Discourses of Europeanness in the reception of the European Capital of Culture events: The case of Pécs 2010

Abstract

Europeanness has been determined in various ways in academic, political and everyday discussions. The concept has become profoundly current in European Union (EU) policy during the past few decades: the EU is paying more and more interest in creating cultural coherence in Europe. The EU has various cultural instruments, such as the European Capital of Culture programme (ECOC), which aim to produce and strengthen Europeanness and cultural identification with Europe among its citizens. The ECOC programme creates an ideological frame for an urban cultural event: the frame directs the reception and experiences of the festivals, exhibitions and performances in the ECOC. Pécs – a city in southern Hungary – was selected as one of the ECOCs in 2010. In the article I analyse the discourses of Europeanness in the reception of the ECOC events in Pécs. The found discourses indicate how transnational spatial categories, such as Europe, and their spatial identities are constantly constituted in local settings through multiple processes in which sensory, perceived, materialized space is intertwined with linguistic and symbolic representations of space, and its subjective experiences, beliefs and uses.

Keywords

Discourse Europeanness identity space the European Capital of Culture programme

Introduction

Europeanness has been approached in various ways in political and everyday discussions. In these discussions the ideas about Europeanness include various geographical, political, moral, cultural and pragmatic meanings, which are interrelated in a complex way. In the past few decades, Europeanness has been actively explored in the academia as well. These studies reflect paradigmatic changes in human sciences. During these decades various studies have stressed social constructionist ideas of laying emphasis on narration, rhetoric, the use of language, and social and cultural phenomena as locations in which meanings are both consciously and unconsciously produced (Christiansen et al., 1999, 2001; Diez, 1999; Light and Young, 2009; Marcussen et al., 1999; Paasi, 2001; Risse, 2004; Rosamond, 1999; Weaver, 2004 for theoretical discussion on social constructionism in European Studies see Checkel, 2006; Zuern and Checkel, 2005). Since the 1980s various influential scholars have stressed constructivist approaches in the study of nationalism. Anderson’s (1983) concept of ‘imagined communities’ and Hobsbawm’s (1983) notion on ‘invented traditions’ have been applied in various studies on nations. Similar approaches have also been applied to analysing Europe and Europeanness (e.g. Delanty, 1995; García, 1993; Shore, 1993; Shore and Black, 1996). These studies are related to a new wave of studies on Europe reflecting the ‘invention’ of Europe (Sassatelli, 2002). In addition scholars become interested in exploring the ‘Europeanization’ of discourses and practices in various fields of society. As Harmsen and Wilson (2000) note, in these studies the term ‘Europeanization’ has been used in various contexts referencing the production, formulation and identification of Europe and in various discourses and practices defining the contents of the concept of Europe.

The ‘invention of Europe’ and attempts to Europeanize various practices also characterize recent trajectories in the development of the European Union (EU) and its policies. The current political discussions on Europeanness within the EU are often characterized by varying emphasis on interpreted unity or diversity of European culture(s) (Sassatelli, 2002, 2009). The current EU policy rhetoric stresses both the unity and the diversity as the key features of European cultural identity – Europeanness is seen to be characterized by the plurality of different cultural units and features, but these cultures are also believed to be connected with some underlying common elements, such as shared cultural roots, history and heritage (Lähdesmäki, 2011). In general, cultural heritage seems to have a profoundly important role in current production of communality, unity and integration within the EU. Various important EU documents, such as the Treaty of Lisbon and the European Agenda for Culture, aim to foster common Europeanness and the idea of Europe through stressing cultural heritage as a shared legacy of Europeans. In various EU policy documents diverse regional and national heritage sites and monuments are often ‘Europeanized’ – that is, represented as European and as a part of common European cultural identity (Lähdesmäki, 2011). The ‘invention’ of Europe as a cultural entity and the Europeanization of cultural practices are implemented in practice in the EU’s cultural programmes, such as the European Capital of Culture (ECOC) programme.

Pécs – a city in southern Hungary – was selected as one of the ECOCs in 2010 together with Essen and Istanbul. In the article I analyse the discourses of Europeanness in the reception of the ECOC in Pécs, i.e. an urban cultural event, which is by definition marked as European by the ECOC programme. The main objective of the article is to provide a case study analysis of experiences and notions on Europeanness at a grassroots level, and explore the discursive formation of Europeanness in a local setting. The recent studies on the ECOC programme have mainly discussed economic and social impacts (e.g. Palmer, 2004; Palmer and Richards, 2007, 2008; Richards and Rotariu, 2009), political meanings and practices (e.g. Bergsgard and Vassenden, 2011; Lassur et al., 2010; Palonen, 2010; Sassatelli, 2002, 2009), local and regional development (e.g. García, 2004; Richards, 2000; Rommedvedt, 2009), changes of the city image (e.g. Richards and Wilson, 2004) and communication, branding, or marketing strategies (e.g. Aiello and Thurlow, 2006). In this article I focus on the reception of the programme and its meanings to the audiences in the context of its core theme: Europeanness. The theoretical discussion of the article relies on an interdisciplinary approach, in which spatiality is taken as a starting point of the analysis. The found discourses are discussed in the article from the points of view of human geography by stressing how transnational and global spatial categories, such as Europe, and their spatial identities, such as Europeanness, are constantly constituted in local settings through multiple and interactive physical, social, and cultural processes (see e.g. Massey, 2005, 2007: 10–16). In the discussions and experiences of inhabitants the concepts of local, regional, national, European and global crisscross and produce each other in various ways. The article aims to analyse the formation of Europeanness as a socio-spatial experience and thus broaden the ongoing academic discussions on Europeanness.

European Capitals of Culture programme: politicizing culture

During recent decades the EU has made various attempts to make the European cultural identity more concrete (Bee, 2008). Besides promoting tangible common symbols, such as a flag, an anthem or a new ritual calendar, the EU has set up various initiatives that aim to create a shared European culture, produce cultural integration to a European community and strengthen a common European identity. Among the initiatives are the EU’s cultural programmes, in which these aims are implemented in practice. Since 1985 the EU has nominated cities as European Cities of Culture – later as European Capitals of Culture – for one year at a time. Over the decades the programme has transformed from a cultural initiative to a significant social, political and economic factor in the local, national and EU policies (Herrero et al., 2006). The ECOC programme has been a real success in its rising popularity, with more cities submitting applications for participation, an increased variety of cultural events taking place in the selected cities, broadened media attention and enlarged budgets (Palmer, 2004; Palmer and Richards, 2007, (2008).

