Yeah Wait for Dana Yeah So if we could all please sit down Make less noise. Thanks. I'd like to introduce you to our second speaker today. Micaela Trimarki coming from Italy Micaela is professor of cultural economics and and cultural analysis of law he writes extensively on cultural policy of policy and cultural economics and works international cultural cooperation Thank you Micaela for making it today He's going to speak about his talk is from Avery Towers to the Urban Texture a map of future culture. Thanks Yeah, well first of all, let me justify myself. I'm an economist, so I'm not the right person to be here But I my impression is that what I can do Trying to be of any use is to give the impression of the ecosystem where we are Whoever you believe you are an artist project leader a cultural manager, whatever it is certainly there is a complex ecosystem and very often that danger is a wee Spend our time with people like we are so we Only we never or we rarely listen to different voices, but very often we At the end of story squeeze our own beliefs thinking that these are the only right ones So maybe just a wide-water view can be of some use I will start from where we are just to understand where we possibly are going to and the point is okay the Dominating feeling in the present word is that things are going really bad because there is something like barbarians Threatening our civilization all the people working in heritage and culture in the arts whatever sector even in opera music Dance, etc. Normally feel themselves and the siege of an ignorant society They say people now are really losing their culture and they feel and they declare a lot of nostalgia Towards something like in the 19th century. Everybody used to like opera, which is of course not true at all now My view is that in present days. We are the most sophisticated Society ever in history so our feelings our approaches our expectations are much more Sophisticated much more able to go into deaths then it used to be even 50 years ago So it's bizarre that the fear of change is so strong and so Deep that actually the real justification is okay. People are ignorant very often I Actually leave a going around in conferences and debates, etc And there is at least one or two people saying something like young people have a very low threshold of attention Because they are actually used to change programs in the TV With a remote control lying on the sofa that doing an effort. That's a moralistic view, of course But I mean it really is diffused and then something like okay. They are used to Video games touch screen, etc. And I always answer saying okay The Lord of the Rings is much longer than any symphony by mother So the point is it's not true that the threshold of attention is low The fact it depends on what you actually are using at doing So there are many things that even younger people Actually are happy to bear because they like it.  So the point is at the end of the story. We should actually Restart from scratch because things of these The accumulation of these commonplace debate is very dangerous because of course at the end of the story It's not only bad atmosphere, but it's also for example less money. So you would less Spaces less urban space. So at the end of story There is a physical damage and a financial damage to culture the arts because very often there is a separation between institutional managing the society and Arts and cultural projects. So it is much more dangerous that we can believe just thinking they're stupid And that's it.  For example, we have the idea of fans being awards So fans are not used to allow Freedom of expression or in some way even variety of projects But just I like you I give you money which is censorship at the end of story But every government in our countries and the pts very often also the emerging economies are Imitating the so-called advanced countries, which is a danger because they are replicating that cloning systems in which they just Give an award to what they personally like, which is not necessarily cultural then of course there is there are strong barriers Against entry the emerging activities are normally considered something low level low quality etc. Which is of course something you can't Demonstrate nevertheless the institutional responses such as this and then of course there are no real incentives.    So culture is not changing your soul but if you read whatever it is magazines newspapers and also sacred textbooks and culture It is very Diffused the idea of Culture doing something special for your soul, which is a very beginning of a disaster at the end of the story Then of course the idea of educating the audience. This is also a very stupid statement We are not there with cultural project to educate anybody We have an expressive urgency and in the story Maybe this sounds familiar to people in society and we can exchange ideas We can exchange intuitions, but the idea of a theatrical say director Educating his own audience is very dictatorial dictatorial at the end of story.  We're normal if I like it everybody can like it culture is very simple The idea is maybe in the last two centuries We've refused this simplicity and we tried to make things complicated not to allow Everybody have a normal familiar access in to culture and then the last bit and that's the economic the financial Bit of it is the idea of demonstrating the culture generates money if you digit something like economic impact of culture on Google a lot of pages from Town administration in the United States Australia Canada will come up Demonstrating okay, we spend 100 for culture, but the end of story we managed to make 1000 circulate So we transform the investment in culture in something like nights in hotels meals in restaurants parking Tickets motorways tickets, etc. Okay True, but this happens for everything even illegal activities produced A big impact on the economy So it would I wouldn't use as an argument also because if I say look you it's right You fund culture because I may generate 10 times your investment Every even small commercial center generates 100 times my Investment so it's very stupid to use an argument that can be very easily reverted against us. Let's say, okay So what what's the problem? We lose the idea of what? Cultural and arts project may generate that no other activities can do so the unfungible impact Which is something much more complex and delicate, but certainly we have the advantage of generating of seeding in some way Fertilizing society with things that no other activity can do so it's stupid to use this sort of arguments which are not at all demonstrable then of course This protection of culture which is dominating the debate in the institutional culture Dominating generations, whatever it is Is generating of course a reaction of people and there are many people saying okay at some stage people will come back to us It's a public budgets as you know Are being drained progressively because maybe there was there was too much public expenditure for everything in the last 20 years So at some stage of course we've had the problem of trying not to expand Even more our public budgets. It is maybe discussed for hours. It's not our Objects so I don't don't lose time on this But certainly I must recall the idea that public budgets are being in its way contracted and certainly culture is Progressively given less money So many people say okay, but it's not the right thing at some stage.  It's an opportunity for us But fortunately things aren't going to be replicated Statically as they used to be in the last 30 or 40 years Then of course on the other hand, there are in some way Action which is on one hand occupation of spaces, which is very romantic in some way I'm not in a position to give evaluations of these. I'm just analyzing them. Certainly. There is an urgency of Going back to places. So the occupation of places has a Strong motivation and as a strong passion in it The question is that probably quite often occupation is a short-term action So it's very difficult to imagine that there could be a strategic project. He also dealing with markets with Society so normally it is a political act which has very strong and it's necessary to Put some something strong in the debate, but the question is okay. How long can it last and how much can we do? Continuing a simple occupation and not a strategy a much more a much wider strategy On the other hand, there is a very commercial drive such as okay We put Disney things whatever it is restaurants the bookshops etc. Wherever whatever it is culture We don't make money because people are prepared to do something for us even donating, but we make money because we actually Use something like with specter spectacular eyes culture.  So this very stupid is what one shot business for one person and Society is not affected at all By this so it's dangerous to be careful about numbers I don't care about what how many people come my question should be how many people come back when once they've been once In my place in my in the place where I'm developing a project on the other hand In this protected ecosystem, there is a wonderful elsewhere What things are happening? So I'm seeing in the whole world. There are no mainstream activities Developing which are in some way crafting their own projects not replicating the Common, you know making foundations or whatever it is So there is also an institutional greed that normally is a cut and pasted to feel protected Actually, what's happening is that many small but Strong projects are emerging out of this mainstream culture and these leaders the interesting beat Of course, I'm not saying that each single project will be successful I'm saying this is a signal of a big attempt in which crafting a project without making reference to the existing models Is the clever thing to do and maybe it is also It's possible that these projects have a longer life Also because they can be adapted time by time and not being in some way mummified. So There is something we're losing but there is something we're earning and maybe what we're going to earn in long-term perspective Is going to be much more interesting than what we are losing so on the other hand the point is Dealing with heritage and the arts and dealing with a word in which this part I just Get my bit from the discussion a few minutes ago The idea of having too many labels is very dangerous because actually culture Institutional culture is very obsessed with the idea of being labeled in some way. So also the being admitted in the UNESCO list Is not Granting you anything at all you need to invest in any case So you only have a label and this is not at all even attracting tourists or whatever it is So you remain exactly as you were before the only thing is you have more formal responsibilities But nobody actually looks at the strategy of your projects connecting your thing heritage whatever even intangible heritage with society so Establishing a relationship between culture and society culture Is a very elementary word coming from the Themological root of cultivation to cultivate you need two elements one is a relationship You need a seed and soil only with a seed you can't cultivate culture Culture culture is normally isolated. So it's strange because they're refusing the Funding route of their identity The second element is the multiplication of value Nobody would plant a seed to get after six months the same seed you need something more So culture means not only relationship, but also action. You need some strategy to set a dialogue with people Whoever they are one by one not necessarily Masses, but certainly it is a delicate but important process if you don't do it. It's not culture So whatever label you may have it doesn't mean anything at all just to be quite bad if we read Statistics about for example reading you say okay in Germany there are Such percent proportion of people are reading at least one book It's not true at all. It's the percentage of the proportion of people buying a book not reading it a B, nobody asks you actually what you read it may be the I don't know The man without quality or it can be also a manual of yoga breathing or a cookbook or whatever it is I May be I can't defend the idea that not necessarily every book has the same Cultural rate and maybe the question should be not only if you