not an attempt to rank them.
6 comments:
This article was an extremely fascinating look into how New York (often considered a cultural center of America) stacks up with the cultural centers of the world. I have always wondered how a city that is no more then 250 years old can compare with cities in Europe and Asia that are ten times that age. I truly appreciated that the study looked at all the cities with a wide variety of elements that are often considered "culture". The surprising element of the study was the sheer number of museums in New York. While I knew there were several I did not know it was to the extent revealed. I was greatly humbled by the fact that while New York did have it's fair share of "wins", other cities also consistantly overtook New York's top spot by a large lead.
Well at least one person who is not in the entertainment industry thinks that it is important. It would make sense that culture would help draw people to cities making them more powerful and stronger, that just seems like common sense. I also like this idea that world cities are very similar and the thing that sets them apart is culture. I think to some extent this is due to the cities history the different types of entertainment and traditions it values. You can find MacDonald's or an Apple Store everywhere but you can't necessarily find Kaboki theater or The Louvre. Culture is tradition and history and it allows us to differentiate our selves from the rest of the world and form community within those different identities.
"The report says the contribution of the arts and creative industries is fundamental to a city's health." AMEN. The quote says it all.
What is shocking to me is the money that the theatre racks in in one year. 28 million may seem like a lot at first glance. Then you realize that movies make that and more in the few weeks they they run out of the year. I suppose this really isn't sad considering films are seen all over the world by everyone and theatres are in one location. One that same note, a play may be seen in Asia that wouldn't ring as strongly for say, a European. Films, on the other hand are generally universal.
YAY CULTURE.
An article like this in a publication that isn't American Theatre Magazine is really heartening to see, and an article that doesn't feel the need to justify support for the arts is even better. So many (American) articles about the arts go into extensive detail about how DESPITE the fact that the arts are non-lucrative and DESPITE the fact that the arts are really a luxury, especially in this time of financial crisis, the arts still need to be supported. While these articles have a point, it's refreshing to have simple statements about the importance of the arts without an accompanying paragraph to defend this position. No one ever feels the need to defend a statement like "a healthy stock market is good for the country", so why is there this need to defend a statement like "a healthy cultural environment is good for the country"?
On another note, I think it's really interesting to see how other cities stack up to New York. I was in France this summer, and while I was in Paris, it was impossible not to notice the amount of bookstores we walked past. And not one of them was a Barnes and Noble. However, it's great (and a little surprising) that New York comes out on top with both theatres and theatre admissions. It's a sign of hope for the industry that a lot of us are going to enter soon, and I hope that the summit they mention in the article comes out with even better ways to improve the cultural atmosphere of New York (and maybe even American cities in general).
Sam's first sentence says it all. Finally an article that shows statistical proof that the arts and ...creative industries... have an impact on culture. Image how these cities would be without the thousands or shops or venues listed. It would be interesting to me however, to take into account the population, or the number of individuals that use these places. Would the individuals that attend or use them make the statistics more telling of the culture of the city? I think it would. Statistics is all about manipulating data, so number of shops to number of people would really say who is more overly cultured.
It means a lot to those in the entertainment industry to hear about others that still are trying to keep different cultures alive instead of forming all into one. One thing that intrigues me so much about traveling is the fact that I'm getting to experience different ways of people interpreting theatre, but still having the basic common across the world. When I went to Taiwan and Toy Story 3 came out I remember going to see it with my host family (luckily it was in english). I felt almost bad for them that they had to worry about reading the subtitles during the movie rather than just relaxing and enjoying it. That in itself is an example of how cultures are conforming into one.
Post a Comment