Hello All,
My name is Caitlin Jones and I am a researcher in the Curatorial and Conservation departments at the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York. For the last few years I have been working on a preservation initiative The Variable Media Network. The VMN looks at the preservation of more ephemeral artworks not in terms of medium, but in the ways that art behaves (for more info about behaviors and network projects) go to www.variablemedia.net).
Although definitely coming from an institutional perspective, I would like to argue somewhat with Martijn's assertion that conservation "equals fixity and eternity and an obsession with taxonomies." I think there are some traditionally trained conservators on this list and they might be able to speak to this more directly, all i would say is that there is no fixity or eternity when it comes even to preserving 'traditional' art objects. Painting and sculpture have an inherent variability when one talks about cleaning treatments, or framing, as just two examples. Conservators have little choice but to accept variabilty as another aspect of their jobs, as most museum collections have vast holdings of installation based works, film and video, and conceptual art - all of which are as variable and immaterial as any new media artwork.
That's all for now!
Caitlin
-----Original Message-----
From: Curating digital art - www.newmedia.sunderland.ac.uk/crumb/ on behalf of marc
Sent: Mon 2/21/2005 8:45 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Rhizome Opportunity
Hi Martijn & list members,
I have been following this debate which has been extremely interesting
and useful for various reasons, not only here but also on Empye
regarding archiving/conservation.
I agree with much of what Martijn has suggested and definatley will have
a look at V2_'s project 'Capturing Unstable Media', with interest.
Perhaps we need to open things up a bit more here, and actively put
forward a more decentralized project (for all) that involves, not just
singular groups within their own nation(hoods), in respect of collection
of mass archivable data and works.
Server-linked collaborations - of archiving, with as many cultures as
possible. So that better funded, aggressive or more pro-active, archives
are put on the same level as less funded groups and organizations. This
will then offer a real chance for those who have not yet been seen by
dominant organizations be part of an archive that is international and
truly networked. Thus collecting work, not fitting into any specific
criteria or national or local politics, canon firing or restrictions.
Individual groups can link from outside these large data-bases, and
still promote whatever they need without the worry of being drowned out
by non-curatorial processes.
I think that decisions on these levels, need to be adressed and dealt
with so that there is a more consciously interactive process of mutual
exploring and solving of such problems in regard to archiving.
marc
http://www.furtherfield.org
http://http.uk.net/
> Let me first introduce myself. I am a Ph D fellow at the Department
> of Comparative Arts and Cultural Studies at the Radboud University in
> Nijmegen, the Netherlands. My research focuses on digital art and its
> relationhip with the concept of the museum.
>
> Without dwelling too much on semantics and definitions, I would like to
> challenge the striving for conservation altogether. What I find
> remarkable
> is that it seems to beyond dipute that art should be preserved, without
> questioning the underlying premises. I have the impression that
> conservation often equals fixity and eternity (no matter how long that
> is)
> and an obsession with taxonomies. Maybe we should just accept the fact
> that
> some things aren't meant to last. In this context I would like to mention
> V2_'s project 'Capturing Unstable Media' which proposes an approach that
> shifts between conservation and documentation.
>
>
>> This does, I think, have relevance to this month's discussion. While
>> some
>> here are concerned with the conservation of existing art work most of us
>> also have to deal with work-in-progress or work-not-yet-made. Do you
>> give
>> preference to work that already exists in the existing hierarchical
>> structure? Do you give preference to work that will fit into it?
>
>
>
> --
> Martijn Stevens
> Department of Comparative Arts and Cultural Studies
> Radboud University Nijmegen
> The Netherlands
>
> http://www.ru.nl/comparativearts
>
>
|