Singapore
A fun capital?
At least it has, unlike HK, a coherent plan, but who will win in 20 years?
Jan 17, 2006

I went to a though-provoking talk on Friday at Hong Kong's Fringe Club, part of their 10 day City Festival that features exhibitions, performances, music, discussions and (of course) food from Singapore.

Some events continue through to next week-end - check it out! The talk I attended was titled "The Remaking of Singapore - Fun Capital or Cultured City?"

The key-note speaker was Prof Kwok Kian-Woon, Head of the Sociology Division at the School of Humanities and Social Sciences of Nanyang Technological University (Singapore) and the talk was moderated by Benny Chia, Artistic Director of the Fringe Club.

Singapore's push towards creating a vibrant arts and culture hub was explained as stemming from two realisations:

1) "fun & funds" - i.e., there's money to be made from art and culture, particularly if it is pop-art and pop-culture; and,

2) the belief that there may be a link between creativity as a catalyst to modernity and overall wealth - 'creative' cities tend to attract brains.

From the practical considerations of 'return on cultural capital' several studies were commissioned by the government resulting in the implementation of policies that have turned Singapore into a city that today boasts a large variety of theatre, movie, painting and music exhibits relative to what was on offer 15 years ago.

Many of the activities are on the 'fun' side of the spectrum (i.e., silly musicals that are lucrative today) while attention is also being placed to 'cultured' activities (i.e., the symphony and other art shows that may foster a more creative society - long term dividends).

Critics in the audience pointed out that the development has still been confined, if anything due to the fact that virtually all funding is provided by the National Arts Council, which itself tends to be the primary recipient of all the available local corporate grant money.

Large projects such as The Esplanade (its developers apparently had no idea that locals would rename it 'The Durians'!) have come at the cost of hundreds (if not thousands) of small 'off-broadway' type productions.

While I took note of the challenges and frustrations presented by Singaporean artists in the crowd, I couldn't help but wonder if Singapore was none the less a few steps ahead of Hong Kong in terms of developing itself as a city of arts and culture.

For one, Singapore has a coherent plan for the development of a regional arts hub, while Hong Kong has no credible plan and is too busy accommodating developers wishing to participate in the development of West Kowloon.

Singapore took a big risk in commissioning an iconic project in the form of The Esplanade.

While it's hard to quantify the pay-off, my impression is that it is succeeding in making many visitors come to Singapore expecting arts and culture.

Can the same be said of Hong Kong? Singapore has a well-funded arts council and is placing centres of learning in the middle of its city - steps to encourage the local population to be participants and creators within the arts scene as well as other industries.

Is Hong Kong at a public or private level doing anything comparable?

I couldn't help thinking that having this talk in Hong Kong was appropriate. In spite of their many differences, Hong Kong and Singapore do share many similarities and concerns.

How will these cities succeed in attracting and retaining the most creative and productive minds?

Where is the hinterland of skilled and creative people that these cities will tap, and how will HK and SG succeed in presenting themselves as more attractive than Shanghai?

Which city will be the most fun in 20 years and enjoy the richest cultural activities? Is the future.... Macau?!
Posted by Dave and Stefan

http://www.blogthetalk.com/2006/01/sg-fun-capital-or-cultured-city.html