Group: http://groups.google.com/group/acedigitaluncut/topics
Simon Poulter <si...@viral.info> May 22 07:12PM +0100 ^
Being aware that this list is seen more broadly beyond its membership, I wanted to clarify a few of the points raised at Future Everything.
• Myself and others have observed that the ecology of media arts is an important aspect of its success. For example it is open, collaborative, networked and outward looking. I think Furtherfield have been thorough in advocating and articulating this.
• My own view of the ACE turnover of staff - and art-form knowledge lost - impacting on development is shared by people inside ACE and ex-staff. I had a conversation last week with an ex-senior ACE member of staff who firmly agreed that there was an expectation that art-form knowledge was now external and less internal. I would also like to acknowledge that there is a considerable weight of pressure on ACE junior staff to respond and deal with the fall-out from NPO and in particular loss of artist led infrastructure.
• There is an overwhelming consensus among the constituency of practitioners and artists (not just digital) that criticality and creativity need to be central to new funds such as Digital Innovation.
• There is a significant body of work, developed over the last 15 years, that explores digital and clearly a need to archive and capture the success of that. Also to celebrate ACE's achievement in that.
• My remarks on the 'Attention economy' are not quite right in the notes. Bernhard Steigler says our collective experience "has become the object of industrial technology, based on a social engineering, where attention and relational technologies develop via social networks etc. This social engineering has as its goal… the capacity to render [the social relation itself] industrially discretable, reproducible, standardisable, calculable and controllable by automata." This is a radical and important insight, when considering the new language of 'content' and 'platforms'. I am arguing that artistic practice is not 'content making', as that in itself is a subjugation to the database and machine.
• I think there is considerable potential to utilise digital as a means of distribution but we want to avoid the creation of expensive 'portals' that we had in the early 2000s. Furthermore, a consensus emerged arguing for production, presentation and distribution and (as Pauline has been saying) an argument that a variegated field of activity and expertise has been a strength.
[• Thanks to Sam Kinsley (http://www.samkinsley.com) for his excellent notes on Steigler.]
Simon Poulter
On 20 May 2011, at 21:57, Pauline van Mourik Broekman wrote:
"Pauline van Mourik Broekman" <pau...@metamute.org> May 23 12:57AM ^
Thanks Simon. And to Sarah C: yes, I'm sure Rachel would very much like to
have those notes redirected to CRUMB. I had also hoped to add my
talks-notes to flesh them out, but I sadly just haven't had a minute's
time to write them up yet... Might try later in the week if it still feels
at all relevant.
Thanks and all the best,
Pauline.
>> Invent new languages, new ways of describing what is relevant, how to
>> present examples, evidence, stories.
>> Mike Stubbs suggests VAGA as a model for advocacy network.
--
Pauline van Mourik Broekman
Director
Mute Publishing
46 Lexington Street
London
W1F 0LP
W: http://www.metamute.org
W: http://www.openmute.org
E: pau...@metamute.org
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Don't miss our...
Critical history of global networked culture:
PROUD TO BE FLESH: http://www.metamute.org/ptbf
Reader on political art in creative cities:
NO ROOM TO MOVE: http://www.metamute.org/nrtm
Whole nine yards:
MUTE ARCHIVE, 1994-2008: http://www.metamute.org/archive
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Ghislaine Boddington <ghislaine....@googlemail.com> May 23 05:20AM -0700 ^
Thanks to all for the great set of notes and inputs post the
Manchester meeting - good to catch up !
In relationship to innovation, for our work we see ALL sectors as
capable of innovation - whether that is arts, technologies, tourism,
education or whatever. The issue correctly pointed out in the meeting
notes above is that, in the arts sector, the history of the innovation
in relationship to the use of the digital is getting lost very fast -
through the lack of knowledge transfer as staff move on from funders,
and through a lack of time/resources within the sector itself to keep
our own history intact.
When we finally closed down shinkansen (1989-2004 - sound and movement
research) and Future Physical (2002-2004 - placing the live body at
the centre of digital technology) we luckily succeeded in receiving a
grant from ACE to do extensive work on our archive. This was however
forthcoming due to the acquisition request by the British Library to
hold our archive of 800 plus tapes and multiple PR materials. At the
first CODA meeting at Art Catalyst we discussed a possible online
"timeline" which we could all fill in, to try and regain an insight
and overview for all into the wonderful innovative work done in the
arts with digital technologies from the early 90s and earlier. Im sure
there are many other ideas/examples from other countries about how
this could happen .........?
