Finkel

7/28/2019 Finkel

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/finkel 1/15

Re-imaging arts festivals through a corporate lens:

a case study of business sponsorship at the HenleyFestival

Rebecca Finkel

School of Business, Enterprise and Management, Queen Margaret University, Queen Margaret University Drive, Musselburgh, East Lothian, Edinburgh EH21 6UU, UK

This paper explores the impacts commercialisation processes have on contemporary arts festivals by

analysing their increasing reliance on private sector funding sources, such as business sponsorship.A case study of the Henley Festival demonstrates the effects that being primarily dependent on cor-

porate subsidies can have on the ‘look and feel’ of a festival. Research methods include a survey sent

to 117 UK arts festival organisers to discern audience demographics, programming, funding andfuture plans. Case study methods include in-depth interviews with the Artistic Director and Market-

ing Director of the Henley Festival, as well as participant and direct observation of the festival, which

was recorded in a personal research diary. Main conclusions suggest that the Henley Festival isexclusionary for many of the local population and classical arts enthusiasts, who are often alienated

from the festival as a result of its emphasis on garnering corporate support and providing corporateentertainment.

Keywords: arts funding, business sponsorship, arts festivals, commercialisation, classical arts, corpor-

ate subsidy

INTRODUCTION

It has widely been accepted that there has

been an overall commercialisation of manycultural forms and leisure activities inrecent years (see Bayley, 1989; Beck, 1990;

Bennett et al., 1998; Caves, 2000; DuGay andPryke, 2002; Rohter, 2003), and this can beseen to include UK arts festivals. Thedegree to which an arts festival is commer-cialised depends not only on the activities

conducted by the festival (Mittila, 2003,p. 17), but also the ways in which the festivalis constructed and utilised by its financialsupporters. Although some commercialelements, such as hiring venues and artists,are standard for most festivals, other com-mercialised activities, such as implementingbusiness techniques and accepting

sponsorship, have been adopted on a widerscale fairly recently (Mittila, 2003, p. 17).The majority of contemporary arts festivalsin the United Kingdom are not profit-driven,but many can been seen as commercial enti-ties because they are being used to createfinancial gain for places and often indirectlycommunities or individuals, and becausesome are increasingly associated with com-mercial enterprises and commercial

practices.This paper explores the effects that com-

mercialisation processes have on arts festi-vals in Britain by analysing how the privatesector sponsors the arts, in general, andarts festivals, more specifically, and the influ-ence this support has on the content andorganisation of the arts festivals. For some

Managing Leisure ISSN 1360-6719 print/ISSN 1466-450X online# 2010 Taylor & Francis

http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals

DOI: 10.1080/13606719.2010.508664

Managing Leisure 15, 237–250 (October 2010)

7/28/2019 Finkel


arts festivals, which receive business spon-sorship, this often means catering to their

programming preferences and striving tomatch festival audiences with sponsors’target markets. This is exemplified by a

case study of the Henley Festival, whichexamines the effects that being primarilydependent on corporate sponsorship can

have on priorities and programming of acontemporary arts festival.

It is suggested that arts festivals areaffected by commercialisation processes inthree different key ways: (1) when they are

organised principally for financial gain andwhen revenue generation becomes theprincipal aim, (2) when they are sponsored

by a for-profit enterprise and (3) when theybecome vehicles for executing economicagendas. The first of these has the potentialto arise when there is a primary emphasison funding the festival from the box office.The second form can be associated withfunding from business sponsorship, even ifthe supporting business does not gainfinancially from the partnership. It can beargued that an association with businessstrengthens the likelihood of making the fes-tival into a commercial entity. The third wayis a more recent phenomenon and suggeststhat the economic motivations behindpublic subsidies are contributing to theincreasing commercialisation of festivals inrecent decades. Public subsidy once was areliable way of guaranteeing that commercialinfluences would not affect the arts (Mittila,2003, p. 17). However, this can be seen tobe no longer the case in many instances inBritain, due mainly to the government’smanagerialist tendencies to measure the

worth of artistic output in economic terms(Holden, 2004).

The beginning of the escalation in thenumber of arts festivals adopting commer-cial practices and the widespread use ofarts festivals for commercial gain in theUnited Kingdom can be traced to the late1980s. Prior to this, in the late 1960s and

1970s, the majority of arts festivals couldbe categorised into two different ways.

There were classical arts festivals, whichwere organised by and for the culturedmiddle classes, often with Arts Council

support, to enable them to see and hear awide variety of work. Also, there were pri-

marily locally-based community celebrations(Bianchini and Parkinson, 1994), which reliedon community volunteers and local council

assistance. Both kinds of festivals still exist,to an extent, today. However, the degreeand nature of public subsidy has been a key

variable that has changed through theyears (Beck, 1990), and this has had aneffect on the development of arts festivals.

Public support was once considered byarts festival organisers to be more favour-able than business sponsorship because itallowed the festival to experiment withmore creative ideas and to operate withoutthe necessity for so many measurable out-comes (Gardner, 2006). However, theincreasing politicisation of arts funding incontemporary Britain has somewhatreversed this trend, and many arts festivalsare unable to programme with the luxury ofreliable and secure public funding or evenmanage to get a ‘foot on the funding ladder’(Gardner, 2006). Arts festivals have a respon-sibility to cover their costs and are increas-ingly seeking alternative ways to do so inthe light of current public funding situations,such as increased competition for funds andrestrictive guidelines for eligibility.

