The current rhetoric surrounding European cities places considerable emphasis on creativity. Local authorities strive to make their cities competitive by attracting investors, tourists and ‘creative elites’. Nowadays, artists, designers and music producers tend to play a central role in what is increasingly an economic approach to urban policy – and are simultaneously expected to counterbalance this. More exciting than lawyers or accountants and cleaner than factory workers, they fit into a culture of trendy cafes, clubs and cultural centres. Creativity complements the intelligent and smooth planning that is often equated with the European character of cities like Amsterdam or Copenhagen – unlike London, which is dependent upon its financial sector, Naples with its traffic chaos or Warsaw, where socialist heritage, patriotic displays and competitive individualism coexist.

On the face of it, it is difficult to disagree with this view. After all, Amsterdam and Copenhagen are well-governed cities with a high quality of life. Here, cultural institutions, independent stores and bicycle paths abound. Social conflict does not seem to exist and an atmosphere of tolerance prevails. Without doubt, they are places that a lot of ‘artistic’ people feel drawn to. Nevertheless, there is also an important flipside to the current discourse and practice of creativity. The dual emphasis on intelligent planning and economic growth makes urban life more and more predictable, which means that there is less and less room for experimentation. In addition, this approach ties into an underlying fear of things falling apart, which has its roots in a specific conception of European cities: they are seen as distinctive because of their social harmony and good citizenship, but these very qualities appear to be under threat from the looming forces of globalisation and individualisation. This is why local authorities are crying out for creativity, while at the same time wanting to control and restrict it.

While the emphasis on creativity as a priority in urban policy may be recent, the fundamental tension between experimentation and regulation is not. In the 1950s and 1960s, governments in all of Western Europe tried to put an end to the unpredictability that had come to characterise cities during and in the period immediately after the Second World War. Thanks to growing levels of wealth and significant public expenditure they were able to expand housing and infrastructure on an unprecedented scale.