The latest decision on the ECOC programme stresses ‘the European Dimension’ as one of the two key criteria for the programme (Decision 1622/2006/EC). This dimension is explained as including cultural cooperation between cultural agents from different member-states, and highlighting both ‘the richness of cultural diversity’ and ‘the common aspects of European cultures’ (Decision 1622/2006/EC). The emphasis on common cultural aspects indicates one of the principle ideologies of the ECOC programme: creating a shared European cultural identity. The ECOC programme focuses on fostering local, regional and European identities, and advises the cities to present how their local culture is linked to the common European cultural identity ((Guide for cities applying for the title of European Capital of Culture, 2009). The nominated cities aim to make these policies concrete in their cultural programme during the ECOC year. Particularly for smaller non-capital cities the possibility of promoting the city as European (i.e. important, particular or typical in European terms) is a significant opportunity for branding the city. The ECOC programme creates an ideological frame for the urban cultural event that directs not only the implementation but also the reception and experience of ECOC events.

Despite the European frame of the ECOC programme, the vagueness of concepts of Europeanness and European identity has been considered problematic in the implementation of the programme. Various scholars have indicated that the ‘European dimension’ or Europeanness cannot be perceived in the contents of the ECOC events (García, 2004: 114; Myerscough, 1994; Palmer, 2004: 85–86; Richards, 2000: 162; Richards and Wilson, 2004:, 1945; Sassatelli, 2002: 444). Similarly the ex post evaluation report on ECOCs of 2007 and 2008, for example, suggests that this dimension was the least emphasized aim for the ECOCs (Ex-Post Evaluation of 2007 and 2008 European Capitals of Culture, 2009). In the programme of Pécs the ‘European dimension’ was present both at the practical level, referring to the collaboration between artists and other cultural actors from different member-states, and in the integration of various European themes in content. The European themes were not always explicitly articulated as European; however, they were often discursively produced as such in the promotional material of the city, e.g. by using references to Europe’s history, cultural canon and canonized works of art, monuments and artists (Lähdesmäki, 2008). The research in question indicates that the audiences in Pécs perceived Europeanness in the contents of the ECOC events. However, depending on the perspectives of those in the audience, the most prominent scale might be not the European, but rather the local, regional, national or even global.

Methodological and theoretical framework

The article is based on empirical data collected in Pécs, which is the fifth largest city in southern Hungary, with a population of 157,000. The city, and the region around it, is known for its multi-ethnic population and multi-phased history, which has left its marks to the architecture and traditions of the area. In the past the city developed cultural layers of Latin, Turkish, German, Serbian, Croatian, Roma and Hungarian origin. Nowadays Pécs is an active academic centre and the cultural and artistic meeting point of South Transdanubia, as it had already been during the Middle Ages.

The data was collected during 2010 with identical online (n = 532) and paper (n = 200) questionnaires, which were available in Hungarian and English. The paper questionnaire data were collected at 23 events during the months of April, May and October. The aim in the event selection was to include an extensive range of the events in the study to represent the variety of the whole Pécs2010 cultural programme. The selected events differed greatly in their size, location, organization, target audience and genre. Some of the selected events were festivals or series of events including various types of performances. The respondents (aged 15 years and older) were selected during or after the chosen events. The selection was based on a focal sampling method (Mony, 2008; Yocco et al., 2009): the data collectors divided the event venue (public space or foyer) into three to five imaginary parts beforehand and aimed to collect from one to five responses from the people who happened to be in the middle of the imagined areas. The data collection was carried out through self-completion questionnaires. From three to twelve responses were collected from each event according to the size of the event. The aim of the method was to increase the randomness of the sample.

The aim of the online questionnaire was to reach the respondents who were particularly interested in the ECOC events, active consumers of culture and well aware of the ECOC programme in Pécs. The sampling of the online questionnaire was based on a combination of convenience, purposeful and snowball sampling (Everett and Barrett, 2009; Patton, 2002). A notice of the online questionnaire was sent to contact persons of 10 different cultural organizations or networks in Pécs. The organizations represented various cultural fields (literature, visual arts, performing arts, heritage and music). Contact persons were advised to inform their own staff and their stakeholders about the online questionnaire. The two data collection methods were chosen in order to provide an extensive overview of the reception of the ECOC events: the data include responses based both on in-situ and ex-situ experiences.

The socio-demographic background of the respondents differed to some extent between the paper and online data groups. As planned, an online questionnaire reached respondents who were in general more interested in the ECOC year, aware of its contents, and active consumers of culture than the people who responded to the questionnaire in the ECOC events. The age of the respondents ranged in the paper data from 17 to 80 years, and in the online data from 16 to 80 years. The respondents were relatively young: the mean age in the paper data was 38 and only 26 in the online data. The online sample design may have had an effect on the age variance: the online form of the questionnaire may have appealed more to younger respondents, who are more familiar with the Internet and more active in using means of electronic communication. A chance to participate in a lottery offered towards the end of the questionnaire may also have appealed to younger respondents. Several studies have indicated that middle-aged people are the typical audiences of various cultural activities (see, for example, Stafford and Tripp, 2000: 32). However, large-scale urban festivals may also attract younger visitors, such as students (Boyle et al., 2010). Pécs is a university city and the students are important stakeholders in many cultural organizations of the city. Students participate in the cultural life of the city both as audiences and producers of art and culture. In the online data 1.1% and in the paper data 1.5% of the respondents were foreigners. In the online data 48.7% and in the paper data 63.5% were citizens of Pécs. In the online data 7.5% and in the paper data 8.5% of the respondents identified themselves with some national or ethnic minority. The most common minority identities were German, Roma and Croatian.

In the online data 72.4% and in the paper data 58.0% of the respondents were female. In general, women usually participate more actively in various cultural activities (Bihagen and Katz-Gerro, 2000; Seaman, 2006; Stafford and Tripp, 2000: 32). However, the high percentage of women among the respondents may influence the results of the study. Analysing the responses from the point of view of gender, the data indicate that women considered the concepts of locality, regionality, national culture and Europeanness more positive than men. Only in the case of national culture in the online data did male respondents have slightly more positive impressions than female respondents. In general, women also considered the concepts to be represented in the ECOC events more often than men. Only in the case of Europeanness data did the male respondents find it to be slightly more represented. In the online data, women were more inclined to consider that the ECOC events should represent locality and Europeanness. (Lähdesmäki, 2012)

The questionnaire included open questions on how the respondents perceived the locality, regionality, national culture and Europeanness to be represented in the ECOC events and how they thought they should be represented in the events. In this article I focus on the responses to the questions ‘In your opinion, how is Europeanness represented in the European Capitals of Culture events in Pécs?’ and ‘In your opinion, how should Europeanness be represented in the European Capitals of Culture events in Pécs?’ The responses, which varied greatly in their length and style, were analysed by the method of discourse analysis. For the discourse analysis the two data were combined.