read it But how you read it if you read it again if you look for other books after you read it at say if you write something Etc. So maybe if we look at figures, we don't have any view of what is really happening in society This is really dangerous because we are we people involved in cultural projects are the only ones who can protect ourselves from these mainstream Terminating strong view of everything being dimensional, which is really dangerous So even our label may be something nice to use in newspapers But certainly it doesn't grant us that that our identity is Appropriately perceived by society and so we very often we have a very loose Identity and a very strong label. We should revert exactly the process to be I mean in our interact in our interest and So of course, it's true We are in a crisis just to go back to words crisis means change in ancient Greek So it's not a bad word. It's just a change When there is a change something happens Maybe none of us will be in the same position as we are now But only those who are afraid of losing something will react against the crisis those who want to bet Want to face the challenge are quite happy that there is a crisis finally There is a crisis things are changing so it's good news if we only are able to interpret them in a positive way and certainly Without setting hierarchies, but cultural people should be those who are most able of the rest of the world to evolve to imagine because we have Contents which are in some way the critical are a discourse like the Anglo-Saxon literature Describes culture is a cultural discourse or the cultural texts, which is not something sculpted and marble, but something evolving time by time But That's good news since culture is regulated in a very rigid way We have a lot of loopholes and open areas in which we can go the emerging Projects I was speaking about a few minutes ago are exactly those using the non institutional area in which you can go so our Legal systems are something like whatever is not prohibited is allowed So rather than fitting making the effort of fitting into legislation We should observe what is ignored by legislation and go into that which is not being illegal It's just not being mainstream and being free flexible and possibly much quicker than the institutional culture That's our challenge in my view Then of course new values We've been grown up can I go on I've been too long You tell me We've been grown up with a very simple idea values when we were children values and still now the values were something like Efficiency competition Excellence these were the three magic words we've been trained our parents will say you need to be efficient You must be competitive you kill people in advance because they could be your competitor eventually etc.  I'm just describing what I see in the world Of course these are not yet mainstream values, but they're becoming progressively mainstream values They are experienced relationship and proximity something in which you craft things Time by time with a local community with a place and with the idea of being flexible so being Empirical which is exactly the contrary to the manufacturing paradigm in which everything should be modeled Very often cultural people ask me what's the model and I always answer that there can't be any model in culture Because by definition culture is made by I say culture to be simple Of course culture the arts that you imagine whatever thing you want, but certainly culture is not at all homogeneous Is by definition every unit of it is unique and not comparable with each other So there can't be hierarchy and easily they say we own Two-thirds of the words heritage etc.  The point is how I am managing it So the point is the new Models imply a much more relaxed view of time and space We don't need to be international. We need to be present in our community. So a local Dimension is much more preferable and certainly it is much more convenient for us. It will set Connection with the rest of the world, but we are not obsessed by our label whether we are local or international Maybe if we start locally we can set a dialogue with the institution much more easily than with word Governments with the spectra etc.  So they have intuition. They have Atmosferical intuition. So it's not computation. It's not excel sheet It's just seeing things that no other sees in that moment even one second before the others and so have an intuition Entrepreneur the word entrepreneur or enterprise Don't focus upon the goal. They focus upon the beginning of something So the real investment is not something computed with a granted outcome, but it's something you can't do without So it is an action urgency in some way and we are there as cultural project people so We are much more entrepreneurs than the excel power point etc.  So it's our time. That's I know I may sound encouraging I'm an economist. I'm being true This does not imply that each cultural thing will be successful This implies that the spirit of time is favorable as it never has been before in the last say six months a being called a few times by and by Companies by business companies asking me what's going to happen in the world and doing this with being sincere Doing this with artists not not on my own but connecting economic view artists intuition We were actually paid to explain to them what's going to happen in the world because they are so much involved in replicated models that they are not any more able to understand what's you know Beyond the wall so Also for this there is a growing demand of art and culture on the part of the rest of the world It's our task to understand it to intercept it and to do something not for them, but do what we do Understanding what can be of any use for them or for the rest of the world? It's still dialogue of cultural value Heritage what's heritage? It's something we received on one hand, but it's not necessarily we may interpret heritage from two points of view Either what we received from our ancestors There is a commonplace sentence I very often listen to which is our fathers did like this So we need to do like they did which is very wrong Mean we wouldn't have invented the wheel doing what our fathers did of course and then second in the 19th century paradigm the idea of Museums and culture was something like okay We are keeping memory of the past because the only the past gave us value Forgetting that the past was needed only by the the capitalist bourgeoisie because it was the only class in history not having a past They stole it actually if you read the Masfield Park by Jen Austin You see that at some stage when there is the guy coming from London He's an entrepreneur young entrepreneur. They want to seduce Fanny Price who is the girl living in a Socratic family He understands that until they are in the park. She is not falling in the trap So he brings her in the wilderness, which is a not organized part of the park There Fanny risked to lose her orientation because of course wilderness is the jungle It's a perfect metaphor for emerging capitalism. We are at the end of the 18th century At the end of story fortunately Fanny doesn't fall into a trap because Jen Austin at this wonderfully reactionary She want to rescue the aristocratic people, but certainly the idea is at the end of the story. That's the metaphor That's why the bourgeoisie needed the past when Napoleon goes to Egypt brings with him more archaeologists and soldiers the war is Very almost a disaster, but they managed to bring in Paris whatever they can Stealing stones from Egypt. That's it. So that's the past the muses are evolving Unfortunately, the mother of the muses who was the goddess of memory Change is changing her view by 180 degree Rather than protecting past memory. We need to create Something worth remembering in the future. So our task as cultural people is not Protecting the existing.  Of course. I haven't say okay. We protect it It's beautiful, but the main Core business shouldn't be any more to protect also the concept of protection implies that we protect things against somebody The idea of somebody threatening culture. I mean culture. I don't see apart from exceptions that happen Once in 10 or 20 years Nobody destroys culture voluntarily.  Imagine the people are actually ready to Destroy everything. It's not true. We protect it But our task being heritage people is to create new heritage something that will be inherited by future generation That we enjoy it presently and since we enjoy it we can transmit some value to future generations So it's not a good and romantic task. It is an egoistic task. We do it. We enjoy it We speak our own language if it's worth memory. It's worth at the end of story. So that's the news of the future a museum Heritage urban spaces can't be anymore a place where you go and visit like blockbuster tourists put crosses on your Moleskine and say okay. I've seen it. That's very you know, it's like anxiety from performance.  So it's another opportunity for us, but also a responsibility So just to be certain models or in some way reference change the manufacturing model is perfectly represented by a symphonic orchestra wonderful place, but Each single musician belonging to an orchestra must replicate Exactly what the conductor imposes. So even if they are wonderful musicians, they can't improvise. They can't interpret They only have to do exactly the single beats Put together by only one person who is the head of the company in such a case the Conductor of the orchestra This is for Dism is a mechanical model. You remember metropolis and that's the symphonic orchestra Now what's happening is something much more challenging, which is the north african Fondue the court yard or handicraft people are there crafting vases plates Pants whatever it is and they craft the objects while they speak With a customer. So the people who want some object speaks with a handicraft Person and this implies that it is crafted in a way, which is unique The next customer will speak differently even telling stories and at the end of story The object will be different. That's the new economy. It's not Utopia, whatever it is. That's happening already Six months ago, none of you would imagine that you could go at the Nike shop crafting your own shoes Now you can do it. So even multinational industry Understood that personalization is the core of our attention towards objects and whatever that in some way represents our self These implies a very big change in the concept of quality because quality is that we go back to the label issue Quality is normally something assessed by experts. I remember when I was a child We were touring Europe and the touring the tourist guides were Describing everything with a number of stars. There was a church or a building or whatever with three stars Some other with two stars and the other with one star If you were in a hurry, you could couldn't lose at least the three stars things This is something which experts assess quality and quality is just a conventional importance Maybe it doesn't give me any contribution Mona Lisa is Whatever one hundred mile million stars painting is an icon. Everybody says it's culture. It's the arts Everybody after having seen Mona Lisa for the first time at the Louvre museum goes on and say but why the hell is it so important? because of course Each of us in the world. I'm testing it But this is of course important because nobody tells anything about Mona Lisa. It's an icon So you only get there the it's beneficial race and become a wonderful person.  