Keep on glazing then...
On 31/03/2011 18:20, "tom.corby" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi Simon
> yes I agree, it has to be framed as part of a research process, not the
> *point* of the research.
> Of course, you're right this is a very difficult thing for people new to
> research to grasp.
> Even for those of us who have grasped it in the past, and need to
> continually remind ourselves.
>
> btw. I personally didn't benefit from our new funded projects but we
> have some very happy ceramicists!
>
> t.
>
> On 31/03/2011 18:08, Simon Biggs wrote:
>> Hi Tom
>>
>> The Early Career Fellowship route can include practice based researchers who
>> do not have a PhD - but they cannot apply for support for their practice.
>> They apply for support for their research. The objective is not that they do
>> creative practice in a research environment (something ACE could support)
>> but that they are mentored as an emerging researcher, if they aren't
>> already. In that respect what I wrote is consistent. So, you can get, and
>> will continue to get, support for projects that include practice but not
>> because they include practice. It might seem a fine hair to split but it is
>> the key to a successful bid (and congratulations - they're hard to get!).
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Simon
>>
>>
>> On 31/03/2011 17:35, "tom.corby"<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not sure that's strictly right Simon.
>>> While the AHRC have pulled the particular funding stream for
>>> "practice-based" research, my understanding is that there is still space
>>> within research bids to include art practice as a means to an end.
>>> We've just received substantial funding for 2 projects that include
>>> practice so unless something has changed within the last 2 or 3 weeks
>>> AHRC are still committed to supporting art-making as part of a research
>>> process.
>>> Unless you know otherwise, in which case we might as well pack the whole
>>> thing in....
>>>
>>> bw
>>> tom
>>>
>>>
>>> On 31/03/2011 17:14, Simon Biggs wrote:
>>>> The AHRC has been clear that they and ACE are working together to better
>>>> distinguish their activities and the things they fund. That means ACE funds
>>>> art and the AHRC funds research. Both may involve practice and creative
>>>> activity but art and research are considered mutually exclusive, in respect
>>>> of funding, not complementary. If you are supported by one route do not
>>>> expect to be supported through the other.
>>>>
>>>> However, looking through the list of ACE awards, I note a number of
>>>> research
>>>> based organisations being funded, even some HEI's. This raises the question
>>>> whether there is a policy in place or not?
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>>
>>>> Simon
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 31/03/2011 16:09, "[log in to unmask]"<[log in to unmask]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Simon makes a good point which also reminds me of another observation I
>>>>> made
>>>>> gradually yesterday ie that with a couple of notable exceptions there
>>>>> appears
>>>>> to be a connection between being cut and being research orientated.
>>>>> Rather
>>>>> than viewing collaborations and connections with the higher education
>>>>> sector
>>>>> as an advantage and positive factor in terms of assessment it would appear
>>>>> (and I say this tentatively as am interested in a broader analysis) that
>>>>> it
>>>>> has been disadvantageous. How accurate is this? If it is then it would
>>>>> seem
>>>>> to
>>>>> run the risk of ACE building its own form of conservatism that can only
>>>>> deal
>>>>> with the established avant garde and in failing to grasp why research
>>>>> matters
>>>>> fails also to allow any sort of space for critical practice to grow...in
>>>>> which
>>>>> case it makes sense to be outside the regularly funded portfolio or indeed
>>>>> the
>>>>> system....
>>>>>
>>>>> When we made a successful case for regular funding in 2004 for
>>>>> onedotzero,forma, proboscis, mongrel and arts catalyst we said they needed
>>>>> core funding to underpin their research and development periods which
>>>>> would
>>>>> then inevitably produce results in future years and also argued that these
>>>>> and
>>>>> other organisations like them brought new partnerships into the system,
>>>>> working nationally and internationally across domains and with very small
>>>>> office base. It seems that recent assessment have demanded quantitative
>>>>> outputs over very short time periods with no regard for the overall life
>>>>> cycle
>>>>> of companies....
