JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives


NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives


NEW-MEDIA-CURATING@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Home

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Home

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING  2001

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING 2001

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: exhibitions

From:

Beryl Graham <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Curating digital art - www.newmedia.sunderland.ac.uk/crumb/

Date:

Sat, 17 Mar 2001 01:42:40 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (94 lines)

Hi,

Thanks Simon for your 'inside information' on curating that show (see
below) - it's just the kind of information useful to other curators.
I'm keen to hear more about the details of feedback about that show,
whether personal or formal:

Do you think that there is an age difference in how people might
respond to big busy spaces vs. more intimate ones? Do you think the
NMPFTV context of also having educational hands-on exhibits in other
parts of the building helped or hindered? Was there any confusion
between interpretational technology and art technology? (I'm thinking
here of Susan Collin's Audio Zone artwork in the V-Topia show in
Glasgow, 1995; a piece using infra-red headphones which some people
mistook for 'a guide to the exhibition' but which was a rather
creative confusion.)

You also get the CRUMB choccy biccy award for being open about
aspects which maybe didn't work so well  - could you say a little
more about what kind of critical feedback from which kind of
visitors?  You can withhold names to protect the innocent.

cheers,

Beryl


>Beryl wrote:
>
>Thanks for this interesting thread - the tension between group and
>individual use of interactive artworks in gallery contexts is a particular
>interest of mine. In arranging a show, the tendency is often to go for
>the "Brothel effect" of individual private rooms off of some kind of common
>space. Other organisations have played interesting games with the ideas of
>using the artworks to get people to interact with each other in a larger
>space, such as Toshio Iwai's "Resonance of 4" or an interesting card
>playing game in the New Metropolis Museum in Amsterdam.
>
>I'd be interested to hear about other such group tactics,
>-----
>When we (myself and Malcolm Ferris, supported by Hannah Redler) put
>together the digital galleries at the National Museum of Photography, Film
>and Television in Bradford (UK) we decided to go for a transparent
>relationship between the individual works. Literally, this meant that all
>the works were, in so far as it was possible, visually transparent such
>that you could see most pieces from any location in the galleries. You
>could see through the works (eg: projections were onto transparent
>surfaces, structures were made of grids or perforated materials rather than
>solid surfaces, etc).
>
>In practice it was not that easy to achieve, but in the end we came up with
>a working compromise. This meant that each individual artist had to accept
>that their work was not the most important thing, that it was a part of a
>larger integrated project. This included work from artists such as Toshio
>Iwai, Paul Sermon, Jeffrey Shaw, Jane Prophet and Joachem Sauter. They all
>(bravely) took this on board and we avoided what you call the "brothel"
>effect. Aside from artworks we also included in the same space other
>exhibits dealing with the development of technology (eg: user interfaces,
>digital imaging, etc), special effects and cinema and a large area
>dedicated to computer games (including a large multi-user Quake space,
>integrated into the gallery and the exhibits around it and where the
>virtual Quake scenario was a model of the gallery and its exhibits, thus
>turning the whole thing inside out). This had a profound effect on the
>nature of the audience engagement with the projects as people immediately
>accepted high levels of physical engagement with everything around them. A
>cinema projection was treated to a degree like a computer game, for
>example. Anyway, something resembling what we originally did is still on
>show at the NMPFT, so a measure of evidence is there to see.
>
>As curators we were looking to create an environment that reflected an
>overloaded polyphonic recursive and chaotic information space, where
>information was everywhere yet transparent, like light itself...this was
>our vision of the information society. Given this objective it was obvious
>that this was the approach to take. But if our agenda had been different
>(eg: to survey the best of new media art and present it as sympathetically
>as possible to each project) then this approach would have been a disaster.
>
>Given some of the critical feedback I have had some visitors clearly think
>that what we did at the NMPFT was a disaster anyway...but that's another
>story...;)
>
>Simon Biggs
>London GB
>
>[log in to unmask]
>http://hosted.simonbiggs.easynet.co.uk/

_________________________________________________________
Beryl Graham.
Post Doctoral Research Fellow in New Media, University of Sunderland
tel: +44 (0)191 233 1098  email:  [log in to unmask]
web page: http://www.stare.com/beryl/   OR
http://www.sunderland.ac.uk/~as0bgr/welcome.html

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager