ACE/NESTA
DanceDigital
Were any organisations asked to contribute to the consultation? If
so, who?
Were any organisations made aware of the online consultation/vote? If
so, who?
We were not and only found out through the informal channels and a
visit to their website.
Simon Biggs
advance of the more general public announcement. But I am not aware of
specific invitations.
I think the process is more about PR than consultation.
Best
Simon
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/
Taylor Nuttall
We were not informed either.
The voting does not really tell us anything new.
Taylor
Pauline van Mourik Broekman
presented in quite a rushed, last-minute manner.
I also keep on telling myself that it's really very naive to hope for
these agencies to seek anything other than what we're describing, as
that would be to wish for an entirely different remit, mode of
operations, and general mission than we have repeatdly been shown they
posseess.
So, particularly for those of us who are hoping for 'enlightened'
re-investment after dis-investment, perhaps it's just a question of
moving on and figuring out other ways of doing the things we want to do.
And, as regards any more sustained contact or relationship we might have
with said agencies, to just see how what they end up doing/supporting
fits with what we want to do and make - if it ever does. There may still
be space for the destination of ACE's Innovation 'pot' to be open to
influence, and obviously all of us wouldn't have inputted into the CODA
letter and dialogue here if we didn't feel it was, but I do think it's
also important to *really* start discussing how we might build economies
outside these powerhouses that seem ever more drained of sympathetic
expertise. For me, that doesn't entail going to another seminar about
private giving, or thinking of a new way to lobby Ed Vaizey and Jeremy
Hunt, but thinking about how the cross-organisational communication and
collaborative work that forums like this have already put in motion can
be built on... as well as how to build a more direct relationship with
audiences (though one that doesn't smack of a devolution of the subsidy
duty downwards to a population already squeezed for every resource it's
got, or a mindless adaptation to the Con-Dem Big Society imperatives.
All of which is obviously incredibly difficult, but still more positive
than banging your head against this brick wall ;) ).
Best,
Pauline.
--
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
Pauline van Mourik Broekman
On request from Rachel, who's having slight nightmares making her main
email address function properly (and so has not managed to make these
notes appear here when intended - last Wednesday), here is the summary she
drew up at the FutureEverything meeting last Saturday. As the conversation
was pretty sprawling and all-encompassing, it's a feat of synthesis. Big
thanks to Rachel - and if anyone wants clarification or has another
question, just say and one of us present will try and chip in.
Pauline.
===
Notes from CODA meeting FutureEverything 14/5/11
1.Simon Poulter and Drew Hemment on Interdisciplinarity
Drew re-emphasised the need to distinguish between 'innovation' and 'art'.
Digital innovation refers to technological development - digital media art
is about critical/philosophical enquiry of technology development.
Simon referred to a digital media art ecology that has built up over the
years and has been erased from ACE's memory.
Question: has that digital media art ecology been proactive enough in making
its case? - probably not.
Tapio Makela points out that the process of assimilation/instrumentalisation
of digital media art by 'creative economy' policy imperatives also occurred
in Finland.
Interdisciplinarity - digital connects fields that were previously
unconnected. Whilst Visual Arts can lend a critical angle it is
not always appropriate to support digital practice primarily through Visual
Arts context. Literature and Theatre are often more synergistic routes for
some practitioners.
The demise of the Interdisciplinary dept at ACE signalled a retrograde step
in ACE's approach to, and thinking around, digital practice.
Some comment on a loss of institutional memory and lack of individuals at
ACE with a sophisticated understanding of digital and interdisciplinarity.
Question: how strong is our practice is if we are dependent on a person or
dept at ACE?
Funds like TSB are bordering on irrelevance for most artists, or small-scale
artist-led orgs. You need to be a sizeable org or find a partner of scale.
Question: Do ACE-funded agencies (RFO's/NPO's) meet *their* responsibility
to support digital media artists? Not often enough.
Drew points out that FutureEverything rarely comission new works because
there simply aren't the funds available. Resort to exhibiting already
existing works.
Simon: in the schema of production, presentation, distribution of art, few
orgs/agencies can do all really well. Usually its production that suffers -
its the most difficult, most expensive. Britains creative tradition of
comissioning without prescription or instrumentalisation is being eroded.
The concept of 'Digital and Creative Economy Relationship Management' comes
directly from business.
In order to release funding for emergent exploratory digital art rather than
business ACE needs support and arguments to argue the case. Evidence and
case studies needed.
How do you document and provide evidence effectively?
Drew - how can organisations co-operate with each other, big and small?
Those that can commission should work together better with those that can
exhibit.
2. Pauline van Mourik Broeckmann and James Wallbank on Criticality
Pauline notes a level of anxiety about 'generality' vs 'specificity'.
