Jitka Pánek Jurková: Czechia’s cultural credit is really strong – we just need to be smart about it
More than two dozen Czech Centres on four continents represent a shop window for Czech culture around the world. But what more can the country do to boost its international image? And how does the network decide where to open, or close, branches? I discussed those questions, and way more, with the director of the Czech Centres, Jitka Pánek Jurková, who took up the post a year ago this month, at the organisation’s headquarters on Prague’s Wenceslas Square.
What led you to the field you work in today?
“I’ve always been really passionate about two things: international relations and the arts, art history. Throughout my middle school I was deliberating over which of these two fields I should choose.
“And one day I read this amazing article in the magazine Mezinárodní politika, International Politics, by Eliška Tomalová, now a very close friend and colleague of mine, about the magnificent notion of cultural diplomacy.
“For me, this really was a eureka moment, because it was like, I can do both – I can actually combine them. So I did.”
I’m sure many of our readers and listeners have been to Czech Centres, they know what you do. But for those who haven’t, in a nutshell what’s the mission of the Czech Centres network?
“The mission is to gain sympathies and a positive emotional response for Czechia, in support of Czech foreign policy.
“So the Czech Centres is the same system, or the same kind of institution, as Germany has the Goethe Institute, as France has the Institut francais, as Britain has the British Council.
“It’s a tool of so-called soft power, meaning really communicating with foreign audiences.”
You have new Czech Centres, opened relatively recently, in Taipei, Belgrade and Hanoi. On what basis were those places chosen as good locations for new Czech Centres?
“Just for their relevance for Czech foreign policy and its goals.
“Taipei I think is pretty obvious. Taiwan has been a very important strategic partner, with growing importance.
“Belgrade, as the capital of Serbia, is also a really thrilling territory to be in, because it’s a geo-strategically very important place. Czechia has a very strong relationship with Serbia and, on the basis of negotiations between former Czech president Miloš Zeman and the current Serbian president, Vucic, we got this really wonderful building in the centre of Belgrade.
“Hanoi has a very specific link to Czechia, historically. There is a very strong community of young people linked to Czechia, and once again the geo-strategic importance and importance for Czech private sector investors is also paramount there.”
These decisions seem so important – do they come straight from the top, from the foreign minister himself?
“Obviously there is always a discussion between the foreign minister and the directorship of the Czech Centres, but, yes, it would be a decision on the level of the foreign minister.”
Conversely, you’re also closing some Czech Centres in Athens and Rotterdam, and some people have started petitions calling for them to be preserved. On what basis were those decisions taken?
“I am actually happy to see the petitions, because it means our agenda is perceived as an important one, and I am really glad that it is perceived as such.
“Cultural institutes are moving to territories where they need to fight strategic struggles.”
“On the other hand, I’m not only in the position of strategist of our institution – I’m also the person responsible for a chapter of the state budget, part of the state budget.
“And the budget remains relatively the same, more or less, whereas our agendas and our responsibilities in other regions are growing.
“My motto, in general, is quality over quantity. And here we needed to make some choices.
“On a personal level, of course it’s sad. I personally studied at the University of Amsterdam and I have a strong relationship towards the Netherlands.
“But it’s pretty common these days that European networks are being a bit lightened up, and the cultural institutes are moving to territories where they need to fight some strategic struggles, I would say.
“So that’s what we decided to do.”
I know the Czech Centre in Moscow is currently on ice. Admirably, you’re still running the one in Kyiv. How does that look, in practical terms?
“We are discussing, and implementing, means of physical and psychological support to some of our directors: in Israel and Ukraine.”
“Well, I’m always saying that entering top level management of cultural diplomacy in these times is a challenge, but also really a privilege, because the times that we are operating in are really, really difficult ones.
“For the first time in decades, we are discussing here at headquarters, and implementing as well, a means of physical and psychological support to some of our directors: namely, obviously, in Israel and Ukraine.
“And these are not the only ones. Tbilisi has become really a difficult location recently, and there are other ones.
“So we have just, for the first time, started a system of psychological support for my colleagues.
“They are getting all the means of support in their mission that they can but still, and I would like to emphasise this, it really stands on the personal commitment – which I would even call heroism – of our directors in difficult locations, because they are under enormous pressure.”
But say in Kyiv, is it open every day? Or how does it work?
“We are not bringing Czech artists to Kyiv anymore, because that would be risking too much.”
“In Kyiv, as in many locations, we don’t have a ‘building’ that would need to be open. The Czech Centre there is an institute, a hub of communication that organises different events and communicates with local people in different ways.
