Auckland vs. Wellington
Simon Wilson’s feature in the March issue of Metro claims that Auckland is the new cultural capital. Apparently all the edgy, big budget productions and concerts and shows are happening in Auckland, and Wellington is in disarray: its theatre crippled, its music regional, and international acts giving it a wide berth.
Auckland’s a huge, whirring economic engine, no one would deny that. But a cultural capital? As Wilson himself points out, they lack four things: the self-confidence, strong champions, business support, and the topography. He sees most of these things as surmountable. Personally, I think they’re too schizophrenic to have the self-confidence, too bitchy to support their champions, too mercenary to get strong arts support from business, and too Auckland to be anything but Auckland. Maybe they’ll get over those things. But in the next five or ten years? Unlikely.
I’m sure they have cultural life. But where you might spend a weekend coming to Wellington to see the World of Wearable Arts and then head up to Martinborough for a day in the vineyards, in Auckland you spend half your time driving from Cultural Destination to Cultural Destination that it feels less like a Cultural Hub than it does pockets of culture in a sea of depressing spec houses. When you visit Wellington for culture the destination is part of the package: like Nelson or Queenstown or Dunedin. Auckland is something you tolerate in order to be able to see Bob Dylan at Western Springs. No one visits Auckland for Auckland.
In the article, Wilson stacks up the major cultural events of Wellington and Auckland, and what he’s called a ‘ledger’: it’s telling that in judging the relative culturedness of the two cities, Metro got their accountant to work it out for them. Unfortunately for him, the title of Cultural Capital is a qualitative one. It’s the whole experience, and Auckland is just too dire.
Compare “Dominion Road” from The Mutton Birds’ eponymous debut with “Wellington” from Salty: the first evokes the rejected bloke in the halfway house in a city with “antennas in the hills” and where the only natural beauty is the sun hitting the road which shines “like a strip cut from a sheet metal plate ’cause it’s just been raining.” Clouds and mountains are symbols of struggle and aspiration. And Jane, his wife or girlfriend, has moved south (probably to Wellington), in search of something better with one of his friends.
“Wellington” could be a catalogue of the fondest wishes of the protagonist of “Dominion Road”. It is a place where the weather is terrible (natch), but there’s “so much more to do” than “the other end of the island”. There are cafes, bars, “the music and the theatre, and the old Cable Car.” It is a place “you can walk everywhere, ’cause nowhere’s very far.” “Wellington” is a song of desire and wishing-I-was-there, “Dominion Road” is a song of bleak hope and of wishing-I-was-somewhere-else.
March 1st, 2009 at 9:40 pm
although i really appreciate it when people respond to the media in this way i'm kind of surprised that you've gone for the whole "no, wellington is actually better than auckland". can't they both be celebrated for their differences and neither has to be the winner? we all make our actual choices in where we choose to live, surely.
March 1st, 2009 at 9:58 pm
The Metro article has asserted that Auckland is the new Cultural Capital; I think they're wrong, so I'm merely taking the opposite position.
This is an argument about culture: not the overall merit of each city. Auckland has a whole bunch of things going for it, and a whole host of reasons why you might live there: work, money, proximity to family, and so on.
But a Cultural Capital is someting else: it's a vibe, a scene, an arts hub. And Wellington just hums in ways that Auckland doesn't. I don't think the claim in Metro is justified.
March 1st, 2009 at 11:34 pm
I love living in Wellington.
I've loved living in Auckland.
The one thing Wellingtonians seem to be unable to grasp (and I'll admit this Metro article doesn't help at all in this sense) is that there is no such place as Auckand.
No one (other than the odd journalist or city councilor it seems) in the Auckland region spends their time talking about this fictional "Auckland" which gets derided so readily outside of it.
Auckland is 4 diverse cities each with dozens of diverse suburbs. No one attaches their identity to the Auckland region.
Or indeed the central city of that name. Because they typically only either work or live there. Whereas, yes, more Wellingtonians work and live in the same area. Which makes them more attached to a place.
Auckland region's diversity makes for people who are more attached to activity and things. Yes perhaps, as the JAFA haters point out, often very superficial things.
But really, in 2009 the superficial is typically more genuine than the forced "culture" of the high art that so typically occupies the politically correct spheres of capital cities.
I remember moving to Wellington for the first time in 2000 and being confronted with billboards calling the city the most "multicultural" in the country. If by that they mean it had individuals from the most countries then, yes possibly. But Wellington homogenises (at its worst) cultures to civil-servant-safe-sameness. Events like Cuba St carnival and the sevens are forced spectacles which are nothing compared to the genuine diversity of communities.
Which Wellington actually has. But it seems determined to package them up, falsely, to prove a point it doesn't need to. Auckland just gets on with what its people want to get on with.
Auckland takes the geographic dispersal approach of NYC where cultures are pushed to distinct regions. Leading to the "trekking" between highlights approach you mention. But if the value of culture is just in the ability to most easily "collect diverse experiences" then… colour me revolted.
The Auckland v Wellington rivalry comes almost entirely from chips on shoulders outside of the region of Auckland.
If you think Wellington is culturally superior to Auckland, then live there. That's all you need to do.
I love living here. But it may just be an affinity for the weather.
All this debate just makes both cities look petty. And frankly, it makes Wellington look more petty, because most of Auckland don't care.
Anyway, anyone who thinks Metro even speaks for a single suburb let alone 1 or 4 cities is wrong. It's a trashy rag over a decade past its prime.
Can we all get back to doing good things wherever we live now?
March 2nd, 2009 at 8:38 am
I'm not from Auckland. I'm from Whangaparaoa.
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:22 am
The Internet is the cultural hub of New Zealand.
I can't speak for anybody else, but I only go outside when it's absolutely necessary.
I don't recall going outside to get any culture.
Where does one go to get culture anyway? The Culture Club?
March 2nd, 2009 at 11:47 am
@thomas – I heartily endorse everything you said except this bit:
The Auckland v Wellington rivalry comes almost entirely from chips on shoulders outside of the region of Auckland.
The only people who really, truly care about it are the editorial rooms of Metro and North & South, and maybe a few city councillors. There's some people south of the Bombay Hills who use it as joke fodder but I imagine there are people north of them who do the same.
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:07 pm
I haven't read the article yet, but I'm really disappointed by its premise. Metro is at its best when it focuses on Aucklandic issues, and at its worst when it gets into "Ha ha, [other New Zealand place]! Auckland is better than you!!!!".
If Auckland actually was New Zealand's cultural capital, it would just be a known fact and Wellington wouldn't even be part of the equation.
I really loved living in Auckland, but loving Auckland involves accepting its flaws. Yeah, it doesn't hum. It can be a really crappy, broken-down city at times, but if you can find the beauty in that, then you can survive Auckland.
But back to culture, since I moved to Wellington 10 months ago, I've gone out more and seen more plays and more live music and got much more involved with arts and cultural things than I ever did in Auckland. It's just that much easier.
But I'd pick the bleakness of "Dominion Road" over the cheese of "Wellington" any time.
March 26th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
I went to Auckland last night to debate this issue with Simon Wilson and Simon Prast on Russell Brown's Media7. It screens on Channel 7 (Freeview) tonight and Saturday at 9.10pm and tomorrow and Tuesday at 12.10pm. Details here: http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/497100/1596964
March 26th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Awesome! Looking forward to seeing it.