Comment: Basel discusses the distribution of public music funding

Classical music receives by far the largest share of public funding. There are historical reasons for this: Even today, municipal concert halls, opera houses and symphony orchestras still primarily represent the political and economic elites that set the tone. Most public funds are tied up in infrastructure, maintenance and wages. For a long time, this seemed undisputed. In the meantime, however, the disparity between costs and the perceived social relevance of classical music has become so obvious that more and more people are asking whether a culture is not being kept alive at great expense that is becoming less and less important and merely serves the aesthetic needs of an exclusive minority.

A study by the Ecoplan research institute and the University of Basel has examined the unequal distribution. It sheds light on the situation with a view to the cantonal Basel "Initiative for more musical diversity", which is likely to be voted on at the Rhine knee in the fall. First of all, the study states that classical music is "supported with 90 percent of the public music budget". The remaining tenth is left for all other styles combined. In a press release, IG Musik Basel, which is behind the initiative, writes that this contradicts the Cultural Promotion Act, which gives the canton the mandate to promote diversity. The 2020-2025 cultural mission statement also sets the goal of "providing appropriate support" for all genres.

However, the study is limited to information on music consumption. The respondents, especially the younger ones, would most often like to see more pop, rock, punk, metal, hip-hop, rap and R&B concerts. Concerts by the Basel Symphony Orchestra account for 15 percent of all events attended. On the other hand, Basel-Stadt invests 74 percent of its entire music budget in the symphony orchestra.

Participation, relevance and openness

So far so clear. Things become less clear when we ask whether the promotion of classical music is seen as meaningful regardless of the actual use of the concert offerings. An interesting indication is provided by a German study, the Relevance Monitor of the Liz Mohn Center and the Institute for Cultural Participation Research. According to this, an overwhelming majority of Germans are "completely or rather of the opinion that theater offerings (spoken theater, classical concerts, musicals, opera, ballet, dance) should be preserved for future generations, even if they hardly or not at all use them themselves".

The German population therefore legitimizes "high culture" not on the basis of its concrete use, but on the basis of its cultural relevance. It can be assumed that the results would be similar in Switzerland. Another interesting result of the monitor: younger respondents under the age of 30 said "with above-average frequency that offers in theaters are not aimed at people like them, that they feel out of place there and do not know how to behave properly".

The Basel initiative for more musical diversity demands that "independent, non-institutional music creation must be supported with at least one third of the annual music budget" in future. However, independent music creation also includes classical music projects. Acceptance of the initiative would therefore by no means mean that pop, rock, rap and so on would receive increased support.

Real estate and jobs cannot simply be dismantled. If we want to eliminate the discrimination against pop, rock, rap and so on in the public funding pots, the solution can only be to open up stages, rehearsal rooms, orchestras, recording studios and other services, which are still almost exclusively used for classical music, to productions of all styles. This would also be consistent in terms of state policy. The public sector should provide neutral means of production and not favor styles.