*** This email has been sent from the MEDIA ARTS AND DANCE email forum. To respond to all subscribers email [log in to unmask] ***
hello Doug, Janine, Jeannette, Brisa, and all:
rather fascinating and eloquent reponse from Doug, I should think, i really liked your attempt to address the curatorial practices / discourses as an iterative practice that builds (often of course also dominates or controls, if you think of MOMA, or the attempts at the Whitney) the "movement" of a form (and the ideas and content approached via the form).
I take your criticism of the babblefish discorses on mocap and max/msp/jitter as somewhat grounded but also biased; yes, there have been discussions on technologies, new stuff, and workshops on such technologies which are also techniques (and extended practices of choreography, interaction design, visual form, improvisation, expression, and sensorial experience) which are being developed and in need of further development (in their materiality), sharing, exchange, and curatorship (as far as labs, workshops residencies are concerned or as far as courses are concerrned in universities , institutes (ZKM) or independent media arts organisations, such as STEIM, V2, Harvest Works, Lemur., etc..........
But I strongly agree that discussion and exchange, in such international forum as this (and Brisa, your comments about your work and the local contexts in Chile and in Latin America are very interesting and immensely helpful, and please why not write in spanish we should be able to use many languges here) perhaps might dwell more on content and form of the movement, the kinds of new ideas (or "classical" manifestations) that shape and re-shape the understanding of the form. This may very well be an academic or formalist (avant-garde) take how one wishes to frame a history , if you think of structuralist filmmaking and would you say La Jetée or Stan Brakhage are important for the form today? for the expanded media culture? And if Moholy-Nagy and Brakhage were important for your understanding of the movement of the form, how does this impact a curatorial choice for work,say, like Skoltz-Kolgen's ? Isaac Julien's? Nicole Seiler's ? or the incredibly beautiful animations of Anouk De Clercq?
For audiovisual or interactive installations or for 3D animations, how would you constrain the "movement" of the forms and under what category do you look (film:? animation? photography? music,? sound painting? visual music (Nam June Paik), kinetic art? installation art doesn't have a long history yet, and interactive installations, such as the group of works you can see at ZKM, have been around for 2 decades, some may not even function anymore today........), dance-interactive installations have not been "collected" or sold yet and not so iterable, unfortunately.
Doug asks: what is the kind of >>work that comes out of a dance-tech milieu..., what does it mean? What is it ultimately about? >>
We did have some longer and drawn out discussions on "Glow," for example (a work by Chunky Move), or on Forsythe's "Atmospheric Studies," , we did discuss ideas on the changing understanding of the formal compositional methods we were trained in (some of us), on choreography, on interactional flow and real time adaptation that marks some of the works under discussion (meaning is not just one thing but can of course be constituted also experientially and sensorially and thus resides in synesthetic and affective modalities that are being philosophically examined now through newer phenomenologies (Hansen, Sher Doruff; Susan Kozel's book, CLOSER, just having come out)......... etc etc.
and in the performance context we are looking at hybrid works.
and i think , reading Janine, Jeannette, Brisa, -- this is precisely where the curatorial cover does not always work since the experimental cross media practices now -- short and mixed up videos/short films deriving their forms and their "informes" (to use the title of Yve-Alain Bois/Rosalind Krauss' book) from other traditions than screendance/dance on film , music films, Dj /VJ work, audio-visual installations, reverse engineered games & machinima -- are continuously tearing away at that cover.
Well, more needs to be said, but I stop with a brief response to Janine's idea of a questionnaire regarding "curator practices' ---
i think this is a very good idea, (and one could also think of other current discussions and efforts to "frame" a phenomenon, such as the practice-based research on the postgraduate levels --- interesting here that Doug thinks the difference between artists and academics no longer matter- -- and how knowledge about a form or methods of knowing about hybrid forms (in cross disipline contexts such as media arts in which many of us work) are constituted, institutionalized and then deployed for evaluations. of art / research, re-deployed by juries and panels on festivals, etc...
I remember that in the fall of 2006, prior to Monaco's last MDF festival and the entries invited to what used to be called the "digital dance" section, -- Philippe Baudelot sent out a questionnaire to all those who participated. Since the results of the questionnaire were evaluated and analysed to help us draw conclusions from it..... it would perhaps be of interest to some of you here .... (it might also be interesting, regarding Doug's preparations for ADF 2008, to ask oneself how quickly such a set of questions might become [historically] dated? What do you think, Janine?
