Hi Sarah,

I'm going to see 010101 today.  Hopefully I can catch some of Steve Deitz'
show at SFAI (if it is still open).  I'll let you know.  I'm not convinced
that having different audiences is bad...or a problem.  I think this will
develop.  When you've got a box to work within, there are always issues...
And the same art in different contexts always is framed by the environment
in which it is presented...the opera in an opera house does sound different
(feels different, is received differently) than one on radio or in Central
Park).  I know that you are getting at something a little deeper.  Still we
are talking about social and personal behavior relating to art...

I'll be out of town until the end of next week.  I've just been asked to
organized a three day "thing" at the American Film Institute.  AFI is more
of a commercial industry training center--and art has always had a tough
time being comfortable in that environment.  I'm throwing caution to the
wind and just working against clock.  I'm kind of curating people more than
art works, I think.  The generic topic:  what do artists need with regard to
making streaming media works/event/etc.  Any thoughts?  I thought perhaps
some smaller arts organizations could collaborate and stream to the site in
August.  Because there is little funding, and most of that comes from the
California Arts Council, the emphasis will probably be on CA artists and
resources.  But I'm for stretching it.  Any thoughts or ideas?  Anything
happening at Baltic in August?  Can CRUMB sponsor some kind of concurrent
on-line exhibition or dialogue?

Looking forward to hearing what you think.  What ever we do will be a bit
odd due to the setting.  I'm OK with that.

All best,

Julie



-----Original Message-----
From: Curating digital art - www.newmedia.sunderland.ac.uk/crumb/
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Sarah Cook
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2001 3:35 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Big Media Art. March Theme of the Month


Hello to our ever-growing list,

I'd be interested to hear from anyone who attended the opening of SFMoMA's
exhibition 01010101 last night, as to the relationship between what's been
online since Jan 1 2001 and what's in the galleries. As Beryl has written,
the target audiences for new technology shows is one that, if hard to pin
down, is certainly interpreted differently by those constituencies within
the museum -
curators, marketers, education officers etc. Do you reckon they are
completely different shows with completely different participants? And do
the two parts of the exhibition further the conflicting stereotypes about
new media art? (Char Davies' VR installations being of the "hands-on" game
variety, and the web-based work being more about entertainment,
commercialism, hacking)?
An example of the lacuna within museums to market two parts of an
xhibition  -- one online, one in a gallery -- to the same degree was the
Let's Entertain exhibition at the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis
(www.walkerart.org/va/letsentertain). Its web component, Art Entertainment
Network (aen.walkerart.org), was almost ignored by the original marketing
plan, and when the large
exhibition toured to other venues, although AEN was still online, it wasn't
included or remembered at the other venues as part of the tour.
Does anyone have suggestions as to how curators in a large institution can
work to overcome this divide in audiences and perceptions of new media work?

Sarah Cook

_________________________________________________________

Curatorial Resource for Upstart Media Bliss
http://www.newmedia.sunderland.ac.uk/crumb/

Co-Editors: Telephone: +44  191 515 2896
Beryl Graham: [log in to unmask]
Sarah Cook: [log in to unmask]