Introduction
In recent years, musical activity has come to be viewed as a potentially powerful driver for urban economic development and city-specific tourism. The term ‘Music City’ is now increasingly used across a range of cultural settings and in cities around the world (IFPI and Music Canada 2015, p. 10). In what can be viewed as an evolution to creative and cultural cities policy frameworks, cities around the world are now proactively looking to cultivate and support music activity in a bid to activate new forms of cultural and creative identity. Homan (2014, p. 149) argues that music is a “vital aspect in the construction of distinctive urban cultural identities and can produce vivid local narratives for regeneration and tourism”. To this end, music is now being purposefully positioned through urban policy as making a vital contribution to the cultural and economic fabric of a city, while also being viewed as a critical way through which both locals and tourists can gauge, and engage with, a city’s cultural and creative identities.
Building on the rich legacy of cities ‘superstar’ cities such as Austin, Memphis, Nashville, New Orleans and Seattle in the United States and Manchester and Liverpool in England, cities around the world are now looking to leverage their own musical identities—however big or small—as part of what has evolved into a global music cities movement. This movement encompasses a range of formalised branding and identification practices—such as UNESCO’s Cities of Music—and commercialised educational events such as the Music Cities Convention, alongside a range of ‘how-to’ manuals and city-specific studies which act as a first step in the development and implementation of Music City policies. These events and manuals examine and reflect on how music cities can be developed and sustained through a range of policy, heritage and tourism initiatives, while also considering music’s contribution to the city’s broader economy and tourism sectors and to community health and wellbeing.
Where the so-called superstar music cities of the West emerged as a consequence of their rich and globally impactful music scenes, the global music cities movement has emerged in a much more purposeful fashion. Despite differences in their underlying approach, it is important to note the cross over, whereby many of the superstar music cities have actively leveraged their musical legacies for a range of economic, creative, cultural and tourism functions. One simply cannot, for example, escape the heritage of the Beatles when visiting Liverpool (Cohen 2017; Jones 2020), nor the country music heritage of Nashville, which is leveraged as part of its ‘Visit Music City’ tourism campaign and branding (www.visitmusiccity.com). Other cities, such as Austin, have dedicated ‘music offices’ which support and promote local music activity and engagement, while also being home to large scale music industry conferences and festivals (such as in Austin’s case, the annual South by Southwest event) which contribute strongly to both their musical reputation and their local economy (Loftsgaarden 2018).
The overall aim of this volume is to provide a critical academic evaluation of the ‘Music City’ as a form of cultural policy that has been keenly adopted in policy circles across the globe, but which as yet has only been subject to limited empirical and conceptual interrogation. Recognising the multifaceted approach that is taken at a local and national levels, which considers a combination of the structure, function and scale of the music scenes in question, as well as the ways in which the movement is circulating globally, this book brings together contributions that engage critically and constructively with the music cities paradigm, with a particular focus on case studies where the adoption has been, or could be, undertaken in a purposeful and proactive manner. The contributions in this volume consider the ways in which music cities strategies have, and have not, been adopted, and the benefits of doing so, as well as the challenges associated with engaging with such a movement. Indicative of the global impact of the movement, this collection includes a cross-section of perspectives from a wide range of cities and their associated creative, cultural and political contexts.
In circulating the call for chapters for this collection, we received submissions from scholars working across wide-ranging fields and examining the music cities concept from an equally broad set of perspectives and angles. Indicative of the emergent nature of our understanding of this leveraging of music for urban economic development and city-specific tourism at a global scale, we received many submissions in which the concept of a Music City was interpreted as any city-based or city-specific music scene. We would suggest that the point of difference between music scenes and a ‘Music City’ is that in the case of the latter the city’s music activity is supported, leveraged and activated beyond its music scene and industry functions. To this end, music is recognised by urban policy makers for its legacy and heritage, its ability to contribute to the cultural and creative identity of the city and as a driver for tourism and for economic growth. As a result, music is supported through a range of policy and funding initiatives, while also forming a vital component of city branding and place activation strategies.
Music Cities: Origins and Definitions
For Homan (2014, p. 149), the ‘Music City’, in both locational and industrial sense shares the ‘key ingredients’ of the creative city, namely: “specialist workers in a range of interdependent relationships which exploit geographical proximity and agglomeration, supported by other key institutions and infrastructure”. Therefore, while above we draw a distinction between music scenes and the ‘Music City’, in understanding the concept of a Music City it is useful to understand the structure and functioning of place-specific and, more closely, city-based music scenes. This is because their heritage and legacy, as well as the health and success of a city’s music scene, directly influence the viability of, and the approach taken to, adopting a Music City framework. In considering this, we refer to the work of Johansson and Bell (2009, pp. 220–225) who posit that the structure and functioning of a place-based music scene are influenced by three broad aspects: the city’s geography, its economy and its culture. Within this, the structure, functioning and size of the scene and associated industry can be influenced by numerous smaller factors. These include the physical environment, the city’s size and relative location within and beyond its boundaries, the socio-economic environment, urban development strategies, healthy and supportive music industry infrastructure (including venues and media), cultural atmosphere, networks of learners, innovators and flows of tourism.
It is also important, however, to consider the external mythologising that occurs in the cases of particularly musically innovative cities. It is this mythologising which has influenced the establishment of the ‘superstar’ music cities, while also influencing the success of the new, purposefully established sites which constitute the current global music cities movement (Ballico 2016; Byrne 2017; Cohen 2017; Stahl 2010; Wylie 2016). Reflective of the nuanced nature of music scenes, the factors set out by Johansson and Bell (2009) are, while interdependent, also weighted differently depending on the scene in question. This nuance is similarly revealed in the ways in which music cities frameworks are advised and adopted around the world and the ways in which cities are encouraged to support and facilitate music activity even if they do not wish to formally brand themselves as a ‘Music City’. Cutting across this is the vital role a city’s informal creative economy and live music ecology play in the structure and functioning of a place-specific music scene, as well as its centrality to the enacting of a Music City framework. Despite the ‘boom’ in live music activity and the increasing importance of live music to the viability of musicians’ careers in the digital age (Holt 2010), challenges associated with the sustention of live music venues in light of ongoing gentrification and urban renewal (cf. Ballico and Carter 2018), reveal some of the contradictory tendencies inherent in the functionality of the music cities framework and also some of its limitations.
Considering this and recognising the rich history of superstar music cities, the concept of a Music City as applied in this collection, are those...