>>>>>
>>>>> with best
>>>>> Bronac
>>>>>
>>>>> Mar 31, 2011 10:48:54 AM, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ===========================================
>>>>>
>>>>> One example I'd like to put forward is New Media Scotland. They lost their
>>>>> core funding as the Scottish Arts Council morphed into Creative Scotland,
>>>>> which no longer "funds" the arts but "invests" in creative initiatives and
>>>>> start-ups (they hope to get their money back).
>>>>>
>>>>> NMS still has devolved responsibility for running Alt-W, which is the main
>>>>> revenue stream that artists can apply to in Scotland for developing new
>>>>> work
>>>>> with digital media. But NMS receives no funding to run itself, pay staff
>>>>> or
>>>>> rent. It is expected to be responsible for these devolved funds for no
>>>>> reward (Creative Scotland are indeed very clever).
>>>>>
>>>>> NMS solved the problem by going into partnership with the University of
>>>>> Edinburgh, who needed somebody to run their new Inspace art/science
>>>>> facility. This provides NMS with a physical home, salary costs and a venue
>>>>> for supporting artists developmental work and to present exhibitions,
>>>>> performances and other events.
>>>>>
>>>>> This has worked brilliantly as Edinburgh now hosts one of the most dynamic
>>>>> and best resourced venues in the country for new media work across the
>>>>> creative arts and at the juncture of art and science research. In this
>>>>> sense
>>>>> the loss of State funding has led to a better outcome than otherwise might
>>>>> have been the case. Mutual need led to something greater than the
>>>>> constituent parts.
>>>>>
>>>>> Whilst it is bad that organisations and groups south of the border have
>>>>> lost
>>>>> funds it might be possible that a few can find a silver lining and develop
>>>>> new ways of functioning through various novel partnerships.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best
>>>>>
>>>>> Simon
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 31/03/2011 14:42, "honor" wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Like Marc, I have been reeling from the news of yesterday and conferring
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> colleagues about what has happened, and what we should do.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Drew Hemment (director, FutureEverything), and I touched base yesterday,
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> Marc and I touched base this morning, and we feel we need to reach out to
>>>>>> all
>>>>>> the organisations hit so hard.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems clear that nationally, the media arts / digital arts landscape
>>>>>> has
>>>>>> been
>>>>>> completely ravaged with funding cuts to a wide range of significant
>>>>>> organisations who have helped shape and define the field over many the
>>>>>> years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> onedotzero, folly, Proboscis, Lumen, Mute, Isis, Lovebytes, SCAN,
>>>>>> Labculture/PVA, AccessSpace, Vivid, Picture This, and several others have
>>>>>> lost
>>>>>> funding, as far as we know. Several other organisations who have been
>>>>>> very
>>>>>> influential in the digital art space, including our friends, ArtSway in
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> New
>>>>>> Forest, Quay Arts on the Isle of Wight, and Moti Roti in London, have
>>>>>> also
>>>>>> been
>>>>>> cut. In addition, many other organisations who have been doing valuable
>>>>>> work
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> including Animate Projects - were not funded.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems to us that that half the digital visual arts organisations
>>>>>> active
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> the UK have been cut.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a massive shock and loss to us all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is clear there will be more need than ever to form partnerships, and
>>>>>> work
>>>>>> collaboratively, and there will be huge pressure on those organisations
>>>>>> who
>>>>>> have emerged in one piece.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We am not sure yet how precisely we deal with this, or whether we need to
>>>>>> formalise our solidarity, but I think it is so important for us to
>>>>>> collectively
>>>>>> recognise that media and digital has been a serious loser in the past two
>>>>>> days.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We believe now is a time to stand up to be counted, and to extend the
>>>>>> collaborative ethos and goodwill that already characterises our sector.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do people feel we could usefully swap notes on tangible ways we can
>>>>>> better
>>>>>> work
>>>>>> together?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Honor Harger
>>>>>> Director, Lighthouse
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Quoting marc garrett :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Sarah& all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have been discussing the subject myself on other lists such as
