Forum A+P 02

114
Tirana
(both European Cultural Capitals in 2001)
have been investing a lot in the development
of creative industries (multimedia, arts)
and this has been a successful approach for
many cities. The real estate approach to the
Creative City is not found as yet in Balkan
cities. There is simply no public investment
available and no demand from the smallscale
creative offices to be together in an
incubator type of office.
The Toolkit for Urban Innovators
Charles Landry’s work (and advisory
practice) in The Creative City: A Toolkit for
Urban Innovators (2000; 2 nd edition, 2008;
see also Landry 2007, 2006), takes creativity
as a starting point for running urban life:
how to think, plan and act creatively in
addressing the city. Planning is the point
at stake and (strategic) planning is a main
concern in Balkan cities. In “The Creative
City”, Landry describes a new method of
strategic urban planning and examines how
people can think, plan and act creatively in
the city. Creativity is the lifeblood of cities:
“Cities have one crucial resource – their
people” (2008, p. xii).
The Creative City is seen as a new form of
urban strategy making. The concept states
that a city’s imaginative capacity should
be seen as a critical asset and significant
planning tool. The idea is to develop an
environment where people (planners,
politicians, citizens, builders, etc.) are
given greater scope to think, plan and act
creatively. Thereby, cities can be made more
vital and attractive for residents and firms.
How to use people’s imagination, talent
and knowledge is the question. Creativity,
as such, is not the solution; creativity is
an instrument, a way of thinking. Landry
argues for more imagination in city making,
from an urban engineering approach to
city development to Creative City making:
“Creativity on its own does not provide the
solution to urban problems, but at least it
gives decision-makers an ideas bank with
which to work and out of which innovations
can emerge” (2008, p. 165).
Creativity, as an instrument and a way of
thinking, can provide useful responses
that bring enlightenment to the dilemma
of urban managers: how to match, in the
most efficient and sustainable way, the
individual desires with political, social
and financial priorities. Landry underlines
that everyone wants a car, but this leads to
increased pollution; developers demand
to build more, but city history and
townscapes are distorted (2008, p. 26).
While in conclusion, everything seems
to be interconnected, compartmentalized
thinking is present, showing limitations in
behavior and in how assets are being used.
According to Landry, creativity for the
city requires a new thinking that goes
beyond and contrasts with uncreative
urbanism, box-like and formula thinking,
under-exploitation of assets and material
consideration of assets, lack of integration
and reactive behavior. “New thinking is a
precondition to recognizing and exploiting
creative possibilities” (2008, p. 49). The
fundamental principle requires an ability
to cope with both personal aspects and
more structural changes. It also requires a
“reassessment of how we think and learn
… and how can this come about?” (2008, p.
51). The latter is about changing mindsets,
changing behaviors, until a more radical
mind shift is reached, and this is, of course,
the most difficult and even frightening