The questions from 2006 were actually meant to sort out whether choreographers or digital art makers (who submit to festivals of this kind or any kind) still think of their "dance making" or artmaking as something that needs to be "qualified" as "digital" or whether the form such as choreography had already subsumed the digital........, and how they think about the form and the practice...........and the tools.
regards
Johannes
Johannes Birringer
DAP LAB
School of Arts
Brunel University
West London
UB8 3PH UK
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/dap
>>>>
Sent: Sun 5/25/2008 6:18 AM Douglas Rosenberg wrote:
Dear Pascale, Johannes, et al,
Happy to see you are all engaged in this important dialog. I would
like to offer some thoughts on questions raised in this strand. I
hope this is not too pedantic, but I am also thinking about these
issues for the upcoming ADF conference on curating.
Pascale says, "On the curation aspect, I must say I am still not sure
what the debate is. Is the core underlying question 'how do curators
select work?', 'why a focus on a theme rather than another one', etc.
It is in my eyes illusory to completely rationalise the curation
process."
Curating is quite different than arranging or programming. It relies
on a set of strategies that are intended to speak back to the form
very directly and in many cases attempts to move the form in a
particular direction. It is also about using works of art to make a
definitive statement that sometime lies outside the form, such as
disability, gender, etc. Programming seems to be a cross between the
way film festivals are often created and the way dance events are
conceived. In both cases it follows an entertainment model, a model
which is contingent on ticket sales and therefore has an agenda that
is perhaps colored by audience expectations. Programming may be done
around a theme but is still a different undertaking than curation,
with a different outcome to be sure. Curation as it is practiced in
the gallery and museum world is in the first iteration, free of
certain encumberances such as ticket sales, (galleries can be entered
without admission fee as can most museums at least once a week). In
subsequent iterations, the curator functions as an interface between
public and artists as well as assuming the responsibility for the
gestalt of the exhibition. The exhibition itself is often intended
to further iterate a particular point of view using the art objects
as a kind of text in order to do so. Some of the concerns that
Pascale raises have more to do with the jurying process, one in which
the artist does often feel "in the dark" about criteria, etc. I
think that is a different but connected issue. In a sense, we are
holding little competitions each time we jury a group of films and as
such our process should be transparent. Who are the jurors, what is
the mission, etc?
The term "screendance" is roughly the equivalent to the term
"painting". In other words, it describes a practice by its formal
characteristics in the broadest terms. The articulation of a practice
beyond those terms requires a subset of language that begins to speak
about the work in more particular terminology. That is, terminology
that begins to allude to style, content, affiliations, histories,
provenance and lineage as well as movements whether art historical,
dance historical or otherwise. To have a show of "painting" without
naming the frame of the specific works in the exhibition would be
rather rare in the art world at large. It is in that scenario, the
job of the curator to choose the paintings for inclusion and to
subsequently create a statement in the form of a catalog essay or
some other text that lays out a rationale and a frame or lens for the
show. In that essay, the curator would address why the group of
paintings was gathered and arranged in a particular way, what is the
connective tissue between the works, what are the intertexts, (in
other words, what do these works have to say to each other and to the
form?) and perhaps speak about the form itself. What is the state of
affairs in painting, does this work indicate a change in course for
the practice, does it restate an existing course, etc? While
curation per se is rare in the dance world, it has existed from time
to time as artist led practice, (Judson Church anyone?) and in the
gravitational pull of downtown dance in New York for instance as well
as the self-organizing nature of post-modern dance as it established
itself as an alternative to Modern dance. Dance was also articulated
through the modern era by writers/critics like John Martin and later
Sally Banes and others. This model is one that screendance would do
well to consider if only as a starting point.
Pascale says, "I feel that the community needs some fresh new blood
and inspiration and that just dance and film is a bit too narrow. We
end up seeing the variation of the same pieces over and over again."
Again, in the painting analogy, this would be recognized as a
movement and named, (abstract expressionist, realism, etc). We need
to begin to name the trends in screendance in order to talk about
them and encourage other visons as well. In another frame, "the same
pieces" might be referred to as "classical". As makers, and
curators, we have the ability to create the kinds of discourse
through curating and exhibiting as well as through writing that can
illuminate these ideas to the field. By curating an alternative to
the strand of work that seems too ubiquitous, and by creating an
essay that frames it, one can illuminate another set of possibilities
and move the field forward.