The methodological background of the study arises from social constructionism, which emphasizes reality as constructions produced in language, interaction and social practices. In social constructionism, language is not just an instrument in communication, but is seen as producing, justifying and changing actual practices (Gergen, 1999; Shotter, 1993: 6–10, 99–101). Discourse studies rely on the theoretical formulations of social constructionism. Even though discourse studies include several different orientations, a common point of view is in the emphasis placed on the constructed character of social entities, relations and phenomena. In the analysis some discourses are seen to produce one version of reality, while some others produce another (Fairclough, 1992: 3–4). In this article I will define discourse as a particular way of representing reality. These representations, which are expressed in questionnaire responses, construct Europe, Europeanness and European cultural identity and the ideas, mental images, notions and expectations related to them.

In sociology and human geography various scholars have stressed the meaning of language in the production of space and place (Lefebvre, 1991; Paasi, 1996; Soja, 1996). According to these points of view, environment as known, interpreted, depicted and theorized space is always related to some linguistic practices (Karjalainen, 2004: 49). Place, environment and landscape are saturated by language: they are formed by language-based concepts, stories, descriptions, memories and associations (Nyman, 2004: 129). When space and place have been approached by stressing the meanings of representations of space, or conceived space (espace conçu) in the sense of Lefebvre (1991), scholars have often used the metaphor of text in reference to environment and landscape. With text the scholars have referred to a possibility to produce and receive environment as a cultural and social phenomenon, to which meanings are coded and from which they can be decoded or ‘read’ (Duncan and Duncan, 1988; Kervanto, 1999: 373). Space has been seen as comprising specific codes, established at specific historical periods and varying in their effects (Foucault, 1977, 1998; Lefebvre, 1991: 17). As in discourse studies in theorizations of space, the concept of text usually refers to a larger category than just spoken and written communication. The concept of text has to be understood in the broader Barthesian sense to also contain visual, material, and physical representations and other meaningful aspects of ‘language’ (Barthes, 1973) such as spatial structures.

An emphasis on language, text and discursive meaning-making processes in human and social sciences reflects the linguistic turn, which has broadened points of view in various disciplines during recent decades (Rorty, 1992). Concurrent constructivist points of view have also been described as subjective, narrative and cultural turns, in which the scholars have stressed subjective experience, narration or cultural relations and communication in meaning-making processes (Ferguson, 2003; Fornäs, 1995: 15). These in turn resonate with a set of trajectories in human geography in which scholars have focused their interests on place rather than space. When space has been conceptualized as a static, abstract and objective spatial entity, the concept of place has been described as a particular, concrete and subjective spatial experience: space to which subjects relate their own stories, memories, emotions and notions (Casey, 1997: 334–339; Giddens, 1990: 18–19; Hall, 1992; Paasi, 1996: 207–208.). Interest in place has motivated scholars to stress relativity in the meanings of space. In recent decades various scholars have also stressed relational approaches to space: both space and place have been perceived as a sphere of multiplicity made out of numerous heterogeneous entities and the relations between them (Harvey, 1996; Massey, 1991, 2005: 9, 2007: 22; Soja, 1996; Thrift, 1996). Space is considered as being always in a process of being made (Massey, 1991, 2005: 9), perceived and signified from various points of view. Thus, the relativist point of view in human geography questions the categorical separation between the concepts of space and place (Massey, 2005).

The idea of space as produced by interrelated social relations has been introduced by Henry Lefebvre in his influential book La production de l’espace, published in 1974. According to him, space produces social relations but is at the same time a product of them. The same space contains various social spaces. In Lefebvre’s thinking the sensory, perceived, materialized space is intertwined with linguistic and symbolic conceptualizations and representations of space and subjective experiences, beliefs and uses of space, which all are present in a multi-layered way in our physical environment. Lefebvre (1991: 38–41) has discussed these different aspects of space as perceived (le perçu), conceived (le conçu) and lived (le vécu) space. Edward Soja (1996: 56) has used the concept of Thirdspace to stress how all the aspects of space – ‘the abstract and the concrete, the real and the imagined, the knowable and the unimaginable, the repetitive and the differential, structure and agency, mind and body, consciousness and the unconscious, the disciplined and the transdisciplinary, everyday life and unending history’ – are intertwined.

In recent studies on the social production of space, scholars have emphasized space as a historical construction. Thus, space is never non-historical. To stress this aspect of space Doreen Massey (2005: 177–180) has used the concept of time-space: spaces are not static entities but continuous processes that are influenced by their past. In addition, the aspect of space as a continuous process has been elaborated further from the point of view of gender studies. For example, Judith Butler’s notion of performativity has been recast to theorize the concept of space. Although Butler herself has very little to say about space or place, her ideas about performativity – ‘that reiterative power of discourse to produce the phenomena that it regulates and constrains’ (Butler, 1993: 2) – have been influential for the critical geography concerned to deconstruct naturalized social practices (Mahtani, 2004: 65). According to Butler (1990), identity is the system of a logic of power and language (i.e. discourse), and it is produced as a performative by active subjects. Similarly area-based identities, such as Europeanness, can be interpreted as performatives produced in various discourses and social practises in space and place.

In the following discourse analysis I understand Europeanness as a multi-layered spatial identity that is constructed as a process in the Thirdspace in Soja’s terms. I will apply Lefebvre’s categorization in the analysis as a starting point to illustrate the multi-layered nature of the discourses of Europeanness that are being produced in a local setting. The analysis indicates how Europeanness is experienced, verbalized and given meaning using three different conceptual levels of space.

Discourses of Europeanness among audiences in Pécs2010

In the responses of the ECOC audiences in Pécs, definitions, descriptions and evaluations of Europeanness form a web of interrelated linguistic utterances. In this web certain meaning-making patterns emerge, and thus form discourses in which Europeanness is understood and conceptualized in a particular way. However, different discourses are closely linked and form partly overlapping structures. In the discourses of Europeanness reality, imagination, expectations and wishes of certain kind of European features and qualities intertwine. In the analysis distinct responses cannot be categorized in a way that would allow each response to be located in a particular discourse. Instead, one response can include meanings that belong to several discourses. In the analysis the various descriptions of Europeanness were divided into meaningful subthemes and ordered according to Lefebvre’s theory of space. In the following analyses I use various quotations from the responses to illustrate the subthemes and the diversity and multi-layered nature of the data.