Additionally how can CODA continue to have an ongoing flow now, with
the aim to put digital arts practice at the centre of the digital
Innovation debate, rather than being held in an edge or fringe
position and painfully watching the "reinvention of the wheel" take
place with the new funds coming online?
body>data>space did have an interview with MTM recently (as did 60
plus digital arts/museums, venues, companies etc throughout the
country) and we emphasised many of the points that have been discussed
in CODA. MTM are seemingly well informed on the sector (having done
previous research for ACE), they listened hard and took lots of notes.
The researchers there are well aware of CODA and see the views from
this grouping as important.
I agree with comments here that the google tick box methodology for
suggestions for the Digital Research and Development Programme 2011
is rather shallow and not conducive to fairness in its methodology (as
Pauline pointed out anyone can sign up under any name and tick as many
times as they want to) yet, if you go there now, there are 2,272 votes
on 64 ideas from 171 people. Some of the suggestions are good, others
misleading, others without context, therefore maybe it is important to
input some of the ideas we have been discussing - in particular the
concerns re reflection, critical debate and creative practice.(there
are a few mentioning these points).
These ACE/NESTA funds are now fully detailed on both organisations
sites and the google group has been put out in their recent
newsletters, so it has been given a wide reach.
http://www.nesta.org.uk/areas_of_work/creative_economy/digitial_rnd
http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/news/help-us-shape-forthcoming-arts-council-england-and/
The google group is here if you want to add any ideas / ticks
yourselves
http://www.google.com/moderator/#16/e=7ce40
I think the deadline is Fridiay this week ?
Also Bronac and I were wondering if we could now do with another
physical meet up - to catch up and action onwards - maybe at Art
Catalyst again if they are happy to host ?
best Ghislaine
pau...@metamute.org May 23 12:37PM ^
This timeline idea is seriously juicy, Gislaine, I'd forgotten about it...
I remember there was an artist who, circa 2000, did something similar for digital art (the work was online; looked a bit like an expanding and contracting jellyfish, but I can't remember his name...), perhaps we could take some inspiration. Obviously, anything exhaustive is a problematic mission - for all kinds of reasons - but a better collective endeavour at remembering milestones, key works, lists, spaces (online and off), political and economic conjunctures, controversies, etc. - would certainly have immediate use in all kinds of contexts (least of all Emmenthalish brains like mine!).
Another meeting is also a good idea. Perhaps if we don't catch Nicola T replying to this soon, one of us could call up soonish and ask. Or people may want to choose another city again - whatever :)
Thanks,
Pauline
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
-----Original Message-----
From: Ghislaine Boddington <ghislaine....@googlemail.com>
Sender: acedigi...@googlegroups.com
Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 05:20:51
To: acedigitaluncut<acedigi...@googlegroups.com>
Reply-To: acedigi...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Notes from FutureEverything CODA meeting (from Rachel B)
Thanks to all for the great set of notes and inputs post the
Manchester meeting - good to catch up !
In relationship to innovation, for our work we see ALL sectors as
capable of innovation - whether that is arts, technologies, tourism,
education or whatever. The issue correctly pointed out in the meeting
notes above is that, in the arts sector, the history of the innovation
in relationship to the use of the digital is getting lost very fast -
through the lack of knowledge transfer as staff move on from funders,
and through a lack of time/resources within the sector itself to keep
our own history intact.
When we finally closed down shinkansen (1989-2004 - sound and movement
research) and Future Physical (2002-2004 - placing the live body at
the centre of digital technology) we luckily succeeded in receiving a
grant from ACE to do extensive work on our archive. This was however
forthcoming due to the acquisition request by the British Library to
hold our archive of 800 plus tapes and multiple PR materials. At the
first CODA meeting at Art Catalyst we discussed a possible online
"timeline" which we could all fill in, to try and regain an insight
and overview for all into the wonderful innovative work done in the
arts with digital technologies from the early 90s and earlier. Im sure
there are many other ideas/examples from other countries about how
this could happen .........?
