al> am i the only one, who originally understood johannes's posting as in
al> no way critical of ana's text or detrimental to it?
Nope. It was a bit short, maybe that confused Ana. Anyway, I thought
his posting was good because it gave a new twist to my simple spotting
of a term I had not seen before, and something like that can help
shape thoughts. So what I think right now is that first of all it is
interesting that Szeeman does not want to call himself a curator
anymore, something which is maybe understandable when one reaches a
certain level (the top) in huge organisations like he has. This seems
to have made him feel more like a manager or producer then a hands on
curator. It also gives the role of Big Curators more of a bussiness
model edge, which it probably should have. Appologies for my strange
English here maybe.
But in Johannes' posting 'producer' refers to theater, radio and
television productions. Because we are dealing with new media curating
here it might be good to consider curating contemporary art (which
includes new media art) as something close to working with media
oneself. I have no idea how curators are educated, but it looks like
some techniques from producing media might be handy in their
And about the quote I sent: of course it was meant very much as a
pointer to netartreview, which I think has developed really well.
Something to keep an eye on, and it looks like Ana's work is so too. I
don't agree about having to cc every quote to its author as well, btw.
Thats very uncommon and undo-able. Let yourself be surprised! I think
that on the net one knows everybody through less then seven people,
maybe just two (as they say that everybody on this planet knows
everybody else through seven aquaintances/people). ;-)
greetings from Amsterdam,