I think this message was misdirected....

------- Start of forwarded message -------
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 20:05:23 +0000 (GMT)
From: Andrew <[log in to unmask]>
X-Sender: uhwe023@sun
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: BCMA
Home: http://sun.rhbnc.ac.uk/~uhwe023/
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Hello all,

I for one think that a BCMA would be a fine idea.
My thoughts on some of Stephens points....

1) here here!!

2) Some of us can't even afford to get to the ICMC! SO
a British form of some sort would be very appreciated.

3) yes.

4) Sonic Arts is a much broader organisation than I 
would imagine the BCMA to be. And the two organisations
(3 if you inc. the ICMA) can surely all strengthen each 
other in colaboration, over-lap etc.

5)While I would encourage an association with the ICMA
I, personally, do not feel that a BCMA should be subset.
The ICMA feels very much like a US body and although
the ICMC travels about, the ICMA does not. The regional 
strength of a BCMA would create an independent 
identity/force/outlet/forum that could/should align 
itself as a _partner_ with the ICMA, not a subset.

To be honest, i would much rather pay my subs to 
a BCMA and feel the money being reflected proportionally 
back into the UK "scene" rather than see it sink into 
the larger ICMA. However, the 2 should not be seen to compete
for my subs!

In summary i feel it would be important for a BCMA to forge 
a strong individual identity, and not just be a UK faction
of the ICMA.

And as for academics with a research agenda.....can we make music too??!!

Just my instant reactions.

Andrew


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask]
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Stephen
> Arnold
> Sent: 01 December 1999 13:21
> To: Douglas Nunn
> Cc: Brit-Comp-Music mailing list
> Subject: Re: BCMA
> 
> 
> Douglas said:
> 
> >  I would like to propose the formation of a BRITISH COMPUTER
> > MUSIC ASSOCIATION, along the lines of the
> > ICMA/AIMI/ACMA/SFIM. It would have similar aims to these
> > national organisations and to this list. The BCMA would
> > present and/or sponsor musical events within the UK. It would
> > disseminate information on research activities, and could
> > hold an annual conference. Membership might also offer
> > reduced rates for ICMA membership or events.
> >
> 
> 1. Firstly, a plea for old-fashioned plain-text email. Being still  
> unreconstructedly UNIX, I don't read mine in a web-browser, so all  
> the HTML tagging just gets in the way.
> 
> 2. In Beijing at the ICMC, Douglas, Kia Ng and I exchanged the view  
> that it was pretty odd how we seemed to meet more often in laecs  
> lilw Beijing than we o in our own country (though maybe that's  
> "countries" now). We went a bit further and said we should think  
> about a framework for for UK-based folk to get together  
> professionally.
> 
> 3. We should be careful of (i) duplication, (ii) appearing to  
> duplicate, and (iii) putting noses out of joint by duplicating or  
> appearing to duplicate.
> 
> 4. In what way would a BCMA differentiate itself from Sonic Arts?  
> Would a BCMA attempt to same coverage as (for example) the ICMA (i.e  
> conjoining composition/performance with research)?
> 
> 5. Should it attempt to have a formal or informal existence? Should  
> it be independent, or should it be part of a larger existing  
> structure (eg the ICMA)?
> 
> I would be intersted to hear how people answer these questions.  I  
> hope people can bear a wee bit of background from the ICMA  
> perspective.
> 
> The I of ICMA is "International".  It has been a struggle within  
> the ICMA to dvelop a genuinely international (i.e. non-US) stance,  
> which is perhaps not surprizing given the association's origins and  
> the fact that the largest grouping of ICMA members is from the US.   
> There have been a number of attempts in the past to link the ICMA to  
> national groups/associations in order to give expression to the  
> ICMA's internalionalism.  These have not developed because of a  
> variety of vested interests which, for the most part, were perfectly  
> legitimate and understandable.
> 
> In the end the ICMA decided to try and go "regional" at a  
> supra-national level, so that no nationally-based organization could  
> misinterpret the ICMA as setting itself up in competition with  
> them.  The purpose of the regionalization is
> (i) to develop membership (i.e. increase the number of ICMA  
> members), (ii) to provide a regionally based legal existence for the  
> ICMA (this is of importance in the European context, where it can  
> be difficult to secure grants unless you have an official status:   
> this has inhibited some ICMC organizers' efforts at fundraising for  
> the conference)
> and (iii) to help develop conference venues.
> 
> In order to be successful with (i), something needs to happen at  
> regional or national levels.  This has been done with some success  
> in Japan within the Asia/Oceania region of the ICMA.  They have held  
> professional meetings and supported students attending the ICMC  
> using a surplus from the 1993 Tokyo ICMC.
> 
> So my interest now, on behalf of the ICMA, would be to canvas the  
> option of the BCMA deliberately aligning itself with the ICMA  
> European region.  By doing so, it ought to be possible to exploit  
> both national and European funding sources to support professional  
> meetings, perhaps even leading to transnational, European projects.   
> There is already a very successful European-funded workgroup  
> (CIUDAD).  Perhaps there could be others.  The advantage here is  
> that we would not simply be reporting to each other (which is fine,  
> btw), but actually working together on issues of common interest.
> 
> Proceeding in this way (i.e. a BCMA affiliated to a European ICMA)  
> would give the BCMA a distinctly different purpose and set of  
> opportunities which (or so I believe) would not damage the interests  
> of any other cognate organization.
> 
> Of course, these remarks are based on the assumption that we'd be  
> coming at this primarily as a bunch of academics who have a research  
> agenda.  This may not be how others see it.
> 
> More feedback?
> 
> Stephen
> 
------- End of forwarded message -------

==John ffitch


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%