Hello All,
i fully appreciate Josephine's argument
concerning conferences and Simon Biggs'
reluctance to pay for showing artwork
at events such as ISEA. My question is
how to solve these issues pragmatically?
Is there an example for a practical
framework and format to discuss and
analyse various issues beyond an informal
(and successful) mail list, such as CRUMB?
Even in select countries where Council funding
is available, the organization of a
forum (conference&exhibition) such as
the latest ISEA2004 becomes very difficult
- how to solve these concerns pragmatically and
to the satisfaction of participating artists?
nina
>hello Crumbs and Oliver,
>
>
>Oliver Grau wrote:
>OG> To begin with the correction: I was not talking about academia, but about
>OG> science, speaking of methods.
>
>Well, so was I, but maybe not clearly enough. This could be where my
>mistake lies, if I made one. I saw the call for papers to this
>conference, and did not apply because it had the look of an academic
>conference. This means in practice: one can maybe get selected to give
>a paper, but then one is to organize one's own travel and accommodation
>fee, plus often one has to pay to give the talk as well, the
>'conference fee'. This is the reason I never respond to calls like
>this one. To me it feels like a cheap trick, get all the content, and
>have the people pay to work for you really. (ISEA works like this too,
>but it has a different history, it was an artist initiative and seems
>more like hacker confs, where everyone pays to make the event
>possible. A bit like:
>http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_meetup_2005 , but this is
>even more open in structure) I understand this is the way academic
>conferences have worked for a long time, and I think it is not
>appropriate anymore. If you are not part of a system or structure that
>pays all this for you, you can more or less forget attending. The new
>media have brought about new institutions and professionals which fall
>outside of this system or which now have to find ways to squeeze
>themselves into it in order to survive. The latter is something which
>makes me very wary, especially since the 'academics' which try to deal
>with the same matter have a comfortable advantage position in this,
>whereas their knowledge (excusez if the remark seems an insult, it is
>not meant this way) and work methods do not always fit the bill.
>
>But I can't find any info on the fees etc on the Refresh site, so my
>comments might not make any sense at all.
>
>
>best wishes,
>
>
>
>
>
>J
>*
|