Additionally how can CODA continue to have an ongoing flow now, with
the aim to put digital arts practice at the centre of the digital
Innovation debate, rather than being held in an edge or fringe
position and painfully watching the "reinvention of the wheel" take
place with the new funds coming online?
body>data>space did have an interview with MTM recently (as did 60
plus digital arts/museums, venues, companies etc throughout the
country) and we emphasised many of the points that have been discussed
in CODA. MTM are seemingly well informed on the sector (having done
previous research for ACE), they listened hard and took lots of notes.
The researchers there are well aware of CODA and see the views from
this grouping as important.
I agree with comments here that the google tick box methodology for
suggestions for the Digital Research and Development Programme 2011
is rather shallow and not conducive to fairness in its methodology (as
Pauline pointed out anyone can sign up under any name and tick as many
times as they want to) yet, if you go there now, there are 2,272 votes
on 64 ideas from 171 people. Some of the suggestions are good, others
misleading, others without context, therefore maybe it is important to
input some of the ideas we have been discussing - in particular the
concerns re reflection, critical debate and creative practice.(there
are a few mentioning these points).
These ACE/NESTA funds are now fully detailed on both organisations
sites and the google group has been put out in their recent
newsletters, so it has been given a wide reach.
http://www.nesta.org.uk/areas_of_work/creative_economy/digitial_rnd
http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/news/help-us-shape-forthcoming-arts-council-england-and/
The google group is here if you want to add any ideas / ticks
yourselves
http://www.google.com/moderator/#16/e=7ce40
I think the deadline is Fridiay this week ?
Also Bronac and I were wondering if we could now do with another
physical meet up - to catch up and action onwards - maybe at Art
Catalyst again if they are happy to host ?
best Ghislaine
Simon Biggs <si...@littlepig.org.uk> May 23 03:30PM +0100 ^
Online jellyfish was by Martin Wattenberg for the Whitney. It is still
online. It is still wonderful.
http://artport.whitney.org/commissions/idealine.shtml
Best
Simon
> physical meet up - to catch up and action onwards - maybe at Art
> Catalyst again if they are happy to host ?
> best Ghislaine
Simon Biggs
si...@littlepig.org.uk
http://www.littlepig.org.uk/
s.b...@eca.ac.uk
http://www.elmcip.net/
http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/
Just to chip in that the timeline would not only be very useful but� timely - but the forthcoming Rewire conference might provide the perfect context to launch/discuss/fill in a timeline
http://www.rewireconference2011.org/
we could host a small meeting for those involved in the hisotrical aspects and invite some of the researchers ?
best
m
On 23 May 2011 18:41, <acedigitalu...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Simon Poulter <si...@viral.info> May 22 07:12PM +0100 ^
�
Being aware that this list is seen more broadly beyond its membership, I wanted to clarify a few of the points raised at Future Everything.
�
� Myself and others have observed that the ecology of media arts is an important aspect of its success. For example it is open, collaborative, networked and outward looking. I think Furtherfield have been thorough in advocating and articulating this.
�
� My own view of the ACE turnover of staff - and art-form knowledge lost - impacting on development is shared by people inside ACE and ex-staff. I had a conversation last week with an ex-senior ACE member of staff who firmly agreed that there was an expectation that art-form knowledge was now external and less internal. I would also like to acknowledge that there is a considerable weight of pressure on ACE junior staff to respond and deal with the fall-out from NPO and in particular loss of artist led infrastructure.
�
� There is an overwhelming consensus among the constituency of practitioners and artists (not just digital) that criticality and creativity need to be central to new funds such as Digital Innovation.
�
� There is a significant body of work, developed over the last 15 years, that explores digital and clearly a need to archive and capture the success of that. Also to celebrate ACE's achievement in that.
�
� My remarks on the 'Attention economy' are not quite right in the notes. Bernhard Steigler says our collective experience "has become the object of industrial technology, based on a social engineering, where attention and relational technologies develop via social networks etc. This social engineering has as its goal� the capacity to render [the social relation itself] industrially discretable, reproducible, standardisable, calculable and controllable by automata." This is a radical and important insight, when considering the new language of 'content' and 'platforms'. I am arguing that artistic practice is not 'content making', as that in itself is a subjugation to the database and machine.
�
� I think there is considerable potential to utilise digital as a means of distribution but we want to avoid the creation of expensive 'portals' that we had in the early 2000s. Furthermore, a consensus emerged arguing for production, presentation and distribution and (as Pauline has been saying) an argument that a variegated field of activity and expertise has been a strength.