>>>>>>> netbehavour& to others privately through email...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am extremely angry.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yesterday was a significant day. A big shift politically, where the
>>>>>>> ideology of an neo-liberalist agenda successfully disarmed half of the
>>>>>>> media art orgnizations in the UK. Some excellent groups who were grass
>>>>>>> roots, doing amazing stuff were attacked. I can't even bring myself to
>>>>>>> mention their names at present, because it feels too raw. Already in the
>>>>>>> UK, artist groups have been just about surviving on minimal amounts of
>>>>>>> income. Yet due to generous dedication, enthusiasm and imaginative
>>>>>>> approaches we have all witnessed an expansive and valuable contribution
>>>>>>> to society, as well as towards the arts across the board. Our endeavors
>>>>>>> collectively and separately have influenced many of the younger
>>>>>>> generation to take on and consider the practice of media art in their
>>>>>>> own practice. But also, (of course) it has been watered down by the less
>>>>>>> critically engaged sectors of art culture also. This more reflects the
>>>>>>> vulnerability of media arts (related) practice, in respect of its
>>>>>>> presence and status in the art world and every day culture.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There has been, and still are excellent digital and media art
>>>>>>> organizations and groups receiving revenue in the UK from Arts Council
>>>>>>> funding, actively changing things via their own, critical approaches.
>>>>>>> Media art organizations across the board deserve more attention and
>>>>>>> appreciation regarding its high output and intelligent production. By
>>>>>>> closing over half of them down, cutting off the supply of revenue when
>>>>>>> these organizations have been offering so much quality to our culture,
>>>>>>> whilst receiving a reasonably modest sum is not only short sighted, but
>>>>>>> serves in sending us all a message that there exists an active bias
>>>>>>> towards more established and privileged sectors in the art world. Gone
>>>>>>> are the days when art was supported because of its challenging contexts,
>>>>>>> it is now more about what fits in via a top-down agenda, not the
>>>>>>> criticalness of the art or culture itself, as a whole.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As some may have noticed, our funding is at the lower end of the scale,
>>>>>>> and obviously fails to reflect sufficiently the amount of hard work we
>>>>>>> actually put into getting everything up and going. A seven day a week
>>>>>>> job, with thousands of hours missing from our personal lives. We were
>>>>>>> lucky to slip through and somehow remain funded. But, to be honest - it
>>>>>>> does not feel that positive when looking around at what's left, as half
>>>>>>> of our culture has been deleted in one day. I have always valued the
>>>>>>> networked elements of having peer practitioners out there to share
>>>>>>> ideas, as well as be challenged, informed and re-educated by them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The recent cuts are unethical and declare a shallow contempt towards
>>>>>>> others who wish to explore more adventurous solutions creatively.
>>>>>>> Already the established art world was content with propping up useless
>>>>>>> and culturally vapid artists via unquestioning protocols and lazy
>>>>>>> initiatives. It has aways been a difficult terrain to deal with when
>>>>>>> having to re-educate those who were not willing to engage with media art
>>>>>>> contexts, even though they ran galleries and art magazines and proposed
>>>>>>> a (supposed) agenda towards new forms of art practice, hypocritically.
>>>>>>> It is not only the Government and its neo-liberal onslaught on anything
>>>>>>> of human value and worth, that has helped in hurting our once dynamic
>>>>>>> and thriving culture - it was the systemic ignorance of a hermetically
>>>>>>> sealed art world also.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> marc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wishing you well.
>>>>>>>> Hi all
>>>>>>>> Yes a letter to journalists as soon as possible is the way to go, can
>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>> collectively draft it here? With some international input too please
>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>> those of you on this list who have been followers and supporters of new
>>>>>>> media
>>>>>>> art in England... It would also be good to have some voices from the new
>>>>>>> media art orgs that were successful, such as furtherfield and lighthouse
>>>>>>> perhaps, who could comment on what the loss of their extended networks
>>>>>>> means
>>>>>>> for their work? Mike, what does it mean for AND fest that one of the
>>>>>>> three
>>>>>>> orgs behind it was cut; rebecca what does it mean for AV fest that
>>>>>>> partners
>>>>>>> in the city such as Amino or Isis were not successful?