It's really ridiculous So quality is becoming something different, which is not at all connected with the icon But with the dialogic ability of cultural supply So it's not Mona Lisa in itself, but it's how it is organized What it can transmit to me as a visitor and this implies for every form of art It's not the thing, but how the thing is in some way framed in something Speaking with us in such a way it can tell us something if it doesn't of course We just accept possibly that somebody else decided it's important for us, which is not the best destiny we may have so This is still another responsibility for cultural project people because we need to understand that the real thing is Sufficient is necessary, but not sufficient. We need a discourse around it We need to introduce people we need to encourage them to form their own vocabulary of appreciation If it if they don't do it, they will certainly fall in the trap How much time of okay, so Just to have some guidelines to do a Wise art and culture project. We certainly need site specific identity Which implies the idea not of protecting our identity, but of letting The territory the area in which we are speak to make a very stupid example in municipal museums There is never a map close to the works of art exhibited. Maybe municipal museums exhibit Objects stories belonging to the territory it could be very nice for me as a visitor to watch a map Which is to zero cost of course with a red dot Giving me them that the information about where this thing is in the urban setting, etc So it is telling things that we expect to make a very Bad example I'm not a football fan, but I'm discovering that since many years ago Football matches are described with statistics now. So even People that in my superficial view are in some way only distinctive, you know people suffering out of their Football team. Nevertheless, they can't appreciate the tea the match only watching People playing they need statistics how many times I passed the ball I received a ball what proportion I was in game, etc So it's normal for us beauty only cultural people don't understand this. This is really important Then of course another thing is to be flexible and to dialogue with the rest of the world Don't be snobbish because very often communities companies even the strongest and hardest Things we have in the territory can be interested in a mutual exchange.  That's a danger the cultural people actually fall into is I only speak with my Similar animals and not with the other species, which is very stupid very wrong because culture also in the past Culture has been successful only if it was able to speak with the rest of society Greek tragedies were compulsory For communities, so it was a state duty to go and enjoy Greek tragedies not you didn't pay a ticket and you were it's like military service But be nice I don't have a story If the question is okay, what what can we? Establish a dialogue between the arts and heritage the pity is that in the past we've been very often Invested with things such as special effects such as the exhibition of contemporary art in our archaeological site That was to be a special effect The point is have you got the opportunity to set a dialogue? So to have a permeability between whatever cultural project and the existing heritage and the urban texture if you do That's winning perspective because it speaks normally with people with what we see every day So I would say of course there is a dialogue. There's no separation between the arts and dialogue and heritage that Transmitting the same kind of urgency is values, etc. But we need to be to To protect or to be in some way to to grant their reciprocal identity not to spoil any Identity very often special effects in a rock concerts in the arena di Verona But not butter good, but it's just a place. It could be also whatever place in the world So what's the contribution as such a wide place gives to a concert none? So maybe we can do it Whenever else doesn't make any change We have a nice example. It's just an example and I told you before Italy's not good place for good examples normally with very Chauvinist and wrong in managing culture. Matera was a municipality having its crafted in stone It's called the sassy the stones is actually the residents of people Nevertheless, they understood that they could Push it ahead and ahead doing something respectful of the identity of the existing heritage which come from prehistoric ages They had a lot of motion pictures of Pasolini, but also Mel Gibson the passion was actually Should there in Nutella and understood that they can have mixing evolution of the Stone culture not only with anti-craft, but also with Artistic sculpture they have a museum National Museum of Contemporary sculpture showing how the language of the stone is continuous There is no special effect and in such a case whatever you do You're not going anymore there to visit an old place But you understand the whole place and you interpret may interpret Effectively every beat through an interpretation of the rest This well important use also tourism is becoming something soft with people who want to be Embedded in the living community rather than going there in a five-star hotel And being in some way remaining stranger For the community so we can bet and there is there are a lot of opportunities to Connect heritage with the arts without spoiling anything and even strengthening the original identity and strengthening the prospective identity so We actually the importance is to reconquer the urban greed Using a lot of examples Make a very elementary example. There is a Public library in the Netherlands who actually invaded the urban space with Digital totems you can download a book with your ebook reader or iPad for free from these totems They're far from the library when you go get to page say 50 They put the 51 there is a map of the library say okay If you want to read the rest you come to the library and you can download the rest for free But you need to come there now the question is if there is something happening in the library then nice because I'm capturing you If there is just a static place where they allow you to download the book you lost your bet So the point is to be active but to do it with a wide view using the whole urban space and Catching people where they are rather than expecting that they will come make the effort to come in our place, etc So and also The idea of using cross-mediality I would like to visit a museum and to watch a painting while I listen to the voice of somebody reading the letter that the painter was Writing while he was painting so to have informations like statistics for football is very elementary We can do it. So these are our challenges To set alliances not to be culture can't be in competition. We're so unique Other cultural things are not in competition. Normally people consume the whole system So I'm lucky if there are other cultural things in my place because at some stage people going in other places will come in my So the real mistake is to fill in competition with culture We should set a lens at least we can also ignore the other but certainly not be Obsessed by the idea that other people can spoil our destiny are our projects and then avoid the idea of considering public authorities static and Immovable we go and negotiate we need to ask not to ask for money But say we want these things think about how many things you may obtain in kind Spaces technology training whatever it is at the end of story Your goal is not to get a lot of money, but to reduce the amount of money you need to get Things objects places whatever it is endorsement That can be much more powerful than money in a stage of launching some products And then of course the idea of not being afraid of the of digital world as something spectacular virtual museums are not the same museum seen in a Program on the it is another thing So there is no separation between the digital word and the digital and the analogic word the word is only one We can use two dimensions So it is clever to exploit the opportunities of a dialogue between analogic and digital Rather than being too much drained against the idea of thinking digital is superficial. It's not at all So we've had fire I'm finishing Be safe feel safe We have the fabled we must use it So we need to reconquered the other space all the all the festivals occurring in these years are a nice symptom Maybe some of them will finish at some stage. They are a symptom that we don't want urban space to be To belong to other people to or to nothing possibly if you draw the map of your movements every day Like home a coffee bar some friends place university whatever it is Normally culture is out of your everyday path you make a deviation to go into a theater or museum, etc You don't never fall into to be Extremely stupid the model should be something like a cultural Starbucks a place where people do every effort to keep you there Not your soul to keep your body there Whatever you drink whatever you do you're there That's a challenge to open a very big area of permeability between the place where we do something cultural and the rest of the town The rest of the urban greed there we can actually we know that because many people will fall into not into a trap But into the place and so if they like it they can do it This is really important. So not to be in some way To keep our identity protecting it from anybody, that's it Thank you for this stimulating lecture Are there any questions? Hi Thank you for your evocative but rather black and white presentation. I would say and was missing more examples of The good work that's being done even in Italy. I have to say that having visited many cultural entrepreneurs They're much more creative about changing their paradigm then then then I see in with with a lot of operators in Holland or here in Germany I Want to maybe ask you a question about Changing the the the idea of time and space where you said Culture operate or culture organizations or whether is active should maybe focus more on on what's happening in their locality and And not so much on what's happening on a global level if I understood correctly. Does that mean that you cancel out? The the need for interconnectedness and the need for bringing in people from outside and the need for being able to also be a global citizen or Being part of a global culture No, it's all I make a very energetic when when they founded Rome The Kingdom of Rome at the very beginning was 70 700 something before Christ They built two temples. The first was Jupiter. The second temple was the goddess Xenia who was the goddess of welcome So the idea was everybody living here is a Roman citizen They started to understand we're speaking about many many years ago They understood that only he predating their own Even biological route, but certainly cultural route They could produce something that we've become eventually a Republican and an empire So it was refusing the idea of keeping their own identity.  So connections are quite important my only worry is not to be I'm gonna say to be decryptible. So my project should be something you can read This does not imply that you accept it passively or that we don't mix together different views But certainly I need to put something on the table You need to put something else on the table and we can fertilize with each other But certainly if before exchanges we don't have an identity We risk to copy and paste from any other model. So I've seen of course your right.  So we have a lot of wonderful good examples and also a lot of bad bad examples And the idea is very often we are too much Obsessed by the idea of doing something international I might just to make a very lamented example the impressionist exhibition in Brescia or in Treviso in Italy It's not at all connected with the territory people go there Ignore the place. They don't visit the town. Don't don't even buy a sandwich in the town They go back by coach. So the point is okay Who is the real? Beneficiary of this idea is just the organizer. So very often in this Superficially globalized Cultural thing that he is that for example, there is a very bad income distribution The point would be to involve the whole community not to do something protected, but do something which is language Not necessarily only of the place, but in some way specific place specific language and then of course being able to connect this language because I'm working in Rome on the River Tiber and we're trying to set of course a lot of Relationship with other River towns in the world because maybe that we have common or different problems But certainly to check the views of each River town is quite important for us But said that we are not going to copy and paste any project done in another River We're trying to make a project emerge from the Tiber. I don't know if I'm answering Not completely maybe to give you a counter example. You must be familiar with the Teatro Valle in in Rome And and what's happened there in the past three years the Teatro Valle occupato The Teatro Valle is one of the oldest theaters in Rome The city was no longer able to pay for its upkeep and renovation and It was threatened to maybe be demolished the neighborhood thought differently and decided to move in There's now an artist collective who run a manifold of very interesting projects But they've been fighting with the municipality now already for two three years. They are in a big Cool Sorry, they're talking to to big name lawyers, etc. Etc. Then last year what happened is that the European Cultural Foundation decided to give an award to the Teatro Valle occupato to Explain that this was actually a quite an interesting way of dealing with cultural heritage And at the same time activate community participation only after that happened a dialogue Took place between the municipality and the people that represented Teatro. So I don't see how That could have happened without International recognition of what's happening on the ground. Yeah, but I totally agree with you Maybe I explained myself badly, but I'm not against the idea of being a Internationally connected or get some recognition. I my site specificity idea is not that of being local and to Avoid contacts is to I mean Teatro Valle as an advantage because on one hand it hosts not only shows but also dialogue discussion debates from all Many parts of the world and they were able to bring in Rome a lot of People I think about the Syrian for example people having problems and giving them a stage and An outcome and a discussion which was okay But they at the same time this was devoted not to nobody or only to elite people, etc. But the people resident in Rome or to tourists so the people using the space. I am trying to Demonstrate that you need to connect the two parts so that our Community is much more Internationally oriented that we can believe that is that we normally fall into the mistake of thinking locals are locals and International means something else. This is not any more true So I'm being quite relaxed about this because I believe that being in a place You are dealing with a community, which is not a community of local stupid folkloric people. It's a Said that's the first thing I said. We're very sophisticated. We're very internationally oriented So it is the right moment to do this. I'm just saying I Wasn't thinking about that of all I was thinking about three tenors Concert impressionist exhibition or the blockbuster things. I think that these blockbuster things tend to imitate something like People coming out in TV in all the world, but not speaking with anybody in the community Not even producing people not even creative artists. So this is bad I'm backing the idea of involving the widest area that I can Both locally and internationally, but doing it consistently What I've seen easily living there. Maybe I much more obsessed with bad examples than Visitor can if there are too many things totally ignoring people and totally dealing with When I met the mayor of Brescia after the impressionist exhibition The only thing he did was to show me the number of pages of newspapers speaking about the exhibitions So he didn't care about people about his town. He care about press. I am just suggesting that caring only about press Is it just something like a backward activity? It's not necessarily convenient for any cultural project. So I agree with you Tosley There are many bad examples doing something different another question Thanks. I I really enjoyed your your economic approach because It's that kind of reality check that I think when we're all forming and constructing projects and talking with Horrible words stakeholders out there whether they work for government or their private businesses and everything you have to have that head-on about You know basically what's in it? For them and also how will it work? Anyway, I I really enjoyed your presentation. Thank you And I'm sorry that more people who I've talked to over the last few days weren't here to hear it I want to ask you about Metira though. You didn't you said You gave a list of things about what it was, but I wonder if you have some examples about how they actually Fulfilled those kinds of things in Matira, you know Matira the the stone place What did they do, you know, did they have people to stay there in these houses? Did they I don't know But what were some of the things that they actually did? They're very simple match to Establish even 20 years ago An evolving dialogue between asymmetrical organizations. So there was a private foundation the administration the Chamber of Commerce and being a small place everybody were actually there were possibly Being a school together or something like this, which is easy in a local place in some place Yeah, they could trust reciprocally now the other story They didn't care about being different from the institutional point of view. They started thinking about what to do so everything was in some way open doors and Discussions were about what are we going to do? Well, normally in many cases we have Reluctant organizations who don't want to be involved in Very often being with cultural projects that the first Thing a public and we try to say is we have no money So even before even before understanding what you're going to speak about they say we don't have money, etc. So they were able to Establish a smooth and subtle discussion about what to do and they could in a long time So it was not immediate, but it was growing and growing and growing respecting the idea of Not setting special effects in the historical center, but for example having incentive for small growing Small companies possibly activated by young professionals to establish at a very low cost in the center So they could actually open some Not necessarily touristic, but also handicraft etc visit to make it living everything was yeah everything was okay to consider Historical center as something where everybody could live and act without being special Which is something normally doesn't happen in at least in the talent experience So there was in some way an anticipation of a smoother paradigm in which the can be cooperation Of course cooperation implies discussion implies possibly Divergence or whatever it is But at the end of the story they were able to speak speak speak and understand and they did things now They have for example a different setting even of Hospitality for tourists which are tourists coming from Italy and from Broad, which is not the big hotel Everybody would have done in other time, but small rooms in in the normal buildings there so it is In some way sustainable financially it is generating Action goods and services speaking about the place so nothing special or alien or whatever it is and it does In some way attract people from the place who can work and also people from other places who can come there That's it. So it is working like this. Of course there is Even an international intention because it has been used as a location for many motion pictures So there have been a lot of relationship. They work the end of story so far. Hopefully they do Thank you very much I think we're perfectly on time on schedule We can start we'll have a lunch break now from 12 to 1 and The lunch is going to be downstairs Same as yesterday We're then going to come back up for the seminars There has been the here in the main hall. We'll have the seminar on storytelling with Anna O'Dowd and Jasmine Koch Downstairs in the basement we'll have manual Sanchez and refunk and Subheritage will happen in the workshop hall Altered video is not able to come today, but Pablo and Emil will Make it anyway, we'll give their presentations and we're gonna have the seminar there Okay, thank you and You


IELTS – International English Language Testing System This refers to one of the most commonly used English language proficiency testing systems currently available. On completion of the test, a student receives a proficiency rating between 0 and 9 based on their performance in the four separate categories of reading, writing, speaking and listening. The IELTS testing system is used as standardized proof of an individual's language skills by a wide variety of organizations, including immigration departments, private corporations, universities and colleges. Because the test does not set a specific pass mark, it is left to each organization to set its own required proficiency rating based on the 0 to 9 sliding scale. For example, a university may set minimum requirement of 6.5 for a student to gain acceptance onto a specific course.


Comencem, doncs, després d'aquesta apertura de l'Ajuntament. Let's continue, then with our session, with a friend and great colleague. We're very happy that he's been able to be here with us and that it's gonna bring a new perspective, que és la creació literària i literatura. Si no ho coneixes, Keith Lowe és l'altre de diversos llocs en la Segona World War. En 2007, va publishar Inferno en les bombes de Hamburg durant la Segona World War, començant en 1943, i en Hamburg, perquè té molts canals, els bancs, no sé si has vist, els xaltres i els bancs són grans estructures concrets. Hi ha ciutadans, en dins, i sculptures. I anem a parlar d'això, durant aquestes sessions. En 2012, va publishar Savage Continents, que va ser sobre l'Europa després de la Segona World War. I, recentment, va publishar Prisoners of History, en què reflecteix en bombes en la Unió Europea, i també monumentes a la guerra. I, potser, l'últim lloc pot ser sobre els avatars en el sud de l'Europa i la mediterrània i l'art. I els llocs han estat translatats a més de 20 llengües. I hem convidat ells per l'espeix, i per escoltar les reflexions molt interessants, com a algú que és un gran comunicador, vam veure en la llibertat europea de l'Europa, dos dies fa, i ell va parlar de la importància d'aquest espai de memòria durant la Segona World War, i de la importància per la nostra societat current, no només d'un punt turista, però també de la importància de reclamar d'entrar en aquest espai. Bona tarda. Moltes gràcies, Jordi. Ok, doncs, Segona World War, bé, vaig començar una mica més tard. És una raó de la natura humana, que, com que trobem una nova tecnologia, la primera cosa que fem és posar en compte com usar-la per aturar una altra. A l'anàlisi del XXI, quan el món era encara molt exigent sobre l'invenció d'aeroplanes, el novel·le de la novel·la de la ciutat, H.G. Wells, va escriure un llibre sobre com els aeroplanes serien usats per agafar la guerra. El seu novel·l diu la història de, estranyament, un atac germà a l'America, que sortia de degenerar a un conflicte global. Però alguns dels seus descriptions són quals és el llibre. Per exemple, aquí és el discreta de la bomba de New York, en el seu llibre. D'acord, ell diu, que s'ha assabentat la ciutat com un fill que s'assabotarà les ciutats de brick i card. A l'anàlisi, ell va deixar ruins, i les conflagracions, et vas cens any també. A l'anàlisi hem anat al응ant la ciutat, però la ciutat va turbine. Allò va reduir, ok?, és una llum robust, i va mana, i va cantar fins a Ark perność.town i la nostra� van estar gaudits. Tenia already i vaig Voiceover i es va posar. que no va passar fins a 1911, quan els italiens bombaven els truques d'Ottoman a Núrcia d'Africa, però, de clar, els efectes d'això no eren iguals, el que els H.G. Wells va descriure. La tecnologia era encara molt primitària. A l'1ª World War, no hi havia una cosa tan gran que bombava. L'estat britán pionejava la pràctica d'anar i, a més de les línies franques, a bombar el ràdio germà, el aeròntic germà, i tal. Però, en realitat, el seu sucess was pretty limited. I els germans també fos zeplins i aeroplanes al costat d'allò a Londres, a bombar a Londres. Però, les bombes, a més de la mena de dama, no tenien una diferència a la guerra. A més a més, militari theoristes d'aquesta manera coneixen que això era una revolució. Per què concentren els teus esforços en el fons de la batalla quan aeroplanes poden avançar al fons de la batalla i destruir les línies de la sèrie d'aquestes? En realitat, per què s'obliden amb l'armi a tot quan poden completament bypassar algun armi amb aeroplanes? Des de la First World War, militari theoristes d'aquesta manera van ser molt excitats per aquest potencial de bombar-se com un armi. Aquí hi ha tres de les més influències de les persones del 1920s. Hi ha, en realitat, unes diferències més grans entre les quals cada d'aquests men s'ha pensat. Però s'ha acabat de dir que, en el 1930s, les seves pensions eren més o menys coalesçades en una teoria de bombar generalment acceptada. No hi vaig anar en detall, perquè no tenim temps. Ara, la més important part d'aquesta teoria de bombar estratègica és la desgràcia de la batalla. Ara, per la primera vegada en la història, pots bypassar la batalla. Pots volar al centre d'una nena, a les xarxes, les ciutats, els parlements, i pots atacar-les a la seva màquina. Les aspectes físiques són molt obvius. Pots usar bombar a destruir l'esforç de les nostres enemes. Però hi ha una cosa molt important, espiritual o psicològic a l'esforç de tot això.  Aquest és el que els americans diuen, shock-en-or, durant la guerra d'Iraq. S'ha adreçat perquè era una cosa nova, però és una altra idea. A partir d'aquesta idea, bombar ha estat l'últim weapon. It can win wars all on its own, according to this theory. Because when your enemy knows that you can strike them anytime, anywhere, why would they carry on fighting? Of course this theory worked on a small scale when it came to fighting rebellions in the British Empire or in Libya or Ethiopia, if you're Italian. But the first time it's going to be tested in Europe on a large scale was during the Spanish Civil War. You're going to be hearing much more about that from people who know more about it than me, so I won't say any more about that now. Instead I'm going to talk to you about the Second World War, which was really where bombing finally became the weapon that all the theorists and the science fiction novelists dreamed that it would be. The Second World War began with a promise by all sides not to bomb civilians. Right at the beginning of the war, President Roosevelt appealed to both sides to renounce the indiscriminate bombardment of civilian populations and both the British and the Germans ostensibly agreed. But of course this promise was almost immediately broken. When the Germans attacked Warsaw in 1939, they bombed it indiscriminately as a way of shocking and owing the Poles into giving up. In 1940 they did the same thing in the Netherlands, especially Rotterdam. Rotterdam is actually quite an interesting case because when the German troops arrived there, they issued an ultimatum to the defending forces. They basically said, give up now or we will bomb your city. This is exactly what soldiers did during medieval times. It's Genghis Khan, but with modern technology. Now the British also promised not to act like this. They actually began the war by attempting to bomb only very specific targets and avoid hitting civilians. The problem was that they weren't very good at it because in order to hit a specific target you have to be able to see it, of course. That means flying by day in a big, slow plane full of bombs. And it also means taking your time over the target. As a consequence, they were very easy to shoot down. So in the first few months of the war, British bomber forces were decimated by the German defences. So in the end they stopped bombing by day, as you would. And they began bombing by night instead. Now they couldn't see their targets. And as a consequence, their accuracy was absolutely appalling. Actually, the RAF conducted a report in 1941 into their accuracy and they discovered that only a third of the bombs that they dropped actually hit within five miles of the target they were supposed to be aiming at. So that's how bad the accuracy was. As a consequence, in 1942, they gave up trying to bomb any specific targets at all. They just bombed whole cities, hospitals, factories, houses, everything. They just bombed everything. It was easier, simpler, more efficient. Meanwhile, the Americans joined the war. When they arrived in 1942 in Europe, they started. Just like the British did, they had high ideals about not bombing civilians. And unlike the British, actually, throughout the war, they continued to bomb in daylight so that they could see their targets properly. But the reality of it was that, by 1945, their accuracy was not much better than that of the British. This is partly because of the weather. What's possible in the clear blue skies of California is not so possible over the cloudy skies in Germany, for example. It's also partly because of a very human emotion, fear. It's very hard to be accurate when your hands are shaking because Messerschmitts are attacking you on every side and flackers coming up from underneath. So American crews became a bit notorious, really, for dropping their bombs too early before they quite got to the target so that they could get out of there as quickly as possible. So you see, in the end, more or less, we all bombed fairly indiscriminately during the war. British, Americans, Germans, all of us. And we justified it to ourselves with the hope that, at least we were shortening the war. I do want to stress that the intentions were kind of good behind here. Military men aren't always monsters. They genuinely thought that their bombing would end the war early. And, of course, if you end the war early, you're actually saving lives. But this is not how it looked to people on the ground. So I want to turn now to those people because, you know, the whole theory of bombing, particularly the British theory, depends on how civilians will react to bombing. Can we destroy the emeral? Can we shock and awe them into giving up? Now, to explore this, I want to talk about a single bombing operation, the one that I know best, the bombing of Hamburg in the summer of 1943. Hundreds of cities were bombed all across Germany in the Second World War, but the reason I want to concentrate on Hamburg is that, you know, this was the ultimate bombing event. This was the biggest, the most successful, and also the most horrific. What happened in Hamburg was what the British were trying to achieve in every German city that they bombed. So I want you for a moment to try and imagine that you are there in Hamburg in the summer of 1943. The war, still a long way off, really. It's almost a thousand miles away and they're out on the Russian front somewhere. Hamburg hasn't suffered much, really, from the war yet. For example, it hasn't really been bombed in the last year. And though the air raid sirens do go off very regularly, they don't really seem to mean very much these days. So this night, this Saturday night in the summer of 1943, when the air raid siren goes off, your first emotion is likely to be one of irritation.    In fact, you only really start to feel worried when you hear the drone of the aircraft up above you. And then suddenly the whole sky is lit up in what looks like green and red fireworks.  But what they actually are, they're the target markers, which the lead aircraft drop so that all the aircraft which are coming afterwards have something to aim at. Well, now for the first time you're beginning to feel a little scared, so you bundle your way into the shelter and you find yourself a seat. This is what most air raid shelters in Hamburg look like. Jordi mentioned that there are one or two really big central shelters with two meter thick concrete walls. But most shelters actually aren't like that, they're smaller, they're community shelters, they're built in the basements of people's houses usually or just underground. They're quite small. Now I've come across hundreds of descriptions of what it was like sitting in air raid shelters like this in Hamburg during the bombing and they are uniformly awful. Many people describe the sound of the bombs which was deafening and the feeling of the walls of the shelter swaying under the force of them. Inside the shelters, it's pure pandemonium, people are screaming, they're praying, children are crying, but what seems to magnify the terror of it all is the fact that very often the electricity generators gave out during an air raid, so this is all going on in darkness. One woman I came across described the physical feeling of what it was like to have a high explosive bomb fall nearby. She said that the really sickening thing was not the, it wasn't the sound of it, it was the change in the air pressure which seemed to sort of suckle the air out of her lungs while all the walls are juddering around her. So imagine if you can what it's like sitting there in pitch darkness surrounded by all this deafening noise while the whole shelter is shaking around you. What scares you most is the noise, the explosions, but actually that's not the most dangerous thing that's happening here. Far more dangerous than the explosive bombs are the incendiaries. All bombing people, the British in particular who ran sort of experiments about this in the early 40s, discovered that what causes the most damage in any bombing raid is not the explosions, it's fire. The reason that they drop the explosives is not to blow up buildings, it's to blow out the windows and to knock holes into the roofs which allows air in and that helps the fires to spread more efficiently. So while the explosives are important, it's the incendiaries that are the main weapon. During that week, over one million incendiaries were dropped on Hamburg alone. That's more than one for every man, woman and child in the city. Now of course, down in your shelter, you don't know this, but dozens of the things have just fallen on your apartment block, just as they have on all the apartment blocks for miles around. So while all the explosions are going on, these incendiaries are quietly setting fire to everything. So you're sitting there, you're surrounded by pandemonium for about 45 minutes, but it seems much longer to you, of course, because you've lost all sense of time. But then at last, the shelter falls silent and at this point you're probably feeling quite relieved, the raid is over and you've survived.  It's coming from somewhere, you don't know where, and the bunker warden comes around with his torch and he tells you that the house is on fire and everybody's got to get out. So you all file over to the door to leave the building and what happens next is kind of beyond imagination, really. When the people stepped out of their shelters on the night of 27th of July, they were confronted by a vision that can only be described as hellish. Here they saw for the first time that it was not just their house which is on fire, it's the whole street and the next street and the street after that. In fact, the fires were so huge that there was just one of them, just one fire covered four square miles. That's a single fire, with lots of other fires dotted around them. Now, a fire which is that big doesn't just burn, it does a lot more than that. Heat, as we know, rises and on that night, there was so much hot air rising above the city so quickly that it sucks in more air from the surrounding areas which blow in to fill the vacuum behind it. This new air brings new oxygen, which helps the fires to burn brighter and fiercer. So you end up with this sort of chain reaction where the fires are getting hotter and hotter and the winds are getting stronger and stronger until the whole city is like a furnace with a hurricane-force wind blowing through it.  There are plenty of testimonies of firemen who went to try and fight the blaze, who had to get down on their hands and knees and crawl against the force of this wind. Parents literally had children blown out of their arms and sucked into the fire. Trees, telegraph poles were toppled by the force of this wind. And of course, the wind is full of sparks. That's the whole point. That's how things get... the fire spreads. Some eyewitnesses actually describe this as being like in a snowstorm, which set fire to their hair, to their clothes, to everything. So as they're running for cover, they have to continually put out their clothes to stop themselves from burning to death. It was a matter of pure luck, whether they, whether you, survived or not. The people who did survive were generally those who found their way to a big, wide open space like a park, or who dived into the canals. But even here, they weren't safe because, of course, many of the canals had oil spilled onto them. So the surface of the water is burning just like everything else. And so we see H.G. Wells' description back in 1908. No longer seems like mere fiction. With hindsight, it feels a little bit like some kind of prophecy. 45,000 people died in Hamburg during that week alone. This is a picture taken by Eric Andres in the immediate aftermath of the bombing. Here's another. The city itself was, of course, utterly destroyed, especially the northeast of the city. Here's a picture of what Hamburg looked like just after the war. You can see it's nothing but empty shells of houses here. Almost a million people became refugees overnight in Hamburg that July. And, of course, they took their stories with them as they fled to all kinds, all other parts of Germany. For a moment, actually, it almost seemed as if the dreams of all the military theorists would come true. For a moment, it looked as if Germany might give up. But, of course, as we know, Germany refused to give up. They carried on fighting for almost two years after this event, until... It's basically another picture of Hamburg which just shows a landscape of rubble and ruins. I mean, it is of Hamburg, but it could have been of any city in Germany. Now, the problem is... How do you remember events like this? I mean, how is it possible for us today to remember this kind of horror without making ourselves mad with grief or with shame, actually?  We think of ourselves as the heroes of the war. Part of this is the fact that we... What we were fighting was such an image of evil. We defeated the Nazis, the Hitler, the perpetrators of the Holocaust. These are the monsters. And this was just our weapon to try and defeat them. So we can't really say that we're the monsters, but we can't really say that we're the heroes either, I don't think. Ah, but we want to. So instead, we just forget. We simply forget what we did. We pretend it never happened. If you ask any British person about the bombing of Germany in 19... Well, between 40 and 45. You know, many people will remember Dresden. You know, we will even apologize about Dresden. But that's the only concession we will make. You know, most people in Britain have never heard of the bombing of Hamburg. Even though it was more than twice as bad as what happened in Dresden. Twice as destructive and twice as destructive in terms of casualties as well. You know, that's Dresden. Hamburg, we don't remember. We forget about Lübeck and Rostock and Würzburg and Fort Simon and all the other 200 cities and towns that we destroyed. We have no concept of these things really in Britain. How we do remember the war... Well, this is one example. This is a statue of the man who masterminded the bombing of German cities. Arthur Harris, the head of RAF Bomber Command. This statue was raised in the 1990s. I think it was 1992. Outside a church in central London. It kind of remembers Harris as a hero. At the time when this was unveiled there were some quite strong protests by British people. His statue was... it was daubed with red paint. There was graffiti sprayed on it and so on. But actually the protest very quickly faded away and he continues to stand there. A hero outside this church with no mention whatsoever of what he did to German cities. Here's another memorial in London. This one was actually built quite recently in 2012. It shows a typical British bomber crew as they would look when they returned from a mission. And they're standing inside this kind of classical building. It's almost like it's a temple and they're the gods who are standing inside waiting to be worshipped. On the wall there is an inscription saying that more than 55,000 airmen were killed flying these missions. So they're not only heroes, they're also victims. They're martyrs to the war. I don't want to be too disparaging because everything that this memorial says is true. These men were heroes. It took real courage to fly night after night in a plane not knowing if you're going to ever make it back home again. They were also martyrs. I mean, 55,000... That's... More officers died in bomber planes than officers who died in the trenches in the First World War. It was a huge sacrifice they were making. So all the things that this monument says are true. But just as important are the things that the monument does not say. There's no mention here of the 600,000 german civilians that they killed in places like Hamburg. There is no mention of the 75,000 French and Dutch and Belgian civilians that they also killed.  We're supposed to be liberating them, not bombing them, but we bombed them too in order to win the war. Nobody in Britain remembers these things. The historians forget that we bombed our allies during the war in the name of winning the war. And memorials like this, which could be an opportunity to remember such things, actually deliberately avoid remembering them. Now let's turn to the Germans. Well, how do they remember the tragedy that they suffered? Well, again, this is a really difficult question, i no ho sé. I imagine themselves as the victims of the war when they were the nation which began the war and, in fact, specifically, began the bombing war. If you look at the memorials in Hamburg, most of them are incredibly modest, really, I think. This is a memorial in the northeast of the city. This is a memorial outside a shopping centre, but it doesn't take pride of place. It stands right in the middle of the road. The road is five lanes of traffic on one side and five lanes of traffic on the other side. It's very different from the big grandiose memorial that the British have to their bomber crews. It's kind of almost apologetic, really, in the middle of this road. The inscription, properly there, some of it's cut off, but it only mentions 370 dead in one of the shelters nearby, not the thousands of others who also died in this area. There's no condemnation here of the British airmen who killed them. Instead, actually, the condemnation is of fascism. The inscription also says never again fascism nor war. Now, if the British don't really remember what happened and if the Germans can't allow themselves to remember what really happened either, what do we do instead? Well, the answer is that we institutionalise our forgetting. The solution we've come up with is really quite ingenious, I think. We follow H.G. Wells' imagination that the bombing war was like a kind of apocalypse. The Germans, as we probably all know, call 1945 stundernull, loosely translated into English as year zero. It's almost as if the whole of history before 1945 has been erased and we're starting again from scratch. Year zero. Internationally, we do something a little bit similar, actually. When we think back to the 20th century, we imagine the Second World War as a kind of rupture in the middle of that century. The world before 1945 was sort of destroyed and replaced with a new world. It's a very comforting image of death and rebirth, like the apocalypse followed by the new Jerusalem, if you like. I don't think it's a coincidence that many of the monuments to the bombing war all around Europe are actually Christian monuments with this sort of idea of death and resurrection built into them. All around Europe, for example, churches were destroyed by the bombing during the war. Many of them have been deliberately left as ruins. This is one in Hamburg, the Nikolai Kirche. There's a permanent memorial here to the bombing, and there's a sort of information centre in the crypt, but what really strikes you is the ruin. It's the end of something. This is the end of a civilisation on display. Here's the equivalent in Berlin, the Kaiser Wilhelm Memorial Church. Here we can see the old destroyed church standing right next to the new rebuilt church. Here we can see the apocalypse and the resurrection standing side by side. This is the British version of the same thing, Coventry Cathedral, and once again you can see the ruin of the old church standing there and right next to it, the new modern caring world is represented by the new cathedral. Now, the emphasis of all these places is a very sort of Christian rebirth-resurrection. Coventry Cathedral, actually, has been instrumental in forging links with lots of places all around Europe which suffered the bombing and other horrific events during the war. It's created a sort of international network of forgiveness and reconciliation. And the emblem of this network is the cross of nails. This is a crucifix made from the medieval roof nails, which were found in the ruins of Coventry Cathedral after the bombing had taken place. They found them in the rubble, polished them up and made them into these crucifixes. So here we've got Christianity and bombing combined in a single image. I just want to finish up by saying it's not only the Christian world that does this. I want to finish by saying that the atomic bomb is kind of remembered in a very similar way. We can see ruins preserved just like the old churches in Europe to remind us of the apocalypse which took place here, the ruins of the old civilization. In the museum nearby we can also see clocks and watches that stopped at exactly the time when the bomb exploded. So here is the even time itself was brought to an end by the bomb. Once again 1945 is this rupture, a moment when everything came to an end and we had the opportunity to reset our clocks. All around these ruins in Hiroshima and the museum where these artefacts are displayed all around there are new roads, there are new memorials new world. And what's the main characteristic of this new world? Well, we only need to look at all the monuments that are in Hiroshima. Here's one of them. This is the Children's Peace Monument. There are dozens of others in the park outside the museum in Hiroshima. There is a peace can. There's a flame of peace. There's a peace bell. There is a peace clock tower. There's a pond of peace. The museum is called the peace memorial museum and the park is called the peace memorial park and if the message hasn't got through yet the road which leads you to this sort of new paradise is called Peace Boulevard. There's no condemnation here of the Americans dropping the bomb just as there was no condemnation of the RAF dropping the bomb in Hamburg. Quite the contrary in fact. The bomb in the museum in all the inscriptions and all the memorials when it's referred to it's almost as if it were a natural disaster you know falling from the sky like an act of God. So the message is the same as it was in Germany. The old bad world has been destroyed completely and a new peaceful world has been reborn. It's a kind of beautiful message, a noble message, a necessary message but it's not history. This is how we've chosen to remember the bombing because we can't really bring ourselves to remember the ugly messy reality about what really happened. So, thank you very much. Thank you kids. We have time for a few brief comments. Especially questions but make them brave and splendid. Same thing to... I'm sorry, my English is not... So I'm coming from Berlin and I'm growing up in the GDR in East Berlin and as I remember that we are always remembered this bombing during the war there's some kind of Anglo-American force to break on us. So you see in the GDR in the East Germany and that's part of the Cold War time now the members remembering on the wars that is their war. There's an imperialistic war that has nothing to do with us. So therefore it's very interesting that even in Hamburg they write on fascism. No more fascism because that's their point of view. We are the heroes we are fighting together with the Soviet Union. We are on the bad side of the world, of the humanity. That's just for... I'm sorry. Just a thing to assemble to your presentation was kind of great. I'm sorry. Okay, yeah, thank you. Of course the memory in the East of Germany is very different from that of the West. I concentrated on Hamburg but I imagine memories are slightly different all across Dresden, for example. Well, thank you for your presentation. I would like you to explain a bit more the discussions and the issues that publicly appear before the opening of the memorial in London that you show us for the aircraft men. If I'm not wrong, even the Dresden you visited London before the opening and publicly asked not to be unveiled or something like this. Can you please explain? Yeah, okay. Yeah, there was a lot of... I was going to say there was a lot of controversy but actually what surprised me was the lack of controversy that was in Britain about this. In the run up to the opening of this memorial in the sort of the five years or so before it was built and inaugurated there was a campaign by British newspapers to create a memorial for our bomber boys, because there