_ft_ ff ff ¢0 09 0 fet 8 Gt tS

For instance, the Culture Board may decide that it's more feasible to close down an inadequately funded state-owned mu-
seum, rather then to keep it running for the benefit of its employees alone. Or that, instead of selling copies of ancient ob-
jects from the cultural heritage (see the example of the Thracian gold travelling shows), it would be better to go beyond
Taschen Kultur, Disneyfication, simulation and cultural tourism, and sell the whole monastery to be reconstructed in an-
other country. Or that an extremely valuable - in creative terms - artist should be re-settled in an affluent society rather
than be wasted in the ruin. Is Culture anything more than the Spectacle, pretending to be ‘contemporary’ but in fact doing
little more than preserving Heritage (by making a business out of it)?

The time has come to find post-managerial solutions which go beyond the logic of efficiency. We have reached the limits
of budget cuts and the ‘flexibility’ of individuals to fit into this or that curator's taste, funding requirement or application
form.

Culture Board is not only in charge of visual, performing, arts etc. but of the realm of media as well. Not only of all the
bankrupt museums, but of all soon to be closed down magazines, theatres, never-existent performance-spaces, empty ex-
hibition halls, rotten archives, forgotten projects and projects without a chance of realisation, all the corrupt creative
unions with their vanished property and non-functional production facilities, etc.

Culture Board is based on a web-site where it can receive and evaluate information, issue decisions, disseminate infor-
mation, accommodate requests for know-how and advice, etc. Culture Board monitors the existing web sites of the BG
President, Government, various institutions, newspapers, etc. In order to evaluate the results of the implementation of its
decisions it travels to the country for on-site evaluation, implementation and information gathering based on the need-to-
know motivation of its members.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

DIGITAL WORK

yoouqueg puet

HOW DOES DIGITAL WORK DIFFER FROM ITS ANALOGUE FORMS?

Increasingly people would like to enjoy the dignity of artisan labour without losing the material benefits of Fordism. Over
the past two centuries, industrialisation has slowly replaced skilled craft labour with repetitive factory and office work. In
the Fordist factory, even the pace of working can be determined by the speed of the assembly lines. For most of this cen-
tury, people have grudgingly accepted the boring nature of their jobs. In return, they have been given enough wages to buy
large amounts of goods and services produced by Fordist industrialisation. However, once their living standards are suffi-
cient, many people would also like to rediscover satisfaction in their work. In sectors such as the media, people can al-
ready combine skilled labour with high productivity. Because each extra copy can be reproduced at a very low price, the
high costs of employing craft labour for making the first copy of a film, programme or recording are economically viable.
With the advent of the Net, the potential productivity of creative work is even greater. Like the artisans of the proto-indus-
trial epoch, digital workers have to use craft skills to produce quality artefacts. Like labourers in a Fordist factory, they
can reproduce multiple copies of the same product. In the age of the Net, digital work could synthesise the best features
of its analogue predecessors: the high skills of the artisans and the high productivity of the factory hands.