Urgent Comments on Residency Outline

[Pablo Barrera]

Dear All,

Thanks for all of the suggestions and feedback about the layout of the
residency project.
Due to the last-second responses, I will have to be as blunt as
possible as we are running out of time to have something finalized for
our talks with a few professors this coming week (starting tomorrow),
so please forgive my frankness.

Firstly, I personally like the layout of the application summary. It
seems like Sol gave us a very logical way to introduce the residency
project and provided a great skeleton to work with.
I also agree with Mr. Kilburn about the suggestions for clarifying and
refining certain topics that were brought up. I think Lois did an
excellent job on bringing up some potential confusions or conflicting
circumstances.
For one, the situation has indeed changed. The family is no longer
available to neither greet the new artists/scholars in residence nor
live with them. I think it would be in the best interest of the
Kilburn Hanok Project to set up a very structured schedule as to when
applicants can be received at the residence.

On that note, let me begin my complaints. For the purposes of time, I
will not mince words, so please excuse my forwardness.
Upon first reading the new suggestions and the new proposed rhetoric
for certain key issues I was struck by two things. First, it is very
true that much is left to be explained. Second, much of the suggested
language left me feeling that the original goals of the Project have
given way to a more traditional approach to Artist/Scholars in
residence programs.

I distinctly remember one of the first aspects that seemed so
innovative to me early in the project. In terms of artists, I and many
agree with what Mr. Kilburn had said about the context of limits put
on works completed or started in Kahoidong: there were none.

This aspect alone is very appealing because it does not stifle
creativity. I think we all agree that many residencies and Artist in
Residency programs are self-serving and severely limit the potential
of the finished work by requiring that it be about the program in some
way (I believe Liverpool was mentioned as a good case in point.)

The fact that all Mr. Kilburn asked in terms of academic contribution
(short essay on the artist or scholar’s experience of living in a
traditional hanok to be added to the website) was very much in line
with what I assumed were the original goals of this undertaking: To
show people that would otherwise not know about what a hanok is, that
it is (contrary to popular belief in Korea) a very nice, unique,
comfortable, and productive place to do academic and creative works on
top of having cultural significance.

I have two major complaints on this front:
- While artists are not being limited, due to the language proposed,
academics, scholars, independent researchers, and writers are.
- The language used and the criteria set forth (stressing the interest
in hanok preservation as a component of proposed projects) not only
limits this further, but essentially guarantees that we lose
applications from the very people we should be giving a chance to
experience a true hanok: those that either do not know or have
misconceptions of its worth.

We do want to keep encouraging people that support the struggle of
protecting hanok, but what about artists that are unaware of this
struggle and wish to do work in Korea? Would their positive experience
not become a shining example of what happens when an uneducated public
finds out the truth the Korean government has been trying to conceal?
What about Independent scholars that are in the same situation? My
guess is that if they are willing to shell out the money to buy a
ticket to Seoul, they must have some interest in Korea. Would this
opportunity not fulfill the goal of Kahoidong.com to reach those that
do not know?

The danger of these limitations in the application process is that we
deny others to join the dialogue, and we end up just talking to
ourselves (A problem I have experienced in my very own Art History
department that I am currently working with Sol to change.)

Another problem is the time restraint. Why one month minimum? I
thought we were open to the possibility of linking this program with a
higher institution. If this is truly what we plan to do, we
automatically confine a good number of potential projects to those
that occur in the summer. We lose many potential applicants that could
otherwise do some artwork or research in the winter break. I remember
Mr. Kilburn first suggesting two weeks. This suggestion seemed more in
line with this early goal. If things have changed, please let me know,
as both Sol and I have been working with our director to set up an
application for two to three-week stays from students in late summer.

I know many of these goals and ideals will be organized more clearly
once Mr. Kilburn writes up a draft, so to save time, I have expressed
what my initial thoughts were on the intentions of the project and you
all can correct me so we do not accidentally secure support from
sources that we cannot include.