To speak a bit to Johannes, the "dance-tech" community (in my opinion
and with respect of course) is also guilty of a bit of obfuscation in
the use of terminology that alludes to materiality without
articulating much in the way of meaning. So we get workshops in
motion capture technologies and pieces made with same, a plethora of
discourse on the technical specifications of software/hardware/
digital spaces, second life, etc, but not much in the way of how this
all may congeal as content. Meaning is an accretion that must be
teased out of the overlaps between one media and another and given
the possibilities that abound in this technological era, the question
I often ask myself upon seeing or reading about work that comes out
of a dance-tech milieu is, what does it mean? What is it ultimately
about? Again, I would say these are questions that can be addressed
by curation and certainly by writing. And certainly screendance is
more than a subset of dance and technology differing in numerous
ways. By vocalizing this difference it may be possible to elevate
the form beyond its current state.
This summer's ADF conference focuses on the practice of curating
(curating as practice). It is a shame that more of you can not
attend to engage in this important dialog. The current scenario in
the screendance environment, in which festival models prevail and in
which films are often referred to as "the best" of a given year or
"the best" festival choices and subsequently tour the country creates
a model that is self perpetuating. If these are the best film then
as a viewer and maker, wouldn't it be logical that I would emulate
the style of work that is being granted such status? If instead,
touring programs were curated to make a number of statements that
move beyond the films and engage broader dialogs about the culture at
large, about media, about humanism, then perhaps we could move away
from the current state of the practice.
One more note about "elitism". The term "academic" has come to be
almost pejorative it seems. It is often used to differentiate between
those who make art and those who theorize or teach. The difference
is more often than not without merit. Practice and theory have
become fluid demarcations, (in my opinion they always were) which
makes the idea that only those with university affiliations can be
"academics" moot. I would offer the term intellectual in its place.
Intellectual rigor is what allows us to debate critical issue in our
field and I would hope that more of us will take part in these
conversations about the future and past of the genres we are engaged
in articulating.
Very best,
Doug
From: Media Arts and Dance on behalf of Janine Dijkmeijer Sent: Mon 5/26/2008 12:33 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Cc:
Subject: Opening up screendance
Attachments:
View As Web Page
*** This email has been sent from the MEDIA ARTS AND DANCE email forum. To respond to all subscribers email [log in to unmask] ***
Dear Doug, Johannes, Pascale and others
Very interesting points ……..
I like to first introduce myself before I jump for the first time in this list J
My name is Janine Dijkmeijer, programmer ( and curator) Cinedans Amsterdam.
See www.cinedans.nl for more information.
If cinedans and adf were not running at the same time ( beginning July) I would love come over to have an active role in this discussion. Is it possible to see the adf filmprogramme for the upcoming event?
Maybe I am running a head of things but I think to prepare the discussion for adf, it would be nice if a good questionnaire is made and curators and programmers can answer how they operate and work. A nice and easy readable list…
I believe we have around 50 dancefilmfestivals (for now I use the term dancefilm, but can be screendance or films about movement, or cameramovement). We haven for sure more curators than 50. (can be anyone actually)
I think indeed we ( curators , programmers) are not that active on this list due to many things ( question 1 maybe?)
In this way we can get a better insight.
Hopefully there will be a ‘publication’ made about the discussion held at ADF.
I am mostly ‘programming’ for the festival ( Cinedans) because we want to present a wide range of films so we can actually make a festival! So what happens is, we offer around 18 programmes and then the audience chooses what they want to see. (makes a choice , a selection according to their taste and mood).
We mainly choose from our entrees. Each year around 300. I also approach filmmakers to enter to the festival.
Next to this I visit other film festivals, ( and follow the contemporary dance scene)
During the year I ( co) curate work for other venues and happenings, which I enjoy because I do not need to turn people down because their film was not selected but actually CHOSEN!
One example is the middle east festival http://dancingontheedge.nl/index.php?id=19 ,
For the festival this year we have a couple of guest curators:
Nederlands Instituut voor Mediakunst and CAPTURE http://www.cinedans.nl/2008/en/programme.films.nimk-capture.php
Carte blanche given to Anne Teresa de Keersemaeker, William Fosythe http://www.cinedans.nl/2008/en/programme.films.carte-blanche.php
We have screenings in China, Russia, Poland, South Africa. Beautiful to see how the response is different in other cultures. Maybe something to discus too.
Best wishes
Janine
Janine Dijkmeijer
Cinedans
Keizersgracht 174
Kamer 201
1016 DW Amsterdam
+31(0) 642273388
[log in to unmask]
www.cinedans.nl
|