Perceived Europeanness

In Lefebvre’s (1991: 36–38) theory a materialized, socially produced, empirical space, which is open to concrete measurement and description, is described as perceived space. In the questionnaire data Europeanness was often described in these kinds of concrete terms. These descriptions form a discourse in which Europeanness is perceived as a spatial identity, which can be located to certain kinds of locations in Europe. In this discourse Europeanness is considered as an identity of a particular place (Relph, 1976), such as the city of Pécs, due to certain qualities of its environment.

Since the 1990s various ECOCs have used the programme as a tool to revive the city by investing in various branches of culture and the creative industry. Declining industrial cities in particular have aimed to regenerate their economy through large building projects of cultural institutes, renovating and reusing old factory buildings, developing and repairing public spaces in the city and, in general, transforming the image of the city to be more dynamic, innovative and inviting with the help of the ECOC brand ((Oerters and Mittag, 2008; Richards, 2000). During recent years, these aims have still characterized several ECOC cities, particularly in former socialist countries. In Pécs the ECOC nomination meant a start to broad construction and renovation projects, which continued after the ECOC year: major museums were renovated, main squares and parks were rebuilt, several new buildings for cultural use were built, an old ceramic factory was renovated and taken to a new use, the façades of major buildings in the centre were restored, streets and roads were repaired, etc.

Several respondents in the questionnaire data considered that the repair of infrastructure and buildings in the city reflected Europeanness. Europeanness was described as being represented, for example, in ‘the revival of the different parts of the city’ (female, b. 1981) or ‘Absolutely in the appearance of the renovated squares and the reconstructed buildings. In attempts to develop up to the standards of other European cities’ (female, b. 1989). In this discourse Europeanness was considered as a materialized quality of the environment; it meant both plans and a will to develop and modernize the environment, and a systematic and fluent implementation of the plans in order to make the environment more aesthetic, comfortable and cosy to live in. Ideas of a better living standard determined the meanings of Europeanness in this discourse. Europeanness was attached in the responses, for example, to ‘economy and development’ (female, b. 1986), ‘working conditions’ (female, b. 1990) or ‘reaching the standard of the European Union’ (male, b. 1987). It also meant ‘high standard’ (female, b. 1990) and ‘level of quality’ (female, b. 1963) in the contents of cultural programmes, and ‘high standard, quality and professional arrangement’ (female, b. 1988) of them. On one hand, the development up to the standard, which was considered as European, was described as a positive attempt. The development was described, for example, in terms of the globalized market economy and its ‘positive’ marks in the local environment: ‘We have a lot of bars, shops, and restaurants that are so well known all over the world, let alone in Europe! McDonalds, Spar, New Yorker, C&A, and so many more!’ (female, b. 1989). On the other hand, the attempts to reach the so-called European standard were considered as a consequence of an external pressure which undervalued the existing living conditions and stressed the appearance of high standards at the expense of the contents of culture and living. The respondents explained these sentiments, for example as follows: ‘It [Europeanness] is always emphasized – that we will catch up with Europe, underlining the feeling of being less, which characterizes our nation (male, b. 1989); and ‘To a large extent we meet the European global expectations, we renovate, prepare, transform everything, but it may be that we should not be so worked up about keeping up appearances’ (female, b. 1986).

In the discourse some respondents linked the renovation and restoration of architecture to fostering common European artistic styles and heritage. Europeanness was considered as being represented, for example, through ‘style characteristics in renovations’ (male, b. 1987) and historical heritage sites. As one respondent stated:

The religion is our common heritage as are the old remnants of the Great Roman Empire, which ruled all of Western Europe, and on which the Central and Eastern European culture is based, and which later determined the entire Western European thinking, not to mention the Turkish treasures. (male, b. 1985)

However, highlighting the common heritage as a representation of Europeanness was rather rare among all respondents. The history and heritage that the ECOC events brought to the fore were mostly understood in a national frame and as representing national identity.

Conceived Europeanness

According to Lefebvre (1991: 38–39) space is dominated by various conceptualizations of planners, social engineers, urbanists, technocratic subdividers etc. He calls this aspect of space conceived. In Lefebvre’s views conceived space is tied to the order of design, to the control over the production of space, and given its character as a product of its ‘engineers’ it reflects a receded relation to space. Conceptions of space tend towards a system of verbal signs. According to Soja (1996: 67), these conceptualized spaces are representations of power and ideology, of control and surveillance. In the questionnaire data Europeanness was often perceived through conceptualizations, symbols and descriptions, which repeated the promotional rhetoric and policy of the Pécs2010 organization, the city management and the EU. In this discourse Europeanness was considered as a spatial identity, which was realized in an organized cooperation between various agents in Europe and in representations of this cooperation. Besides verbal signs, Europeanness was perceived in this discourse through visual and performative signs, such as in visual logos or cultural performances, which were considered as signifying Europeanness.

Various respondents described representation of Europeanness in cultural events in Pécs by stressing the presence of the EU-related symbols, such as the EU flag, in the city, or by pointing to the name of the cultural programme itself as representing Europeanness. The top-down policy and promotional rhetoric was repeated in various responses: ‘The whole city is full of plaques of [the EU] support. In addition, every time (for example in the welcoming speeches) the question of Europeanness is addressed’ (female, b. 1965). In general, various respondents in this discourse parallelled Europeanness with the EU. Thus Europeanness could be simply described as follows: ‘We are an EU member-state, Pécs is the European Capital of Culture in 2010: an integral part of the EU, and this is stressed in the events’ (female, b. 1987).

In this discourse Europeanness was perceived as a spatial identity, which was realized in a conceptualized space rather than in a concrete environment. In the discourse Europeanness meant stressing existing broader bonds to Europe, such as ‘relations of Pécs to European culture’ (male, b. 1978), or ‘relations between Hungary and Europe’ (female, b. 1949). Highlighting the significance of these bonds and links reveals a wish to belong to that something seen as a common European community. This is in fact one of the EU’s main ideological objectives in the ECOC programme (Lähdesmäki, 2011). However, ways of defining Europeanness through bonds and links between Pécs and Europe also included nationalistic motives. According to these views: ‘It must be shown what Europe has received from us, rather than what we got from German, Latin, Slavic or English Europeanness’ (male, b. 1985). In this discourse Europeanness was seen as a patchwork of various nationalities or ethnicities, which, however, includes hierarchical structures of dominance and subordination between the nationalities. The idea of fostering relations with and bonds to different European nations and cities is brought to more concrete terms in responses in which Europeanness was seen as being manifested in ‘the cooperation with the other ECOC cities’ (female, b. 1985), or in ‘involving European friend and partner cities in the events’ (male, b. 1980). However, in these responses Europeanness is again described in terms of upper-level policy structures – not as a practice which an individual could set up and implement.