Many of the other issues (room accommodations, utility costs,
responsibilities during certain seasons, tour schedules and duties)
will be refined and established once we come back from the winter. We
will also have a better idea of what is possible once we have
experienced the hanok through the various seasons. Also, in terms of
having a history of hanok, this is very problematic. There is none. In
fact, Sol and I are working on a large scale project that will
challenge this short-coming. Perhaps more like a sort of personal
response from the Kilburns as to what a hanok means to them?

Furthermore, there is the issue of how many people can apply at a
given time. Once again, we will be looking into this in the coming
winter. From what I saw, I personally think that four additional
people can very comfortably live there. This is also taking into
consideration the need for studio space for fine artists. As it
stands, there are two rooms that can be used. One is small and one is
large. I think each room can house a project or both can serve to
house one very large project. So I am thinking 2 projects maximum,
four people maximum. In other words, if two artists are accepted, only
one art project per room so only two people can stay. If two
independent projects are accepted, each project can only comfortably
be allowed to bring two people per room.

I believe the issue of housework was addressed. I personally think
that part of the experience of living in a hanok home is to be given
very specific shores to fulfill. Otherwise it is like a hotel.

Also, in regards to the question of details such as whether or not we
provide directions, I think this can influence an applicant's
willingness to apply and, furthermore, ensures there are no surprises
as to where they are living, should they get to a level where this
information is crucial. So, yes, I think we should have them from the
beginning on the website but not necessarily on the form itself

But for now, I think the intentions do indeed need clarification and
focus from the only people that can define them: the Kilburns
themselves.

I apologize once again for my straight-forwardness, and I apologize
for further complicating the matter with what I am about to add:
When speaking with Mrs. Kilburn, she expressed the need to not limit
this project to only one hanok. This suggestion served double duty. It
considered the government’s views on profit and commercial licenses,
as well as allowed for expansion. I’m sorry if I sound really crazy
right now, but in the back of my mind, I see this project becoming
some sort of non-profit organization that can later establish models
for other residencies in other volunteer locations. I think this
conversation was had a while back during a g-chat combined with one of
my previous rants.
I only mention this because perhaps with this in mind we can get a
better sense of what needs to be said on the application.

While the issue with the Kilburn residence in Kahoidong is specific to
Korea, the underlying message and problems inherent are universal.
Cultural Heritage is a very complicated issue that is far from being
resolved. This project can provide a reference point to conduct study
if it is in dialogue with the context in which cultural heritage is
viewed: contemporary society in all its forms.

As I speak, Sol is finishing another draft. I ask that we get feedback
as soon as possible as we are in the process of garnering support from
various sources very soon, and we need to know if it is even worth
pursuing these potential applicant pools.

Please forgive me for being so pushy.
Have a wonderful day, and we hope to hear from you all soon.

Best,

Pablo

[David Kilburn]

Dear Pablo, Sol.

This is a forum for discussion, so please do not worry about asking
forthright questions or raising problems.

The intentions are unchanged, as I hope my comments below to some of
your points will make clear. We are now starting to address some of
the practical issues of how things would work - we will need to
discuss these in more detail - and the goal is to ensure that people
reading through the web site will be quite clear about what is on
offer, and how it works, and what are the requirements they must meet
to be candidates. Eventually, there will be a list of projects and
people on record that help make our scope clearer, but for now we need
to work out the language and the questions we must answer that help
avoid applications from people whose projects or qualifications or
interests are not appropiate in some way.

I'm sorry this discussion has become a last minute one, but events
over the last few weeks have made it very difficult to progress a lot
of things as promptly as I would like.

I hope these specific comments address some of your problems . .

“due to the language proposed, academics, scholars, independent
researchers, and writers are.” – you are mistaken – there is no
intention to do this beyond ensuring that project goals are, in at
least some broad sense compatible with our own. In Korea at least,
there are distinguished scholars who wholeheartedly approve and
support the changes in Kahoidong, e.g. the Seoul Development Institute
and there may be others elsewhere. Given a choice between an academic
applicant whose project touched in some way on heritage/cultural
matters and someone interested in a study of Korea’s electronics
industry, or the transition away from from family rule in the
chaebol, etc etc then we would choose the heritage/culture related
applicant each time. We need to make that preference clear. But if
the only choices open to us were non-cultural, non-heritage
applicants, we would choose one of those.