As public funding becomes more compli-cated and more uncertain as a primarysource of financial support for many arts fes-tivals, government funders have encouraged

arts organisations to increase their earnedincome through the box office and retailsales and to seek corporate sponsorship(Caust, 2003, p. 55). However, the pursuit ofthese private methods of funding can alsobe seen to be having an impact on the pro-gramming decisions and operations of artsfestivals. It is suggested that the main

238 Finkel

7/28/2019 Finkel


factors affecting many arts festivals as theyenter into the arena of private support are:

increasing competition for funds, potentialloss of creative control over programming,increasingly target-driven approaches to

operations and increasing commercialisa-tion of the festival.The cultural sector faces a funding

landscape that is increasingly competitive(A and B, 2005) due, in part, to arts market

saturation and the increase in the numberof other public sector organisations seekingto partner with businesses (A and B, 2004,

p. 2). Although business sponsorship forthe arts has increased 8% in the previousyear and three-quarters of arts organisations

that applied for private funding were suc-cessful, private sources typically make upno more than 13% of their overall revenue(A and B, 2004). Arts festivals are not onlycompeting with each other for suchfunding, but also with other events, artforms and modes of entertainment. Manyalso do not know how best to position them-selves to successfully compete in an environ-ment that requires a business-orientedapproach (Evrard and Colbert, 2000, p. 4).The added pressures of becoming more stra-tegic can be a financial drain, as it oftenrequires hiring staff with management orgrant writing expertise.

The critics of business intervention in thearts believe that such measures have thepotential to commodify artistic output andturn arts organisations into commercial enti-ties (Clark, 2004, p. 34). However, before con-demning arts organisations for engaging inbusiness practices and associations, it isnecessary to pause and consider if commer-

cialisation is necessarily such a bad thingfor them in practice. From an artist perspec-tive, private funding can often allow artists topursue innovative activities that they wouldnot otherwise have the opportunity topursue. Also, many artists accept corporatefunding in order to afford to perform atsmaller events without having to charge

charities or publicly-funded organisationsas much. However, it is important, especially

in the current ‘strings attached’ climate ofarts subsidy, that artists and arts administra-tors retain creative control despite funding

pressures (Gardner, 2006).

DEVELOPMENT OF BUSINESS

SPONSORSHIP FOR THE ARTS

The concept of business sponsorship for thearts can be traced to the American traditionof business philanthropy implemented by

Carnegie, Rockefeller and other industrialistsof the nineteenth century. By the 1950s, itwas an established function in many large

companies in the United States and theGreat Britain. The idea was to demonstratethat the companies cared for their employ-ees by giving back to the communities inwhich they lived (Laurie in Robinson et al.,1994, p. 68). Business sponsorship was seenas an advantageous proposition for boththe company and the arts. As Chong put it,‘big business feels comfortable supportingthe arts; arts organisations deem supportby big business as an essential ingredientfor financial success; and target audiencesare made aware of the corporate contri-bution to cultural life’ (2002, p. 47).

In the 1980s, corporate support for thearts became a wider phenomenon on bothsides of the Atlantic aided by the Reaganand Thatcher governments’ direct encour-agement (Wu, 1998, p. 28). At the time, theConservative government in the UnitedKingdom wanted businesses to fund thearts, in order to make up for the decreasein government support (Beck, 1990, p. 393).

Unlike the nineteenth century philanthro-pists, however, business sponsorship of thearts in recent times should be partly con-sidered as a commercial undertaking andnot a purely altruistic activity. The Associ-ation for Business Sponsorship in the Artsin the United Kingdom states that sponsor-ship is part of a calculated promotion and

Re-imaging arts festivals through a corporate lens 239

7/28/2019 Finkel


publicity campaign for the business name,products and services (Wu, 2002, p. 128).

Along with providing innovative status forassociating themselves with the arts, spon-sorship provides positive branding for

businesses (Gardner, 2006). However, aswell as the results of Thatcherism, thereare other reasons why sponsorship has

grown. Growth in business investment inthe arts in recent years is attributed to the

increasing importance of corporate socialresponsibility for businesses, the increasedawareness that affiliations with the arts

stimulates creative business cultures, regen-eration projects, European City of Culturebids, growth of cultural tourism and

renewed popularity of certain kinds of artforms, such as visual arts (A and B, 2004,p. 2). O’Hagan and Harvey (2000, p. 222) listfive primary motivations for contemporarybusinesses to sponsor the arts. In order ofimportance, these are:

. Promotion of image/name

. Supply-chain cohesion1

. Corporate entertainment for clients

. Non-monetary benefit to managers orowners

. Enhancing good will/corporateresponsibility

In terms of promotion, well-known artsevents attract certain audiences that fitmany corporations’ socio-economic market-ing targets, and sponsorship is consideredto be a relatively inexpensive and effectiveadvertising tool for the companies involved(Wu, 2002, p. 129). For example, tobaccocompanies have been known to use artssponsorship as a way of getting cheaper

advertising and sometimes as a way ofgetting any advertising since cigarette adver-tising is illegal in many places (Wu, 2002,p. 129). Sponsorship of the arts can oftenhelp change the image of a product orcorporation that may have negativeconnotations.