was this idea that they had been remembered badly by history that they were the heroes who were never recognised because the ideas behind bombing are dodgy to say the least particularly left wing people were remembering them in a bad way. So the right wing press were trying to put across this idea of British airmen being kind of like the victims really that needed to be taken out of their victimhood and celebrated as heroes. I mean it was quite ridiculous really because it was the case in the 1970s that the bomber forces were remembered in this sort of way as like perpetrators of an evil. But during the 1980s and 90s they were kind of rehabilitated and in Britain we realised that it was a normal it was part of the war they weren't doing it for sort of bad reasons they were doing it because it was necessary and horrible it's a complicated thing so it became much more nuanced idea in the 1990s but then newspapers like The Daily Mail and The Daily Telegraph sort of stirred up this idea of victimhood and we're not remembering our heroes properly I don't really understand why. Other people around Europe especially in Germany reacted badly to this as you can imagine so who are really the victims here and what made it particularly irksome for people in Germany especially but also all around Europe this was 2012 when this monument was opened this is the year of the Olympics the whole of the world is coming to London in a celebration of international sport and so on we're remembering we'll remember our dead but we're not going to remember any of yours it's quite a sort of insular thing which we've seen this insularity of Britain expand towards Brexit and so on over the years I mean that's probably a very long rambling answer to your comment but yeah it was controversial elsewhere kind of wasn't for some reason thank you very much for a very interesting talk something else that we in Britain like to forget is that this bombing war we had practised it in the empire Italy as well had practised bombing in the empire and in Ethiopia and through the 1920s and the 1930s Britain and other countries learned punishment bombing as a strategy if there was an uprising in somewhere in the empire in Iraq in Africa you bomb villages as punishment and it works and this was never controversial at the time there was no international outcry and after the Second World War Britain returned bombing empire and so on un controversial again it is only controversial when it's white people under the bombs arguably so there is many many layers of this heritage and these arguments and it's very interesting so thank you again for your talk yeah I absolutely agree with that during the 1930s especially on the free pay of police in the empire rather than sending a whole army there to keep police forces to keep down any disturbances all you need is one or two planes to drop bombs on people and the protests stop so it was a cost cutting measure as much as anything else produce terror and stop any uprisings it's quite brutal thank you very much for your presentation no, no. Thinking very much about everything you say about the world, everywhere, is almost you are giving the principle thing that everywhere they say just forget it. It's like no one wants to talk about that, after maybe one century, now, here and in Barcelona, and everywhere is the same, forget it. It's like no one wants to talk about this situation, la real història, què és el que passa? No comunicar amb les persones que han fet la guerra. Per què? És terrible. Perquè ningú sap exactament què passa. D'acord. I d'acord. D'acord en el món. No parlo amb aquests persones, perquè són l'oposic. Bé, crec que és millor just saber què passa. Perquè, com que dius en l'oposic de la teva xarxa, la nova tecnologia és quina és l'alternària. I estem en aquest món. D'acord. D'acord. No hi ha ningú en xarxa, d'acord amb les seves xarxes, d'acord amb les seves idees sobre què passa. N'hi ha ningú que veu què passa. I què penses? Bé, moltes gràcies. D'acord. N'hi ha ningú que no vulgui sentir descomptat. Així que just ignoren-lo. I no només el descomptat, sinó que és pànting. Les persones que han patit, no volen recordar-ho gaire. No és sorprès que... que les majories memorials, com les holocaustes i altres, no van ser immediatament després de la guerra. Van venir després, en les setmanes i 80s, hi havia una imatge de memòria d'aquestes coses. 30, 40 anys després, només després d'un lloc de temps, que ens demanem que estiguem i pensem en el que ha passat. Bé, com a víctimes i també com a perpetrators, o fins i tot, els heroes volen celebrar-los. Directament després de la guerra, hi ha monumentes de heroes. The monuments to more shameful things, more difficult things don't start to appear until much later. So, with the terrible things which happen today, I think the same thing will happen, you know. It will be there, in the back of our minds, we all know it, but we don't necessarily talk about it, remember it, concretise it in things like monuments and so on. Well, thank you, kid. We are closing here, we have a coffee time now. Thank you for your speech and welcome again, soon in Barcelona. Next May, I think. Thank you.


Hello there and welcome back to Game Dev Academy. I'm Shane and guess what? It's Christmas! So because it's Christmas I thought we'd do something a little bit different and hopefully a little bit interesting. I thought we could do a little contest. Something that I'm calling the 12 days of low polymers. Good name right? Very catchy. So how does this work? I hear you ask. Well it's based on the 12 days of Christmas obviously but with a twist. So let's go through what some of the rules for this are going to be and hopefully you'll understand them because I'm not sure that I fully do. But we'll see how it goes. Rule number one you've got to make a 3D model based on the 12 days of Christmas. Rule number two is that it can't really be based on the 12 days of Christmas. This is the 12 days of low polymers so you've got to do something slightly different. It's got to rhyme with it. So if you think about that meme from a few years ago where it was whoa living on a prayer what oh where's it at fair that one you know it let's do that so we're going to make it rhyme with whatever day it is. So instead of doing like four no let's say instead of doing two turtle doves you might do two purple gloves or instead of 12 lords are leaping it could be um 12 fords are beeping yeah four calling birds could be four falling turds don't make that that would be so brown. Okay so it's going to be that kind of thing. I will be showing you one on screen at some point and that is four instead of a partridge in a pear tree it's a low poly christmas tree yeah you get it you see what i did there it's clever. The next rule is that you have to make the number of items that are in your day so if it's two purple gloves you'll make two gloves if it's um 12 fords are beeping then you need to make 12 fords so that's what you have to keep in mind so if you're doing 12 it might be a little bit more complicated. Here's where the tricky rules come in you can only use 200 triangles per item that you're making so for the low poly christmas tree that stayed under 200 so i'm good i can enter but the thing is if you're making something that's got so if we're doing two purple gloves then you've got a total of 400 triangles that you can use because you've got two items in there if you're doing um 12 fords are leaping then you've got 2,400 triangles to work with but you've got to make 12 individual things within that hopefully that makes sense so it's 200 per item to keep it nice and low poly you're also allowed to use only one material for your entire scene so you'll have seen in my example or you will see depending on where i put it that i only used one texture and that was the next rule is that can only be 32 pixels by 32 pixels in resolution and you can only have one material so you're going to need to do a bit of atlasing if you want to have lots of different things going on with your models but that being said you can have more than one texture as long as you've got only one material so you can have your diffuse texture you can have roughness you can have um normal if you need it you can have metallic emissive might come in handy with it being a christmasy sort of theme so keep that in mind so one material and keep any textures used to below 32 by 32 pixels the way that you need to submit if you want to enter this little contest is via twitter so my twitter handle is at media tutor although i think the name comes up as game dev academy and you'll need to put at media tutor on your tweet where you're submitting to the contest you'll also need to do the hashtag 12 days of low polymers because that's what we're doing and that's hopefully how i'm going to find all the tweets because i'm sure there'll be millions to wade through millions ideally when you are sending me a tweet you'll be sharing something like a sketch fab link so i can have a proper look at your model so then i'll be able to see what your poly count is i can look around your model see how you put your texture together that would be ideal but if you're unable to whatever reason you can send me just a series of images so that can be screenshots or renders or whatever as long as i know what the poly count is and i can see what your texture maps are and you make it look pretty the closing date is going to be the 20th of december the way you'll know whether or not you've met the deadline is what date it says on your tweet so if the tweet says that you tweeted on the 20th of december or before you're good if it says the 21st of december you're too late sorry so that should be a pretty easy one to follow and i think that's everything you need to know currently there's no price for this it's just for fun but should that change if any sponsors reach out between now and the deadline then i will add a price to it i'll put it on the rules there will be a link to the rules in the description if you want to read them for yourself and i'll put whether or not there's a prize in there but i don't think there will be it's only if you know some sponsor with deep pockets wants to get involved by the sponsors if you want to get involved just drop me an email but yeah just for fun but there is the potential to make me look like a twat so if i managed to get enough entries so that there's something for all 12 days of low polymers i will sing it from 12 down to 1 i will start with the 12 day of low polymers and i will work my way down and make myself look like a right twank as i'm doing it so that's got to be worth it if nothing else ideally i think if you just miss one day out like the eighth day then i think i'm fine not to sing it so i think i've got a way out anyway that's the video today let's have a little bit of fun let's do a contest my my entry is ready to go it's a low poly christmas tree it's not that imaginative but it does fit the brief so so far i'm winning well doesn't she i hope that you guys will get involved as well i look forward to seeing your entries in the coming days and weeks anyway that's enough waffling i look forward to seeing you in a video where i may or may not have to sing see you later