The idea of Europeanness as a combination of various national identities and diverse ethnic cultures is stressed in the discourse through emphasizing the significance of presenting cultures and features of other European nations in the ECOC events. Europeanness was considered as being manifested in ‘the diverse multinational programmes, of which the city is full’ (male, b. 1974), and in ‘thematic programmes on European countries’ (female, b. 1965). Besides national cultures, Europeanness was related to displaying ‘the culture of European minorities’ (female, b. 1988), and ‘giving an opportunity to ethnicities and minorities to perform’ (female, b. 1987). Eventually, Europeanness narrowed in this discourse to a performance, which is being organized in a top-down process, restricted to a stage and controllably performed to the audience in the city.

Lived Europeanness

Lefebvre (1991: 39) describes the space of inhabitants and users – those who seek only to describe rather than control or actively transform the space – as lived space. Lived space is a directly but passively experienced space of everyday life. For Lefebvre, lived space is, however, teeming with sensual intimacies and passionately filled with imagination, and thus offers a terrain for the generation of counterspaces. In Butler’s terms, lived space is generated through various individual spatial performatives through which people use, produce and make sense of their environment and its spatial identities. In the questionnaire data Europeanness was also experienced as a lived space, in which the subjective, sometimes bodily, impressions, emotions and sentiments were taken as a basis for defining identities. In this discourse Europeanness was seen as being manifested in the relations and encountering of subjects in the city. It was related to a particular atmosphere and its influences to the individuals’ direct experiences on the city and its cultural events. Thus, in this discourse Europeanness was considered more as an identity of people (Relph, 1976) than of place.

The most common way to describe Europeanness in the data in general was to stress the presence of people who were considered as ‘Europeanizing’ Pécs and the ECOC events in the city. ‘European personalities’ (male, b. 1985) were seen as having an influence on the European atmosphere of the city. Similarly several respondents described how ‘the artists from abroad bring a piece of Europe to us’ (male, b. 1982). Besides European or foreign performers, the respondents stressed foreign visitors or tourists – ‘I see and hear a lot of foreign people’ (female, b. 1965) – and international students as a source of an experience of Europeanness: ‘Many foreign students live in Pécs thanks to the Erasmus programme, it is such a European atmosphere, cultures already meet, many performers from Europe’ (female, b. 1990). In addition, the experiences of multiculturalism and multilingualism determined this discourse. Europeanness was considered as being represented through, for example, ‘foreigners, minorities, the appearance of multilingual events’ (female, b. 1977) and ‘Translations of programmes into foreign languages. Hungarian literature made available to foreigners. Multi-lingual programmes’ (female, b. 1979). One of the respondents summarized the multicultural experience of Europeanness as follows: ‘Pécs is a melting pot, a great number of European ethnic groups and their values can be found here’ (female, b. 1986).

In this discourse the social relations of people were the basis for describing Europeanness. These relations were described as having various values, which were seen as determining European mentality or European atmosphere. These values included ‘patience and paying attention’ (female, b. 1981), ‘positive thinking, inclusiveness, hospitality, solidarity, tolerance and openness’ (female, b. 1984) and ‘peaceful, helpful and smiling mentality, which characterizes an established peaceful democracy and well-being in Europe’ (female, b. 1965). This kind of social awareness of fellow-citizens was considered as being manifested, for example, in the acceptance of cultural diversity: ‘Different cultures can appear together and can be accepted’ (female, b. 1989). Thus Europeanness could be seen, for example, as ‘symbolizing togetherness’ (female, b. 1987). In this discourse Europeanness as spatial identity was determined from a humanist point of view and in opposition to the economic or material value-based determinations of Europeanness. In some responses this kind of emphasis of Europeanness was discussed in connection to the memories of ‘a socially better past time’:

We need to have an attitude in which we overcome the problems and have a common goal to realize that we work for a common purpose, which would motivate rather than make us discouraged. Yes, it is important to get back to the attitude that the common good is our priority rather than being selfish. (female, b. 1984)

In this discourse Europeanness as a lived space meant stressing various types of grassroots-level cooperation and interaction of people in everyday situations. Involving people in producing culture together and creating culture from their own starting point characterized the meanings of Europeanness in the discourse. In general, openness to interaction was considered as determining Europeanness: ‘Several events also point out that Pécs has become not only a European Capital of Culture but also a centre in which people could meet’ (female, b. 1989).

Europeanness and its Other

As with all identities, describing and defining Europeanness includes making distinctions and borders (Delanty, 1995: 1–3). In general, identity building needs a reflection of the Other: a reflection of something which ‘we’ are not or to which ‘we’ do not belong (Connolly, 1992; Hall, 1990). Similarly the spatial ‘inside’ is realized only in reference to the real and imagined ‘outside’ (Massey, 2005). In the questionnaire data, Europeanness was, however, rarely compared with identities or qualities outside its imagined borders. The Other of Europeanness was difficult to perceive from the responses; it rather seemed to exist within and as a part of Europeanness. National identity seemed to form the strongest counterpart to Europeanness in the data. Several respondents stressed in their responses that Europeanness ‘does not need to be represented!!!!’ (male, b. 1982) in the ECOC events and the events ‘should basically be now about Pécs and Hungary’ (male, b. 1985). Many respondents considered Europeanness as an opposite to ‘our’ identity, which was seen as important to foster and strengthen. As one of the respondent answered: ‘It [Europeanness] should be less important than our own identity. We should not belong there [the EU] at all, it [the ECOC events in Pécs] should be about what we are’ (male, b. 1986). Some respondents stressed that the rhetoric of Europeanness was strongly promoted during the ECOC year in Pécs, but the ECOC programme as such did not produce any specific experiences of Europeanness. One respondent wrote:

In the speeches of the opening ceremony, performers emphasize that Pécs is the European Capital of Culture. Beyond this, I do not feel ‘more European’ than before, but this is a good thing, because I think that Hungarian identity is more important. We could say that I am firstly Hungarian and secondly European. (female, b. 1989)

In this response having national identity did not exclude the identification with Europe. However, in some responses Europeanness was considered as a direct threat to a more important national identity:

Primarily, the interests of the city and the country should be kept in mind, and after that those of Europe. The lowest level of Europeanness should be addressed, even if we are members of the EU. We should be members of the union in a way that we would still preserve our identity, and not merge with everyone.