“but what about artists that are unaware of this struggle and wish to
do work in Korea?” There is no intention to exclude such people – we
haven’t really thought through how we would evaluate artists/
photographers

“What about Independent scholars that are in the same situation?” We
would evaluate their project proposal, as with any other. There is no
requirement to be linked to a university etc and no requirement that
people should have prior experience of Korea.

Since, in reality, it looks like on-site support may be minimal, we
need to think about the issues that raises and how to deal with them.

“one month minimum” this presumes someone coming to Seoul just for
their discrete project. For people already in Korea, yes shorter
periods would be OK. After each person leaves and before each
newcomer arrives, there has to be some cleaning and clearing – it
would be difficult to be doing this every week and might even be
difficult every two weeks. Even the simple process of getting sheets
and towels laundered takes a few days.

“Perhaps more like a sort of personal response from the Kilburns as to
what a hanok means to them? “ . . . this is to be found in the
article “The House of Choi,” on the website – which can be re-written
and extended to fit the needs of the project.

“Four people” Four people – probably four projects , and maybe four
different lengths of stay . . . I think they would be stepping on each
other’s toes, queueing to use the phone, waiting in line to shower, or
cook lunch. We would want to begin with something we knew could be
managed successfully and would deliver a quality experience to each
person. Nothing would be more rash than starting off with a disparate
group of 3-4 independent people pursuing from 2-4 projects.

“the need to not limit this project to only one hanok” the project
has never been about one specific hanok, it is about the overall
issues that relate to the preservation of cultural heritage. However
it is only fair that residents should know what we are doing ourselves
in this field, quite independently of whatever they may be doing in
their own fields. Our own project stretches back to 1988, we would
hope that those of the residents also have longevity and help in
widening the scope of discussion and enquiry into all the related
issues.


David

[Pablo Barrera]

Thank you David.

That really clarifies things. I'm relieved to see we are on the same
page. I was mainly concerned because it looks like we can be expecting
some very strong interest from a couple of universities very soon. We
just needed some key aspects laid down before committing this project
to these circles.

Also, you have absolutely no reason to apologize. You have been very
busy as of late and have had far greater things to worry about. The
comment about needing responses urgently was not intended to be
directed at you in the least.

However, on that subject, things will be moving very fast starting
tomorrow, so we will be sure to specify when comments will be most
useful. If we get no feedback (from the rest of the group, not you
David) we will take the decision making upon ourselves and then pass
it on to David for the definitive stamp of approval.

I also want to take this opportunity to clarify some things.
In terms of the amount of people in the house at any given time, I
think we all agree that for the most part the initial year will be
friends and acquaintances due to the tense nature of the situation in
Kahoidong. Also, the fact that the Kilburns cannot be there will make
it crucial that the newcomers are people we know well.

Hopefully, this inaugural year will provide ample feedback to
streamline the schedules ad residency logistics. Sol and I have
already begun this process this past summer, and we will continue it
this Winter, thus giving the group a better idea of what to prepare
for given a myriad of weather conditions. Lois, you are very lucky
since Bum, Sol, and I already know what to expect in terms of the
summer heat. Sol and I will be working on a sort of packet to leave
for you detailing any possible concerns as well as tips for getting
around and finding resources. We will continue to refine this
"Acceptance Packet" for future residents (bilingual of course...maybe
even trilingual?) We already have some of it written up, and will be
posting it soon.

