 |
 |
Dear Marc, all, maybe some of you have already heard of the REFRESH! Conference (http://www.MediaArtHistory.org), which we are presently organizing together with the Banff New Media Institute, Leonardo and other partners. Integrating documentation/preservation into the conference concept was one of my main goals: We will try to bring together those researching and teaching digital art scientifically with those, who work scientifically in the field of documentation. Full of hope we are suggesting to found an international meta-database project/movement, where as many of our partly highly specialized initiatives as possible could be part of. The idea is to draft national and international applications together. But we will discuss these matters at the conference and the following summit in Banff in detail. Best regards, Oliver --------------------------------------- Hi Martijn & list members, I have been following this debate which has been extremely interesting and useful for various reasons, not only here but also on Empye regarding archiving/conservation. I agree with much of what Martijn has suggested and definatley will have a look at V2_'s project 'Capturing Unstable Media', with interest. Perhaps we need to open things up a bit more here, and actively put forward a more decentralized project (for all) that involves, not just singular groups within their own nation(hoods), in respect of collection of mass archivable data and works. Server-linked collaborations - of archiving, with as many cultures as possible. So that better funded, aggressive or more pro-active, archives are put on the same level as less funded groups and organizations. This will then offer a real chance for those who have not yet been seen by dominant organizations be part of an archive that is international and truly networked. Thus collecting work, not fitting into any specific criteria or national or local politics, canon firing or restrictions. Individual groups can link from outside these large data-bases, and still promote whatever they need without the worry of being drowned out by non-curatorial processes. I think that decisions on these levels, need to be adressed and dealt with so that there is a more consciously interactive process of mutual exploring and solving of such problems in regard to archiving. marc http://www.furtherfield.org http://http.uk.net/ >Let me first introduce myself. I am a Ph D fellow at the Department >of Comparative Arts and Cultural Studies at the Radboud University in >Nijmegen, the Netherlands. My research focuses on digital art and its >relationhip with the concept of the museum. > >Without dwelling too much on semantics and definitions, I would like to >challenge the striving for conservation altogether. What I find >remarkable >is that it seems to beyond dipute that art should be preserved, without >questioning the underlying premises. I have the impression that >conservation often equals fixity and eternity (no matter how long that >is) >and an obsession with taxonomies. Maybe we should just accept the fact >that >some things aren't meant to last. In this context I would like to mention >V2_'s project 'Capturing Unstable Media' which proposes an approach that >shifts between conservation and documentation. > >>This does, I think, have relevance to this month's discussion. While >>some >>here are concerned with the conservation of existing art work most of us >>also have to deal with work-in-progress or work-not-yet-made. Do you >>give >>preference to work that already exists in the existing hierarchical >>structure? Do you give preference to work that will fit into it? > > > >-- >Martijn Stevens >Department of Comparative Arts and Cultural Studies >Radboud University Nijmegen >The Netherlands > >http://www.ru.nl/comparativearts