(Female, b. 1989)

In these kinds of views Europeanness was interpreted as a homogenizing identity, which flattens the particularity and originality of cultures. This threat included negative views on the unwanted blurring of cultural characteristics and original cultural phenomena. The responses of both female and male respondents included views in which the national identity was considered as the main focus of the ECOC programme, or Europeanness as a threat to the particularity of national identity. However, the male respondents expressed their views on the threat in a more straightforward manner. The most nationalist responses were given by male respondents.

However, national identity, like other area-based identities, was often considered in the data as an important element of Europeanness rather than its opposite. Thus, the notion of Europeanness in the data was often based on an idea of multi-layered identity according to which people have various different identities, which activate in certain situations or circumstances. The same qualities and issues can be considered as identity markers of different identities in different situations or circumstances.

Conclusions

As the study indicates, space can be approached as text, which can be both ‘written’ and ‘read’ in various ways. The discursive understanding of space enables the perception of the coexistence of several meanings of space, and the comprehension of the transformation of spatial meanings. As Massey (2005: 9) notes, space includes a possibility of the existence of multiplicity: it is the sphere in which distinct trajectories coexist; the sphere of coexisting heterogeneity. Similarly Lefebvre’s ideas of the multi-layered nature of space emphasize the coexistence of various spaces – both official and subjective – in the same place. In his views the physical, mental and social spaces merge forming a ‘logico-epistemological space’ – a space in which nature, formal abstractions, and ‘space occupied by sensory phenomena, including products of the imagination such as projects and projections, symbols, and utopias’ intertwine (Lefebvre, 1991: 11–12).

The heterogeneity, or the multi-layered nature, of perceiving Europeanness in the cultural events of Pécs2010 indicates how the abstract area-based identity was given different meanings through linguistic, social and performative practices. Europeanness was not only received as a fixed identity, but produced and justified in language, interaction and social practices in the reception of the ECOC events. The questionnaire study itself provided a certain kind of space for the discursive production of Europeanness. The perceptions of Europeanness among the investigated respondents followed the three different conceptual levels of space discussed and theorized by Lefebvre. The heterogeneity of perceptions existed not only between the respondents: the study indicates that one respondent could perceive and describe Europeanness in several discourses and through several conceptual levels of space.

According to Lefebvre (1991: 40–46) conceived space directs or even dominates everyday life in space and beliefs about space (i.e. lived space) in the modern world. However, the lived space has a strong influence on how the concrete environment is perceived and given meanings in everyday experiences. The ECOC programme functions as a conceptual frame for Europeanness in a local setting. It formed a conceived space of Europeanness that directed the interpretations of Europeanness among the ECOC audiences in Pécs. In this discourse Europeanness was approached more from the position of a distanced outsider than from that of a subjective insider (Relph, 1976): Europeanness was something conceptualized, symbolized, narrated or performed. Besides the conceived space, interpretations of Europeanness through experiences of lived space were common in the data. Experiences produced Europeanness in various ways: through a subjective inside position in the place (see Relph, 1976) and as lived in the body (see Merleau-Ponty, 1962). Thus both the conceived and the lived space dominated the formation of discourses on Europeanness in the data; it was less interpreted through concrete environment and materialized places (i.e. perceived space). Even though the ECOC programme can be interpreted as the EU’s attempt to attach Europeanness to concrete locations and places in Europe (Lähdesmäki, 2011), the audiences in Pécs mostly considered Europeanness as an abstraction: as a social and mental project, rather than as any localized qualities in physical places.

In the data only a few respondents discussed Europeanness through common European heritage, monuments or historical sites. Descriptions of Europeanness were profoundly ahistorical. The descriptions contradict with Massay’s ideas on space: for her space is never ahistorical. The lack of history in the descriptions of Europeanness among the audiences can be interpreted in several ways: either Europeanness was perceived through contemporariness – as a spatial identity, which has been formed only recently or which is getting its form through various relations in present time – or the history is commonly related to the identity formation on a national level, not on a European level. In fact, when the same audiences described how national culture was represented in the ECOC events in Pécs, one of the most common ways of description was to stress the presence and display of history and traditions in the city. Various scholars have stressed how identity, place, and memory are closely intertwined (e.g. Foote, 1997; Paasi, 1996; Yeoh and Kong, 1999). Particularly national and ethnic memory and cultural identity include strong geographical dimensions, in which the past and cultural heritage is seen as anchored to various – real or imagined – places and landscapes (Said, 1985). Meanings of places consist of both images of the past and experiences of present time (Yeoh and Kong, 1999). In the case of Europeanness, the experiences of the present seem to form a more important starting point for the meaning making of the common European identity.

Even though the respondents emphasized in general the importance of national culture in the ECOC events, they also considered that Europeanness is and should be represented in the ECOC events. Various factors may explain the positive attitudes towards Europeanness among most of the respondents. After the change of the regime in the Eastern European countries, ‘European’ identity was often brought to the fore when the nations aimed to detach themselves from their previous socialist identities. In this context ‘European’ referred to adapting the legal system, institutions and economy to the principles of western countries of the EU (Kolankiewicz, 1993: 106–107). Similar adapting was needed when Hungary joined the EU in 2004. On one hand, the high expectations of the relatively fresh membership may have influenced the reception of the ECOC programme in Pécs. On the other hand, the rise of the nationalist movement in Hungary during recent years may have encouraged some respondents to stress the ‘European dimension’ in the reception of the ECOC programme. In the responses the European identity was often discussed in relation to the EU and with pride and a feeling of the importance of being a part of the union. On one hand, Europeanness was seen as something that manifests better living standards and a higher level of quality in various fields. On the other hand, it was also considered to be a bureaucratic force with which a national entity must contend in order to make its significance clear.

During the past decades nationalist movements have become stronger in various European countries. In several member-states of the EU, such as Hungary, nationalist parties have gained major victories in recent parliamentary elections (the election was held in Hungary in April 2010). At the same time the EU has faced severe constitutional crises, which have shaken the base of the European integration process in various policy sectors (Calhoun, 2009). In spite of these factors, or because of them, during recent decades the EU has started to pay more and more interest to cultural questions and identification of its citizens. The ECOC programme is one of these tools created to produce Europeanness in local settings. The study indicates that the programme succeeds in producing both top-down-based notions of Europeanness and subject-based feelings and experiences of Europeanness, of which many people become aware because of the frame of the ECOC programme.

