City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 123–130

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

City, Culture and Society

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ccs

The cultural contradictions of the creative city q

Andy C. Pratt
Culture, Media and Creative Industries, King’s College London, UK

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper is concerned with both what creative cities are imagined to be, as well as what they actually
Received 10 February 2011 are. This is a challenge for policy makers. Overall, the paper seeks to create a platform for a more nuanced
Received in revised form date 5 June 2011 and subtle approach to creativity, culture and cities: one that is situated and not universal. It seeks to map
Accepted 8 August 2011
out an approach that is concerned not simply with the growth possibilities, but also redistributive strat-
Available online 25 September 2011
egies. In so doing it questions whether can we conceive of creative cities as a truly progressive field of
policy and practice, in direct contrast to what we judge to be the socially regressive form they take at
Keywords:
present. The paper is divided into three main parts. The first locates the creative city within the discourse
Culture
Innovation
of place marketing, but flags up the tensions between the universalism of place marketing, and the par-
Creative city ticularities of culture and creativity. The second critically examines notions of liberalism and creativity as
Work they underpin the creative city. The final part takes the actually existing creative city and highlights many
Liberalism of the negative and regressive elements of policies that promote them. The paper argues for the need for
more nuanced approaches, and for more attention to the (lack of) redistributive outcomes in existing cre-
ative city debates.
Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction and not universal; and, one that is centrally concerned

not simply with the growth possibilities, but also with
This paper is concerned with both what creative cities redistributive strategies. In so doing we see the opportunity
are imagined to be, as well as what they actually are. We to make creative cities a truly progressive field of policy
point out that in many ways the concept of creative cities and practice, in direct contrast to what could be judged
fits in neatly with neo-liberal globalisation strategies, but to be a socially regressive form at present.
at the same times presents them a ‘human’ or ‘cultured’ In this paper we explore these tensions to escape from
face. If this were an explicit aim we would disagree with the limitations of ‘cookbook’ approaches to creative cities
the basic strategy, but argue that it was at least logical on based upon narrow branding, or place marketing, logics
its own terms. However, countering this view, we would and we consider instead a more nuanced approach that is
suggest that our focus of argumentation perhaps might be sensitive to local cultures and difference (Pratt, 2010).
better turned onto what sort of trade off, and for whom, The UNESCO (2001) declaration on cultural diversity is a
does the normative concept and settlement favour? This challenge to normative approaches to creative cities: argu-
paper takes the debate even further, into the realm of cul- ably most such strategies are enemies of diversity and pro-
tural production as well as cultural consumption. This is mote sameness, for reasons that we explore in this paper.
something has been advocated previously (Pratt, 2004), One potential vehicle for operationalisation of the princi-
although it is an approach that is itself beset with prob- ples of the declaration on diversity is the UNESCO creative
lems. In the current paper we want to add an equally crit- cities network. Contrary to the one size fits all mentality of
ical perspective to this approach as well. Overall, the paper the creative city ‘manual’ (the normative place marketing
seeks to create a platform for a more nuanced and subtle model) the UNESCO network is focused on local partner-
approach of creativity, culture and cities, one that is situated ship building and the notion of examining shared experi-
ences and challenges across cities. The UNESCO network
also alerts us to the variety of types of creative cities; a
q
A previous version of this paper was presented at ‘‘The International Sympo- point that we will return to later.*Whilst this paper is crit-
sium on City, Culture and Society – Reinventing the City for Cultural Creativity and ical of much current practice, or outcome, in the field of
Social Inclusion” organised by Osaka City University, Urban Research Plaza (URP),
creative cities its argument and intent is compatible with
Osaka, December 15–17, 2010. Thanks to all participants for feedback.
E-mail address: andy.pratt@kcl.ac.uk both the aspirations of the UNESCO Creative Cities
URL: http://web.me.com/andycpratt/andy_c_pratt/Welcome.html Programme (Bandarin, 2011), and the UNCTAD Creative

1877-9166/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ccs.2011.08.002
124 A.C. Pratt / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 123–130

Economy report (UNCTAD 2010). The point made here is and its culture, to attract exogenous investment (see for
that policy makers and citizens cannot afford to be ‘starry example, Hall and Hubbard (1998) and Kearns and Philo
eyed’ about the creative city , rather they need to engage (1993)). One outcome of this is the hard branding strategy
with both the challenges and opportunities that it may that creates cultural icons that are generally acknowledged
bring. Resolutions of the issues, and conflicts, will require to attract decision makers and (cultural) tourists to cities
creative policy making to match the complex diversity of (Evans, 2001, 2003). The innovative work of Florida, draw-
social, economic and political actors that constitute the ing upon Glaeser’s (1998) arguments about human capital
actually existing creative city. mobility, has sought to frame the types of city form that
The paper’s title is a self-conscious borrowing of Bell’s will attract the ‘creative class’ which is the object of desire
(1978) theme: the contradictions between a particular eco- of cutting edge firms (and urban managers). The picture is
nomic and a specific cultural logic. It represents a tension now familiar: liberal values of social and political gover-
that could easily characterise those of the creative city, a nance and a particular type of cultural consumption space.
notion not dreamt of at the time. The paper has two objec- Put in this way, we may pose the question: who would be
tives: first, to highlight philosophical freight (liberalism, unhappy with this? Not surprisingly, there has been a rush
creativity and culture) that concepts of creative cities carry; from many cities to put in place these components, and
and second, to offer a clearer way of thinking about creative hence compete to be ‘the most creative city’.
cities in situated ways that review actually existing crea- As has been pointed out elsewhere (Pratt, 2008a), there
tive cities as opposed to idealist and aspirational forms. is another debate about the cultural and creative industries
Of course it is an irony that Florida (2002) draws heavily in cities that has addressed cities as new sites of cultural
on Bell’s (1973) earlier work to frame the notion of creative production, and implies a different set of assumptions
class. We do not want to follow Bell here, except to and desiderata as to what comprises the ‘creative city’.
acknowledge that he raises a pertinent question, one that Moreover, there are yet other debates that frame creative
is directly challenges Florida’s wider conceptual frame- cities as problem-solving cities, based upon novel forms
work, one that merits further investigation. of governance (Landry, 2000). Instead of simply counter-
Williams (1976, p. 87) famously commented that culture posing the two strands of creative city argument we seek,
was one of the most complicated words in the English lan- in this paper, to explore a wider terrain, and to examine
guage; one might add that creativity and liberalism share the actually existing creative city (of production and con-
some difficulties. The argument in this paper seeks to ad- sumption) that is quite different to that of the ideal type
dress the current assemblage that is represented by the creative city of popular debate. Our aim is to both re-ener-
interweaving of the ideas of culture, creativity and liberal- gise debates about the possibilities and limits to (produc-
ism and their association with the city. There are two tion based) creative cities, and to offer a more nuanced
themes of the argument here. First, the concern that no- reading of the creative city that might work as a corrective
tions of the creative city are commonly freighted with a to what are by default neo-liberal celebrations of a partic-
number of co-assumptions about romanticism and neo-lib- ular manifestation of ‘creativity’.
eral economics, as well as particular interpretations of so- The paper is divided into three main parts. The first lo-
cial and moral liberalism. Our point here is to highlight cates the creative city within the discourse of place market-
these assumptions, and suggest other possibilities. Second, ing, but flags up the contradictions of the universalisms of
we want to take the creative city at face value and explore place marketing, and the particularities of culture and cre-
what the nature of life and livelihood is in the actually ativity. The second critically examines notions of liberalism
existing creative city; and by implication to contrast this and creativity as they underpin the creative city. The final
with the more general rhetoric in favour of creative cities. part takes the actually existing creative city and highlights
It is hoped that the argument advanced here will open many of the negative and regressive elements of policies
up some space to think about the creative city more clearly, that promote them. The paper argues for the need for more
and more incisively, than has been done previously. More nuanced approaches, and for more attention to the (lack of)
generally we want to argue against a universalist notion redistributive outcomes.
of creativity and the creative city, and in favour of a so-
cially, cultural and economically embedded and situated ‘Nice’ cities: For shiny happy people1
one. Moreover, we want to highlight the asymmetry of
power relations (and hence distributional consequences) Before delving into critique we want to take the norma-
that are embedded in all representations (plans, images tive viewpoint, but we want to push it to its limits, and
and marketing) of the city, in favoured strategies, and eco- examine its consequences (rather than aspirations). The
nomic sectors, but are particularly strongly found in crea- normative view is expressed by a city ‘off the architect’s
tive cities. However, we also want to stress that at the drawing board’ as represented in a city marketing video.
same time that such asymmetries are denied by the appar- This is the expression of modernity, rationality and pro-
ent universal gloss of liberalism and creativity that are gress, with a cultural inflection (with cultural hard brand-
commonly characterised as a universal and undifferenti- ing used as product differentiator). This gives up a vision
ated positive in creative city debates. of the best of all possible worlds. In many respects of course
The general tenor of debates about creative cities has such a debate neatly undermines the easy criticism of glob-
added a particular twist to the older neo-liberal discipline alisation as the great leveller of taste and culture: here
of foreign direct investment (FDI). Simply this foregrounds globalisation is centred on differentiation and difference,
a particular logic, and an associated set of expectations of
how and in what ways a city must sell itself, its people 1
A reference to REM’s (1991) ‘shiny happy people’ from the ‘Out of time’ album.
 A.C. Pratt / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 123–130 125