Emergent areas and forms connect into other areas - both a strength and
weakness. This interdisciplinarity or lack of category is a vulnerability of
media art practice (in funding terms)
Mute has been nervous of analysing it as a niche artform and felt the claims
made for digital were primarily social, not artistic.
Digital tech and its promise of eliminating 'mediation' power was the
attraction, plus how it situates art and artists, the development of cities,
how culture is instrumentalised to create prosperity.
An inherent contradiction for Mute - support and engage, but also resist
(critique).
Between digital art and the contemporary art world there exists a prejudice
resulting in the ghettoisation of digital art.
But for all concerned the disconnection suits.
Digital creates new conditions for production and consumption - cheapness.
The same tools are being shared by different disciplines.
Importance of seeing arts cuts in context of larger cuts - shared spaces are
under attack from output-driven, metric-driven ideology.
Question: Whenever there is a need to 'make the case', are 'metrics' and
measurable 'outputs' unavoidable?
LANGUAGE.
James - makes a seperation between 'digital art' practice and 'digital'
practice.
Axis of digital art practice:-
digital spectacle
digital participation
experimentation
criticality
Aspects of digital practice:-
innovation
empowerment
inclusion
instrumentality
Criticality is inconvenient in any practice where the sponsors define the
framework, the language.
Its a big push to ask commercial orgs that want to shift product to accept
any critique.
But if ACE don't support criticality = who will?
On participation - digital art offers potential for ordinary people to
become artists - 'Great Art *By* Everyone'. !
However, the nature of digital connection tends towards centralism.
ACE's digital research suggests that digital art is not accessed by, or
acessible to, lower socio-econmic groups.
But the experience of Access Space in Sheffield suggests otherwise. However
people gravitate to the centres of power, not to the margins - to the big,
not the small.
Participatory practice encourages invention, rather than innovation -
creates more artists rather than more art.
Art criticism and digital criticism are seperate but intertwined.
Simon refers to the 'Attention Economy' - People are not becoming more
digitally literate in seeking attention through digital profiles
and social media. Twitter is the apotheosis of an attention economy.
Criticality is not present, the connection between the database and
attention is not made.
Interesting digital media art practice is about asthetics and politics,
making the connections visible.
Instrumentalised investment does not allow for this but instead supports
practice that uncritically functions within the walled gardens of Apple,
Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft etc contributing to a digital illiteracy.
---
Question: There is no art market for digital media art, but is there an
audience for it?
With respect to criticality and historicity ACE organisational memory and
knowledge is important -
i.e the funder has to hire critical peers to evaluate an orgs work, but if
the level of understanding is poor this is worrying if that becomes a
benchmark for decision making.
It appears that many small digital media arts orgs were subject to crude
decision making processes.
Tapio comments that policymakers should listen to the critical faculties and
opinions of 15 year olds and that a critical 90's voice is in
danger of marginalising digital media art from popular digital culture.
I.e Citizen innovation - how does criticality function here, in
app-building etc, what are the enabling practices?
What does it means to learn to use digital tools?
3. Mike Stubbs and Taylor Nuttal on Innovation
It was a conceptual technology artist, Nam Jun Paik, who was the first to
use the term 'the information superhighway'
Formula 1 motor-racing represents innovation in technology.
Innovation is about efficiency.
(Ergo - ACE has been 'innovative' in wiping out those media arts groups...)
Innovation is a result of demand.
Innovation should not be confused with invention.
We need to create environments to help artists invent.
But can the public sector innovate as well as the commercial sector?
Most innovation occurs in the private sector, producing stuff that affects
us.
Public sector is good on creativity but not on innovation.
Simon: Invoking 'innovation' is an easy way to propagandise projects.
Claire Wellsby refers to 50's and 60's computer-based artists and their
innovation that brought about a new industry.
Simon: Innovation is about monetisation. Apples' apps store is 'innovative'
because it monetises the process of making apps.
What drove the early pioneers of new media art - there was a need, an
opportunity and a democratising ideology.
Now - a different situation, entire sector has to reframe itself - FACT is
funded as a Visual Arts client but with a new media emphasis.
Apichapong Weerasthukul doesn't define himself as a new media artist but
will engage with new media.
The demands of the arts sector is now much broader more challenging more
competitive than the 90's, more instrumentalised, and there is less money.
But art is still a place in which to take risk and experiment.
James returns to concerns about centrism - digital is in danger of creating
an efficient trickle-down culture from centre to the recipient.
Simon - but the Big Society is an idea about localism, about people taking
responsibility for provision of services - an opportunity to draw down the
power to yourself within the localism agenda.
RB requests for some direct points about the ACE digital innovation fund.