Footnotes

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References

Aiello

Thurlow

(2006) Symbolic capitals: visual discourse and intercultural exchange in the European capitals of culture scheme. Language and Intercultural Communication 6(2): 148–162.

Anderson

(1983) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.

Barthes

(1973) Théorie du texte [Theory of text]. Encyclopedia universalis. Available at: http://www.esnips.com/doc/2627e09b-78c0-4b77-a566-d91c196d4155/Roland-Barthes-=-Th%C3%A9orie-du-texte (accessed 4 August 2011).

Bee

(2008) The ‘Institutionally Constructed’ European identity: citizenship and public sphere narrated by the commission. Perspectives on European Politics and Society 9(4): 431–450.

Bergsgard

Vassenden

(2011) The legacy of Stavanger as capital of culture in Europe 2008: watershed or puff or wind? International Journal of Cultural Policy 17(3): 301–320.

Bihagen

Katz-Gerro

(2000) Culture consumption in Sweden: the stability of gender differences. Poetics 27(5–6): 327–349.

Boyle

Joham

Abdullah

(2010) A study of attendances to an international arts festival. In: The 6th international conference on cultural policy research, Jyväskylä, Finland, 24–27 August. Finland: University of Jyväskylä, 1–12.

Butler

(1990) Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.

Butler

(1993) Bodies that Matter: On the Discursive Limits of Sex. London: Routledge.

10.

Calhoun

(2009) Cosmopolitan Europe and European studies. In: Rumford

(ed.) The Sage Handbook of European Studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 637–654.

11.

Casey

(1997) The Fate of Place: A Philosophical History. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

12.

Checkel

(2006) Constructivist approaches to European integration. In: Jorgensen

Pollack

Rosamond

(eds) Handbook of European Union Politics. London: SAGE, pp. 57–66.

13.

Christiansen

Jorgensen

Wiener

(1999) The social construction of Europe. Journal of European Public Policy 6(4): 528–544.

14.

Christiansen

Jorgensen

Wiener

(eds) (2001) The Social Construction of Europe. London: SAGE.

15.

Connolly

(1992) Identity/Difference: Democratic Negotiations of Political Paradox. Ithaca, NY and London: Cornell University Press.

16.

Decision 1622/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 2006. Available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:304:0001:01:EN:HTML (accessed 4 August 2011).

17.

Delanty

(1995) Inventing Europe: Idea, Identity, Reality. Basingstoke: Macmillan Press.

18.

Diez

(1999) Speaking ‘Europe’: the politics of integration discourse. Journal of European Public Policy 6(4): 598–613.

19.

Duncan

(1988) Re-reading the landscape. Environment and Planning D: Society & Space 6(2): 117–126.

20.

Everett

Barrett

(2009) Investigating sustained visitor/museum relationships: employing narrative research in the field of museum. Visitor Studies 12(1): 2–15.

21.

Ex-Post Evaluation of 2007 and 2008 European Capitals of Culture (2009) Birmingham: Ecotec.

22.

Fairclough

(1992) Introduction. In: Fairclough

(ed.) Critical Language Awareness. London: Longman, pp. 1–30.

23.

Ferguson

(2003) Phenomenology and social theory. In: Ritzer

Smart

(eds) Handbook of Social Theory. London: SAGE, pp. 232–248.

24.

Foote

(1997) Shadowed Ground: America’s Landscapes of Violence and Tragedy. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

25.

Fornäs

(1995) Cultural Theory and Late Modernity. London: SAGE.

26.

Foucault

(1977) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. London: Penguin Books.

27.

Foucault

(1998) The History of Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge, vol. 1. London: Penguin Books.

28.

García

(2004) Cultural policy and urban regeneration in western European cities: lesson from experience, prospects for the future. Local Economy 19(4): 312–326.

29.

García

(ed.) (1993) European Identity and the Search for Legitimacy. London and New York: Pinter.

30.

Gergen

(1999) An Invitation to Social Construction. London: SAGE.

31.

Giddens

(1990) The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.

32.

Guide for cities applying for the title of European Capital of Culture (2009) Brussels: European Commission.

33.

Hall

(1990) Cultural identity and diaspora. In: Rutherford

(ed.) Identity: Community, Culture, Difference. London: Lawrence and Wishart, pp. 223–237.

34.

Hall

(1992) The question of cultural identity. In: Hall

McGrew

Held

(eds) Modernity and its Futures. Cambridge: Polity Press and Open University, pp. 273–327.

35.

Harmsen

Wilson

(2000) Introduction: approaches to Europeanization. Yearbook of European Studies 14: 13–26.

36.

Harvey

(1996) Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference. Oxford: Blackwell.

37.

Herrero

Sanz

Devesa

. (2006) The economical impact of cultural events: a case-study of Salamanca 2002, European capital of culture. European Urban and Regional Studies 13(1): 41–57.

38.

Hobsbawm

(1983) Mass-producing traditions: Europe, 1870–1914. In: Hobsbawm

Ranger

(eds) The Inventing Traditions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 263–307.

39.

Karjalainen

(2004) Ympäristö ulkoa ja sisältä: Geografiasta geobiografiaan [Environment from inside and outside]. In: Mäntysalo

(ed.) Paikan heijastuksia. Ihmisen ympäristösuhteen tutkimus ja representaation käsite [Reflections of Place. Research of the Relation Between Man and Environment and the Concept of Representation]. Jyväskylä: Atena Kustannus, pp. 49–68.

40.

Kervanto

(1999) Cities as texts: urban practices represented or forgotten in art history. In: Reinik

Stumpeö

(eds) Memory & Oblivion: Proceedings of the XXIXth International Congress of the History of Art held in Amsterdam. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 373–377.

41.

Kolankiewicz

(1993) The other Europe: different roads to modernity in eastern and central Europe. In: García

(ed.) European Identity and the Search for Legitimacy. London and New York: Pinter, pp. 106–130.

42.

Lähdesmäki

(2008) Concepts of locality, regionality and Europeanness in Tallinn, Turku and Pécs as European capitals of culture. Ethnologia Fennica/Finnish Studies in Ethnology 35(2): 6–15.

43.

Lähdesmäki

(2011) Rhetoric of unity and cultural diversity in the making of European cultural identity. International Journal of Cultural Policy 18(1): 59–75.

44.

Lähdesmäki

(2012) Celebration of locality, regionality, national culture or Europeanness? Notions on area-based identities in Pécs 2010 culture in/and crisis. In: Proceedings of the 4th annual conference of the university network of the European capitals of culture (ed. Cloudenys

), Antwerp, 27–28 October 2011, UNeECC Forum, vol. 4. Pécs: University Network of the European Capitals of Culture.

45.

Lassur

Tafel-Viia

Summatavet

. (2010) Intertwining of drivers in formation of new policy focus: case of creative industries in Tallinn. The Nordic Journal of Cultural Policy 13(1): 59–85.

46.

Lefebvre

(1991) The Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell.

47.

Light

Young

(2009) European union enlargement, post-accession migration and imaginative geographies of the ‘New Europe’: media discourses in Romania and the United Kingdom. Journal of Cultural Geography 26(3): 281–303.

48.

Mahtani

(2004) Judith Butler. In: Hubbard

Kitchin

Valentine

(eds) Key Thinkers on Space and Place. London: SAGE, pp. 65–71.

49.

Marcussen

Risse

Engelmann-Martin

. (1999) Constructing Europe? The evolution of French, British and German nation state identities. Journal of European Public Policy 6(4): 614–633.

50.

Massey

(1991) A global sense of place. Marxism Today, June, 24–29.

51.

Massey

(2005) For Space. London: SAGE.

52.

Massey

(2007) The World City. Cambridge: Polity Press.

53.

Merleau-Ponty

(1962) Phenomenology of Perception. London: Routledge.

54.

Mony

PRS

(2008) Talking to visitors about conservation: exploring message communication through docent-visitor interactions at zoos. Visitor Studies 11(2): 151–162.

55.

Myerscough

(1994) European Cities of Culture and Cultural Months. Glasgow: The Network of Cultural Cities of Europe.

56.

Nyman

(2004) Arkkitehtuuri ruumiillisuutena ja representaationa [Architecture as corporality and representation]. In: Mäntysalo

(ed.) Paikan heijastuksia. Ihmisen ympäristösuhteen tutkimus ja representaation käsite [Reflections of place. Research of the Relation Between Man and Environment and the Concept of Representation]. Jyväskylä: Atena Kustannus Oy, pp. 127–140.

57.

Oeters

Mittag

(2008) European capitals of culture as incentives for local transformation and creative economies: tendencies – examples – assessments. In: Whose Culture(s)? Second annual conference of the University Network of European capital of culture (ed. Coudeny

), Liverpool, 16–17 October 2008, pp. 70–97. Pécs: UNeECOC.

58.

Paasi

(1996) Territories, Boundaries and Consciousness: The Changing Geographies of the Finnish-Russian Border. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

59.

Paasi

(2001) Europe as a social process and discourse. European Urban and Regional Studies 8(1): 7–28.

60.

Palmer

(2004) European Cities and Capitals of Culture: Part I. Brussels: Palmer/Rae Associates.

61.

Palmer

Richards

(2007) European Cultural Capital Report I. Arnheim: ATLAS.

62.

Palmer

Richards

(2008) European Cultural Capital Report II. Arnheim: ATLAS.

63.

Palonen

(2010) Multi-level cultural policy and politics of the European capitals of culture. The Nordic Journal of Cultural Policy 13(1): 87–108.

64.

Patton

(2002) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

65.

Relph

(1976) Place and Placelessness. London: Pion.

66.

Richards

(2000) The European cultural capital event: strategic weapon in the cultural arms race? Cultural Policy 6(2): 159–181.

67.

Richards

Rotariu

(2009) Trends in tourism development after a European cultural capital programme. In: The international conference on administration and business, 14–15 November, pp. 694–701. Bucharest: University of Bucharest. Available at: http://www.itchannel.ro/faa/694_pdfsam_ICEA_FAA_2009.pdf (accessed 18 May 2012)

68.

Richards

Wilson

(2004) The impact of cultural events on city image: Rotterdam, cultural capital of Europe 2001. Urban Studies 41(10): 1931–1951.

69.

Risse

(2004) Social constructivism and European integration. In: Diez

Wiener

(eds) European Integration Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 159–176.

70.

Rommedvedt

(2009) Beliefs in Culture as an Instrument for Regional Development: The Case of Stavanger, European Capital of Culture 2008. Stavanger: IRIS.

71.

Rorty

(ed.) (1992) The Linguistic Turn: Essays in Philosophical Method. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

72.

Rosamond

(1999) Discourses of globalization and the social construction of European identities. Journal of European Public Policy 6(4): 652–668.

73.

Said

(1985) Orientalism. London: Penguin Books.

74.

Sassatelli

(2002) Imagined Europe. European Journal of Social Theory 5(4): 435–451.

75.

Sassatelli

(2009) Becoming European: Cultural Identity and Cultural Policies. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillian.

76.

Seaman

(2006) Empirical studies of demand for the performing arts. In: Ginsburgh

Throsby

(eds) Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing, pp. 415–472.

77.

Shore

(1993) Inventing the ‘People’s Europe’: critical Approaches to European Community ‘Cultural Policy’. Man 28(4): 779–800.

78.

Shore

Black

(1996) Citizen’s Europe and the construction of European identity. In: Goddard

Llobera

Shore

(eds) The Anthropology of Europe: Identity and Boundaries in Conflict. Oxford: Breg, pp. 275–298.

79.

Shotter

(1993) Conversational Realities: Constructing Life Through Language. London: SAGE.

80.

Soja

(1996) Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and Other Real-and-Imagined Places. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

81.

Stafford

Tripp

(2000) Age, income, and gender: demographic determinants of community theatre patronage. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing 8(2): 29–43.

82.

Thrift

(1996) Spatial Formations. London: SAGE.

83.

Weaver

(2004) Discursive approaches. In: Diez

Wiener

(eds) European Integration Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 197–216.

84.

Yeoh

Kong

(1999) The notion of place in the construction of history, nostalgia and heritage. In: Kwok

K-W

Kwa

Kong

. (eds) Our Place in Time: Exploring Heritage and Memory in Singapore. Singapore: Singapore Heritage Society, pp. 132–151.

85.

Yocco

Heimlich

Meyer

. (2009) Measuring public value: an instrument and an art museum case study. Visitor Studies 12(2): 152–163.

86.

Zuern

Checkel

(2005) Getting socialized to build bridges: constructivism and rationalism, Europe and the nation-state. International Organization 59(4): 1045–1079.