�
[� Thanks to Sam Kinsley (http://www.samkinsley.com) for his excellent notes on Steigler.]
�
Simon Poulter
�
On 20 May 2011, at 21:57, Pauline van Mourik Broekman wrote:
�
�
"Pauline van Mourik Broekman" <pau...@metamute.org> May 23 12:57AM ^
�
Thanks Simon. And to Sarah C: yes, I'm sure Rachel would very much like to
have those notes redirected to CRUMB. I had also hoped to add my
talks-notes to flesh them out, but I sadly just haven't had a minute's
time to write them up yet... Might try later in the week if it still feels
at all relevant.
�
Thanks and all the best,
Pauline.
�
>> Invent new languages, new ways of describing what is relevant, how to
>> present examples, evidence, stories.
�
>> Mike Stubbs suggests VAGA as a model for advocacy network.
�
--
�
Pauline van Mourik Broekman
Director
Mute Publishing
46 Lexington Street
London
W1F 0LP
�
�
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
�
Don't miss our...
�
Critical history of global networked culture:
PROUD TO BE FLESH: http://www.metamute.org/ptbf
�
Reader on political art in creative cities:
NO ROOM TO MOVE: http://www.metamute.org/nrtm
�
Whole nine yards:
MUTE ARCHIVE, 1994-2008: http://www.metamute.org/archive
�
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
�
Ghislaine Boddington <ghislaine....@googlemail.com> May 23 05:20AM -0700 ^
�
Thanks to all for the great set of notes and inputs post the
Manchester meeting - good to catch up !
�
In relationship to innovation, for our work we see ALL sectors as
capable of innovation - whether that is arts, technologies, tourism,
education or whatever. The issue correctly pointed out in the meeting
notes above is that, in the arts sector, the history of the innovation
in relationship to the use of the digital is getting lost very fast -
through the lack of knowledge transfer as staff move on from funders,
and through a lack of time/resources within the sector itself to keep
our own history intact.
�
When we finally closed down shinkansen (1989-2004 - sound and movement
research) and Future Physical (2002-2004 - placing the live body at
the centre of digital technology) we luckily succeeded in receiving a
grant from ACE to do extensive work on our archive. This was however
forthcoming due to the acquisition request by the British Library to
hold our archive of 800 plus tapes and multiple PR materials. At the
first CODA meeting at Art Catalyst we discussed a possible online
"timeline" which we could all fill in, to try and regain an insight
and overview for all into the wonderful innovative work done in the
arts with digital technologies from the early 90s and earlier. Im sure
there are many other ideas/examples from other countries about how
this could happen .........?
�
Additionally how can CODA continue to have an ongoing flow now, with
the aim to put digital arts practice at the centre of the digital
Innovation debate, rather than being held in an edge or fringe
position and painfully watching the "reinvention of the wheel" take
place with the new funds coming online?
�
body>data>space did have an interview with MTM recently (as did 60
plus digital arts/museums, venues, companies etc throughout the
country) and we emphasised many of the points that have been discussed
in CODA. MTM are seemingly well informed on the sector (having done
previous research for ACE), they listened hard and took lots of notes.
The researchers there are well aware of CODA and see the views from
this grouping as important.
�
I agree with comments here that the google tick box methodology for
suggestions for the Digital Research and Development Programme 2011
is rather shallow and not conducive to fairness in its methodology (as
Pauline pointed out anyone can sign up under any name and tick as many
times as they want to) yet, if you go there now, there are 2,272 votes
on 64 ideas from 171 people. Some of the suggestions are good, others
misleading, others without context, therefore maybe it is important to
input some of the ideas we have been discussing - in particular the
concerns re reflection, critical debate and creative practice.(there
are a few mentioning these points).
�
These ACE/NESTA funds are now fully detailed on both organisations
sites and the google group has been put out in their recent
newsletters, so it has been given a wide reach.
The google group is here if you want to add any ideas / ticks
yourselves
�
http://www.google.com/moderator/#16/e=7ce40
I think the deadline is Fridiay this week ?
�
Also Bronac and I were wondering if we could now do with another
physical meet up - to catch up and action onwards - maybe at Art
Catalyst again if they are happy to host ?
�
best Ghislaine
�
pau...@metamute.org May 23 12:37PM ^
�
This timeline idea is seriously juicy, Gislaine, I'd forgotten about it...