I have next question coming up for you and here it goes on your screen. In how many ways can the number one zero eight zero zero can be resolved as the product of two factors? Okay, before you start solving this one, please let me conclude the previous theory. Okay, so guys just excuse me and I'll just conclude the previous concept. So I'll generalize this. I have not generalized this yet. So kindly allow me to generalize this. Then we'll go back to that question. So let's generalize this concept. So if you have a number which is prime factorized as P1 to the par Alpha 1 P2 DT or 2 P3 to the par Okay then we say that the sum of all the devices is given by sum of all the devices is given by. p1 to the power 0, p1 to the power 1 all the way till you reach p1 to the power alpha 1 times p2 to the power 0, p2 to the power 1 all the way till p2 to the power alpha 2 and this trend continues till pk to the power 0, pk to the power 1 all the way till pk to the power alpha k. those who would be interested in knowing its simplification its simplification is p1 to the power alpha1 plus 1 minus 1 by p1 minus 1 you can note down this result as well it will save a lot of time for you later on p2 to the power alpha2 plus 1 minus 1 by p2 minus 1 okay and this multiplication continues till we reach the last term over here which is pk to the power of alpha k plus 1 minus 1 by pk minus 1 okay this result don't be surprised this comes from your GP comes from the sum of a geometric progression which anyways you are going to learn in the chapter series sequence and progressions later on with me okay now we are ready to go to the next concept next concept in fact next question that we had given over here in how many ways can you write 100800 as a product of two factors now what is the meaning of that product of two factors means let's say one way would be to write it like 108 into 100 so these are the two factors let me tell you 100 into 108 is also counted as the same way of writing it okay so don't doubly count this they are the same way of representing the same thing okay let's see somebody has replied to it yeah sure Arpita what I did okay let me just go back to the previous board once again see we had already discussed the previous example that you are going to start with the prime factor from power 0 all the way till you reach alpha 1 yes or no okay so that's what I am doing by generalizing it so remember I had a problem 24 right 24 was 2 to the power 3 into 3 to the power 1 right to find the sum what did we do 2 to the power 0 2 to the power 1 2 to the power 2 2 to the power 3 whole multiplied with 3 to the power 0 3 to the power 1 right correct so in the same way I am now generalizing it I am making it scalable so if a factor is going yeah if a factor is having alpha 1 power will start from 0 all the way till alpha 1 and keep doing this and multiply them all does it make sense to you Arpita yes sir okay good good to know that let's move on to the problem yes anybody who is ready with the answer how many ways can you write this number as product of two factors ananya no that's wrong again start small start small you will come to know the pattern no ranganath that is also not correct that is also not correct no no no no no no arpita how no shawmek no trippan okay no aditya okay we will come back to this problem after having seen the example of 24 okay so let's say I want to know in how many ways can 24 be written as a product of two factors okay now let's try to count the number of ways 1 into 24 is one way correct 2 into 12 is another way correct 3 into 8 is the third way correct 4 into 6 right next you would feel like writing 6 into 4 but remember 6 into 4 is already covered under 4 into 6 correct next you would feel like writing 8 into 3 8 into 3 is already covered under 3 into 8 next you will feel like writing 12 into 2 that is only covered under 2 into 12 correct next you will feel like writing 24 into 1 that is already covered under 1 into 24 so the answer here is you have just 4 ways okay does this ring a bell in your mind srishti you are correct awesome you were quick to pounce upon it my simple example very good srishti others did it ring a bell to you that what is happening here sir the number of ways to represent it as product of two factors is half the number total number of factors okay now who is this by the way Anurag sir Anurag okay Anurag you have concluded it very well but remember there are some exceptions to this for example let's say 36 first of all let us write down all the devices of 36 okay what are the devices of 36 can we all correct Krishna you are correct okay all of you please pay attention here 36 has factors 1 2 3 4 6 9 12 18 36 right can you count how many of these are there 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 now if you say Anurag your answer for writing 36 as a product of two factors is 9 by 2 doesn't it become absurd because 9 by 2 is a fraction 9 by 2 is a fraction right so what went wrong okay that worked for this one but did not work for this Anurag can you tell me why it didn't work for this anybody open to anybody why that half the number of factors did not work for 36 36 is a perfect square absolutely so when a perfect square comes in that approach of halfing the total number of factors of a number to find the number of ways in which you can express as a product of two factors fails right why because I'll show you right now 1 into 36 correct it has another factor 36 into 1 that's why there's a pairing happening here okay so I'll write it down over here so this pairs up with 36 into 1 okay there's a pairing happening between these two then there's 2 into 18 then there's something called 18 into 2 so there's a pairing happening between these two fellows then there is 3 into 12 12 into 3 so there's a pairing happening between these two correct then there's 4 into 9 then there's 9 into 4 so there's a pairing happening between these two now when there's 6 into 6 there is no pair to it okay so when you see this basically what you're doing you are writing every factor at least once over here right you see it okay but here you are repeating the same factor 6 with itself okay so the number of ways in which you are going to write 36 as a product of two factors is just going to be 1 2 3 4 5 okay now how can we generalize such a thing when you have a perfect square coming up and when you have not a perfect square coming up for not a perfect square I'm sure you would have found the trick when n is not a perfect square not a perfect square so what you're going to do is you're just going to do the total number of factors the total number of factors divided by 2 this is the number of ways of writing it as a product of two factors product of two factors right but if n happens to be a perfect square it's absolutely correct Shomik, Kirtan, Siddharth you're all giving me the right one yeah so if it is the perfect square okay the number of ways would be total number of factors okay you can say minus 1 by 2 plus 1 which is actually a stupid way of saying total factors plus 1 by 2 both are same thing actually okay why I subtracted a 1 is because that repeated factor I subtracted other factors are always repeated okay so that 6 and 6 2 factors which are okay that 6 factor is a repeated factor to make a 36 that I subtracted rest others will be paired up so I divided by 2 and ultimately I added up a 1 2 account for that 6 this itself is simplified to total number of factors plus 1 by 2 so just remember this that would be sufficient so the number of ways of this is the total number of ways of writing a number as a product of two factors if the number happens to be a perfect square is that clear so now answering that previous question of mine so one okay let me go back to the previous question so page number 4 it was yes yeah so coming back to this question 1 0 8 0 0 I'm sure you would have prime factorize it by now it is 2 to the power 4 3 to the power 3 into 5 to the power 2 okay so total number of factors a total number of devices for this will be 4 plus 1 okay 3 plus 1 2 plus 1 now my question here to all of you is how do I know whether it's a perfect square or not perfect square will give an odd number of factor that's one thing another thing is that if a number is a perfect square you would realize that all the powers of these prime numbers would be even don't you think that a perfect square will have all the exponents of those prime numbers as even okay so here 3 doesn't have an even power it has a power of odd number right so it is not a perfect square it is not a perfect square if it is not a perfect square as Krishna also lightly pointed out the total number of factors will come out to be odd for a number which is a perfect square so here my number of ways in which you can write it as a product of two factors would be nothing but this divided by 2 so answer is 5 into 4 into 3 divided by 2 2 2 gone answer is 30 the right answer is that is that fine everybody are you able to connect with this concept okay so let me ask you another one please stop me if you have not understood anywhere and please write clear keep writing this clear even though if I forget to say it please write it down okay here comes the next question in front of you find the number of devices of this number thankfully this number has already been given to me as a prime factorise form which are perfect square find the number of devices of this number which are perfect square by the way it's not completely fine factorise they have tricked you this is 9 to the power 11 so be careful okay let's see who answers this first time starts now I'll give you 3 minutes to do this please reply privately to me Sharmik no that's not correct no Krishna that is also not correct no that's way too much you have to tell those factors which are perfect square themselves getting my point for example 4 could be a perfect square factor for this right no Shristi no Anurag that's not the right answer no Tirpan that's also wrong see this is just tweaking of the same concept okay I'll just tweak the same concept so Dhartha no Shankin no okay guys good to see you all working it out no Anjali that's not correct okay now all of you please listen to me see if you want a factor to be a perfect square okay remember that factor should be made up of even number of prime numbers for example 4 okay 4 is made up of 2 to the power 2 and all the other factors would be 0 0 0 right by the way this number has not been written in a proper way okay just to confuse you they have written 9 over here so what I'll do is first I will make myself are no pratham that's not correct first of all I will write this as 2 to the power 3 3 to the power 5 5 to the power 7 7 to the power 9 and again this is 3 to the power 22 yes or no right so all together I have 2 to the power 3 3 to the power 27 5 to the power 7 7 to the power 9 as our number correct okay now see if you want to make a divisor okay let's say there's a divisor called K okay this divisor whatever it is made up of let's say 2 3 5 7 it should always have even number of powers on top it should always have even even even even do you all agree with me or not yes or no yes or no just type yes shankin my god that's correct wow awesome shankin has given the right answer well done shankin okay so yes so you all of you agree with me that there has to be an even choice of power right very good now 2 to the power 3 how many even powers I can pull out I can either pull out 2 to the power 0 or 2 to the or 2 to the power 2 only correct yes or no from this guy yes or no that means only 2 ways yes or no 2 to the power 1 sorry sorry that's that's 2 to the power 0 and 2 to the power 1 no no even even powers even power is what is the even power that you can go to yes 0 and 2 only right yes no problem now 3 to the power 27 you can pull out 3 to the power 0 3 to the power 2 3 to the power 4 3 to the power 6 3 to the power 8 oh my god 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 oh my god how many are there 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 so 14 ways you can select the powers of 3 okay now 5 let's check 0 2 4 6 4 ways to do it okay 7 will be 0 2 4 some people have started answering it also no no no no no no Anurag Silya wrong no Krishna that is also wrong 6 and 8 that is how many 5 I guess yes or no so the total number of ways you can end up making a even device sorry perfect square divisor is nothing but the product of these numbers 2 into 14 into 4 into 5 that's nothing but 28 into 20 answer is 560 ways guys remember how used to make the factors how used to count the total factors either you could put a factor 0 number of times or one number of times or two number of times till that maximum amount you can take right so that is to give you alpha 1 plus 1 but here that same concept is slightly tweaked right that's why J doesn't want its candidate or aspirants to come up memorizing a formula you have to know the logic from which that particular formula is evolving so here I have only the liberty to pick up 2 to the power 0 or 2 to the power 2 that means only 2 options are there when I talk about picking up various powers of 2 similarly they're just 14 options when it comes to picking up you know even powers of 3 there are only 4 options for picking up even powers of 5 and again 5 options for picking up even powers of 7 so altogether 5 6 0 is the total number of ways in which you can pick up even devices from this number is that clear please type clear