Another concern was the number of people. I think if the residents are
all friends or acquaintances, it would be very feasible to have two
projects at once. I am going to say this now, because it turns out
that professors are getting very excited about Sol and my
Anthropological/Art Historical Project. We have received overwhelming
support and it looks like the funds are getting lined up. I believe
Lois will be there for a few months this summer, and, at first, it
looked like a massive project of this scope and scale was going to
take another half a year to get properly funded, but it just so
happens that the Penn Museum is much more influential than expected.
We may even start as early as this Winter thus ensuring that we will
never sleep until we graduate.

In other words, there is a very good possibility we will be seeing you
this summer as well provided it is ok with Mr. and Mrs. Kilburn. Part
of the project we are undertaking will require GIS mapping as well as
detailed measurements. We are also getting IRB permission through a
professor at the Cultural Heritage Center at the Penn Museum and will
be having to get detailed information from a few of the Hanok in the
surrounding area as well. Given the urgency of the situation in
Kahoidong, our formation of a baseline for serious academic work will
be very significant in challenging current representations of the area
and the structures themselves. This will speed up the next phase of
the project which will seek to generate Art Historical analysis of the
area and the hanoks themselves, thus, for the first time in modern
academia in Seoul, seriously bringing hanok into scholastic realms.

The hanok has two bathrooms and two rooms, so two people to a room
should not be too uncomfortable, if at all. This can also become a
good case study to learn what adjustments will be necessary for such a
situation in the future. I agree with Mr. Kilburn that we cannot
possibly have separate projects share the same room. It would be
disastrous if we had more than two at once. I think one project per
room should be the max.

That brings up another point. Since the Kilburns are not going to be
able to travel to Seoul anytime soon, I imagine they need a close
fried or relative to help manage the place i their stead. I am sure
the Kilburns have some people in mind, but perhaps we can also enlist
any of our friends to help as well if they happen to be in the area.
This once again highlights the importance of the first several
residencies to be friends of the group so as to make life easier/
flexible. Since Sol and I will be going back and forth for frequent
intervals, we would be more than happy to lend a hand when there. I am
sure others feel the same.

One more thought, now that it has crossed my mind. In regards to the
expressed concerns about how we move from one applicant to the next,
we have proposed in the example outline of the application a sort of
semi seasonal deadline. Our thought is that if we break up the
potential residency stays into blocks with a single deadline for each
block, we can then choose the best applicants first, and then organize
which ones will appear when in accordance to what is possible, if at
all. We will know beforehand the schedules of each applicant, and thus
have a better idea of whether or not to have multiple projects at once
and when. This will give us more control so that there is enough
breathing room between shifts if need be. For example, if in the
Summer block (May to end of August) yielded three applicants for one
month on June, July, or August respectively, the time we can
accommodate them could be a factor in deciding which one gets
accepted. We can even talk with the more favorable applicant about
being flexible on their proposed time slot so that we can accept/
accommodate that individual. We would then not accept anyone for any
of the months in the block that are not occupied due to logistical
reasons. However, if the one from, say, June agrees to come in, say,
August, we could have two applicants in August and no one else.In the
situation that we can receive all three, we can stagger the rooms
during the overlap, and not accept any additional projects at the same
time slot so as to facilitate the shifts from month to month. Another
quick scenario is that if a collaborative project had three people ad
we liked the application, we could just accept that project, put two
in the large room, place one in the small room, and not accept any
more applicants for that time slot.

We do not want to force anyone to share a room with a stranger at any
given time.

I also think that artists, due to the nature of their work and their
need for a studio space, should not have to make due with limited room
because of another good application for the same slot. For the
meantime, the small room should be the studio space for an artist.
However, this winter, I will look into the feasibility of turning the
attached room to the larger one into the studio spot. It looks like a
really nice place to do something creative. Just a thought. Forgive me
if I am being too liberal with the logistics.
At the moment I am too tired to go into detail about this semi-
complicated strategy, but basically it will give more control to us so
as to not allow the accommodating to get out of hand and become more
than we are equipped to handle.
Although it appears that I am ranting, believe me when I say that I
have indeed thought this one through.

I need to go to bed now. I start my day in two hours.
Let me know what you guys think.

Best,

Pablo

.