For those interested, the 'Curating, Immateriality, Systems' conference at
Tate Modern will be archived at:
http://www.tate.org.uk/onlineevents/archive/
And in addition to what Beryl already mentioned in her posting below I
thought I would add few comments to clarify the concerns of the conference -
most importantly the intention to consider curating in relation to the
concept of immateriality and dynamic systems. The concept of immateriality
is particularly useful as it describes new ways of organising relations of
production in response to (following Italian autonomists - Lazzarato and
Negri in particular) 'increasingly immaterial forms of social relations,
communication networks and information systems'. This can be extended to
cultural production and aesthetic practices such as curating.
In this context the conference focused on the central question:
If the assumption is made that traditional curating follows a centralised
network model, then what is the position of the curator within a distributed
network model? In other words, how have distributed networks changed the
nature of curating?
The intention is not to set the simple opposition between centralised /
decentralised model and to suggest that the curatorial power (control) is
simply decentralised but to investigate how it is reconstituted (or
redistributed) in new ways in relation to network systems - hence the
argument for 'redistributed' curating (something along the lines of
peer2peer curating).
The conference presented some of examples of curatorial projects that
address this issue and incorporate the idea of the system (network) in the
curatorial process itself - for example C@C by Eva Grubinger, runme.org by
Olga Goriunova and Alexei Shulgin. It is also in this context that the
KURATOR software (currently under development) was very briefly introduced.
It might be useful to think about an analogy between the use of the term
programmingı here both in the curatorial work of programming events
(traditionally in a museum or exhibition but also clearly in organising
something like a conference) and in programming of the technical system that
facilitates the work; the work of curator as analogous to the work of
programmer - from artist-programmer or software artist to curator-programmer
or software curator (akin to what Lazzarato would describe as an
animatorı). Indeed 'curating' source code is standard practice in this
field of software production and so is a collective/collaborative production
process involving various agencies including the programmer and curator.
The full version of the introduction to the conference is at:
http://www.kurator.org/read/Conference
--
Best wishes
Joasia Krysa
on 6/6/05 2:47 pm, Beryl Graham at [log in to unmask] wrote:
> Dear List,
>
> On Saturday I attended the Curating, Immateriality, Systems
> conference at Tate Modern, and some interesting themes emerged. I'll
> mention just one below, but also wanted to mention that Sarah Cook,
> with myself, will be moderating an online panel discussion following
> up this event (there is also an associated public forum). The online
> panel includes Christiane Paul, Charlie Gere, Patrick Lichty and
> Trebor Scholz, and starts on 13th June. See
>
> http://www.tate.org.uk/contact/forums/online events
>
>
> One theme from the conference that I thought might relate most
> strongly to past debates (especially March 2003) on this list is the
> 'curatorial models' or metaphors: The 'curator as editor' model
> occurred most frequently in the conference, and Christiane Paul also
> referred to Anne-Marie Schleiner's 'curator as filter' model.
> Franziska Nori pointed out that the diversity of skills needed means
> that it's important to work in teams (echoes of Barnaby Drabble's
> "co-producer" or even "multitasking maniac" from last month's
> discussion perhaps?)
>
>
>
> The Conference webcast is being archived, and so forms a very useful
> resource, so please do comment either on this List or on the Tate,
>
> Yours,
>
> Beryl
>
>
>
|
