Cultural Programming with Impact (I): Beyond Personal Taste

One of my earliest lessons in programming came while observing Dr. Rageh Daoud reviewing submissions from young bands in Alexandria who were seeking to perform at Bibliotheca Alexandrina. I remember my surprise when he allowed metal and hard rock bands to be included in a space I had, at the time, associated with a very different musical identity. My immediate reaction was to question the suitability of such genres within that context. Yet, in that moment, I realised that programming is not about reinforcing one’s personal taste, but about understanding the role of culture within society. That experience, along with the guidance of Maestro Sherif Mohie El Din, shaped my approach early on. It taught me that meaningful cultural programming requires setting aside individual preference in favour of a broader vision, one that considers relevance, inclusion, and long-term impact.

In the cultural sector, programming is often misunderstood as a process of selection driven by personal taste or artistic preference. In reality, impactful cultural programming operates within a much more structured and intentional framework. It is not about what a programmer enjoys, but about what a programme is meant to achieve. A programme can be designed to create impact on multiple levels: on the venue itself, by shaping its identity and positioning; on audiences, by expanding their exposure and deepening their engagement; on artists, by supporting their growth and visibility; on specific genres, by developing and sustaining them; and, more broadly, on the cultural ecosystem. At times, a programme may successfully contribute to all of these dimensions.

This approach also requires intentional risk-taking. There are moments when programmers choose to present artists who are still in a developmental phase, fully aware that they may not yet attract large audiences. This is not a compromise, but a deliberate investment. Without such opportunities, many artists would not have the space to refine their practice, gain visibility, or build an audience. In this sense, programming becomes not only a curatorial act, but a mechanism for enabling growth and ensuring the continuity of the cultural sector. It is also an act of leadership, recognising that someone must take the initiative to create opportunities rather than simply follow existing demand.

I recall one of my most decisive moments in this regard, when I chose to take contemporary dance beyond traditional venues and into underprivileged communities in Alexandria as a deliberate act of audience building. At the time, ticket sales for this genre were limited, which signalled not a lack of value, but a lack of exposure. In 2012, we responded by creating a dance festival in public spaces, Nassim Al Raqs, in collaboration with my colleague Emilie Petit. One of the locations was a shipyard, and another brought performance directly into Bahary, one of the most densely populated sha‘by areas of Alexandria. There, the amazing dancer Shaymaa Shoukry drew inspiration from the movements of fishermen, translating them into a contemporary dance vocabulary and performing on the sand in front of the community. It was not only a performance, but an introduction, offering audiences an encounter with a form they had not previously experienced, and in doing so, expanding both their perception and the potential audience for the genre.

Another clear example of this was in 2006, during the summer festival at the Bibliotheca Alexandrina, when the festival adopted the theme “First Time.” The intention was to provide a platform for artists performing for the first time on a big stage, offering them not only a stage, but also an intensive capacity-building workshop that supported them in developing their performances for the festival. Many of these artists have since become among Egypt’s leading musicians, shaping the scene across multiple levels today. Similarly, when I was managing Massar Egbari, I witnessed firsthand how their earliest concerts looked while they were still building their audience. These early opportunities, often modest in scale, played a critical role in their trajectory. Such examples reaffirm that investing in emerging artists is not a short-term compromise, but a long-term contribution to the vitality of the cultural landscape.

At that time, and throughout those early projects, I had not yet undertaken my international fellowship in Arts Management at the DeVos Institute of Arts Management, then based at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts (2010 to 2012). I had also not yet fully understood the distinction between programmatic and institutional marketing.

It is important to pause here, because programmatic marketing is often overlooked. Marketing for cultural events frequently adopts a purely promotional approach: the event is on this date, at this time, and here is how to purchase a ticket. In doing so, it overlooks the intended impact of the programme itself. When impact is placed at the forefront, the messaging shifts. It begins to communicate not only the “where” and “when,” but also the “why” and the “how.”

This became clear to me when Michael Kaiser and Brett Egan explained “The Cycle,” a framework that highlights how strong programming, supported by both programmatic and institutional marketing, builds the audience base that ultimately sustains income. Within this model, great art is not necessarily the art that appeals to everyone. Rather, it is art that is meaningful, relevant, and intentional. Programmatic marketing, in turn, plays a critical role in generating awareness and cultivating audience appetite, enabling such work to find its place and its public.

Effective cultural programming begins with a clear vision. It defines objectives, identifies target audiences, and aligns each programme within a broader strategic direction. Over time, consistency in programming becomes essential. It is through sustained and coherent efforts that audiences are built, artistic ecosystems are supported, and long-term cultural value is generated. This approach stands in contrast to entertainment-led programming, which is often designed to maximise attendance and provide immediate audience gratification. While entertainment has its place and plays an important role in attracting wide audiences, it does not necessarily aim to create lasting cultural impact. Its success is typically measured through metrics such as ticket sales, reach, and short-term engagement.

Cultural programming, on the other hand, operates with a different set of priorities. It seeks to contribute to artistic development, support local talent, preserve and reinterpret cultural heritage, and create meaningful engagement with audiences. Its outcomes are not always immediately visible, and its success cannot be measured solely through numbers. This is the intrinsic value we always overlook. It is reflected in the gradual development of audiences, the emergence of new voices, and the strengthening of cultural identity over time. A key distinction lies in intention. Programming for mass appeal often responds to existing demand, whereas cultural programming can also shape and create demand. It introduces audiences to new forms, unfamiliar narratives, and different modes of expression. In doing so, it expands cultural horizons and encourages deeper engagement.

This does not imply that cultural value and accessibility are mutually exclusive. On the contrary, the most effective programmes are those that balance both. They remain accessible without compromising artistic integrity, and they engage audiences while maintaining a clear cultural purpose. Ultimately, the role of the cultural programmer is not to curate based on personal preference, but to act as a mediator between vision and audience. This requires discipline, long-term thinking, and a commitment to impact. It also requires the ability to make programming decisions that may not always yield immediate results, but contribute to a broader cultural trajectory.

A strong cultural programmer does not programme based on personal taste, but on cultural value, ecosystem thinking, and intended impact. This impact is not created through one-off, high-visibility moments, but through consistent, purposeful programming over time. When supported by programmatic marketing that communicates the “why” alongside the “what,” this impact is amplified and sustained. Here, the distinction becomes clear: cultural programming builds long-term value, while entertainment delivers immediate satisfaction.