Dear CRUMB

Peter Weibel has replied in detail to the various
discussions and authorised me to repost this to CRIMB

Roger

Dear Roger Malina,

Finally I have the time to answer your more in extenso. I've been
forwarded your e-mail posted on the CRUMB mailing list, in which you
criticize, that the curator of spaceplace refused to publish the
conversation with you. If you are referring to my person -- I have never
refused that you publish my first short answer on the CRUMB list; in
contrary I have sent it to anyone who wanted to read it. I've written to
anybody who was concerned, that I will comment on the subject as soon as
possible. Please forward this mail to the CRUMB list if you find it helpful.
Initially I want to give you an idea of the site and scale in which the
project "spaceplace" was conceived. The ZKM has an ongoing collaboration
with the city of Munich to set up a program of media projects in a --
for many years unfortunately often neglected -- subway passage, called
"Maximiliamsforum". After several presentations of videotapes and
installations I was interested to involve the passers-by as active
participants. Philip Pocock had been collecting for some time data on
different artist projects related to the idea of orbit and space. I
proposed to use his research for the site in Munich to test the
possibilities of the idea of "curating by the consumer". I have been
reflecting for quite some time what the advent of platforms like flickr,
myspace etc. will mean for public institutions like publishing houses,
museums, record companies, newspapers etc., when the audience has its
own channel as its disposal to publish their photos, music, texts, news;
when they can communicate these data to each other directly via the net
and exchange ideas, information, works; where people can download music
and videos and finally make their own music and video program; when news
from Parisian suburbs on the net are offering more direct and individual
news than official mass media ; when photos and videos from tsunamis and
hurricanes taken by so called amateurs with consumer technology are seen
globally -- what will be the consequences for corporations and
institutions? Will they refuse these developments or integrate them?
I myself welcome strongly these new platforms of user-generated content,
these peer-to-peer communities, and the unprogrammed personal access to
information. I do not consider this to be a menace to the classical
pillars of wisdom, like the press, books, exhibitions, and TV programs.
I welcome this emancipation of the consumer and the option of the
internet as something as important as the invention of book printing.
Naturally the classic institutions of information loose their monopoly.
Therefore I have been reflecting how a museum should react to these
developments. Why should professional curators have the monopoly to
select and arrange information? Why shouldn't they just offer a
framework, in which the visitor can choose the information and even add
information; have exchange with other people about the information
available. Why should he not communicate with other visitors about a
project? etc. The new tools of the net make these old ideas technically
possible.
I therefore asked Philip Pocock to implement these ideas in his project.
Axel Heide helped to create a new Bluetooth interface as a local
possibility in the Zkmax-forum Munich to enter the site and upload
material. Anyone who accepts to download the spaceplace application to
their phone, is asked to start the application, and starting it can
navigate and upload a 'gotchi.' That gotchi is a masked handy cam image
the ZKMax guest takes. The mask is the shape of a head. In this phase
only image uploads are allowed locally. Apart from that spaceplace two
other interfaces are offered: Firstly: "web - www.orbit.zkm.de" -- any
member can create content, pages, upload images, text; any anonymous
non-member can leave comments, but so far no images. Secondly: "mobile -
mobile.orbit.zkm.de" -- same as above, but limited by all but the most
modern mobiles (smartphones).
What you see under spaceplace is a database of artistic space projects
assembled by Philip Pocock and different news feeds, which are actual
web2mashs to offer people information on this topic. It is meant to be
an experiment in "web-curating", which invites net users, to contribute
projects to the site and local passers-by, who can via a Bluetooth
interface upload information. This unprogrammed approach to an art work
the condition of which can be used and changed by the consumer are for
me the most important aspects.
This project is a preliminary test for further projects. The long-term
goal is that the databace of space projects will rotate as a satellite
around the earth, that orbit projects are indeed revolving in orbit and
that by tele-remote information exchange people can creatively attend
this project.
Naturally since this is an experiment and a test the results can be
questioned and discussed.

The databank is meant to become an open platform for projects related to
the idea of orbit. Therefore it can be seen as a contradiction that the
data speak as "Gotchies" in the first person. This use of fiction as a
narrative technique, this allusion to the developers culture was
apparently misleading or at least creates the fear that other readers
than oneself -- though oneself realized it quickly - could not understand
the tongue in cheek approach. We thought that the fabricated,
constructed, fictional character would be obvious, since persons like
Galileo Galilee speak in the first person. That information was
rewritten to fit into the narrative form can be interpreted as a
violation of personal rights. I regret this, as the "gotchies" were not
meant as an attack on artists' identities, but as an act of positive
attention in the art context. The problem is that we started off the new
structure of an open platform with old techniques of narration. In a way
we started off with a still old curating practice: the curator did not
only offer a form, but wrote the narrative content. We have assembled
information, fictionalized parts of it and told something instead having
the user putting in the information from the beginning. Maybe the
project was still too curated by the "WhoAmI" narrations. Yet, maybe it
could be understood as an "attractant" for future users, which is more
effective than a verbal call for participation.
The style of narration may also support the assumption that the included
artists, since speaking in the first person, had been asked to
participate or put in the information themselves. We believed that the
fictional character of the gotchies were so evident that everybody could
understand its irony. But people have different ideas of humor. We
should have been more careful and make it explicit, that these are
fictious characters and that this is supposed to be an open database for
consumer generated content like for example the internet movie database,
where it is clear, that it is not the director himself who has put in
the information. We believed that we do the artists a favor in offering
information on their project within this platform, which is meant to be
open and does not hide, but indicates its sources -- referring to the
original context of the information. We did not want to dispossess
anybody, or deform in bad faith personal information, we rather changed
the texts in order that they fit in this poetic narration of an
universal and transhistorical community of orbital artists -- from
Galileo Galilee to Steina Vasulka.
This project has no commercial purpose, no entrance or user fees are
requested anywhere. ZKM spends money on this project as on any other art
project. We wanted to feature with this project the new possibilities of
"webcurating" by the emancipated user, to push the boundaries of
curatorial practice. I see in this idea an outstanding option for the
future of cultural institutions and therefore I regret to have neglected
some aspects, which unfortunately offended some "members" of these projects.
Dear Roger Malina, I hope I could answer some of your questions.

Best regards,
Peter Weibel