“We are not bringing Czech artists there anymore, because that would be risking too much. But, for instance, the Czech Centre there would facilitate study programmes for young people that would be a channel for studying Czech music, for instance.
“Or they organise programmes for younger kids with Czech methodology, in order to support them mentally.
“The concerts they have been holding, by Ukrainian artists with some Czech repertoire, have been running for some time in underground shelters, which only testifies to the dramatic extent of the situation.”
Prior to taking your current position you were the head of the Czech Centre in Brussels for five or six years. How was that experience?
“It was amazing. Brussels is such a thrilling place. It’s the centre of policy-making in the EU, the audiences there are very diverse. Obviously there’s the so-called ‘Brussels bubble’, but also the French population, the Flemish-speaking population of Belgium and so forth; we also worked in Luxembourg.
“So it was really interesting, especially because I was also there for the period of the Czech presidency [of the EU], where I think I can proudly say that, together with our partners, we did a really good job representing Czechia through arts and culture.”
If I understand it correctly, when a post like that comes up the people who are interested submit ideas for what they would do if they were the head of the Czech Centre, as well as budget proposals. But when they get the job, how much – if any – autonomy do they have?
“Oh yes, they do have significant autonomy, because the biggest raison d’être of foreign cultural institutes is to kind of live with the local audience abroad.
“Our directors are selected on the basis of knowledge of the territory. Sometimes the pool is bigger, when it’s a large territory like the United States. Sometimes it’s smaller, when it’s Georgia.
“But we always suppose that the director would know and have a relationship towards the territory.
“And from that stance, we do want to provide them with really large autonomy, because their judgement as to what will work with the local audience is really paramount.
“On the other hand, though, we do have central or umbrella themes that we are kind of rolling throughout the network, if it makes sense, obviously.
“And these themes form the DNA of our programming, and of course our kind of external visibility and identity.
“Next year, for instance, we will be celebrating the anniversary of the end of the Second World War and the question always with historical anniversaries is, How pertinent could this be today?
“So the theme we are working with next year is called Safe Space and it’s a theme of mental resilience and how we can contribute to that.
“This will be an umbrella theme for the whole network, but the directors themselves choose in which way exactly they will be working with it. Some of them have artistic residencies, some of them have large debates; it depends.”
As you say, some positions may be relatively hard to fill, in some territories. What’s the maximum length of time that a director can remain in place?
READ ALSO
“The standard really is four years. If they do a good job, that can easily be prolonged by a year or two.
“However, there are some exceptions where, for specific reasons, our directors have been there longer, and this is in two, three, maybe four countries.”
This year has been the Year of Czech Music. During the year Radio Prague International collaborated with the Czech Centres on a podcast. How has the Year of Czech Music project gone from your perspective?
“Amazingly. And I’m especially happy to say so, because I think this was an example of really good practice: when multiple subjects from the Czech public sector had a similar theme and there was a budget dedicated to it.
“I think the Year of Czech Music was an example of really good practice.”
“So we collaborated with the Arts and Theatre Institute and many others – the National Museum and so on and so forth.
“Like this we were able to put together really beautiful and representative things outside of Czechia, including a tour of the Stro.my Ensemble, with contemporary allusions to Smetana and his genius, and much, much more.
“So I’m super happy about the Year of Czech Music – and my colleagues actually say the same.”
Generally speaking, what are the areas of the arts that tend to resonate most with the public around the world?
“Well, that would differ. There are obviously some areas for which we are proverbially known, such as the Czechoslovak New Wave.
“That is very popular and my colleagues love to work with it around the world. However, we always try to motivate them to add a contemporary layer to it.
“So, for instance, when we are talking about the Czechoslovak New Wave we would be also talking about cinematography today, female directors and so on and so forth.”
Also I guess different directors would be popular in different territories?
“Absolutely. [Jan] Švankmajer is a huge name in Japan, also for the Japanese love of animation in general.
“And other directors in other countries. Daria Kashcheeva won the Student Oscar in LA, so that would make her more popular in the USA, for instance.”
A few years ago you yourself had a podcast called Jazzman versus špioni, or Jazz Artist Versus Spies. It’s an intriguing title – what was it all about?
“The podcast – and if I may I will use this platform to recommend it to those who are interested in cultural diplomacy in general – really is about cultural diplomacy, it’s logic, the thrilling stories that are behind it; and there are many, especially during the Cold War, when cultural diplomacy was one of the very few channels of how to communicate with foreign audiences, across the Iron Curtain.
