THE FLNEURS

IN THEIR
TERRITORIES:
ART, PUBLIC
SPACE AND
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
IN THE
FLNEUR
PROJECT
PEDRO COSTA
RICARDO VENNCIO LOPES
INSTITUTO UNIVERSITRIO DE LISBOA (ISCTE-IUL)
DINAMIACET-IUL
THE FLNEURS IN THEIR TERRITORIES:
ART, PUBLIC SPACE AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
IN THE FLNEUR PROJECT
1. INTRODUCTION1
The project Flneur New urban narratives, which took
place in several European cities between 2015 and 2017,
endeavored new approaches to the relation between art,
public sphere and local communities through the way
creative processes were developed and exhibition devices
on public space were displayed.
In this text we aim to shed some light on the relations
and processes which can be stablished between the
artworks created, the kinds of creative processes
developed, and the territories and art worlds where
they were implemented. Our main interest is to analyze
the contribution of the projects activities to enhance
sustainable territorial development processes in these
communities, exploring particularly the dynamics
of sharing artistic creations and the co-creation of
knowledge involved. Their territorial embeddedness, the
contribute they bring to community development, and the
way they build their relation with photography art worlds
are particularly explored, drawing upon empirical work
based on direct observation and interviews to most of the
27 international photographers as well to some of the
curators and producers involved in the network of festivals
and cultural institutions that were gathered around this
project.
Flneur New Urban Narratives was itself set up as a
network project2, designed as an international partnership
that involved 20 organizations from 11 different3 countries.
The project was based on artistic interventions within
public spaces, challenging contemporary photography
practices, both at the creative side and at the level of
exhibition and mediation processes.
Artists were encouraged to create new interpretations of
urban territories, taking the concept of flneur as their
starting point and considering the physical context of the
city as a social construct in a state of constant flux and
change. A transversal perspective on the social dynamics
that configure urban space was pursued, created by a
large and diverse group of artists who, drawing from a
common theme, would render a new look upon the plural
realities that compose public space - a look that would
be shared with a wide audience, who was invited to drift
and stroll around the city, rediscovering it. Besides the
art projects and interventions in the public space, the
project comprised several other parallel dimensions
brought to light in various ways, such as workshops,
masterclasses, artistic residencies, creative camps and
conferences initiatives intended to foster a critical
analysis of contemporary photography and to contribute to
a reflection on the relationship between art practices and
the city.
During its two year span, Flneur project was being
developed and presented in 18 cities4, mixing internal
and external perspectives, which resulted from the
participation of local photographers and invited ones, who
were asked to develop artistic residencies in those cities
(and in several cities, in addition, a complementary work
was conducted within workshops that target the local
population). The results were displayed in public space
(in central squares, streets or parks, in each of those
cities), contributing to a process of deconstruction and
democratization of the access to art, sharing it with an
heterogeneous audience. Replicating the city, open and
accessible 24 hours a day, the exhibition displays were
configured as modular backlit structures, which were
adapted to each specific site.
The analysis in this text draws upon empirical work
collected by direct observation and through semi-
structured interviews to most of the 24 international
photographers selected to develop the artistic residencies
and the exhibitions as well to some of the curators and
producers involved in the network of festivals and cultural
institutions that were gathered around this project. It
was our aim to analyse how the relational dynamics
stablished between the diversity of agents involved in the
creative process, in the mediation mechanisms, and in
the exhibitions displaying are connected to a culturally
sustainable development perspective. On one hand, in
an artistic perspective, studying artists and curators
options and the way they assume the role of the flneur
in the city and the relation with the territories where they
photographed and where they exhibit their work; on the
other hand, through the analysis of the ways these public
space interventions (and their performativity) engage with
the local communities, in the diverse cities, and the way
they enhance the co-creation of knowledge and reflexivity
on urban issues and the involvement of audiences in these
processes.
In the next section some introductory and methodological
aspects about the work conducted will be explained.
The following sections present some results of the
analysis of the several topics under scrutiny: the themes
and approaches to the Flneur topic followed by
photographers; their creative processes; their relation
with space and territory; the way they see the relation
with the exhibition device and the way it was appropriated
by the audience; and the relation with the mediation
processes and the structuring of the art world. A brief
concluding note gives us some hints about the relation of
this project with the idea of the promotion of sustainable
and community-based development processes.
2. THE ANALYSIS OF THE FLANUR:
INTRODUCTORY AND
METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS
In parallel with the multiple interventions on public space
which were displayed in several cities throughout Europe,
the Flneur project encompassed a more reflexive and
analytical dimension, which is being reported in this text.
That was centered on the exploration of the work of the
photographers and its relation with the territories and the
communities in which they were working, as well as on
their relation with the photography art worlds.
A documentary film (directed by Eduardo Amaro5) and a
set of scientific papers and academic presentations6 (by
Pedro Costa and Ricardo Lopes) were developed and give
us a quite extensive panorama about the organization of
this project, the involvement of the photographers with
the flneur thematic, their personal approaches to this
object, their relation with the territories they visited and
their artistic practices.
Apart from the visit to several of the exhibitions, with
on-site direct observation, and informal talks to several of
those involved in the project, most of this work was based
on a series of semi-structured interviews which were
conducted by Pedro Costa and Eduardo Amaro, either
in person or via skype phone calls, to several elements
of the Flneur Project. They tried to get contributions societies? what forms can it have? in which territories
from most of the curators and producers involved and all
the photographers, aiming to understand how they have
approached the thematic and how the interventions in the
different cities and contexts were set up and developed.
This material was worked both for the documentary and
for the component of academic analysis of this project,
being always complemented and confronted with the
results of direct observation carried out in the field by the
researchers.
The interviews followed a pre-defined script which
covered five main broad themes, each of them comprising
different subcomponents and questions. These broad
themes were: (i) the theme and the approach chosen by
each participant in their specific personal project; (ii) their
particular creative process in this work and the way it
relates to their usual work practices; (iii) the relation each
of them stablished with space and with the territories
in which they photographed and exhibited their works;
(iv) the relationship they stablished with the particular
exhibition device used in this project and the way they
perceived the public appropriation of it; and (v) the way
they see the mediation processes and their relation within
their art worlds after this project. Naturally, the questions
were adapted to the context and to the work developed by
each respondent, providing a very fruitful and satisfying
dialogue.
It is important to notice that, before all this, one of the
starting points of this project has been the International
Conference Flneur New Urban Narratives, held
in Lisbon (So Luiz Municipal Theatre, May 12nd-13rd
2015), which was a key-moment in the launching of the
project, and provided a broad forum to exchange ideas
amongst the participants and to discuss, conceptually and
in practical terms, about the pertinence of the Flneur
concept in contemporary times and in contemporary
cities. The idea was to question the potential for new
urban narratives of the traditional flnerie concept,
raising issues such as: what is the sense of flnerie
today? how does it cope with the acceleration of modern
can be developed? by whom? in which conditions? with
what purposes? These and many other questions were
raised on a deep and vibrant debate which was structured
around 3 main discussion topics: Rethinking the city walk
in modern and contemporary art, City and Cinema: the
representations of the flneur in the audiovisual and
Territories of flnerie: experiencing urban spaces today.
The results of this reflection, which are available in the
book originated in the conference7, were accessible for all
photographers and participants in the project, in case they
would consider it to inspire or frame their work (although
that was not the option for most of them).
In this context, and considering also that most of the
photographers were chosen having in consideration
flneur-related approaches to urban spaces in their
previous works, the thematic of the Flneur, drifting
through the city, and the idea of the new urban
narratives were, not surprisingly, very familiar and
esteemed by all participants which we had opportunity to
talk to.
Nevertheless, the way they interpreted the thematic and
the way they approached their diverse territories reveal
different backgrounds and varied interests that were
expressed in a multitude of perspectives and outputs.
But that was predictable and would be perfectly natural
and even appropriate, with a thematic such as this one,
opening to several forms of dealing with the strolling in
the city, and with the several cities inside that city, in
their building (or subverting) of the new, the urban,
and the narratives. As it was quite well stated by
Arianna Rinaldo (curator, Cortona) in her interview, the
possibilities of working with this are virtually endless: I
think the beauty of urban narrative is the infinite. First
of all because cities are transforming and changing
continuously. So, every time you walk in a city or you
walk around a place you can look at it differently ().
New urban narratives can be seen as something infinite,
an infinite potential of ideas, as cities are always in
transformation and in permanent dynamics.
By the same token, very diverse attitudes were taken
considering the way they related with the exhibition
dispositive and the art world, as well as that enabled them
to work their relation with the community. But that was
also other of the crucial dimensions the project wanted
to explore, seizing the freedom offered by an exhibition
device in public space, permanently open to non-expert
audiences, and outside the protection of an art gallery
or a museum. As Krzysztof Candrowicz (Curator,
Hamburg and Lodz Festivals) points out () there is no
better place to present art than the streets; like streets
belongs to people and art belongs to people; art is free
and streets are free and create this tension between the
artists and viewers. So, I couldnt imagine better place to
display the work about Flneur ().
This diversity in the approaches to the photographic
thematic, the organization of their work, the relation
with the community and the art worlds was the main
richness this project gave us to explore, and one of its
main structural characteristics. In this text we explore
some insights on each of those topics, which for us
were the fundamental ones, in analytical terms, to
interpret and acknowledge this diversity, giving some
examples of the issues raised, and aiming to provide a
panoramic view of the overall project and its diversity.
For a more comprehensive approach, reading this text
must be complemented with the visioning of the Flneur
documentary which is the other face of this work, and
which is provided with this publication. For a detailed
analysis of the results of the project and the challenges it
has brought this can also be accompanied by the several
texts and reports produced on its scope, including the
two editions of the Cahiers du Flneur, as well as the
aforementioned book which resulted from the initial
conference where the contemporaneity of the Flneur
concept was discussed.
3. THE THEMES AND THE APPROACHES
FOLLOWED BY THE PHOTOGRAPHERS
The first main issue raised for discussion was centered
on understanding how each photographer approached
the general theme of the project (the flnerie) and coped
with the territory and the community in which he or she
has been working. All of them were confronted with the
Flneur thematic, although most of them in the context
of a specific festival, with its particular framework
and focus. Each of them developed their personal
perspectives departing from those specific frames and
from a general idea of building new urban narratives
from the flneur perspective. We were interested in
disentangling how they explored the idea of flneur as a
concept in contemporaneity as well as in perceiving how
photographers related their work to this concept, to the
festival frameworks, and with the public space of the
exhibitions, as well as to the particularities of an audience
which was marked by its fluidity, diversity and, at the end,
by being quite uncharacteristic.
The proximity between the contemporary urban
photography and the ideal of the flneur is present in
almost all the interviews, including here the producers
and curators involved as well as the photographers.
This is quite well illustrated by what Kajal Nisha Patel
(photographer, residency in Mansfield) tells us: us
photographers, I guess, we do it anyway, we are just
walking true and observing life. This relation is almost
unanimously raised by all photographers which either
refer that this is something that is always in their artistic
practices and in previous work (being assumed by many
as the motivation for their own selection for this project),
as well as something that was presumed (even if for
being deconstructed) as leading driver for this work.
Nevertheless, the way how the photographers interpreted
the challenge was diverse. In some cases, they followed
their own personal subjects and ways of working,
following or reinventing it (e.g Augusto Brzio in Lisbon);
in other cases they tried to draw new ideas and practices
for themselves. These diverse ways potentiate different
 imaginaries and the construction of a multitude of new
urban narratives.
Some examples give us a perspective on this. Some of
the photographers adopted a personal-experience point
of view to deal with the theme (e,g, Kajal Nisha Patel,
who revisited her family background through a flnerie
through the manufacture working class at Mainsfield),
while other cultivate a certain distance as flneurs
strolling as external to those territories (e,g, Martina
Cleary in Lisbon). Some of them, like Giacomo Brunelli,
in Hamburg, or Augusto Brzio, in the peripheries of
Lisbon, followed randomly persons who ended up being
the ones who conduct them in their drives. Other
chose to deal with the contingencies of a short-term
residency to do this work on a different manner. For
instance, Toni Amengual (exhibited in Cortona) decided
to explore the ephemeral appropriation of the tourists in
main monuments of the city of Rome, because the period
of residence in Rome wouldnt allow him to enter in the
everyday life of those who live in the city. The differences
between the urban narratives of the ones who live in the
city and the tourist or the passerby were highlighted in
almost all the interviews. Some photographers decided
to assume themselves as a tourist or at least a transient
resident in the city while others tried to enter more deeply
in the ambiences and the environment of their living
spaces. Jens Masmann (residency in Lisbon) gives notice
about this when he relates us the difference between the
spaces of utopias, where he claims to took the photos,
and the Disneyland spaces he felt returning home at
night.
Some draw upon literary references to build narratives
(e.g. Ruth Blees Luxemburg in London), other let
themselves surprise by the exotic and the eccentric (e.g.,
Dougie Wallaces Milan, exhibited in Cortona), while
other simply totally subvert the idea of urban narrative
(Esther Teichmann, in Dublin). The relation established
between the city and photographers in their flneries
reveals diverse sensibilities, as it will be seen in the
following sections. While for some of them the people
Photo: Virglio Ferreira
were the main topic (e.g, Martina Cleary in Lisbon,
Mariusz Forecki in Kaunas, David Severn and Kajal Nisha
Patel in Mansfield, Toni Amengual and Dougie Wallace
in Cortona), to others tiny details of the city assume
the leading role in the search, be it objects and urban
fragments (e.g, Henry Duncker in Kaunas, Alex F. Webb in
Riga, Rik Moran in Dublin) or buildings and textures (e.g
Sonia Hamza in Lisbon, Jonas Feige in Riga). The diversity
of sensibilities on the general ambiences of the city (e.g.,
Virgilio Ferreira in Hamburg, Alexander Gronsky in Lodz)
or its surrounding regions (e.g., Antonio Julio Duarte, in
Olot), the combination of the multiple layers of history,
carefully researched (e.g., Discipula, in Derby), or the
capture of the festivity of an ephemeral moment (Olot Art
School students, in Olot), can all be mobilized as drivers
for this search.
In some cases, the concept of appropriation of public
space was expanded to spaces of the public sphere in
projects such as the one of Cristina de Middel, in Lodz
(as she proposed to interpret the city without leaving her
hotel room, using it as a studio to build a story) or the
one of Marcello Bonfanti, in Cortona (driving us to Turin
through images of interior spaces of buildings designed
by the eccentric Italian architect Carlo Mollino). In
other cases, a wide idea of public sphere is apprehended
through the look over specific segments of the community
that caught the eye of the artist (e,g, the brass bands of
Liz Hingley, in Derby; or the Milans wealthy shoppers
in Dougie Wallaces work exhibited in Cortona), or
through the dialogue with its historical evolution and with
specific social or political issues which challenge those
communities (e.g, Alexander Gronsky and Dyma Gavrish
in Lodz, Sergiy Lebediskiy in Kaunas, Tom Hunter in
Derby).
Many photographers didnt knew beforehand the
territories in which they were making their residencies (or
at least not more than in a superficial way), what fueled
the potential of change and of drift and empowered
the flneur attitude, as argued by Nuno Ricou Salgado
(producer and curator, Lisbon and Olot, general
 coordinator of the project). developed in following projects.
On the contrary to all these richness and diversity of
Wrapping up, in this project the Contemporary Flneur
approaches, the perspectives of the participants about
can be seen as someone who crosses accuracy and
the way their projects were adapted and targeted to the
research, as it was expressed by the words of the
festival frameworks, and to the specific characteristics
photograph Virgilio Ferreira (exhibited in Hamburg).
of the public space of the exhibitions and its audience are
The potential of all the new urban narratives
much more inconclusive. In spite of all of them declare
these artists brought to life gives us a multitude of
to appreciate and value the relation with the public space
layers that certainly help us de-codifying contemporary
and the potential of the passersby as audience, as can be
urban space and social relations in the city. The idea of
seen in the next sections, the fact is that just a minority
accumulation of urban narratives was itself explored
of them assume that effectively explored a project which
in the project, by curators, photographers and the
was thematically and conceptually aimed to correspond
audiences. Mindaguas Kavaliauskas (curator, Kaunas)
to those audiences, to the festival particularities, or to the
talked to us about the ambition of creating an online
specificities of an exhibition display at the public space.
database where photographers could deposit narratives
They assume they do it for the sake of their own projects
about street photography. The experience of the project
but not necessarily for corresponding for pre-requisites
of the photographers Caravan Gallery (also in Kaunas),
such like those ones.
for instance, establishing a participative way to create
Overall, we can consider that most of the photographers, urban narratives in an informal museum, gives also signs
in their artistic approaches to the terrain, embraced the in this direction. At the end, all these (quite personal
generic challenges with which they had been confronted, and diverse) layers of flnerie, which were accumulated
that is, the ones related to the idea of deconstructing, during this period by all this artists, throughout these
today, the traditional flneur paradigm, the one that still multiple cities seem (fortunately) quite diverse and
is recalled as being (mostly) a male, quite wealthy, drifting disperse. One of the generic ambitions of this project, as
lazily through urban space, that is, just within its central his leader Nuno Ricou Salgado told us, was to bring us a
areas, and looking to the urban realm essentially by the transversal look over an imaginary city, an idea of city,
lens of his external and privileged gaze. In this project, of urban space which could cross the several specific
these several dimensions were challenged. However, realities which were strolled and portrayed. This diversity
although quite more gender balanced and urban diverse, of perspectives on the contemporary urban realm, in
with many of our artists strolling by the centers and all these cities, will certainly contribute for that endless
by the peripheries of these cities, the diversity in the work-in-progress project
approaches was the rule, with some of them building
projects strongly committed with the communities they
were observing, but other ones opting to develop projects
with a much more external look. One aspect was though
quite surprising for us. The dimension of exploring the
potential of the virtual spaces which interrelate with
these contemporary urban territories, in particular with
the exploration of on-line dimensions of flnerie and
their relations with the physical territories, was much
less explored than it could be predictable, and that must
be certainly one of the aspects which can be further

Photo: Augusto Brzio

4. THE CREATIVE PROCESS
Our second main discussion issue was centered on the
creative process itself. We tried to understand how the
creative work had been developed by their authors;
what was their starting point and how did those ideas
materialized; how did the personal photographing
methodologies occurred in practice; and, at the end, if the
creative process in this project had been different or not
from their usual procedures and habits.
In this topic we can find, again, a huge diversity,
complexity and density in the interviews answers.
Naturally, that will not be a surprise, as this is the
core nature of their creative work, and it would be
expectable this richness of contributions on a discussion
about the way the project have been developed by each
photographer and curator.
The everyday life of the cities was assumed as the stage
for all these works, but the look at it was completely
different between them. We found photographers that
arrived to the cities, to do their artistic residence, without
any previous research (many of them said that done it on
purpose, to be free to look at the city and to be open
to it) while others programmed in detail their work before
arriving. As an example, we can think on two completely
different perspectives on the photographers who worked
at Lisbon in 2016, with Jens Masmann, researching the
Portuguese history and pre-programming beforehand
in detail with google views most of the places that he
would like to photograph in the city, at the same time that
Sonia Hamza deliberately arrived in Lisbon without any
specific idea, opening her mind to the a free and clean
drifting through the city.
Some of the photographers made their residencies
together in the city, others were alone during that time;
some preferred to stroll on their own (most of them),
other wandered often together through the city (e.g. Alex
Webb and Jonas Feige in Riga); some planned to join
each other and to confront and discuss their work at the
end of the day (e.g. Sonia Hamza and Jens Masmann in
Lisbon). Some of them coordinated their final work and
combined it in the exhibition display; other worked and
exhibited it separately. In some cases the curators had a
preponderant role on these choices; on other cases they
give total liberty to the artists.
The new urban narratives were assumed by the
photographers as a mix between realities, framed by
their photos, and fictions created by their perceptions
and constructions of territory. This aspect reveals a
wide range of diverse creative processes, from the more
ethnographic perspectives to the almost surrealistic ones.
Between these extremes, a diversity of rich results was
produced, enabling a complexification and a broadening of
readings on the atmospheres of these cities.
The next examples give us a general idea of diversity of
approaches inherent to those creative processes and their
richness. The creative process of Virglio Ferreira was
assumed as a social kaleidoscope. Juxtaposing imagens
of everyday life of Hamburg in diverse hours and points of
views, he built images that represent a possible lecture
of the multitude of layers that compose one city. Henrik
Duncker, on the contrary, created an atmosphere between
photographing street details (Savanoriai Street had been
with her photos and using sentences from the work of
chosen by the curators of Kaunas Festival for all projects
in this city) and objects collected in shops. Working at the
same street, The Caravan Gallery (Jan Williams and Chris
Teasdale) proposed an informal museum composed by
objects and imagens made by them and by objects and
memories brought by the local population.
The banality of the commercial street was confronted,
for three weeks, with a museum. Other approaches let
the place contaminate and define the creative process
in a different manner. Usually Antnio Jlio Duarte
works about the urban milieu but when he arrived at
Olot and was confronted with that reality he decided to
work instead with the natural environment of the citys
volcanic outskirts, marked by the woods and natural
landscapes. Bringing this atmosphere to one of the citys
old squares, where the exhibition was displayed, was the
way of the author confronting the audience with a parallel
reality, as it was integrated in Llurnia light Festival,
which congregates a series of urban interventions under
the theme of the fire, allowing an access of everyone to
the symbolic representations of the town, as refers its
director, Pep Fargas.
The fictional way, building or recovering narratives,
was another important mechanism used by some
photographers. For instance, Dima Gavrysh crossed
imagens of previous works, in Afghanistan and Ukraine,
with images produced in Lodz, trying to create something
that had never been there, as he was interested in
building an atmosphere, which confronted the audience
with an hypothetical reality (induced by the texts
displayed), which raised a set of political and social claims
for the city of Riga, but having always in mind an inherent
statement with what was happening in Gavryshs Donetsk,
in Ukraine. The creative process of Rut Blees Luxemburg
(in London) also assumed a performative option between
the images and the place where the photos were
displayed. She imagined a narrative relation between the
banality of the everyday life in East London, where she
lives, and the photogenic place of Somerset House where
the photos would be exhibited, creating a performance
philosopher Alexander Garca Duttmann.
These are just some examples of the diversity of these
creative processes put into practice. The contingencies
and practicalities of the photographing processes often
conditioned also the creative process. For instance, when
Martina Clearly realized that the Lisbon inhabitants
didnt like to be photographed as she wanted, she
started to work as a voyeur, with a secret camera, trying
to be discreet to capture her true milieus in a Lisbon
marked by the fluxes of tourists and residents. On the
contrary, conditioned by the choice of photographing
with a large format camera, and with the contingencies
of its imposition on public space, Jens Masmann, also in
Lisbon, explored the advantages of long stays on public
space and the interactions that were provided by that.
As it is explored in the other sections of this text, the
immersion of the flneur in the city was made in very
diverse circumstances and with quite distinct objectives,
from the ones that assume their drive in the city, more
or less intuitively (e.g Alexander Gronsky in Lodz, Sonia
Hamza in Lisbon, Alex F. Webb and Jonas Feige in Riga), to
the ones who subvert it, building their narratives indoors
(e.g, Cristina de Middel, in Lodz) or playing with different
historical layers and memories (e.g., Discipula in Derby).
All these configure different ways of exploring, artistically
and technically, the limits of their work, and most of
them assume that this work was important to expand the
frontiers of their previous works, although in some cases
(e.g, Augusto Brazio, in Lisboa), they claim this project
hasnt changed their ways of photographing.
Regarding the comparison between the creative
processes followed in this project and the previous work
from the same artists the answers were very diverse
between the speakers. Elements of continuity and of
disruption can be identified concerning the photographic
subjects; the techniques and formats used; the drifting
procedures; the way audiences and community were
aimed or engaged in the process; amongst other aspects.
Overall, we can sketch two main patterns, the ones
who followed essentially their normal way of working,
with slight adaptations to the particularities of this
project; and the ones who tried to approach the concept
proposed exploring new techniques and perspectives, and
challenging their own traditional procedures. In any case,
elements of innovation and creativity can be found in all of
those works, considering the ways each of these artworks
was conceived, their sets of images were produced,
selected and composed, and the exhibition displays were
imagined and put together.
Assuming each cube as a narrative (e.g, Ruth Blees
Luxemburg, in London), interpreting each face of the
cube as a composition of images and narratives (e.g
Dima Gavrysh in Lodz), playing with the set of all cubes
as a narrative (as happened in the most cases), or even
assuming the set as interaction between works of more
than one artist (eg. Sonia Hamza and Jens Masmann in
Lisbon), the exhibition device was used in very diverse
perspectives. It enabled exploring its 3-dimensional
materiality, but also the interaction with other media
(e.g, the use of live performance, relating with literature,
by Ruth Blees Luxemburg in London, or the use of the
potential of augmented reality by Liz Hingley, in Derby).
Interestingly, the formal contingency of the square
format was generally very well accepted by all the
photographers, essentially as a (in some cases new)
challenge. Nevertheless, some of them highlighted
using it already, or reporting it as something particularly
adequate to their way of framing/photographing (e.g.
Cristina de Middel, Lodz), while other were testing the use
on both formats (square and 4:3 or 3:2) for different uses
of the images (e.g Henrik Duncker in Kaunas, Kajal Nisha
Patel, in Mansfield) and other were subverting the cube
exhibition format, expanding square or rectangles outside
of the faces of the cubes (e.g. Jens Masmann and Sonia
Hamza in Lisbon, Discipula in Derby).
Anyway, at the end, each of them assumed this creative
process as a challenge, in their multiple dimensions (the
residency on a new territory, the link with the community,
the exhibition in a public space, the narrative in a set of
cubes, ), which was dealt with in very different manners.
But it was always a new challenge, for each of them,
assumed always as a very personal and site-specific
endeavor. As it was curiously put in words by Sonia Hamza
I felt Lisbon like a person, that I have to seduce (...).
5. THE RELATION WITH SPACE
AND TERRITORY
The third main discussion topic was related to the spatial
dimension of the project and the territorial embeddedness
of it. Several aspects were explored on this. We were
interested to know to what extent each project related to a
particular place or neighborhood in the city, and how and
why it occurred. We were also interested in understanding
if each project was related to a specific representation of
that city (or other), and how that symbolic construction
was perceived or (re)constructed by each photographer.
We wanted to explore the relation between the works
produced and some particularities of the physical, social
and cultural space of these cities. Then, we would try
also to perceive the use of these spatial and territorial
implications on the artists work and how these ideas
could or not be interpreted by the local audiences from
the images displayed.
The richness of the contributions on this topic and the
fruitfulness of the discussions and debates that they allow
is the first aspect to highlight. Naturally they could not
all be covered in this brief text but will be just referring to
some highlights and examples of it. The Flneur project
was conceptually anchored on the notion of territoriality
from its beginnings and it would be natural that this would
be reflected in the work of the local production teams and
of all the curators and artists involved (even if, in some
cases, they had to try to question and challenge this link
to territory, as could be naturally expected, as creatives
that they are).
The relationship between the artists and the territory
reveal different starting points. All of them were invited to
present their work on a specific city, most of them after an
artistic residence in that city, realized in the framework of
the project. Naturally, that period and the particular daily
life conditions during it structurally shaped that work,
even if in some cases the artists would have previous
contact with that city.
In some cases the curators and producers pre-defined
the territories to be explored (e.g, the centering of all
projects on one main street, in Kaunas; or, the choice
or three other Italian cities for the 3 projects displayed
on Cortona), as well as the coincidence of it with the
spaces for public exhibition of the final outputs in the city
(usually a square or a street, that could be more central or
peripheral, as appropriate in each case). In other cases,
the artists had total freedom to explore the city as they
would like, to interpret their own concepts, and build their
own representations of a wider or narrower territory.
This is expressed in a wide diversity of points of
entrance in the city: some entering by the city center,
other by peripheral locations; some by the daily life of
the regular users, other by the tourist fluxes; some by its
social life, other by its architecture and landscapes; some
by well-recognized signs and symbols; other by textures
and details.
The choice of the place had always a directly reflex in
the works. That could, in some cases, result from a
progressive immersion in the city and the discovering
of its neighborhoods and streets, in-deepening the
knowledge of a (re)new(ed) reality, or, in other cases,
result from the contamination of this process by disruptive
forces. For instance, Antnio Jlio Duarte arrived at Olot
and decided to break with his previously work, usually
based on urban atmospheres, to explore the natural area
around the city which fascinated him. The state of mind
of the artists in that moment, the cultural milieu they
found, the artistic or political statements they need to
perform, were several of the motivations we can highlight
from the ideas inferred from the testimonials collected.
As aforementioned, Cristina Middel, for example, worked
in Lodz without leaving her hotel room, trying to explore
the ambience of these places of passage, and playing
and challenging the ideas of photographing/exhibiting
in private/public spaces. Dyma Gavrysh, also in Lodz,
created an alternative reality, confronting the local
population with a fictional construction which mixed real
images with the (des)contextualization of the discourse
imported from other reality, challenging that specific
territory to deal with the historical, cultural and political
perception of their reality. In the more radical case, Esther
Teichmann (in Dublin) centered her work on the seaweeds
and on the memory of early botanists, assuming a flnerie
which produced images that could be almost seen as
perfectly de-territorialized.
On the other hand, other artists worked deeply the
territoriality of place, exploring their own personal or
familial roots in those territories (e.g, exploring specific
communities, such as Kajal Nisha Patel, in Mansfield), the
signs of local history (e.g, the work of Alexander Gronsky
in Lodz); the touristic gaze that marks them now (e.g, Tony
Amengual, with Icona, exhibited in Cortona, exploring
the way people approach the places with the new
technologies) or the consumption tendencies and signs
of global capitalism that also structures their identities
(e.g., the luxury consumer practices in Milan explored
by Dougie Wallace, also in Cortona), for instance. The
confronts between the outsider and insider looks into the
territory were permanently raised, be it by the perspective
of the own photographer (e.g Martina Cleary, Lisbon) or
by the narrative dispositive constructed to support the
artistic intervention (e.g, the use of the A. G.Dttmann
texts in Rut Blees Luxemburg work, at London, and the
performance set up by the artist for it).
The spatial dimension of the project can also be seen in
the perspective of the connection between the photos
and the dispositive used for displaying the images in the
public space (the cubes), which was explored by some
of the artists: Virglio Ferreira (in Hamburg) essayed
to make a relation between the facades of the cubes
with the perspectives the images were produced from
the skyscrapers (combining the spatial perspective in
the juxtaposition of the images itself); Toni Amengual (in
Cortona) planned the cubes in 2D to make a composition
in 3D; Discipula collective (in Derby) mixed several layers
of knowledge (landscapes, images of coal union banners,
archive material) in order to subvert the cubes plainness;
Jens Masmann and Sonia Hamza (in Lisbon) combined
and mixed their work in the exhibition device, challenging
the spatial structure of it with images which crossed and
overlap its borders.
As it will further discussed in the next section, it is
important to notice that the own issue of the territorial
placement of the exhibiting device the cubes structure
- (and its variability, from case to case, in each street or
square), has considerable impacts both at special level
(that is, in the relation to the physical space where it is
deployed) and at territorial level (that is, in relation with
the community where it operates), functioning either as
focal points of attractiveness and passing itineraries, or as
places that allow a capacity of reflexivity about these same
territories (as quite explored, for instance in Mansfield or
Lodz, at different scales).
Overall, a relationship was pursued with the local
community, which was built mobilizing very different
aspects in the diverse situations: from the banality of
the quotidian (as stated by Ruth Blees Luxemburg, in
London, or pursued by Martina Cleary in Lisbon) to
the exceptional, be it the different or the specific (e.g,
Amenguals tourist gaze, Wallaces wealthy consumers,
Hingleys brass bands,), or the staging of nice narratives,
even if somehow displaced (e.g, the fictions of Dyma
Gavrysh or Cristina de Middel in Lodz). Some sought
the recognition effect from the community, and worked
specifically with a view to the exhibition place (the specific
square or street where the images would be displayed).
That were, for instance, the cases of Giacomo Brunelli in
Hamburg, of Alexander Gronsky in Lodz, or of Kajal Nisha
Patel in Mansfield. Others sought active involvement
of the community in the experiencing of the images
(e.g, Liz Hingley, with augmented reality, in Derby). In
some cases, it was the own photographic process which
helped to develop that linked with the community, while
capturing the images (e.g, Jens Masmann, in Lisbon with
his large format camera) or in the research behind it (e.g.
Discipula, in Derby, collecting and crossing a diversity
of stories and imaginaries of a territory in deep socio-
economic restructuring).
6. THE RELATION WITH THE
EXHIBITION DEVICE AND THE WAY IT WAS
APPROPRIATED BY THE AUDIENCE
The discussions about the notion of public space and of
the practice of artistic interventions on the urban realm
were central on this project. Our fourth main topic of
discussion was centered on this. We asked participants if
they had the opportunity to observe the relationship of the
public with their work, and how this actually happened.
We tried to find out how it corresponded or not up to their
expectations and what surprised them in the dynamics
that they had opportunity to observe between their
audience and the exhibition display.
This was a structural point on most of the interviews,
which in generally revealed a very passionate discussion
about it. We approached this thematic trying to
understand the opinion of the photographers, curators
and producers questioned about the cubes device and
the way the public related to the exhibitions. Most of
them were able, at the moment of the survey, to have
been already present there, but some of them had not yet
that opportunity and expressed themselves about their
expectancies, also very vibrantly.
The concept of the structure, displayed in a central
square or street of each city, open 24/24 hours, and easily
accessible by all kind of audiences, were they more or less
familiar with photography art worlds, or even unrelated to
cultural practices at all, was crucial in the entire project.
This was an important aspect of the overall project design,
allowing the development of new audiences, particularly
amongst those segments that in most the cases do not
have cultural habits or cultural capital to access regularly
to the often sacred white cube of the art gallery or of
the fine arts museum. This was perfectly intelligible to
all the actors involved, who tried to make the most of its
potential. The light box mechanism, illuminating photos
during the night, was particularly appreciated for many
of those involved (e,g Giacomo Brunelli, Augusto Brzio).
Martina Cleary, for instance, called our attention for her
memories of a father taking photos of his children seizing
and enjoying the lights in the boxes, over her images.
In effect, as Louise Clements (Curator, Derby) points
out, the light boxes are architectonic objects that allow
an interesting articulation with the city, changing the
architecture of the space and potentiating multiple
changes in everyday life of the squares. They allow new
significations of meanings, and the reinvention of everyday
social practices in these territories, and that was often
visible in our observation period in the various cities.
Moreover, as Antonio Carloni (project manager, Cortona)
evidenced, the cubes were absorbed by the users, from
the younger to the elderly, in very informal manners, In
the specific case of Cortona, the fact of having this specific
device on public space was an important tool to attract
the local population to visit the festival, as in precedent
editions, the symbolic (and pragmatic) barriers between
the population and the indoor exhibitions realized in the
scope of this Festival still persisted.
All of the actors, in general, enjoyed the different
reactions expressed by the passerby who discovers the
exhibitions. Some of them essayed stablishing dialogues
with them, trying to catch the reactions. The design
and the location of the structure in the public space
enabled the easy crossing of it, by the passers-by who
stroll themselves in the city, by the flows of people who
come home back from work, by the nightlife people who
appropriates public space. The possibility of observing
the photos in transit, as highlighted by Augusto Brzio
or Rut Blees Luxemburg, assumes great relevance for
the photographers, as well as the possibility of being
there, hanging around, for quite a long time, chatting
or drinking, and having the opportunity to (re)discover a
particular photography, with a new occasional look to one
of the images exposed. The easy accessibility for cycling,
for skating, for baby strollers or for wheelchairs, for
instance, allowed different kinds of appropriation, many
of them quite unusual to most of the artists involved. Even
if many of them were already used to exhibit their images
on public space and to show their work on unconventional
places, here their artwork can be easily trodden, can
serve as a chair, as a table or as a support to hang a drink
while talking. People can step over, walk on, jump, or
interact in the most varied forms and many did it.
Most artists cherish very much this dimension, even the
ones who state that their works could be so exposed
there as elsewhere. The rhetoric of all of them highlights
the importance of the art becoming more public and
less sacred, and most of them feel in generally very
comfortable with the informality of the appropriation
of it. They are not concerned about the safety of their
artworks or hypothetical vandalism which could affect
them, and some of them even assume that informal
interventions on their works (such as graffiti or other
forms of interaction with their art works) could eventually
give rise to a creative dialogue between the vandalizers
and the artists. However, despite of this discourse,
most of them, essentially accustomed to the art gallery
environment, centered their creative work on developing
quite conventional exhibition ideas on the streets, not
challenging too much furtherer the differences between
designing an artwork to a gallery or to the street.
In general, the exhibitions were marked by great tolerance
and acceptance, from the point of view of the contents
exhibited, even if most of the artists did not seem too
keen on challenging the audiences through controversial
aspects, in a public space open to everyone (rather than
in an aesthetical perspective, and even that just in some
cases). However some more provocative works in sexual
(e.g. Ruth Blees Luxemburg, in London), political (e.g
Dyma Gavrysh, in Lodz) or social terms (e.g, Kajal Nisha
Patel, in Mansfield) were taken into practice, but were
perfectly pacific.
The exhibition display, therefore, easily openable to
the involving communities, allowed confronting them
to their specific problems, assuming a certain degree
of reflexivity on contemporary urban issues. That was
another important dimension of the project, which was
very diversely worked in the different scenarios. The
choice of the particular location for the exhibition device
was not neutral (the side of the street or of the square
in which it was set up; the selection of the neighborhood
itself, etc.), and some of the Flneur initiatives were
particularly attentive to this aspects involving or aiming at
particular populations (e.g., more deprived or difficult
communities, in Mansfield, or in the Intendente location
at Lisbon). For instance, the working class people brought
to Mansfield square by David Severn and Kajal Nisha
Patel, becoming models of another possible story
than the restructuring post-industrial socially deprived
landscapes of that region, was an important symbolic
contribute to the empowerment of the community. Even
if some of the portrayed were initially afraid of being
photographed as they fear that someone would pee in the
photo with their face, the fact is that the exhibition went
unscathed, in a quite difficult area, and was gradually
appropriated and advocated by the community. Naturally,
other kinds of links were stablished between the
photographers and the community, assuring channels
for this communication, which has naturally different
requirements than the one stablished in the framework
of an art gallery or other conventional exhibition
space. Public space, with its overdose of images and
advertisements, can definitely be very challenging in the
field of communication. The generalist target that is
the potential audience to these open-air exhibitions could
be involved by diverse mechanisms and many authors
explored different mechanisms in that communication
process, promoting the identification with their audiences.
The Caravan Gallery, for instance used the idea of
everyday life. Also in Kaunas, Henrik Drunker, opted
to adopt the relation with the consumer as driver for
designing his relation with the street. The students of Olot
Art school, under direction of Boris Eldagsen, draw upon
the recognition effect of a remarkable event in the life of
the city. Several others, as seen above, used disrupting
mechanisms to draw an involving narrative. But on the
end, as Sonia Hamza mentioned, the cubes give back
to the streets tiny intimate parts of photographers
observations, and that, in all its diversity, is the trigger to
a real community involvement.
The complexity and dimension of this heavy itinerant
structure, resembling a kind-of-rock-band tourne over
Europe (involving a logistic of moving 11 tons between
each exhibition), set important challenges in terms of
the overall programming articulation as well as in the
place-based local decisions, which had to be dealt, on a
daily basis, as highlighted by the producers. However, in
general, the functioning of all these went quite well, and
the structure was rarely vandalized or damaged, being the
care of maintenance easily treated. Local communities
appropriated quite easily and rapidly the new public
space structure provided, in every location, may be aware
of their ephemerality. Despite some episodic small
problems, which happened more by accident, than by
vandalism or by intentional purposes, and that were
promptly solved, the structure rapidly become (though
temporarily) assumed as part of that public space. Be
it at the center of central main squares (e.g. in Olot
or in Kaunas), at important crossing points on central
commuting trajectories (e.g in Lodz, or at Intendente, in
Lisbon), at more demanding locations requiring dedicated
dislocations to most of its users (e.g in Derby or Paris),
or nearby important sociability areas (e.g in Mansfield or
in Prncipe Real, in Lisbon), these places always gained a
vibrancy and vitality during the period of the exhibitions,
and the device was clearly an important key-factor to the
involvement of the community.
7. THE PROCESSES OF CULTURAL
MEDIATION AND THE RELATION
WITH THE ART WORLD
The final of the main issues discussed in these interviews
related to the way the ones involved see the mediation and
gatekeeping processes and the way they evaluate their
position within their art worlds after being involved in this
project. On one hand, we tried to assess the perception
of the impacts of the participation on this project for the
festival partners and for the photographers careers; the
idea was to understand how each one of them became
involved in the project and what they ended up gaining
with it. On the other hand, we tried to understand to what
extent those involved considered it would be different
and relevant to be exposed in the street, instead of
being in a gallery or a more dedicated (and reputed)
exhibition space. The idea was to discuss the differences
between developing a project in public space or under
the protection of the legitimization granted by the art
galleries or other well-recognized institutions.
Concerning the first issue, a diversity of mechanisms
of involvement with the project were identified, which
relates to the great variety of partners involved in the
project (festivals, publishing and training institutions, etc.,
both in the fields of photography or more enlarged visual
arts), as well as to the diversity of the artists involved,
in different positions on their careers and professional
and personal trajectories. Previous personal direct work
and interactions between team members, or the contact
with some specific work of each of the artists were
aspects mentioned as very important in the structuring of
participation opportunities. Most of the participants were
selected by the curators, during the process, although
certain exceptions (e.g., in Riga) allowed the participation
via open calls. Interesting data about the structuring
and reputation-building process in the art world was
provided and can be furthered explored, shedding some
light to the complex gatekeeping mechanisms behind
the structuring of the legitimizations on this field and the
networks construction in the art world itself. However,
maybe seeming something quite naif, for most of the
artists interviewed, the conviction expressed is that their
selection was due essentially to the awareness about
their previous works and about their quality. All of them
acknowledge the importance of this project for their
artistic careers, even if some of them hadnt heard about
its mentors (Procur.arte) or about some of the festivals
involved before. Most of them declare, anyway, that they
knew the work of the majority of the photographers
involved beforehand.
Anyway, in general, the impact of their participation
is quite well assessed, and its importance perfectly
recognized, even if, naturally, reflecting the different
stages in their artistic and professional careers as
photographers: some of them highlight the importance
of the opportunity of doing this kind of residency after
graduation (e.g Jonas Feige), other stress the importance
of the project for their internationalization (pe., Toni
Amengual), while most of them generally assume
the artists, some of them (e.g, Toni Amengual, Cortona)
it as one more step (but a quite relevant step) on a
rather natural and smooth trajectory, even if not pre-
programmed at all. As Andreas Gorsky puts it, its quite
complicated (...) I really dont know how career works ()
so it is very much about happy coincidences or unhappy
coincidences. And in fact, a project such as this one
can be structuring in putting together the conditions
for the existence of these coincidences, even if people
arent quite aware of them. These network effects are
decisively one of the success key-factors on a project
such as this one, both at pragmatic production effects
level and at reputation building level, considering the
multiple gatekeeping mechanisms involved. In parallel to
this, some of the artists surveyed (e.g Cristina de Middel)
acknowledge also the importance of a project like this
in terms of legitimizing the small cities and the festivals
themselves, contributing for building up their own
reputation in photography art worlds, adding up some
evidence of these other gatekeeping layers to the multiple
symbolic and reputational effects of the project.
Regarding the second question, most of those involved
in the project share a rhetoric which considers that the
exhibition in the public space, without the protection of
an art gallery or a museum or other institution is not a
problem at all for them. They assume they are working
in their personal projects, without constraints, and
value the challenges on working on public space most
from the side of the capacity of communicating with the
audiences rather than from the side of having the need
to have a reputation which establishes them at the eyes
of those audiences. At the end, that would be easily
understandable, not just because, in most of the cases,
they are fairly established and internationally recognized
photographers, as also by the fact that, beyond the
project Flneur itself, each of the respective festivals
where their exhibitions are included works per se as a
sufficient legitimizer for the display of their work in the
public space. Anyway, even if the vulnerability of being
in the public space without the symbolic protection of
an art gallery or a museum is not accepted by most of
recognize the need to combine the two different worlds,
and develop different kinds of projects, more and less
institutional, in order to manage more efficiently their
reputational value.
8. CONCLUDING NOTE:
SOME CONTRIBUTIONS
TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
A project such as this one, comprising so many different
looks, on so many different cities, is not easy to cover in
all its extension, as it is spreading its effects at diverse
range of levels. From the aforementioned ambition of
providing a transversal look on an imaginary city (Nuno
Ricou Salgado), an idea of contemporary city, which would
cross the various realities of all the cities photographed,
to the pragmatic and tangible effect that any of the
exhibitions or any image had in the life of any passer-by
who crossed one of these squares, the achievements of
the project could be measured and accountable (both
quantitatively and qualitatively) in a multitude of different
levels and dimensions, in their artistic, urban, social,
economic or political dimensions, for instance
In this text, we were particularly interested in seeing what
were the relations of these flneurs with their territories,
trying to understand a little more which were the relations
between art, public space and community development
in this Flneur Project. At the limit, we were considering
the links that can be stablished between a project like this
and the contribution for the sustainable development on
those communities and those territories.
From the observation conducted around this project
we can identify a set of different channels for the
promotion of community involvement in activities
such as the ones developed in Flneur. A multiplicity
of layers in what concerns to the relation with the
territory and the community are discernible: in the
work of the photographers (the theme, the approach to
flnerie, the approach to the city, the approach to the
local communities,); in curatorial terms (the choice
of places, of themes, of artists); in choosing the sites
and locations for displaying the exhibition device; in the
relation stablished by the population with the device
and its appropriation; in the attitude pursued towards
openness and inclusiveness, and audiences development;
in the range of complementary activities developed;
in the changes induced in the symbolic and material
relation of the community with the local festivals; in the
changes induced in the positioning of this actors (and
events) in their specific art worlds. All these dimensions
are intertwined, but effects in each and all of these
dimensions can and should be assessed in future work.
As it was expressed by Krzysztof Candrowicz (Curator,
Hamburg, Lodz), this was the first project in which all
is connected (curators, artists, audiences,) and this
brings a vast potential for the crossed-potentiation of all
these community development effects. Moreover, the
choreographic structure, the performing arts side of
this project (Nuno Ricou Salgado, general coordinator,
curator, producer, Lisbon, Olot) enables an increased
potential of performativity in the public space (by artists,
but also, particularly, by their audiences and by the
mixed types of uses permissible at the same time that
the art work is being experienced) which, by several
mechanisms, promote the community involvement and
even allow the development of deliberate strategies for
that by the promoter or by public policy promoters.
This project gives us very interesting signs of the multiple
roles of art in/for/as sustainable development8 which
will be certainly further explored in future works. On a
first level, naturally, several aspects can be identified
concerning the role of arts in sustainable development (as
an essential support to sustainability), that is considering
the effects of several aspects of this project in terms of
having a self-standing role in sustainable development:
for instance if we consider all the creative and cultural
value created by these residencies, expressed in these
artworks, the effects they caused through their fruition
to their audiences, the impacts on the raise of cultural
capital, in the knowledge accumulated by the artists, and
so on. In parallel, many other effects can be identified
if we think in the perspective of art as element of
connection, in the role of art for sustainability. The creative
and artistic manifestations had effects in the pursuing
of the other pillars of sustainable development, and
that should also be acknowledged. Aspects such as
promoting equity by merely providing the art in public
space (access for all, opening 24/24 to wider audiences
, increasing cultural capital), allowing the expression of
cultural diversity (in curatorial and photographers work);
promoting the protection of national/local cultural capital
and its specificities (in the work of some photographers)
or the several mechanisms for interconnecting cultural
and economic development (e,g market opportunities,
books, careers, workshops in parallel to exhibitions
in most festivals; acknowledgment of economic value
creation opportunities) are crucial here. Despite the
aspect of the high ecological footprint of the festival (the
11 ton rock tour), the fact is that there is a concern with
the permanent reutilization of the structure and recycling
of materials. Other aspects such as the accessibility and
inclusiveness of the device and its public display and
the social cohesion it allows through the wider access
permitted (e.g. handicapped), or the fact they stimulate
indirect economic returns to those territories (artistic
residences, location in public space, positive externalities)
should not also be underestimated, and even, in
some cases, the work of some of the photographers
and curators, raised a social, economic or ecological
awareness that, at the end, is also a contribution of
this project for sustainable development. On a third
level, the one of arts as sustainable development, that
is the way this project could be creating sustainability,
potentiating the transformative role of culture as
sustainable development, may be the project (as most
of the cultural projects in general) became a little short
of this potential. Despite the development of some links
of solidarity, amongst partners, to cope with risks of
uncertainty (mostly economic) and some signs in terms of
a coherent aesthetic and ethic attitude, exploring paths for
emancipation, as well as interesting cooperation effects
between newcomers and renowned artists, other aspects,
such as the co-construction of sustainable projects and
the developing of sustainable network collaborative links
amongst artists, creators, partners, festivals, could go
a step forward. Naturally some collaborative links were
established, particularly in some festivals, although many
times relying just on utilitarian short-term interests.
But many interesting signs of potential sustainable
collaboration (between these artists, these producing
teams, these communities) through this network were
also evident, and many of these effects will have naturally
space for grow in the future, after (for many of them) this
first opportunity for co-creating knowledge together.
Naturally, a more comprehensive assessment of the
impacts and results of a project like this would need
more background work, and that certainly can be done
in future opportunities. Regardless this aspect, the fact
is that this project gives us several clues about how its
various initiatives have given important contributions to
the involvement and empowerment of the communities
involved, and thus also contributed to the sustainability of
the development of these territories.
1. A synthetic and briefer version of this text was published in the
final catalogue of the Flneur Project (Salgado, 2017), under the title
Catching the flneurs: the interviews of the Flneur Project. For that
reason, naturally, some parts of this text are similar to that text.
2. Coordinated by Procur.arte and funded by UNESCO (International
Fund for Promotion of Culture) and the European Commission
(Creative Europe Cooperation Program), among other partners.
3. Procur.arte (Lisbon, Portugal), Cmara Municipal de Lisboa
(Lisbon, Portugal), Canal 180 (Porto, Portugal), Cap Magellan
(Paris, France), CCCB Centre de Cultura Contempornia de
Barcelona (Barcelona, Spain), Cortona on the Move (Cortona, Italy),
EGEAC (Lisbon, Portugal), First Art (Creswell, United Kingdom),
Fundacja Edukacji Wizualnej Fotofestival Lodz (Lodz, Poland),
Gloc Festimagem (guas de Prata, Brazil), Instituto Universitrio
de Lisboa ISCTE-IUL / DINAMIACET-IUL (Lisbon, Portugal), ISSP
International Summer School of Photography (Riga, Latvia), Llurnia
Associaci Cultural (Olot, Spain), Next Levl Projects (London, United
Kingdom), Photoireland (Dublin, Ireland), Photo London (London,
United Kingdom), Quad / Format (Derby, United Kingdom), Triennale
der Photographie (Hamburg, Germany), Universidade Nova de
Lisboa FCSH (Lisbon, Portugal), Vsl Sviesos Rastas Kaunas Photo
(Lithuania).
Internacionale, Paris, 8th-10th March 2017; Costa, P. and Lopes R.
(2017), New urban narratives at the public space: art, territoriality
and community development in the Flneur project, 13th Conference
of the European Sociological Association (Un)Making Europe:
Capitalism, Solidarities, Subjectivities, Athens, Greece, 29th August
-1st September 2017.
7. Alves, M.B; Costa, P.; Lamoni, G.; Saldanha, J.L; Soares, A.I;
Tavares, M. (Coord) (2016), Flneur. New Urban Narratives, Lisboa:
Procur.arte
8. Using the terminology stablished in the context of the discussion
held in a recent COST action (cf Dessein, J; Soini, K; Fairclough,
G; Horlings, L. (eds) (2015), Culture in, for and as Sustainable
Development Conclusions from the COST action IS1007
Investigating Cultural Sustainability, Jyvaskyla: Jyvaskyla University
Press).

4. With projects exhibitions (and other activities) in Mansfield (UK,

April 2015 and April 2017), Lisboa (Portugal, May 2015, September
2015 and August 2016), London (UK, May 2015), Hamburg (Germany,
June 2015), guas de Prata (Brazil, July 2015), Cortona (Italy, July
2015), Paris (France, May 2016), Riga (Latvia, May 2016), Lodz (Poland,
June 2016), Dublin (Ireland, July 2016), Kaunas (Lithuania, September
2016), Olot (Spain, November 2016), and Derby (UK, March 2016),
and other parallel activities also in Abrantes (Portugal) and Kuldiga
(Latvia). Apart from these, some other cities have been targeted
by the work carried out in this project. For example, the artist
residencies in Italy, whose results were presented in Cortona, took
place in Rome, Milan and Torino.

5. Documentary Flneur - New Urban Narratives, which is also

part of this edition (in its short version with aprox 28 minutes, 2017,
Dir. Eduardo Amaro, Prod. Procur.arte).

6. Costa, P. (2017), Arte, espao pblico e desenvolvimento

sustentvel: o territrio e o seu uso no projecto Flneur Novas
Narrativas Urbanas, Seminar Criatividade, Cultura e Territrio: A
interveno urbana e as dinmicas criativas no(s) seu(s) territrio(s),
ISCTE-IUL, Lisboa, 24th January 2017; Costa P. and Lopes, R. (2017),
Art, public space and sustainable development: the use of urban
territory in the Flneur project, Colloque International Les arts du
spectacle au prisme du dveloppement durable, Thtre da la Cit
Aknowledgements:

The authors would like to acknowledge the indispensable

contribution and permanent collaboration of Eduardo
Amaro, director of the documentary that is the other
face of the analysis undertaken in this text, and that was
an active part in all the interviews.
The authors would also like express their gratitude to
all the photographers that collaborated in this work
being interviewed and sharing their flneur experience
with us: Alex F. Webb, Alexander Gronsky, Antnio Jlio
Duarte, Augusto Brzio, Caravan Gallery (Janet Patricia
Williams and Christopher Teasdale), Cristina de Middel,
Dima Gavrysh, Discipula (Tommaso Tannini), Giacomo
Brunelli, Henrik Duncker, Jens Masmann, Jonas Feige,
Kajal Nisha Patel, Liz Hingley, Martina Cleary, Rut Blees
Luxemburg, Sonia Hamza, Toni Amengual and Virgilio
Ferreira. By the same token, the authors express their
recognition to all the festival producers and curators
which have granted us with their interviews: Antonio
Carloni (project manager, Cortona), Arianna Rinaldo
(Curator, Cortona), Krzysztof Candrowicz (Curator,
Hamburg, Lodz), Louise Clements (Curator, Derby),
Mindaugas Kavaliauskas (Curator, Kaunas), Nuno Ricou
Salgado (General coordinator of the project, producer and
curator, Lisbon, Olot) and Pep Fargas (Producer, Olot).
Finally, the authors would like to acknowledge the
importance of several informal talks and discussions held
during all over the period of concretization of this project
with other members of Procur.arte production team
(Pedro Bacelar, Maria Salgado, Francisco Salgado), and
the set-location team Ana Limpinho and Tiago Pombal,
as well as some informal talks held with other curators
and agents involved, including Angel Luis Gonzalez
(Curator, Dublin), Boris Eldagsen (responsible for the
workshop Students of Olot Art School, Olot) and some of
the other photographers involved in the project, which
comprised (in addition to the above mentioned) also works
of: David Severn, Dougie Wallace, Esther Teichmann,
Marcello Bonfanti, Mariusz Forecki, Rik Moran, Sergiy
Lebediskiy, Students of Olot Art School and Tom Hunter.
Photo: Toni Amengual Photo: Kajal Nisha Patel
References

Alves, M.B; Costa, P.; Lamoni, G.; Saldanha, J.L; Soares, A.I; Tavares, M. (Coord) (2016), Flneur. New Urban Narratives, Lisboa:
Procur.arte
Arnason, H. (1985). A history of modern art. Painting. Sculpture. Architecture. London: Thames and Hudson
Bagcioglu, N. (2016), Artistic Labour: Seeking a Utopian Dimension
Bishop, C. (2012), Artificial Hells: participatory art and politics of spectatorship. London; New York, Verso Books
Bourriaud, N. (1998 (2002)), Relational Aesthetics. Dijon: Les Presses du rel
Cartiere C., Willis S. (2008), The Practice of Public Art. New York: Routledge
Costa, P. (2012), Gatekeeping processes, reputation buiding and creative milieus: evidence from case studies in Lisboa,
Barcelona and So Paulo, in Lazzeretti, L (Ed.), Creative industries and innovation in Europe: Concepts, measures and
comparatives case studies, Routledge, pp. 286-306.
Costa, P. (2007), A cultura em Lisboa: competitividade e desenvolvimento territorial, Lisboa: Imprensa de Cincias Sociais
Costa, P., Lopes, R. (2013), Artistic intervention in public sphere, conflict and urban informality: an international comparative
approach to informal dynamics in cultural districts, Cidades, Comunidades e Territrios, n 2, Junho de 2013
Costa, P., Lopes. (2015), Urban Design, Public Space and the Dynamics of creative Milieux: A Photograpic Approach to Bairro
Alto (Lisbon), Grcia (Barcelona) and Vila Madalena (So Paulo), Journal of Urban Design, 20:1, 28-51,
Debord, G. (2012 (1972)), A Sociedade do Espectculo. Lisboa: Antgona
Dessein, J; Soini, K; Fairclough, G; Horlings, L. (eds) (2015), Culture in, for and as Sustainable Development Conclusions from
the COST action IS1007 Investigating Cultural Sustainability, Jyvaskyla: Jyvaskyla University Press
Duxbury, N., Cullen, C., & Pascual, J. (2012), Cities, culture and sustainable development, in H.K. Anheier, Y.R. Isar, M.
Hoelscher (Eds.), Cities, cultural policy and governance, London: Sage, pp. 73-86.
Gehl, Jan. (1987 (1917)), Life between buildings: using public space. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold
Kebir, L.; Crevoisier, O. ; Costa, P. ; Peyrache-Gadeau, V. (Eds.) (2017), Sustainable Innovation and Regional Development:
Rethinking Innovative Milieus, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA, Edward Elgar Publishing
Lopes, R. (2012), Intervenes artsticas efmeras e apropriao de espao pblico em contextos urbanos informais: anlise de
cinco bairros criativos: Bairro Alto e Cais do Sodr, Grcia, Vila Madalena, Brick Lane e Kreuzberg SO36, ISCTE-IUL, Lisboa
Markusen, A; Gadwa, A. (2010), Creative Placemaking, Washington DC: Art Works Procur.arte and partner institutions are responsible
for the choice and the presentation of the facts and
Miles, M. (1997), Art, space and the city Public art and urban futures. London: Routledge opinions in this project which are not necessarily
those of UNESCO and do not commit the
Salgado, M. (coord) (2017) Flneur - New Urban Narratives (catalogue), Lisbon: Procur.arte Organization. Project supported in the 2015 edition.

Traquino, M. (2010), A construo do lugar pela arte contempornea. Ribeiro: Hmus

UNESCO (2016), Culture: urban future; global report on culture for sustainable urban development, Paris: UNESCO