The traditional partnership of art, moneyand social status can be seen to exist at

certain high-profile festivals and culturalevents, and many companies want not onlyto advertise to that target audience, but

also have their name associated with suchprestigious events in order to strengthentheir brands (Zukin, 1995). These types of

events are also good arenas for corporateentertainment. Not only do sponsors

receive free tickets or reduced ticket pricesfor employees and clients to attend presti-gious events, they are also provided with

heavy exposure of the company’s logo forclients to see (Laurie in Robinson et al.,1994, p. 69). As the former director of the

Metropolitan Museum of Art, ThomasHoving put it in more basic terms, ‘Art issexy! Art is money-sexy! Art is money-sexy,social-climbing fantastic!’ (Wu, 1998). Thismay help to explain why business sponsor-ship is sometimes criticised for using thearts for corporate propaganda (Hewison inRobinson et al., 1994, p. 29).

On a less strategic level, sponsorship isalso a way for companies to be seen givingback to the community. Businesses seek tocreate positive environments in which theycan operate more effectively. Sponsoringartistic activities shows that they maintaina social responsibility to the communityand care about their customers, which inmany instances they do. As Murray Bring,Senior Vice President and General Counselfor Philip Morris, puts it, ‘Selling a productis not the principal motive for giving to thearts, and if it were, it would fail’ (in Robinsonet al., 1994, p. xvii). Corporate leaders believethat when people feel good about what a

corporation is doing for the community,they will feel better about the corporationand buy from it (Laurie in Robinson et al.,1994, p. 70). In recent times, there has beenmore pressure on companies to demonstratetheir social responsibility. The arts com-prises about 11% of most major companies’

240 Finkel

7/28/2019 Finkel


overall contributions budget (Laurie inRobinson et al., 1994, p. 68).

Also, there are global-local linkages thatmany multi-national corporations take intoaccount. A company that deals in the global

marketplace can demonstrate its good willand connection to a local area where thefirm has an office or a plant, by helping to

support local celebrations and traditions. A festival can be viewed as a means for the

company to market their products withoutas much competition from other brands, aswell as embed themselves locally, despite

being a company with national and inter-national business interests.

Businesses do not often give directly to

artists or to all types of arts evenly, or toall places geographically (Laurie in Robinsonet al., 1994, p. 72). In the past, what was spon-sored was determined by the chairman’staste in art (Laurie in Robinson et al., 1994,p. 69). However, decisions about what tosponsor are becoming increasingly prag-matic and focussed to capitalise on nameassociation and branding potential benefits.Banks tend to prefer arts programmes thatbolster regional development; publishersfund literary projects and so on. Forexample, The Guardian’s sponsorship of theHay Festival of Literature is a strategicmove, given the connections between thetopic of the festival and the sponsor’s indus-try, as well as the overlap of the newspaper’sreadership and the festival’s attendees.

Perhaps due to alignment issues drivingpartnerships, community arts organisationsand activities tend to be more disadvantagedwhen seeking business sponsorship. Theirnarrow audience reach and the marginal

groups on which they tend to focus areoften seen as unattractive to businesses,and, despite growth trends in support forother art forms, total business sponsorshipin community arts decreased 15% in 2003(A and B, 2004, p. 3). There is the dangerthat this may lead to a gap in arts provision

on a local level if grass-roots arts are increas-ingly under-funded and financially forgotten.

It is unlikely that the funding situation willimprove in the future, given the competitionfor funds posed by the Olympics, among

other new programmes (Serota, 2006), andwill probably get worse for those at the

bottom of the arts festival hierarchy ascompetition keeps increasing. However, asdemonstrated in the following case study of

the Henley Festival, relatively little known,mid-level arts festivals can attract businesssponsorship by positioning themselves stra-

tegically to cater to their corporate audi-ences’ needs. The Henley Festival reliesalmost wholly on corporate funding and

corporate attendance, and, therefore, owesits continued existence on establishing asuitable arena for corporate entertaining.

This decision by Henley Festival manage-ment to actively seek out corporate spon-sorship and a primarily corporateaudience can be viewed as an interestingtactic to ensure continued support of thefestival and the mainly classical arts it pre-sents. Most other surveyed arts festivals,which feature mainly classical arts oftenhave difficulty sustaining their festivalsfrom one year to the next due to changesin the public funding environment and vari-able interest classical arts performances.Henley Festival can also be considered ashitting the spatial lottery ‘jackpot’ withregards to its proximity to London, its situ-ation in a wealthy county and its relation-ship with the well-known Henley Regatta,which are a few of the factors facilitatingits initial appeal to business sponsors andclassical arts enthusiasts. Henley’s location

by the Thames is also very attractive.These can be viewed as advantages thatHenley Festival has over many of the othersurveyed arts festivals seeking businesssponsorship, who often have a more diffi-cult time attracting big business sponsorson a regular basis.


7/28/2019 Finkel


RESEARCH CONTEXT AND METHODS

This case study is part of a larger researchproject, which examines social, economicand political impacts of UK combined artsfestivals on communities and places.

Combined arts festivals are defined by theArts Council as those containing more thanone genre of artistic performance, i.e.,music, drama and visual arts events, asopposed to those presenting events in onlya single genre of arts, such as film festivals(Casey et al., 1996, p. 93). Researchmethods include a 42-question mail-backsurvey questionnaire sent to 117 combinedarts festivals in the United Kingdom, inDecember 2003 and January 2004, to obtain

festival demographics, programminghistory, funding and future plans. The ques-tionnaire was adapted from a survey pub-lished in a 1992 study conducted by thePolicy Studies Institute, concerning bothsingle-genre and combined arts festivals inthe United Kingdom (Rolfe, 1992). The 117combined arts festivals represent the totalnumber of combined arts festivals in theUnited Kingdom in 2003. A listing of thesefestivals was compiled from the Arts

Council of England, Scotland, Wales andNorthern Ireland arts festivals lists, as wellas the British Arts Festivals Associationmembership list, European Festivals

Association membership list, British Federa-tion of Festivals membership list andInternational Festivals and Events Associ-

ation membership list.The data are based on a 56% response

rate. A majority of the major cities in

England (Birmingham, Liverpool), Scotland

(Edinburgh, Glasgow), Wales (Cardiff) andNorthern Ireland (Belfast), which have

combined arts festivals, responded to thesurvey. A majority of combined arts festivals

in Greater London responded; these areprimarily organised by local neighbour-hoods or councils, as there is no major

London-wide combined arts festival. The 51

combined arts festivals that failed torespond are similar in size variation and geo-

graphical area to those that did respond.Case studies were selected for this

research because they were viewed as the

best means to obtain a holistic understand-ing of cultural systems of action, which are

sets of inter-related activities in whichactors in a social situation are engaged(Tellis, 1997, p. 5). The Henley Festival was

chosen as a focus in order to discern amore in-depth understanding of the aimsand goals, audiences and content influences

of a combined arts festival that is primarilyfunded by business sponsorship. A varietyof methods were implemented, including

semi-structured and open-ended, in-depthinterviews with the festival’s ArtisticDirector, Marketing Director and theHenley-on-Thames Tourist InformationOffice. Informal interviews and casual con-versations with festival participants andlocal business people in the town contribu-ted to the participant and direct observationand recording of the festival experience in apersonal research diary.

Field work for the Henley Festival tookplace from 8 to 11 July, 2004. All interviewstook place during the festival visit in theday, when there was not as much happeningto distract the interviewees. Interviews wererecorded and conducted face-to-face in oneof the champagne tents on the festival site.Attendance at multiple festival events wasfacilitated by location because all of theevents took place in the same area of enclo-sure separated from the town by the river.

HENLEY FESTIVAL: A CASE OF

CHAMPAGNE WISHES AND

CORPORATION DREAMS

The Henley Festival of Music and the Artsseeks to be a ‘glamorous’ event that requestsits female attendees to wear evening dressesand its male audiences to wear at least jacket

242 Finkel

7/28/2019 Finkel


and tie, with black tie optional. The arts festi-val is five-days long and is held the week after

the famous Henley Regatta in July. The festi-val uses the same site and tents along theriver as the regatta, which are physically

set apart from the town of Henley-upon-Thames. One of the reasons for thecreation of the arts festival was to get more

use out of the regatta site and tents. Theother reason was the director of the regatta

28 years ago was an opera fan and wantedto bring more opera to Henley-upon-Thames, which is a town two hours west of

London.The festival began as an opera festival and

grew throughout the years to include other

art forms. It now hosts performances span-ning all types of music (orchestra, choral,chamber, opera, jazz, folk, world, rock),contemporary dance, folk dance, fireworksdisplays, stilt walkers, performance artistswithin the tented festival area, comedyacts, non-fiction and poetry talks, visualarts exhibitions (painting, crafts, sculpture,installation) and children’s events. The chil-dren’s events, however, are all held on aSunday afternoon ‘Family Fiesta’ and arevery much separated from the main festivalevents, which do not allow children in theaudience.

The Henley Festival is, for the most part,representative of the local environment dueto its regatta legacy and wealthy commu-nities. As they share the same site, manypeople confuse the arts festival with theregatta, but the two events are separate enti-ties. However, the festival does benefit fromthe regatta’s renown and exclusivereputation. The Manager of the Henley-

upon-Thames Tourist Information Centresuggested that the energy level of the townis raised by the regatta, and the festival main-tains that for a longer period of time. He alsonotes that although the festival is not aspopular as the regatta, it does help keep visi-tors in the area. It is uncertain what percen-tage of regatta attendees are also festival

attendees, but it is estimated by the TouristInformation Centre that there is some

cross-over in event audiences. Accommo-dation, e.g., is very difficult to find duringthe festival due to regatta attendees staying

through the weekend. It is worth notingthat the accommodation in Henley-upon-

Thames is relatively expensive during thisperiod, which is in keeping with the audi-ences for the regatta and festival, who can

afford such prices. This can be seen to beone of the many ways in which the HenleyFestival attracts a self-selecting group for

its audiences. In this way, access is restrictedto those who can afford to attend and stayover in the town.

Tickets are not sold for specific events, asis the case with most other arts festivals.Instead, each person buys a ticket for anevening (or a series of evenings), whichincludes admission to all the events on thatspecific date. To make up a part of itsbudget of £1.6 million, ticket prices are notsubsidised and they range from £35 for afamily to attend the day-long ‘Family Fiesta’to £178 for Lawn tickets for all five evenings.The average Promenade ticket costs £37 forthe evening (plus £7 parking). The averageGrandstand A ticket costs £64 for theevening (not including parking). Wednesdayand Sunday evenings are less expensive.The Marketing Director interviewed for thisresearch noted that this is done specificallyto encourage more local participation onthose evenings, which are usually quiet.

The majority of the festival events couldbe categorised as ‘classical arts’, with anemphasis on classical music. The HenleyFestival presents some famous names in

music, such as Dame Kiri Te Kanawa andJools Holland, along with smaller ensemblesand experimental works. This varied classi-cal content focus can be seen to be ‘con-structing new hierarchies of taste anddiscrimination’ (Bassett, 1993, 1974). As theArtistic Director interviewed for thisresearch says, ‘I think you have to fight


7/28/2019 Finkel


harder for attention, therefore, you’ve got tobe seen these days. There needs to be more

of a buzz. The stakes are higher for entertain-ment these days.’

The Henley Festival is a prestigious arts

event with audiences who would also be athome at the Glyndebourne Festival Operaor Cartier International Polo. However,

there are a number of arts festivals in highincome areas that do not have the same lux-

urious trappings and corporate connectionsas the Henley Festival. It is suggested that itis primarily the way in which the festival is

funded that has the most impact on the festi-val’s content. The Henley Festival can afforddifferent and top-quality arts events because

of the patronage of its wealthy audiences andthe sponsorship they attract. It also has ahistory of business sponsorship, perhapslinked to the regatta. The lack of dependencyon public funding means that the festival isable to programme without adhering to artsorganisations’ or local council’s socialinclusion or diversity agendas. The ArtisticDirector says there are ‘no boxes to tick’ inhis decision making, although he does saythat the corporate entertaining element hasan indirect impact on programming. Forexample, there is no samba parade and noamateur performers, as can be found atmany arts festivals across the UnitedKingdom.

On the whole, business sponsorshipfunding gives the Artistic Director theliberty to present unique performances thatother organisers may not have the luxuryor budgets to present. The Artistic Directorusually adds a ‘quirky’ event to the festivalprogramming to keep people interested,

entertained and returning each year. Hesays, ‘We give people what they want, butnot what they expect.’ For example, the2004 festival featured the Vienna VegetableOrchestra, who use vegetables as instru-ments and then make soup with them atthe end of the performance (Henley Festivalprogramme, 2004). These types of events

also give the festival recognition and set itapart from the increasingly similar arts festi-

val environment in the United Kingdom(Finkel, 2009). This particular event washighlighted on the BBC website and the TV

programme, ‘Richard and Judy’, which pro-vided national exposure for the festival.

The festival mainly advertises in nationaland regional newspapers, BBC Proms Guide,Opera Now magazine and on the radio

station Classic FM, according to the Market-ing Director. This emphasis on classicalarts advertising gives the festival exposure

to the kinds of people who would be inter-ested in attending the performances andalso helps attract sponsors who are inter-

ested in reaching to those types of audi-ences. The reputation of the festival as anupmarket event facilitates obtaining luxurygoods and corporate sponsorship becauseits audiences fit many businesses’ socio-economic marketing targets. Indeed, involve-ment in cultural activities of this calibre todisplay status, education and good taste,which Bourdieu (1992) suggests is a motiv-ation for ‘high’ arts participation, may be akey concept upon which many companiesare depending, when they decide tosponsor and be associated with this event.

According to Blau (1996, 1161), ‘Supportfor the arts has conventionally been part ofthe very process whereby social elitesdefine themselves as a dominant class andestablish social distance between them-selves and the populace, drawing on the dis-tinction between popular and high culture tobolster class differences’. Although theboundaries between the so-called ‘high’ andpopular culture have become increasingly

blurred in contemporary UK society (Gans,1999; McGuigan, 1996), the Henley Festivalhas retained the traditional perceptions ofexclusivity of the classical arts by fosteringperceptions of elitism despite the encroach-ments of a political correct society.

Bourdieu (1989) argues that consumptionfunctions as a source of social distinction

244 Finkel

7/28/2019 Finkel


and fulfils the social function of legitimatingsocial differences. With this kind of ‘cultural

accumulation’, the cultural elite can beseen to exert their social distinction anddominance (Bourdieu, 1989, p. 7). Corporate

entertaining and relatively expensive admis-sion prices are barriers to establish socialdistance in this instance, as unconnected

arts enthusiasts may not be able to affordto attend or are intimidated by the corporate

business nature of the event.Furthering the exclusionary nature of the

festival space, the majority of the festival’s

sponsors are either corporations, such asInvesco Perpetual, Simmons and Sons,Johnson Service Group and Sackville Proper-

ties, or luxury goods companies, such asLexus, Courvoisier, Whittard of Chelsea andSotheby’s. The website informs prospectivesponsors that every concert and perform-ance is available for sponsorship, alongwith the restaurants, resident artists andvisual art displays. Sponsors are offered thebest seats in the Grandstand and dinners atAlbert Roux at the Riverside. Most of all,sponsors have the ability to associate them-selves with an upscale arts event that givesthem exposure to people with high spendingpower.

The festival marketing material states,‘Sponsorship can ensure that you stand outfrom the crowd, creating visibility, profileand status with your clients and peergroup. It opens up new commercial andsocial opportunities, allows you to meetnew clients, forge new business relationshipsand reach new audiences’. This demon-strates more than an appeal for the appreci-ation for the classical arts; support for the

arts in this instance is part of a process tolegitimise an elite by establishing socialdistance through shaping norms of publicdiscourse within the festival environment(Waterman, 1998, p. 57).

Reduced public subsidy or public subsidythat comes with socio-economic directivesand targets has increased the search for

private or corporate sponsorship amongmany combined arts festivals surveyed for

this research. However, the private sectoralso has instrumental agendas when invest-ing in the arts. The often contentious

relationship between the arts and businessis seen by Bourdieu and Haacke (1995) as

the exchange of financial capital for symboliccapital because businesses support the artsprimarily to strengthen their images and

public relations. Indeed, the corporately-financed festival becomes a medium forbusiness image making (Waterman, 1998).

This can be seen to be an example of com-mercial interests attempting to control thefestival environment and highlights the

latent tensions between arts festivals andthe cultural economy (Quinn, 2005;Waterman, 1998).

The corporate face of the Henley Festivalsets the tone of the festival – not just thecontent – but also the requisite socialetiquette, which restricts access to thosewithout the specific cultural background oreducation to feel comfortable in such anenvironment. According to Chan andGoldthorpe (2007), cultural participationdepends on region (provision), education,income and social status. In turn, sponsor-ship by luxury brands and financial corpor-ations reinforces the desirability of thefestival to those in these groups. They mayalready be consumers of such brands andservices and associate themselves with thatparticular target market; also, they may notwant to miss out on something enjoyed byothers in their self-perceived social strata.

The field note extract in Exhibit 1 sets outexcerpts of personal observations from a

research diary of attendance at the HenleyThames Festival in July 2004. The mainobservations from this research are: (1) thefestival presents mainly national and inter-national performers; (2) there are manyluxury goods and corporate sponsors forthe festival; (3) the audience for the festivalis primarily white, upper middle class and


7/28/2019 Finkel


40–60 years old. The key point that theresearch diary excerpts illustrate is theextent to which corporate involvement inthe festival shapes its outcomes andatmosphere.

The recognition of a festival attendeebased on clothing raises representationalissues involved in having a dress code forthe festival. It can be viewed as creatinganother layer of distinction between theworld outside of the physical festival site

and the ‘festival world’. In many respects,the dress code signifies a kind of brandingof festival attendees. Based on Bourdieu’s(1992) belief that ‘the arts predisposestastes to function as markers of class’, it issuggested that the dress code represents amarker of belonging to one side of the riverrather than the other – at least for an

evening. This demarcation on an individualbasis as well as on a spatial plane can beinterpreted as adding to the liminal experi-ence of the festival and creating a festivalenvironment that reinforces its exclusiveimage to its corporate clientele. Placebecomes a metaphor for social status, andthe festival reflects this (Waterman, 1998) –see Exhibit 2. It is suggested that incorporat-ing such layers of status are consistent withthe general atmosphere of the festival,

which is filled with advertising and pro-motion for expensive goods and businessservices.

Arts festivals have been argued to trans-form places from every day settings in tem-porary environments that contribute to theproduction, processing and consumption ofculture in a concentrated time and place

Exhibit 1 Research Diary (Friday evening, 7 p.m.– 9 p.m.).

246 Finkel

7/28/2019 Finkel


(Waterman, 1998). On top of this, through itslinks to the regatta, use of a separate site,dress code and luxury goods branding, theHenley Festival creates a private members’club atmosphere, which also distinguishesit from other arts festivals and makes itappear to some as restrictive and elitist.

But then, some could argue that Henley-upon-Thames is a restrictive and elitisttown, thereby making the arts festival areflection of the local environment. In manyrespects, it is an upmarket festival in an

upmarket area. It is seeking to emulate thestylings of more renowned non-urban artsfestivals, such as Aldeburgh, Glyndebourne,

Tanglewood, Verbier and Aspen, whichrequire performers and audiences to cometo them from cities (Waterman, 1998, p. 69).

The use of a non-urban setting can beargued to add to the image that this is adesirable event reserved for a ‘select’ group

due to accessibility issues. Around 23,000people are expected to attend the festival

in 2009; 30% of its audience come fromLondon for the festival, including celebritiesof the London arts scene, such as Charles

Saatchi. The Artistic Director says program-ming was not specifically designed toattract tourists to the festival. The HenleyFestival website says audiences are approxi-mately 50% private visitors and 50% guests ofcompanies. In terms of demographics, 42% ofthe festival audience is over 45 years old, and

78% are over 36 years old. (Henely Festivalwebsite, 2009). As the marketing materialstates, ‘Every one of them is a potentialclient for you’, which again reinforces thenetworking opportunities of the festival,

making it more of a business than necessarilya leisure offering.

The festival organisers commit many

resources to obtaining and maintainingsponsors. For example, almost half of thepermanent staff is devoted to development

and marketing. Along with complimentarytickets, elegant dining options and invita-

tions to the festival board’s opening nightparty, the festival is also willing to brandjust about anything in the festival space

with sponsors’ logos, including stages, enclo-sures, marquees, car park railings, souvenirprogrammes and swing badges that all

Exhibit 2 Examples of corporate branding of festival space by luxury goods companies.


7/28/2019 Finkel


patrons must wear. Also, the festival offersthem access to their 12,000 person mailing

list and will work with sponsor’s PR consult-ants to ensure sufficient coverage has beenachieved. If requested, sponsors can be

thanked over the festival’s PA systemduring the event and are acknowledged onthe festival’s website. If this is not flexible

enough, the festival’s marketing materialalso assures potential sponsors that ‘other

ideas within the cost parameters can be con-sidered in order to achieve a sponsor’s aims’(Henley Festival website, 2009). This could

be interpreted as an overt commercialisationof the festival space and festival experience;however, it also could be viewed as impera-

tive for the future sustainability of thefestival due to practical financial consider-ations. Indeed, satisfaction appears to behigh among sponsors, as many of thefestival’s main sponsors have continuedsponsorship for the past five years.

Another ‘selling point’ for sponsoring thefestival are the corporate social responsibil-ity benefits. The festival has set up acharity, the Henley Festival Trust, to helpbring arts education and arts therapy toyoung people in Berkshire and Oxfordshire.Their projects work in 15 schools with 800students. The Marketing Director statesthat sponsorship money goes into thecharity for workshops and does not gotowards the ‘Festival Limited’. According tothe Marketing Director, ‘Southern Artsloves us!’ Sponsors, then, can also be seento be helping the local community by theirinvolvement in the festival. With this charita-ble element of the festival sponsorshippackage, the Henley Festival can be seen to

fulfil four out of the five primary motivationsfor contemporary businesses to sponsor thearts, as previously set out by O’Hagan andHarvey (2000, p. 222), including promotionof image and name, corporate entertainmentfor clients, non-monetary benefit to man-agers and enhancing good will/corporateresponsibility. It is uncertain whether there

are supply-chain cohesion benefits to spon-sors through this event.

A distinction should be made, however,between community work and communityaccess to the festival. The closest to the

festival many local young people and familiesget is watching the fireworks from the bridge

that separates the town from the festival site.However, just as the festival attendees are aself-selecting group, there is a self-excluding

group in the community who purposelyavoid the festival due to its cost, image andstatus markers. Although a large portion of

those in the local area do attend the festival,it is not run by the community for the com-munity. There are no volunteers; instead,

there are eight staff members, who areprofessionals in events management andwhose job it is to make sure the HenleyFestival is the special event that corporatehospitality does not miss.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of UK arts festivals havebecome more commercially focused due toa number of social, economic and politicalfactors in the past few decades. There hasbeen an active adaptation of commercialpractices on the part of many arts festivalsdue to financial practicalities as well as theuse of some arts festivals by public andprivate funders for commercial gain. Due tothis growing ‘managerialist orientation’ ofarts groups, Chong (2000) has argued thatmore critical perspectives on the relation-ship between the arts and management areneeded in order to ensure artistic integrityis upheld. However, the research presented

here does not identify ways in whichquality is compromised by commercialfunding, as the Henley Festival can be seento leverage corporate sponsorship to main-tain a high standard of performers and per-formances. Henley lies at an extreme and isnot a typical arts festival found in theUnited Kingdom in this regard.

248 Finkel

7/28/2019 Finkel


In the mid-twentieth century, communityarts festivals as well as classical arts festivals

were largely non-commercial due to theirprimary reliance on support from local andnational councils and individuals. Today,

this is becoming less of the norm becausepublic subsidy is more difficult to acquireand also often comes with a commercially-

motivated agenda. Although the HenleyFestival is similar to the classical arts

festivals of the 1960s, its reliance on businesssponsorship has raised its exclusive statusto include the corporate upper classes

while ‘pricing out’ many in the communityof classical arts enthusiasts. Yet,managerially, the festival is as well targeted,

which is a success factor not to be ignored(even when the target is the well-off).Indeed, arts festivals in the current environ-ment have had to become more strategic inorder to survive in a competitive marketplace. Securing funding is a realisticimperative for continued success. Althoughthe nature of the funding received shapesalmost every aspect of the Henley Festivalfrom marketing and design to content andentertaining, commercial sponsorship is away of ensuring financial viability andsustainability. This raises the question ofwhether or not the ‘innocence’ of holding afestival for the sole enjoyment of thearts may indeed be a thing of the past(Archer, 2006).

NOTE

1. This is defined as, ‘making production more

efficient, linking up key suppliers, focusing on

employees of firm’. Its rationale is one of

reducing costs by avoiding industrial relations

tensions. It also occurs when a company that is

competing on international markets chooses to

sponsor a local arts event in the country in

which it is located (O’Hagan and Harvey,

2000, p. 222).

REFERENCES

Archer, H. (2006) Sounds in the night, Cherwell ,

24.

Arts and Business. (2004) Results of Arts Sector

Qualitative Research, London, Arts and

Business.Arts and Business. (2005) Investing in Culture: Chal-

lenges and Opportunities, London, Arts and

Business.

Bassett, K. (1993) Urban cultural strategies and

urban regeneration: a case study and critique,

Environment and Planning A, 25(12),

1773–1789.

Bayley, S. (1989) Commerce and Culture: From

Pre-Industrial Art to Post-Industrial Value,

London, Design Museum.

Beck, A. (1990) But where can we find a Heineken?

Commercial sponsorship of the arts onMerseyside, The Political Quarterly , 61(4),

393–401.

Bennett, M., Ravenscroft, N., Philips, D. and

Bennett, M. (eds) (1998) Tourism and Visitor Attractions: Leisure, Culture and Commerce,

London, Leisure Studies Association.

Bianchini, F. and Parkinson, M. (eds) (1994)

Cultural Policy and Urban Regeneration: The

West European Experience, Manchester,

Manchester University Press.

Blau, J. (1996) The toggle switch of institutions:

religion and art is the US in the nineteenth

and early twentieth centuries, Social Forces,

74, 1159–1177.

Bourdieu, P. (1989) Distinction: A Social Critique of

the Judgement of Taste, London, Routledge.

Bourdieu, P. (1992) The Field of Cultural

Production: Essays on Art and Literature,

Cambridge, Polity Press.

Bourdieu, P. and Haacke, H. (1995) Free Exchange,

Cambridge, Polity Press.

Casey, B., Dunlop, R. and Selwood, S. (1996)

Culture as Commodity?: The Economics of the

Arts and Built Heritage in the UK , London,

Policy Studies Institute.Caust, J. (2003) Putting the ‘art’ back into ‘arts

policy making’: how arts policy has been

‘captured’ by the economists and the market-

ers, International Journal of Cultural Policy ,

9(1), 51–63.


7/28/2019 Finkel


Caves, R. (2000) Creative Industries: Contracts

Between Art and Commerce, Cambridge, MA,

Harvard University Press.

Chan, T. and Goldthorpe, J. (2007) The social stra-

tification of cultural consumption: some

policy implications of a research project,

Cultural Trends, 16, 373–384.Chong, D. (2000) Why critical writers on the arts

and management matter, Studies in Cultures,Organisations and Societies, 6(2), 225–241.

Chong, D. (2002) Arts Management , London,

Routledge.

Clark, T. (2004) The City as an Entertainment

Machine, London, Elsevier.

DuGay, P. and Pryke, M. (eds) (2002) Cultural

Economy: Cultural Analysis and Commercial

Life, London, Sage Publications.

Evrard, Y. and Colbert, F. (2000) Arts manage-

ment: a new discipline entering the millen-nium? International Journal of Arts

Management , 2(2), 4–13.

Finkel, R. (2009) A Picture of the contemporary

combined arts festival landscape, Cultural

Trends, 18(1), 3–21.

Gans, H. (1999) Popular culture and high culture,

New York, Basic Books.

Gardner, L. (2006) An offer they can’t refuse. TheGuardian, available at http://www.guardian.

co.uk, accessed 20 June.

Hewison, R. (1994) Public policy: corporate

culture: public culture. In O. Robinson, R.Freeman and C. Riley II (eds) The Arts in theWorld Economy: Public Policy and Private

Philanthropy for a Global Cultural Community, Salzburg Seminar , London, University Press

of New England, pp. 26–32.

Holden, J. (2004) Capturing Cultural Value: How

Culture Has Become a Tool of Government

Policy , London, Demos.

Laurie, M. (1994) Corporate funding for the arts.

In O. Robinson, R. Freeman and C. Riley II

(eds) The Arts in The World Economy: Public Policy and Private Philanthropy for a Global

Cultural Community, Salzburg Seminar ,

London. University Press of New England,

pp. 67–76.

McGuigan, J. (1996) Culture and the Public Sphere,

London, Routledge.Mittila, T. (2003) Commercialisation of Non-Profit

Organisations, Lugano, The 19th Annual IMP

Conference.

O’Hagan, J. and Harvey, D. (2000) Why do compa-

nies sponsor arts events? Some evidence and

a proposed classification, Journal of Cultural Economy , 24(3), 205–224.

Quinn, B. (2005) Arts festivals and the city, Urban

Studies, 42(5/6), 927–943.

Robinson, O., Freeman, R. and Riley II, C. (eds)

(1994) The Arts in the World Economy: Public

Policy and Private Philanthropy for a Global Cultural Community, Salzburg Seminar ,London, University Press of New England.

Rolfe, H. (1992) Arts Festivals in the UK , London,

Policy Studies Institute.

Rohter, L. (2003) Carnival in Rio is dancing to

more commercial beat, The New York Times,

February 25, p. A1, A12.

Serota, N. (2006) A new direction, The Guardian,

available at http://www.guardian.co.uk,

accessed 5 June.

Tellis, W. (1997) Introduction to case study,

The Qualitative Report , 3(2), available athttp://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/tellis1.

html.

Waterman, S. (1998) Carnivals for the elites?: the

cultural politics of arts festivals, Progress in

Human Geography , 22(1), 54–74.

Wu, C. (2002) Privatising Culture: Corporate Art

Intervention Since the 1980s, London,

Verson.

Zukin, S. (1995) The Culture of Cities. Cambridge,

MA, Blackwell.

250 Finkel

http://www.guardian.co.uk/



http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/tellis1.html







7/28/2019 Finkel


Copyright of Managing Leisure is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to

multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users

may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

Finkel

Documents

Transcript of Finkel