Taylor expresses a concern that community participation has been downgraded
in the arts.
The Dept of Business, Innovation and Skills are prioritising community
participation but NOT the DCMS.
Creative Industries is the most buoyant part of the UK economy and quick to
build, so government need this sector to be successful.
Taylor expresses the hope that the fund emphasises practice that is about
doing things rather than receiving things.
Pauline objects to the standardisation about what orgs can do - no smart
intelligence about different scales or difference per se.
i.e some are better at focussing on production, some on audience, some on
education, some on business. Can't do everything!
The current MTM consultation regarding the innovation fund is primarily
about:-
1. distribution across artforms being more effective
2. digital innovation associated with economic innovation
We all know examples of how digital media art practice is
co-opted/appropriated by the commercial space. But the Creative Economy
rhetoric is dying, does not hold water.
There is a need for international networks, collaboration across countries
borders, India, indonesia, US.
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.
Simon Biggs
Very useful for those of us who were regrettably unable to be in Manchester.
Best
Simon
On 20/05/2011 21:57, "Pauline van Mourik Broekman" <pau...@metamute.org>
wrote:
marc garrett
Sorry I was not there this time round, unfortunately we had events in
London & other things needing immediate attention, as well as being
completely run down, with just about finding time to eat let alone go to
the meeting, the timing was all wrong.
I do have some things to discuss, agreements and disagreements regarding
the content of the notes, but on the whole it looks like a great meeting.
We are currently setting up a the new exhibition for next Thursday, and
another project at our space. After then, there will be more time to
engage in these matters.
wishing all well.
marc
Sarah Cook
We hope the event will be of interest to academics, curators, collectors, artists and sector professionals wishing to:
- help establish best practise for acquiring digital and new media art
- strengthen the perception of digital art within the wider visual arts sector
- discuss the roles that museums, galleries, collectors and educational institutions can play in this.
------------------
Current: An Experiment in Collecting Digital Art - the Debate.
The 'Current' Experiment involves an exhibition, acquisition and debate, acting as a practical case study for the collection of digital art into museums and galleries.
Having selected an artwork by Thomson & Craighead for acquisition, we will be hosting an event to discuss the issues and challenges that arise from the project on: 24th May 2011, at University of Central Lancashire, Preston.
Through the debate we aim to challenge the current climate of collecting new media, and the fact that very few museums are collecting and exhibiting artists that work with this art form.
The half day morning event will discuss the background, short-listing and acquisitions processes, and the realisation and installation of the exhibition - along with our findings from the experiment.
The optional afternoon session is aimed mainly at sector professionals; to debate the role of digital art with in the wider visual arts sector, and the roles both the museum and education sector can play in this.
This debate will be developed with experts from CRUMB (Curatorial Resource for Upstart Media Bliss – University of Sunderland); and chaired by Sarah Cook - Co-editor of Crumb and Research Fellow at the University.
Tickets are £10 with a limited number of free places for UCLan students.
Those interested in purchasing a ticket for this event should contact Project Co-ordinator Steph Fletcher in the first instance:steph.f...@folly.co.uk.
For more information, visit: http://www.current-experiment.org.uk/debate
Simon Poulter
• 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
Pauline van Mourik Broekman
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.
--
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
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
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
Simon Biggs
online. It is still wonderful.
http://artport.whitney.org/commissions/idealine.shtml
Best
Simon
claire_w
I'm in the process of writing up my thoughts from the CODA discussion
at FutureEverything too, and will post a link once they're published.
On the matter of a time line, there are a couple of fascinating and
thorough published accounts of UK media art activity from 1950-1980 in
'Computer in the Art Room' by Catherine Mason, and 'White Heat Cold
Logic', edited by Paul Brown, Charlie Gere, Nicholas Lambert and
Catherine Mason, that are definitely worth a read if you haven't
already.
As Ghislaine and others point out, activity from 1990-present is
pretty poorly documented, especially in the context of a recent art
history. Having run InterventTech in the early 00's I'd happily fork
through the archive and put forward stand-out work from this period if
that would help. I think I compiled quite an extensive list of
practicing UK media artists during this period too.
Claire
On May 23, 1:20 pm, Ghislaine Boddington
claire_w
I've written up my notes from the FutureEverything meeting and you can
find them here - http://lifeartus.wordpress.com/2011/06/07/its-been-a-really-tough-year-but-whats-next-for-media-art-uk/
If you have questions or comments about the content of the post,
please feel free to start a conversation on the blog. I hope it's both
interesting and useful to you.
Be warned - there was a lot to pack in, so it's quite long!
Claire
On May 20, 9:57 pm, "Pauline van Mourik Broekman"
>
> read more »