Arts & International Affairs: Volume 2, Issue 1 | Page 108

on the institutionalized national and local levels and hardly interested in
rationalizing the global influences.
Cultural Policies’ Responses to Cultural Stratification
In the aforementioned interpretations of cultural globalism, the role and
position of cultural policies have not been fully addressed. Although
cultural policies have experienced changes in their roles, functioning, and
scope, they are not quite adapted to the ongoing cultural stratification that
has occurred through cultural development formatted by globalism and
globalized cultural contexts and that is largely influenced by the still ongoing
globalization processes. Cultural policies have diversified and expanded into
different cultural strata and various cultural organizations, but remain feebly
interlinked and mainly un-systematized.
In the institutional culture, the position and functioning of cultural policies
have been best preserved. Within this type of culture cultural institutions
are well established and their functioning is organized and planned by the
state administration. Even when decentralized to the local and city levels,
cultural policies follow general administrative, organizational, and financial
rules. Moreover, they remain “…oriented primarily toward supporting supply
side, while the demand side (users’ expectations and needs) that points to
the relevance of cultural offer in the present day context to the present day
audience has not been tackled adequately” (Primorac, Obuljen Koržinek,
and Uzelac ����:��). Cultural production within such frameworks may be
repetitive, but it clearly reflects standards of creativity and consumption
developed in line with the standards set by the state and by national
cultural identification frameworks. In this sense, it widely supports cultural
professionalism and is interested in presenting its results internationally.
The independent culture is supported by foundations, whether private or
public, and follows manifold and multidirectional aims. Cultural policy is
eventually developed by very different NGOs or professional cultural and
media associations, as well as by individual small enterprises. At the same
time the frameworks for cultural production and creativity are designed by
the interested sponsors, often in cooperation with the artists and producers
concerned. The need for flexibility and temporary orientations in creativity
and production mean that planning and relative stability in cultural creativity
are rare. This prevents stable financing of cultural actions and programs.
Participants in independent culture accept such risks and short-term
107