�
I remember there was an artist who, circa 2000, did something similar for digital art (the work was online; looked a bit like an expanding and contracting jellyfish, but I can't remember his name...), perhaps we could take some inspiration. Obviously, anything exhaustive is a problematic mission - for all kinds of reasons - but a better collective endeavour at remembering milestones, key works, lists, spaces (online and off), political and economic conjunctures, controversies, etc. - would certainly have immediate use in all kinds of contexts (least of all Emmenthalish brains like mine!).
�
Another meeting is also a good idea. Perhaps if we don't catch Nicola T replying to this soon, one of us could call up soonish and ask. Or people may want to choose another city again - whatever :)
�
Thanks,
Pauline
�
�
Sent from my BlackBerry� wireless device
�
-----Original Message-----
From: Ghislaine Boddington <ghislaine....@googlemail.com>
Sender: acedigi...@googlegroups.com
Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 05:20:51
To: acedigitaluncut<acedigi...@googlegroups.com>
Reply-To: acedigi...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Notes from FutureEverything CODA meeting (from Rachel B)
�
Thanks to all for the great set of notes and inputs post the
Manchester meeting - good to catch up !
�
In relationship to innovation, for our work we see ALL sectors as
capable of innovation - whether that is arts, technologies, tourism,
education or whatever. The issue correctly pointed out in the meeting
notes above is that, in the arts sector, the history of the innovation
in relationship to the use of the digital is getting lost very fast -
through the lack of knowledge transfer as staff move on from funders,
and through a lack of time/resources within the sector itself to keep
our own history intact.
�
When we finally closed down shinkansen (1989-2004 - sound and movement
research) and Future Physical (2002-2004 - placing the live body at
the centre of digital technology) we luckily succeeded in receiving a
grant from ACE to do extensive work on our archive. This was however
forthcoming due to the acquisition request by the British Library to
hold our archive of 800 plus tapes and multiple PR materials. At the
first CODA meeting at Art Catalyst we discussed a possible online
"timeline" which we could all fill in, to try and regain an insight
and overview for all into the wonderful innovative work done in the
arts with digital technologies from the early 90s and earlier. Im sure
there are many other ideas/examples from other countries about how
this could happen .........?
�
Additionally how can CODA continue to have an ongoing flow now, with
the aim to put digital arts practice at the centre of the digital
Innovation debate, rather than being held in an edge or fringe
position and painfully watching the "reinvention of the wheel" take
place with the new funds coming online?
�
body>data>space did have an interview with MTM recently (as did 60
plus digital arts/museums, venues, companies etc throughout the
country) and we emphasised many of the points that have been discussed
in CODA. MTM are seemingly well informed on the sector (having done
previous research for ACE), they listened hard and took lots of notes.
The researchers there are well aware of CODA and see the views from
this grouping as important.
�
I agree with comments here that the google tick box methodology for
suggestions for the Digital Research and Development Programme 2011
is rather shallow and not conducive to fairness in its methodology (as
Pauline pointed out anyone can sign up under any name and tick as many
times as they want to) yet, if you go there now, there are 2,272 votes
on 64 ideas from 171 people. Some of the suggestions are good, others
misleading, others without context, therefore maybe it is important to
input some of the ideas we have been discussing - in particular the
concerns re reflection, critical debate and creative practice.(there
are a few mentioning these points).
�
These ACE/NESTA funds are now fully detailed on both organisations
sites and the google group has been put out in their recent
newsletters, so it has been given a wide reach.
The google group is here if you want to add any ideas / ticks
yourselves
�
http://www.google.com/moderator/#16/e=7ce40
I think the deadline is Fridiay this week ?
�
Also Bronac and I were wondering if we could now do with another
physical meet up - to catch up and action onwards - maybe at Art
Catalyst again if they are happy to host ?
�
best Ghislaine
�
Simon Biggs <si...@littlepig.org.uk> May 23 03:30PM +0100 ^
�
Online jellyfish was by Martin Wattenberg for the Whitney. It is still
online. It is still wonderful.
http://artport.whitney.org/commissions/idealine.shtml
�
Best
�
Simon
�
�
> physical meet up - to catch up and action onwards - maybe at Art
> Catalyst again if they are happy to host ?
�
> best Ghislaine
�
�
Simon Biggs
si...@littlepig.org.uk
http://www.littlepig.org.uk/
�
