Print

---

Hi all

thanks so much for contributing to this discussion on preservation  
versus documentation of new media art - i've really been enjoying the  
responses so far.

further to Annet's email, i wonder if i can ask some direct questions  
of people lurking on the list:

Wolfgang Strauss: in working with the ZKM to preserve  
Netzspannung.org do you still feel responsibility for ongoing  
documentation of your own activities in relation to it?

Anne Laforet: what are some of the more interesting documentation  
strategies you've come across in your study of how museums are  
dealing with net art?

Sandra Fauconnier and Gaby Wijers at NIMK: how has involving the  
public in curatorial selection of works in the archive (through the  
new mediatheque, or curator for a day project, for instance) led to  
new ways of thinking about preservation and documentation of the  
works? Can you tell us a bit about inside-installations.org and the  
OASIS project (Open Archiving System with Internet Sharing)?

Aymeric Mansoux at GOTO10: do you think the idea of 'open-sourcing'  
documentation tasks, by distributing them to the makers/developers,  
is a good solution?

any thoughts from any others would be great too,
thanks
sarah


On 10 Jun 2009, at 15:07, annet wrote:

> Dear all,
> Although we're not completely finished with deciphering all the  
> notes and remarks from our meeting I thought it would be good for  
> the discussion to share some of the results with you.
>
> Archive 2020 was a first attempt to sketch out the issues and  
> problems that surround born digital cultural content. Although we  
> focused on the meaning and possibility of online archives. Most of  
> the attention went to the investigation of existing practices,  
> examples of failures and successes were mentioned and pro's and  
> con's of various strategies were discussed.
>
> *what follows is a short outline of some of the issues:
>
> How can an ONLINE ARCHIVE be SUSTAINABLE? Suggestions that were made:*
> - shared responsibility, a bottom-up approach: create or organise a  
> network that feels responsible and is involved in the process or  
> content of the work. Think in the line of social networking  
> strategies that collaborate on creating shared resources and  
> knowledge. In the long run it would be important to clarify and  
> distribute responsibilities.
> - distribute the work as much as possible: think of remixing  
> strategies and what Kevin Kely calls «movage», the more it is out  
> there, the more it is seen and the better it is archived.  
> Interesting examples were named that showed the working of this  
> 'underground' archive strategy.
> - centralise: integrate into existing institutions and have them  
> apply for projectfunding. While this strategy has many positive  
> sides it is important that a project is grounded into the  
> institution and that it is not in the hands of one (enthousiast)  
> individual. It also needs to be very clear what happens if funding  
> stops
> - standardise: with the same indexing standards access will become  
> easier, an international task force is needed that takes this up,  
> maybe even similar to the Wikipedia model
>
>
> *The issue of sustainability let inevitably to the DISCUSSION OF  
> RESPONSIBILITY: who is responsible and what is the role of the  
> artist, programmer, curator, museum, audience,...?*
> - increase the responsibility of the artists, make them aware of  
> the problem, for example by introducing preservation strategies  
> into funding applications. This however brings up the question what  
> is valued more: the quality of the work or the preservation  
> strategy. Sometimes works that weren't the best of their time  
> become well known because they make interesting case studies for  
> preservation, the term 'darwinistic archiving' was introduced (i.e.  
> survival of the best documented).
> - institutions and museums, or even universities, have more  
> resources and know-how, they could take a coordinating role, so  
> that smaller organisations or individuals can join. To make it  
> beneficiary for both sides a 'funding for research' approach was  
> suggested. (i.e. establishing an institution that is related and  
> attached to a research field; the institution would help with  
> preservation and in exchange would get access to, for example,  
> software artworks as their research materials - it was said that  
> the Daniel Langlois Foundation had participated in these kind of  
> projects, maybe someone could elaborate?!)
> - network community and users: the web is made by individuals  
> instead of organisations. Mobilise them and make them aware of  
> their self-sustainability (see for example the case of Turbulence  
> and Rhizome).
>
> *
> What to keep - DOCUMENT OR PRESERVE? Although there were no ready  
> answers many SUGGESTIONS were made, it would be interesting to hear  
> your comments:*
> -    you can't save everything, focus on the most informative parts  
> that convey the main idea of the work. (who decides, selects?)
> -    for born digital works it can be important to preserve/ 
> document the process
> -    instead of saving the original code it could be better to make  
> a diagram that represents al the possible states and scenarios of  
> the work.
> -    videotape the work: desktop video and context video
> -    write books, articles and reviews in magazine or newspapers:  
> in order to make it visible "the online" needs to become physical;
> -    organise exhibitions as they will bring out the urgency and  
> problems of preservation: more attention to presentation and exposure;
> -    could the strategy of 'scanning on demand' that is practiced  
> by some large archives also work for the preservation of born  
> digital content?
> -    by changing the terminology from 'digital preservation' to  
> 'permanent access' might give an incentive to the importance and  
> understanding of the work.
>
> The best quote of the day was 'jack the wrapper': put the software  
> in a box and describe / document the whole thing so that someone  
> else can clone it.
>
> *And finally, some questions and needs that came up:*
> -    What is the reaction of artists to existing documentation  
> strategies, for example, the VMQ?
> -    What has succeeded and what attempts have failed and why? Make  
> best/worst case practices where we can all learn from.
> -    How are other fields dealing with these issues, for example,  
> archeology, musicology, information science, dance and performance  
> art,... and what can we learn from them?