“It was such an important platform to keep contact. Unfortunately in some ways nowadays it’s the same.
“So the podcast really illustrates the history of cultural diplomacy, including its little spy chapters, but also the trends that are happening today.”
You say that during the Cold War the Americans sent out African-American jazz musician as kind of cultural envoys, including here, where for example Louis Armstrong played at Lucerna in 1965.
“Yes, that is absolutely correct. And very interestingly the whole jazz diplomacy was designed by the first Afro-American congressman, Adam [Clayton] Powell.
“He was at an international conference in Jakarta at a time when there was this very significant movement of unaligned countries – and he realised that the USA was losing the war for the hearts and minds of these countries.
“So he, together with his friends, including Duke Ellington, came up with this idea of using culture in a way that would be the closest to the hearts of the audiences they needed, including African audiences.
“And it did play a significant role.”
I understand why they would try to appeal non-aligned countries, but why would they be sending artists behind the Iron Curtain, basically to the “other side”, to countries like Czechoslovakia?
“Because they needed to demonstrate that the American philosophy, or way of life, is a very viable competition towards the one presented by the governing regimes in the Eastern Bloc, right?
“Another example that I like to use is that the American secret services would drop copies of Orwell’s Animal Farm from balloons into Poland, exactly because they wanted to present a way of thinking – individualism and other pillars of American, or Western, identity in general – to audiences in the Soviet Bloc.”
If you look around the world, or at least around Europe, are there any countries that you consider masters at national branding?
“Oh yes, so many. Many of them, in so many different ways.
“I do like to follow the Korea Institute and Korean cultural diplomacy. They set their targets pretty clearly years ago: pop culture, the film industry, cuisine and other things, and they have just really pushed forward in these fields, to amazing results.
“And they have been really successful in branding South Korea as a very contemporary, interesting country. So that’s one example.
“Finland has been really great, and the Scandinavian nations in general also know what they are doing, ever since the 1960s. For them branding was also part of the reinvention of their societies after the Second World War.
“And not only that, they have managed to establish a really strong position of their design, but with it also a strong position of their ideas, including inclusivity and sustainability, for instance.
“The Goethe Institute is such a good example – a very professional network of cultural institutes with a very clear narrative and a very clear mission for Germany.”
This leads me to the question, How good is Czechia in this area? Or what more can you do?
“I’m extremely happy about the infrastructure we have. It really is amazing to already have a really beautiful and professional network of cultural institutes – almost 30 of them around the world.
“What we as Czechia are not great at is defining our strategic goals and really putting our effort behind them.”
“This is such a great achievement, that this was established after the Velvet Revolution and has been functioning and growing ever since.
“What we as Czechia are not great at is defining our strategic goals and really putting our effort behind them.
“I do believe that for Czechia cultural diplomacy is such a strong tool, because our cultural credit around the world is really strong – we just need to be smart about it.
“So what we would need to do, I think, as a country is to postulate what our specific strategic visions are, what our target audience is, and develop this, of course within Czech centres and within other public institutions that are active in this field.
“Such as – once again back to Scandinavia – the Team Finland effort, which always postulates these goals for multiple institutions, and they work on those concurrently in their specific domains.”
I saw an interview you gave in which you said that you wanted the Czech Centres to take a more Havel-like approach to your work. What did you mean by that?
“Well, Havel is just such an amazing example for our work in general, because he was exactly what I think is the best practice of cultural diplomacy.
“Havel is just such an amazing example for our work in general, because he was exactly what I think is the best practice of cultural diplomacy.”
“He had very strong ideas – packed in a perfect, super form – that were relevant to international politics.
“So he knew what he was doing, he was able to articulate it beautifully, in his theatre pieces and his books, and these things were very valuable for Czech foreign policy.
“And all of these three pillars we should include in our activities as well.”
Is there any way for you to measure the success of cultural diplomacy?
“Of course. There is, and we do – but.
“We have very precise quantitative measurements. We of course know how is the attendance at our events, if it’s growing, who is going there, how is the social media response, how is the traditional media response, how is the traffic of our website – all of that we map.
“On the other hand, we still haven’t perfected our qualitative evaluation, and it’s something I’m slowly working on, because I would like to know more about, for instance, the development of the relationships that emerge through our events, how are people translating the message they brought home to their further environment and so forth.
“There are studies internationally that deal with this and the conclusion always is that it’s a long-term run, a long-term effort, but it is always worth it.”