the production of diversity to attract a particular type of tivity has gained a further resonance in that it has been
investment and investor, and workers who demand/need posited as the driver of all innovation, and of the informa-
a particular cultural milieu. tion society, on the back of a rhetoric driven by books such
The same can be said of the ‘quality of life’ indicators as Bell’s (see Garnham (2005) for a critique). This then, is a
that are the nearest relative of creative city in applied place potent formulation, and one that seems to be a self-rein-
marketing (Rogerson, 1999). These share much the same forcing perpetual motion that everyone can gain from.
character as the creative city initiatives – on the surface This of course has led to the criticism of ‘whose city,
they appear to be a win-win solution: a nicer, safer, cleaner whose culture’ (Zukin, 1995) as the prioritisation of invest-
city and more jobs. However, the resources are generally ment and choice are focused on those aspects that may de-
focused on particular versions of ‘quality of life’ and are tar- liver the most income, despite the fact that a whole
geted at making the quality of life of the few rather than population’s taxes are being deployed. Moreover, it means
the many better (that is the middle or senior management, that incomers and the creative class disproportionately
and/or cosmopolitan lifestyle migrants). The distributional benefit from this public and private investment. The stan-
consequences are not logically, or practically, progressive; dard criticisms are valid: skewed distributional effects
in fact they are most likely to be regressive. and the regressive impact on taxation (the poor pay most
At base the creative cities debate, pace Florida, is a new and receive least in return). Added to which there is an im-
iteration of FDI logic, a step beyond quality of life indica- plicit hegemonic project of favouring a particular type of
tors. Many extant city branding strategies shade into this culture (that appeals to a modern, or cosmopolitan, sensi-
category as essentially hard cultural branding of cities; a bility) over local or indigenous styles.3 In many senses this
variant itself of the heritage city (Ashworth & Tunbridge, is the classic cosmopolitan/international – local tension:
2000). City branding has become institutionalised in the played out very strongly via culture. Those in opposition to
form of ‘city of culture’ initiatives. Whilst all have their such a view are badly positioned as anti-cosmopolitanism
nuances the key aim is place marketing, in the case of her- and anti-liberal which leaves them open to a jibe: ‘whom
itage the unique selling proposition is a finite set of immov- would oppose openness and diversity?’.
able built heritage, or locally situated cultural expressions. Of course, this plays out in quite different ways in vari-
However, these are a limited set, so the next best thing (if ous locations. In the West it may result into generating
one does not have a built heritage) is to create a new spec- some cultural benefit for marginalised groups; but most
tacle; and hence the phenomenon of cultural-icon branding commonly to the well-off middle classes. In the East it
has come into being. To be successful the building/s at the has quite other connotations. First the cultural imperialism
core have to be as unique and controversial as possible is a little more apparent. Second, we can raise the even
thereby generating their own media and ‘USP2’. more tricky issue of culture/creativity and democracy. For
City branding strategies seek to find or impose unique- many there is a presumed synergy in romanticism and lib-
ness; city of culture strategies whilst promoted as unique- eralism between freedom of expression and great art;
ness and localness, can easily shade into normative hard moreover, the point of view that attempts to corral and
branding strategies. The problem with all such approaches plan art and culture is a contradiction in terms. Art and cul-
is that they are essentially consumption hubs, and as such ture – it is argued – flourish with freedom and no limits. If
unsustainable, without huge re-investment periodically (as these ideal conditions were correct there would be no cre-
fashions change see Peck, 2005; Pratt, 2008a). Soft brand- ativity or innovation outside the neo-liberal heartland, and
ing, or culturally-led initiatives, are less common. In this they would only be sustained where the whole society
sense we can characterise Florida’s creative cities as hard bows down to the ‘god’ creativity. It is clear that creativity
branding with a soft edge. The hard branding comes by must be defined in relative terms: these terms are defined
way of boutique/niche consumption spaces that are fo- as responses to local conditions and hence take on unique
cused on establishing or encouraging a cultural milieu forms.
based around consumption. In this sense it has much to re- On the other hand, we think we can also see some chal-
spond to the grey suited executives imagined of FDI as it is lenges to Florida’s central notion of the idea of tolerance.
based on attracting those who like a funkier downtown, the Tolerance is a prime liberal notion. In Florida’s version tol-
appeal is not to the upper class mores of opera and concert erance has a proxy of sexual orientation. It is interesting the
halls, but of nightclubs and boutique galleries: the habitus view debates concerning the application of a de rigour no-
of the creative class, or the information class. Who would tion of Florida’s work in Singapore where there are ques-
oppose it? tions being raised as to changing laws on homosexuality
(or not). Did this mean that Singapore was not creative,
Where the liberal gloss wears thin could not be creative, unless is has a particular legal status
for homosexuals? We do not agree with the Singapore laws
There is a tension between the neoliberal project of banning homosexuality, but one has to question if this is a
industrial development at the lowest cost, and cities com- result of simplistic model application: that homosexuality,
peting to provide resources to host highly skilled labour which is a proxy of tolerance, must be made lawful to at-
whom will act as bait for FDI. Florida’s creative attempt tract economic development (Ooi, 2008). The key issue is
to ‘square the circle’ is achieved though playing the trump not to change the proxy, but make it a society tolerant (if
card of creativity (very much like previous urban strategies that is felt necessary and desirable – but is it? If we asked
and the use of quality of life indicators). Culture and crea-
3
See further debates on cosmopolitanism and the city Hannerz (1996). See also
2
USP, unique selling proposition. Smith (2001) and Robbins (1999).
126 A.C. Pratt / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 123–130

the question about tolerance of wealth inequalities we neo-liberalism is the necessary and sufficient home of creativ-
have a quite different formulation: in this paper we are ity. Hence, the oft-repeated formulation that creativity and
happy to be cast as intolerant of inequality). The logical neo-liberalism are compatible, and the new common sense.
extension of Richard Florida’s position is that we should This paper argues that creativity neither is, nor is not,
be tolerant of neo-liberalism. This is patently not a good critical for social or economic change, rather, that the par-
argument upon which to base the reform of laws about sex- ticular form that it takes and how it is fermented, is spe-
uality to make better capitalists. There are good arguments, cific: in fact this very point highlights the contradictions
but not this one. The logical end-result appears to be that between the (common) universalism associated with the
creative cities must be neo-liberal cities and visa versa. This notion of creativity. That is, creativity is a situated activity,
is, we think, not a defensible argument, nor one that is sus- not a universal one. What is creative in one situation is not
tained by the facts; it is an elision of creativity, culture and in another. Thus a singular figure of the universal creative,
liberalism with neo-liberalism: so, we need to think again. or creativity, often used in debates about creative cities,
falls foul of this logic. Thus, picking up on the last section
where we discussed creativity and culture as a mask for
Creativity, liberalism and culture
neo-liberalism; we might better see it has become, or is
being promoted as, a partner of neo-liberalism; or some
This section will question the deployment of notions
even suggest that creativity requires neo-liberalism; and,
such as creativity and moral liberalism as universals, and
as Florida seems to suggest, a moral liberalism.
the challenges presented by the lay admixture of liberal-
We might follow through the particular inflection that
ism, creativity and culture. Our objective here is to prob-
this gives the creative class; a necessary vanguard that will
lematise atomism and universalism and substitute them
be found in, and necessarily attracted to (hence legitimated),
with a more nuanced situated perspective. We draw influ-
creative cities. We will not repeat here (Pratt, 2008a) a cri-
ence from writers such as, Young (1990) writing about con-
tique of Florida’s creative class, and Bell’s information class,
cepts such as justice which have been similarly
that Florida’s work draws upon; simply to point out that
characterised who have pointed out that the imposition
Bell’s (1978) later book, The cultural contradictions of capital-
of universals will, in a pre-existing unequal world, actually
ism, neatly summarises the conflict between selfless work,
exacerbate inequalities. We are suggesting that we can dis-
and hedonistic pleasure. Florida, who does not refer to this,
cuss culture and creativity in the same light.
reflects instead Bell’s earlier tract with an economically
We begin by noting the prevalence of notions of liberalism
determinist logic. Bell points to an internal contradiction be-
that lie at the heart of many notions of society. Here a moral
tween production generally and the consumption of culture.
liberalism of individual freedoms and rights, and a sover-
So, if unlike Florida’s focus on consumption we look to pro-
eignty of the self. The particular articulation that we are con-
duction, and a complex, and situated characterisation of it
cerned with here is the way that such notions are
we can point to the double contradictions within and be-
universalised, such that they become normative. We are not
tween creative and other sectors.5
arguing against a political programme to universalise a par-
ticular point of view, rather to question it as an a priori state
of being that can be asserted to be the one best, or true, con-
Be careful what you wish for: The creative city
dition. The counter argument is one that, taking classic, liberal
debate forward that recognises the rights and possibilities,
It is precisely this debate that can be found to animate –
and necessary limitations on those as a result of living collec-
in various ways – a number of recent explorations of the
tively, and the resort of third parties for conflict resolution
internal tensions between creativity, organisation and
(state) that might offer a situated and conditional limit on
knowledge (see Boltanski and Chiapello (2005), Lazzarato
rights and individualism. It is this version of liberalism, or
(2007), McRobbie (2003) and Thrift (2005)). There is no
another political or moral philosophy that will take particu-
space to detail these debates here (but see Gill and Pratt
lar forms in specific times and places: a situated account.
(2008)), but it is sufficient to note that they range from no-
So, how does this apply to creativity? As we have noted a
tions that art and creativity represent work’s ‘other’ and
common, lay, interpretation of creativity is the boundless-
hence a space of individual freedom, to that of the idea that
ness of action, and the will of the individual. This is the sub-
art and creativity are an example under capitalism of a total
jective position that underpins much of the debate about
exploitation of body and brain that high Fordism never
Romanticism, and gives us the subject of the ‘artist’ in Wes-
achieved (compare Burawoy (1979)). These debates have
tern society (Pratt, 2008b).4 It is, to be sure, a very particular
framed a whole set of subsidiary writing about the relation-
and situated interpretation of art and creativity. We have a
ship between creative work and management (see Bilton
whole body of literature, especially that emanating from pop-
(2007) and Nixon (2003)). This a large and expanding field,
ular business studies and economics, which reifies this con-
that requires much more empirical investigation, and
ception of education and posits it as a universal solution to
further reflection on the role of the urban situation. This pa-
economic growth. This debate is strongly interwoven, or
per represents an initial step in that direction.
meshed with, notions of economic liberalism, which view
The following section explores dimensions of actually
the atavistic entrepreneur in similar ways to which artists
existing manifestation of creative cities. We begin by
have been characterised in romanticism. Thus, creativity is
read as creativity in the context of neo-liberalism; and that 5
The cultural and creative industries are contested, and in some interpretations
meaningless. If we take them to be based in production and a noun that labels that
4
There are also counter interpretations of romanticism and modernism that have activity this is satisfactory, however, the common usage where ‘creative’ is used as
sort to challenge what is essentially the normative viewpoint related here. adjective modifier of industry is not helpful.
 A.C. Pratt / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 123–130 127

pointing to the substantive literature on gentrification, partner in the proponents of the ‘urban experience econ-
which has recently become inflected to the particularity omy’ where shopping and (a particular type of) culture seek
of art and artists. We highlight that this represents a nega- to re-position the city as idealised consumption space (Pine
tive aspect of the normative consumption model of the cre- & Gilmore, 1999). In this case two types of exogenous
ative city. In the second half of this section of the paper we development are targeted, the FDI normally discussed,
outline the benefits that a stress on production might offer; and the more immediate US concern of the suburbs and
however, we equally provide a view of the negative social the emptying inner city (and depleting its tax base).
and economic consequences that it too contains. Thus the liberal city in its apparently innocent promo-
tion of culture and creativity simply promotes one version,
aside from the tendencies to hard branding, and its afore-
Consumption
mentioned shortcomings, and massive iconic infrastruc-
ture, and the general neglect of revenue funding, and
The aspirations and generally perceived positive ele-
support for cultural production. Moreover, there is a mas-
ments of the notion of the creative class and the creative
sive skew in whose culture and whose images are projected
city have been well documented; but as has been suggested
in and through such policies.
above, these accounts are inevitably partial; they are pred-
Thus, the consequence is of a particular city built for a
icated upon the displacement of an existing population, or
particular audience, one that makes it easier for the privi-
down-grading their demands and needs. A well-docu-
leged group’s quality of life, and makes it implicitly worse
mented process of the influx of higher income and/or dif-
for others (Jarvis, Pratt, & Wu, 2001; Pratt, 1996). If such
ferent cultural capital is the core of the generalised
debates rested upon a public sector cultural budget expen-
process of gentrification (Lees, 2000). Of course, a particular
diture, and democratic/re-distributive decisions thereof, it
twist to gentrification is artistic gentrification well docu-
might be more acceptable; however, there are numerous
mented by Zukin (1982, 1991, 1995) in SoHo, NY, and still
‘unintended consequences’ of cultural funding driven by
alive and kicking in Hoxton, London (Pratt, 2009b), and
an externally referenced economic agenda. To be clear,
elsewhere (Lloyd, 2006). The extent to which gentrification
the amount of money sustaining cultural projects in cities
has become both a state sanctioned and state-enabled pro-
overwhelmingly benefits real estate but comes from regen-
cess (as the availability of redistributive funding dimin-
eration budgets, then from social inclusion budgets: intrin-
ishes) has also been debated. But it is clear that the
sic culture is very low on the agenda, or usually appears as
promotion of the creative class must facilitate and legiti-
‘icing on the cake’ (see for example discussion in the UK
mate the relocation of segments of the middle class (the
context Symon and Williams (2001)).
creative class) to the inner city. A logical consequence is
that existing residents will be progressively economically
‘out bid’.
We do not want to examine these debates here, simply Production
to note that gentrifiers would fit neatly in Florida’s (2002)
creative class. Promotion of the creative class, and its hab- An alternative to the focus on consumption spaces and
itus, if not actively checked, is a de facto support for a par- places has been to re-examine the role of cultural produc-
ticular type of gentrification, and an implicit, or often tion in cities, and to develop polices to encourage it (Pratt,
explicit, (re-) ordering of social and cultural priorities at a 2008a). It is true that there is now a literature that provides
ward and city scale (Lees, 2000). Of course, as many have clear evidence of the economic, social and political contri-
also pointed out, gentrification, based upon the initial spark bution of cultural industries to cities (Scott, 2000), that
of cultural capital of art, often results in the demise of that maps the scale and import of the cultural production econ-
very art and cultural practice. This is yet another inflection omy in cities (rivalling many ‘traditional’ sectors such as
of the cultural contradictions of capitalism. financial services (GLA Economics, 2004)). There is also a
More generally, we can see a parallel with an older ac- healthy debate as regards which types of policy either
count of urban redevelopment and the politics of economic might encourage, or dissuade, such developers policies
development: the ‘urban growth machine’. In the initial range from those that promote FDI to cluster, to single
formulation, based upon US cities, Logan and Molotch industry policies (Pratt, 2009a). Also, it is worth mention-
(1987) pointed to the alliance between retail capital and ing a very productive line of debate that seeks neither to lo-
urban politicians, and the consequences for the zoning of cate itself in the production or consumption sphere, but
land, and political alliances, and social control. If one sub- looks at the potential transformative power of creative
stitutes cultural consumption capital for retail capital, the problem solving based on existing cultural resources in cit-
concert hall, the museum, etc. which is the staple of US ies (Landry, 2000, 2006; Wood & Landry, 2007).
downtown regeneration (Clark, 2004; Hannigan, 1998), In line with the discussion advanced in the previous sec-
and is an exemplar of hard cultural branding of cities the tion, we do not want to dwell on the potential positives of
world over, we can see how the priorities of a particular cultural production; these have been well described in the
version of cultural consumption begins to structure invest- normative literature (albeit neglecting the intrinsic value
ment and social and economic reproduction. One can point and concentrating on instrumentalism). The challenge is
to the debates about gentrification in Bilbao (Plaza, 2000), to examine some of the more difficult downsides as well,
or San Francisco (Jarvis & Pratt, 2006; Pratt, 2002), New and to caution against a gestalt type shift from policies that
York (Zukin, 1982), Sydney (Bounds & Morris, 2006) or Lon- promote consumption to those that support production. In
don (Butler & Robson, 2003) as elsewhere. As has been fact, as has been argued, it is always about both, but also,
noted elsewhere, this impetus has found an excellent our point here, that it is the situated and embedded nature
128 A.C. Pratt / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 123–130

of cultural production (in its broadest sense) in the city that this sub-sector it might be expected that it would present
matters. the most favourable picture of the sector as a whole.
So, what we want to examine is that if we are to favour Looking in detail at 2009 survey figures (Skillset, 2009),
the growth in cultural work, what sort of city are we creat- the latest available, we can note that whereas there are
ing? This section of the paper offers some snapshots from more or less 46% women working in the UK workforce,
the cutting edge of research and practice in the cultural the figure is just 27% in the audio visual sector. The picture
industries, which themselves may be considered pictures is even worse for black and ethnic minority workers; the
from the future of creative cities (added to which many proportion of black and ethnic minority workers in London,
have argued that the creative economy is leading the rest where more than half of creative sector employees work, is
of the economy in adopting these novel organisational around 24%, but in the audio-visual industries it is just 7%.
forms). There is now an emerging body of work on the Skillset (2001), in a survey now over a decade old, re-
organisation of the cultural and creative industries, and in corded that one third of workers were on freelance con-
particular, about that nature of work in them. This litera- tracts. As noted in research referred to the previous
ture seeks to counter-balance the simplistic and star struck section, this has significant implications for gender and
optimism of many participants, and many policy makers, age discrimination, as well as creating uniquely unstable
with a realism rooted in practice and evidence (Beck, ‘careers’. We know that the proportion of freelancers has
2003; Blair, 2001; Gill, 2002; McKinlay & Smith, 2009; increased over time. In addition, there is the pernicious
McRobbie, 1998; Pratt, Gill, & Spelthann, 2007). practice of ‘free internships’, where those entering the la-
Scholarship indicates that firms in the cultural and crea- bour market have to work for free in the hope of getting
tive economy have many differences from ‘normal’ firms. a job. Of course, the social norms and economic background
First, that organisationally, they have been tended to be that this implies is exclusionary. Some people have to work
organised in hetrachical forms, that are predominantly for up to two years for free before securing a paid job. In an
small and temporary: what has been termed project based industry where getting a job depends upon whom you
companies (Grabher, 2001, 2002; Pratt, 2006). Second, know (most jobs are not advertised, but filled via word-
workers tend to be freelance and work on short-term con- of-mouth), education and social background are critical. If
tacts. Finally, individual skill and expertise, as well as rep- further evidence of the tight socio-economic filter on
utation is often critical in getting a job, and as is forming employment in the sector were needed, a survey by the
and working as a member of a successful team. This leads Sutton Trust (2006), reveals that 54% of all news journalists
to the unusually embedded nature of firms in relation to attended non-state funded schools; and of those who had
one another, and to the ‘labour pool’ and cities (and hence degrees, 56% had them from just two elite universities: Ox-
between the formal and informal/work–non work) (Jarvis & ford and Cambridge.6
Pratt, 2006). Finally, if we turn our attention from the sector to the
On one hand, this vignette of ‘creatives’ is the attractive city we can see that these patterns are in fact typical of
mirror image of the corporate enterprise, and seemingly the creative workforce (Freeman, 2010). Most would agree
commensurate with the ‘artistic’ lifestyle. Indeed, there is that London is one of the premier creative cities in the
a sub-literature that celebrates the ‘free agent’ (Pink, world (London_Development_Agency, 2008). In London,
2001), or rise of the ‘independent worker’ (Leadbeater & whereas less than 15% of employment in all industries
Oakley, 1999), the ‘no collar’ worker. This appears to be a was on self-employed basis, the average for the creative
liberal utopia. However, as a emergent body of work high- industries was nearly 30%, with music and performance
lights, it also has its dark side (Gill & Pratt, 2008; Ross, closer to 65%. In London the proportion of female workers
2003) in the precarious work conditions with no social sup- in all industries was nearly 45%, in the creative industries
port, where training, and all social reproduction is the 35%: only fashion, art and antiques, publishing and adver-
workers’ responsibility (Christopherson, 2002; Christoph- tising were above average.7 Finally, looking to black and
erson & van Jaarsveld, 2005; Neff, Wissinger, & Zukin, ethnic minority workers in London, the figure for all indus-
2005). tries is just over 25%, but for the creative industries it is
17%, with publishing, radio and television, advertising and
fashion languishing below even the creative industries
average.8
Is this the future that was anticipated?
So, the new work that is being created so quickly, which
is presented as the saviour and future of cities and nations
Views of the hoped for sunny uplands of creative work
is some of the most unstable and precarious work, that
abound in the literature; as noted above, there is an emerg-
reproduces the most regressive social and economic struc-
ing literature on the realities in particular the structures
ture. Far from the creative city and the creative worker
and organisation or creative work, and what the experience
being the meretricious and liberal solution to urban change
of creative work is really like. What is generally lacking are
and future growth, it looks more like a neo-liberal hell.
urban level analyses; there is good reason for this: it is an
as yet emerging, and fast changing field of economic activ-
ity. Some snapshots of the creative sector as a whole can be
gleaned from sectoral labour market planning agencies
6
such as Skillset in the UK. These studies focus on the 7
Thanks to Doris Eikhof and Chris Warhust for alerting me to this study.
Other work suggests that female employment in these industries is over-
audio-visual sector, and it is clear that there are differences
concentrated in lower level grades and ‘non-creative’ work.
with other creative industries. But, given that so much reg- 8
The figures are different from those cities above for BME workers as the basis of
ulatory attention and public sector funding is directed to the two surveys was different.
 A.C. Pratt / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 123–130 129

Conclusions to think in creative ways. As with other networks in the

cultural and creative industries attention will need to be
The aim of this paper has been to take a critical look at paid to the governance of this network, in the sense that
the notion of the creative city. We took our lead from Bell participation and learning is more effective if it is curated
and framed the argument around the contradictory nature and facilitated, and lessons learned – failure and successes
of the creative class and thus the creative city. Bell’s inter- – and archived and reflected upon. A particular challenge at
nal contradiction was a central problem in post-industrial present is to move beyond the tourism, heritage and con-
societies; it is a debate that has resurfaced under different sumption focus of many initiatives and to embrace the full
formulations in more recent debates (see for example cycle of culture making that includes cultural production.
Boltanski and Chiapello (2005) and Gill and Pratt (2008)).
This paper took its conceptual lead from these interventions,
as well as those of Ross (2003) all of whom have sought to References
re-direct otherwise theoretical debates on the actually
existing nature of cultural work, and its internal, as well as Ashworth, G. J., & Tunbridge, J. E. (2000). The tourist-historic city: Retrospect and
prospect of managing the heritage city. Amsterdam, Oxford: Pergamon.
external, contradictions. Here we have sought to articulate Bandarin, F. (2011). The creative power of cities. City, Culture and Society, 2(3),
these concerns to the creative class and the creative city. 121–122.
Beck, A. (2003). Cultural work: Understanding the cultural industries. London:
In this paper we have highlighted two types of contra-
Routledge.
diction, and confusion: first, the nature of creativity and Bell, D. (1973). The coming of post-industrial society. New York: Basic Books.
its linkage to liberalism the ‘good society’ and universalism. Bell, D. (1978). The cultural contradictions of capitalism. New York: Basic Books.
Bilton, C. (2007). Management and creativity: From creative industries to creative
Second, we have pointed to the need to explore, and pro- management. Malden, Mass., Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
vided some examples of, the outcome of a ‘creative city’ Blair, H. (2001). ‘You’re only as good as your last job’: The labour process and labour
(both in the consumption, and in the production modali- market in the British film industry. Work, Employment and Society, 15(1),
149–169.
ties). In this sense the paper is a salutary caution of ‘being Boltanski, L., & Chiapello, E. (2005). The new spirit of capitalism. London, New York:
careful what you wish for’. Verso.
Bounds, M., & Morris, A. (2006). Second wave gentrification in inner-city Sydney.
The conclusions that we draw are the need for a more
Cities, 23(2), 99–108.
nuanced, reflexive and evidence based analysis of the crea- Burawoy, M. (1979). Manufacturing consent: Changes in the labor process under
tive city. We have argued that situated analyses reveal that monopoly capitalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Butler, T., & Robson, G. (2003). London calling: The middle classes and the remaking of
creativity is relative and situational, not universal or inde- Inner London. Oxford: Berg.
pendent. Moreover, the relationship with liberalism is far Christopherson, S. (2002). Project work in context: Regulatory change and the new
more complex and nuanced that it is commonly character- geography of media. Environment and Planning A, 34(11), 2003–2015.
Christopherson, S., & van Jaarsveld, D. (2005). New media after the dot.com bust:
ised. This has a number of consequences in terms of aca- The persistant influence of political institutions on work in the cultural
demic research and policy advocacy. It means that in industries. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 11(1), 77–94.
Clark, T. N. (2004). The city as an entertainment machine. Amsterdam, London: JAI.
academic terms that there is a need for a far more nuanced
Evans, G. (2001). Cultural planning: An urban renaissance? London: Routledge.
analysis of the relationships between and spill-overs across Evans, G. (2003). Hard-branding the cultural city – From Prado to Prada.
production and consumption, the formal and informal International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27(2), 417–440.
Florida, R. L. (2002). The rise of the creative class: And how it’s transforming work,
economy, and attention needs to be paid to the varieties leisure, community and everyday life. New York, NY: Basic Books.
of cultural work, and to the difference in conditions in var- Freeman, A. (2010). London’s creative workforce: 2009 Update. London: Greater
ious industries; clearly, there are differences between London Authority.
Garnham, N. (2005). From cultural to creative industries: An analysis of the
places as well. In policy terms, debate needs to be founded implications of the ‘creative industries’ approach to arts and media policy
upon the aforementioned understandings, and not on a making in the United Kingdom. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 11(1),
15–30.
simplistic repetition of the universal ‘good thing’ that the
Gill, R. (2002). Cool creative and egalitarian? Exploring gender in project-based new
creativity and liberalism is. They have as many downsides media work in Europe. Information, Communication and Society, 5(1), 70–89.
as there are upsides to this issue; more nuanced policy Gill, R. C., & Pratt, A. C. (2008). In the social factory? Immaterial labour,
precariousness and cultural work. Theory Culture & Society, 25(7–8), 1–30.
information, policy-making and evaluation is needed if GLA Economics (2004). Measuring creativity: 2004 Update of the GLA’s creative
any of the hoped for outcomes are to be achieved, there will industry economic data. London: Greater London Authority.
not be a simple magic bullet fix-it; policies will need to be Glaeser, E. L. (1998). Are cities dying? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12(2),
139–160.
developed and managed in relation to their own particular Grabher, G. (2001). Ecologies of creativity: The Village, the Group, and the
situatedness. This does not mean that everything is differ- heterarchic organisation of the British advertising industry. Environment and
Planning A, 33(2), 351–374.
ent everywhere; what we are arguing is that the local con-
Grabher, G. (2002). The project ecology of advertising: Tasks, talents and teams.
ditions require of policy makers a more inventive, or Regional Studies, 36(3), 245–262.
creative, response based upon hard evidence rather than Hall, T., & Hubbard, P. (1998). The entrepreneurial city: Geographies of politics, regime,
and representation. New York: Wiley.
hope and rhetoric. Hannerz, U. (1996). Transnational connections: Culture, people, places. London:
Perhaps these reflections should begin to cause us to Routledge.
think beyond the creative city, and not to be constrained Hannigan, J. (1998). Fantasy city: Pleasure and profit in the postmodern metropolis.
London: Routledge.
by what has gone before. As noted above, we need to Jarvis, H., & Pratt, A. C. (2006). Bringing it all back home: The extensification and
appreciate the diversity of objectives and practices that ‘overflowing’ of work. The case of San Francisco’s new media households.
Geoforum, 37(3), 331–339.
constitute creative cities, and for this diversity to become
Jarvis, H., Pratt, A. C., & Wu, P. C.-C. (2001). The secret life of cities: The social
the foundation of a learning process. One way to encourage reproduction of everyday life. New York: Pearson Education.
this process and outcome might be to become a member of Kearns, G., & Philo, C. (1993). Selling places: The city as cultural capital, past and
present (1st ed.). Oxford England, New York: Pergamon Press.
the UNESCO creative cities network. However, network Landry, C. (2000). The creative city: A toolkit for urban innovators. Earthscan, London:
participation should not be simply about the prize and Comedia.
prestige of membership, but an encouragement or license Landry, C. (2006). The art of city-making. London: Earthscan.
130 A.C. Pratt / City, Culture and Society 2 (2011) 123–130

Lazzarato, M., 2007. The Misfortunes of the ‘‘Artistic Critique” and of Cultural economies, creative cities: Asian–European perspectives (pp. 9–23). Heidelberg,
Employment. Germany: Springer.
Leadbeater, C., & Oakley, K. (1999). The new independents – Britain’s new cultural Pratt, A. C. (2009b). Urban regeneration: From the arts ‘feel good’ factor to the
entrepreneurs. London: Demos. cultural economy. A case study of Hoxton, London. Urban Studies, 46(5–6),
Lees, L. (2000). A reappraisal of gentrification: Towards a ‘geography of 1041–1061.
gentrification’. Progress in Human Geography, 24(3), 389–408. Pratt, A. C. (2010). Creative cities: Tensions within and between social, cultural and
Lloyd, R. D. (2006). Neo-Bohemia: Art and commerce in the postindustrial city. New economic development. A critical reading of the UK experience. City, Culture and
York, NY, London: Routledge. Society, 1(1), 13–20.
Logan, J. R., & Molotch, H. L. (1987). Urban fortunes: The political economy of place. Pratt, A. C., Gill, R. C., & Spelthann, V. (2007). Work and the city in the e-society: A
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. critical investigation of the socio-spatially situated character of economic
London_Development_Agency (2008). London: A cultural audit. London: Greater production in the digital content industries, UK. Information, Communication &
London Authority. Society, 10(6), 921–941.
McKinlay, A., & Smith, C. (2009). Creative labour: Working in the creative industries. Robbins, B. (1999). Feeling global: Internationalism in distress. New York, London:
Basingstoke, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. New York University Press.
McRobbie, A. (1998). British fashion design: Rag trade or image industry? London, Rogerson, R. J. (1999). Quality of life and city competitiveness. Urban Studies,
New York: Routledge. 36(5–6), 969–985.
McRobbie, A. (2003). Club to company. Cultural Studies, 16(4), 516–531. Ross, A. (2003). No-collar: The humane workplace and its hidden costs. New York, NY:
Neff, G., Wissinger, E., & Zukin, S. (2005). Entrepreneurial labour among cultural Basic Books.
producers: ‘‘Cool” jobs in ‘‘hot” industries. Social Semiotics, 15(3), 307–334. Scott, A. J. (2000). The cultural economy of cities: Essays on the geography of image-
Nixon, S. (2003). Advertising cultures: Gender, commerce, creativity. London: Sage. producing industries. London: Sage.
Ooi, C.-S. (2008). Credibility of a creative image: The Singaporean approach, creative Skillset, 2001. Freelance Survey 2000-1, London.
encounters: Creativity at work. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School. Skillset (2009). 2009 Employment census. London: Skillset.
Peck, J. (2005). Struggling with the creative class. International Journal of Urban and Smith, M. P. (2001). Transnational urbanism: Locating globalization. Malden, Mass.,
Regional Research, 29(4), 740–770. Oxford: Blackwell.
Pine, J. P., II, & Gilmore, J. H. (1999). The experience economy: Work is theatre & every Sutton Trust, 2006. The educational backgrounds of leading journalists, London.
business a stage. Harvard: Harvard Business School. Symon, P., & Williams, A. (2001). Urban regneration programmes. In S. Selwood & G.
Pink, D. H. (2001). Free agent nation: How America’s new independent workers are Brown (Eds.), The UK cultural sector: Profile and policy issues (pp. 54–65). London:
transforming the way we live. New York: Warner Books. Policy Studies Institute.
Plaza, B. (2000). Evaluating the influence of a large cultural artifact in the attraction Thrift, N. J. (2005). Knowing capitalism. London, UK, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
of tourism: The guggenheim museum bilbao case. Urban Affairs Review, 36(2), Publications.
264–274. UNCTAD (2010). The creative economy report. Creative economy, a feasible
Pratt, A. C. (1996). Coordinating employment, transport and housing in cities: An development option. Geneva/New York: UNCTAD/ UNDP.
institutional perspective. Urban Studies, 33(8), 1357–1375. UNESCO (2001). Universal declaration on cultural diversity. UNESCO: Geneva.
Pratt, A. C. (2002). Hot jobs in cool places. The material cultures of new media Williams, R. (1976). Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society. London: Fontana.
product spaces: The case of the south of market, San Francisco. Information, Wood, P., & Landry, C. (2007). The intercultural city: Planning for diversity advantage.
Communication and Society, 5(1), 27–50. London, Sterling, VA: Earthscan.
Pratt, A. C. (2004). The cultural economy: A call for spatialized ‘production of Young, I. M. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
culture’ perspectives. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 7(1), 117–128. University Press.
Pratt, A. C. (2006). Advertising and creativity, a governance approach: A case study Zukin, S. (1982). Loft living: Culture and capital in urban change. Baltimore: Johns
of creative agencies in London. Environment and Planning A, 38(10), 1883–1899. Hopkins University Press.
Pratt, A. C. (2008a). Creative cities: The cultural industries and the creative class. Zukin, S. (1991). Landscapes of power: From Detroit to Disney World. Berkeley:
Geografiska Annaler Series B-Human Geography, 90B(2), 107–117. University of California Press.
Pratt, A. C. (2008b). Innovation and creativity. In J. R. Short, P. Hubbard, & T. Hall Zukin, S. (1995). The cultures of cities. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
(Eds.), The Sage Companion to the City (pp. 266–297). London: Sage.
Pratt, A. C. (2009a). Policy transfer and the field of the cultural and creative
industries: Learning from Europe? In L. Kong & J. O’Connor (Eds.), Creative