Laden with great expectations: (Re)Mapping the arts housing policy as urban cultural policy in Singapore
The arts and artists need space to thrive. However, as much of the land in Singapore is state-owned, the finiteness of space – literally and figuratively – remains a key challenge. Yet there is a rich variety of arts infrastructure in Singapore today, from exhibition spaces to performing arts venues...
Saved in:
| 主要作者: | |
|---|---|
| 格式: | text |
| 語言: | English |
| 出版: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2020
|
| 主題: | |
| 在線閱讀: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/3299 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/soss_research/article/4559/viewcontent/LadenwithExpectations_2020_sv.pdf |
| 標簽: |
添加標簽
沒有標簽, 成為第一個標記此記錄!
|
| 機構: | Singapore Management University |
| 語言: | English |
| 總結: | The arts and artists need space to thrive. However, as much of the land in Singapore is state-owned, the finiteness of space – literally and figuratively – remains a key challenge. Yet there is a rich variety of arts infrastructure in Singapore today, from exhibition spaces to performing arts venues and state-subsidised artist studios. This infrastructure comes at a cost - these arts spaces are positioned as policy interventions capable of achieving a broad confluence of cultural, urban, economic and social outcomes for Singapore.
This article aims to provide an understanding of how arts spaces in Singapore has been framed and legitimised as a strategic means to pursue multiple policy goals. In particular, this article will focus on the Arts Housing Policy, which was formally introduced in 1985 as an artist assistance scheme that provides subsidised work spaces to artists and arts groups. Over the years, the policy has evolved into an urban cultural policy expected to achieve urban rejuvenation goals.
Through tracing the governmental structures and organisational processes behind the evolution of the Arts Housing Policy from an artist assistance scheme into an urban cultural policy, this article will demonstrate how and why arts housing spaces have become encumbered by the institutional layering of potentially incommensurate policy agendas, assumptions and aspirations. This article contends that an analysis of the bureaucratic structures and processes behind policy development will enable a more nuanced understanding of the impractical tensions and incongruities between the arts, artists and urban cultural policy goals in Singapore. |
|---|