For Sacco, the analysis of culture can be seen as made of three successive steps in time. In preindustrial societies, the predominant model, Culture 1.0, invests the artist or intellectual in a symbolic relief, sponsored by patrons or the church, in short, the holders of resources and power in quite unequal societies. Who enjoyed it? These same, the powerful, or the masses, in public ceremonies brokered by religion and power. Proximity to culture dispensed with prestige and reputation, but the culture was not yet a sector in itself; it lived before the discretionary will of the powerful and the inspired. Some of the most resilient symbols of cultural production were created in this way and still inspire crowds of tourism and photography. This view of cultural production resists, in a broad sense, in our time.
In the next phase, which we may call Culture 2.0, the emergence of industry and market societies, in conjunction with the advancement of democracy and the modern state, has raised resources, hitherto only imagined, into cultural production. Cultural audiences widen, the privileges of the ruling classes are undermined. The widespread public education and new technologies applied to paper, sound, photography, and film popularize the incarnations of culture, now also as entertainment. Radio and television multiply this proximity to the masses. The purchasing power and leisure time of the workers set off an entertainment "industry". As audiences grow, the number of culture producers remains limited by the fixed costs of the new cultural instruments. Culture, now clearly latu sensu, becomes an important part of the economy.
Finally, and only in recent decades, Culture 3.0 comes into play. Technological innovations greatly expand the possibilities for cultural enjoyment and creation. Everyone, or almost everyone, can easily move between consumers and producers, and the notion of authorship, like that of the audience, changes dramatically. Culture becomes an everyday element, part of the texture of societies and economies while affecting ideas and spending habits. Many of the new cultural transactions show a non-commercial nature, but many revive the primordial, symbolic power of the first major cultural exchanges.
Traditionally clinging to the building, the material and what the state is interested in preserving and transmitting, the patrimony area resists many of the changes that the transition from Culture 1.0 to 3.0 entails. Dialogue with the market and the mundane, accessibility to new audiences and the ability to reflect the rhythmic interrogations of the politician are fundamental to a new appreciation of patrimony. An approach that promotes the transaction and the party, along with preservation. Examples of extraordinary innovation abound, and cultural patrimony management must become a new tool for dialogue between the valuable remains of the past and the marvelous rhythm of the present. Three-point what?
This article was written regarding José Tavares (2014), “Culture and Development: A Guide for Decision-Makers”, available here.