>>>>>>>> Does anyone have any names of journalists we could contact? it is hard
>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>> to see it as massive de investment in a little understood or appreciated
>>>>>>> artform.
>>>>>>>> Hurried thoughts from London... If any non British based readers on
>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>> list have thoughts or need an explanation, do speak up!
>>>>>>>> Sarah
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 31 Mar 2011, at 11:08, Gary Thomas wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ditto what Taylor, Mat and Mike said..
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And I think Ele's suggestion of a letter to The Guardian would do no
>>>>>>>>> harm.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (It was only after the guardian's cutsblog mentioned that our gfta had
>>>>>>> been rejected that ace called us to encourage us to resubmit)
>>>>>>>>> This isn't just about cuts - it's about a lack of balance in their
>>>>>>>>> friggin
>>>>>>> portfolio!
>>>>>>>>> gt
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> From: Ele Carpenter
>>>>>>>>>>> Date: 30 March 2011 21:50:33 GMT+01:00
>>>>>>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] ACE funding
>>>>>>>>>>> Reply-To: Ele Carpenter
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Here is the list of organisations to be cut on Guardian blog:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/mar/30/arts-council-cuts-list-
>>>> fu
>>>> n
>>>>>> ding
>>>>>>>>>>> It's such a long list it's hard to comprehend - and as Clive says
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> media arts seem very hard hit within the percentage of visual arts
>>>>>>>>>>> cuts. I'm sure there's someone on this list who can download the
>>>>>>>>>>> Guardian data and do the maths?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Whilst everyone is reeling in shock, could we draft a letter to the
>>>>>>>>>>> Guardian? At don't think it's gonna make a difference - but
>>>>>>>>>>> visibility
>>>>>>>>>>> seems important. Maybe there'll be a Media Arts Block with the
>>>>>>>>>>> http://artsagainstcuts.wordpress.com protests now.... ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>>>>>>>> Ele
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 30 March 2011 20:45, Clive Gillman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't want to start a new line, but it feels like some comment is
>>>>>>> needed on
>>>>>>>>>>>> the complete wipeout of ACE-funded organisations working with new
>>>>>>>>>>>> media
>>>>>>>>>>>> announced today - folly, PVA, Mute, Access Space, Lovebytes,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Proboscis,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Vivid. Been out of the loop in England, but is that it for Arts
>>>>>>>>>>>> Council
>>>>>>>>>>>> England support for new media ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Ele Carpenter
>>>>>>>>>>> Curator
>>>>>>>>>>> Lecturer, MFA Curating, Dept of Art, Goldsmiths College, Uni of
>>>>>>>>>>> London.
>>>>>>>>>>> m: +44 (0)7989 502 191
>>>>>>>>>>> www.elecarpenter.org.uk
>>>>>>>>>>> www.eleweekend.blogspot.com
>>>>>> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>>>>>> honor harger
>>>>>> email: [log in to unmask]
>>>>>> r a d i o q u a l i a:
>>>>>> http://www.radioqualia.net
>>>>>>
>>>>> Simon Biggs
>>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>>> http://www.littlepig.org.uk/
>>>>>
>>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>>> http://www.elmcip.net/
>>>>> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/
>>>>>
>>>> Simon Biggs
>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>> http://www.littlepig.org.uk/
>>>>
>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>> http://www.elmcip.net/
>>>> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/
>>>>
>>
>> Simon Biggs
>> [log in to unmask]
>> http://www.littlepig.org.uk/
>>
>> [log in to unmask]
>> http://www.elmcip.net/
>> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/
>>
>
Simon Biggs
[log in to unmask]
http://www.littlepig.org.uk/
[log in to unmask]
http://www.elmcip.net/
http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/
|