broadly I agree, and I didn't mean to come across as defensive (or
indeed as Annick pointed out, surprised; that was meant as an ironic
kind of question about the gap between art and new media, but
Still I am surprised at the way they think 'an exhibition delivered
to an audience' (a quote from Parreno) is something new... as all
broadcast media, including the internet, have long been based on
this. And artists working with new media have tried to disrupt that
for just as long as well!
I'd be interested to hear thoughts from other list lurkers about
curating time-based arts exhibitions where the time of delivery/
experience is built-in to the idea of the 'show.'
from sunny! Sunderland,
On 18 Jun 2007, at 13:53, Chris Byrne wrote:
> I'm surprised by the defensive tone of some comments about this
> news snippet. Somehow I suspect the statement by Hans Ulrich Obrist
> and Philippe Parreno has been (perhaps unwittingly) misinterpreted.
> I don't think they are claiming that this is the first time
> something like this has EVER happened. The way I read it was that
> this is the first time that their particular notion for a
> curatorial collaboration, in the new context of this festival,
> could occur; implying that they may do something similar again,
> somewhere else. Note that the statement "this group show aims to
> redefine how visual arts can be experienced" is NOT a quote from
> the curators; most likely some marketing copy written by the
> Festival's PR department. Meaningless hype is nothing new in the
> world of theatre, or the arts in general!
> I can't see anything to worry about...
> On 15 Jun 2007, at 11:23, Sarah Cook wrote:
>> hi crumbs
>> as a complete aside from the interesting discussion re Second
>> Life, I just got this notice in my inbox about a series of
>> commissions to happen in Manchester curated by Hans Ulrich Obrist
>> and Philippe Parreno (http://
>> www.manchesterinternationalfestival.com). It reads:
>> >The question becomes... what if having an exhibition is not a way
>> to occupy space, but a way to occupy time...?
>> >With up to 15 minutes of ‘exhibition time’, each artist is
>> creating their own distinctive work - inviting guest performing
>> artists, specially commissioned music - but none using film or
>> video - to create this new form of group show.
>> >By focusing on time-based work, this group show aims to redefine
>> how visual arts can be experienced. Set in a theatre, it
>> transforms the established gallery model into an exhilarating,
>> shared audience experience.
>> >“The title of the piece relates to my notion of ‘postman time’,
>> and the idea that this exhibition is delivered to the audience
>> rather than the audience walking through it in their own time,”
>> comments Philippe Parreno.
>> >Hans Ulrich Obrist adds, “One of the things that Philippe and I
>> have been discussing since we met each other is what would happen
>> if you have a group show exhibition where each artist would not
>> get space, but each artist would get time? And so that is the
>> point of departure. And through a dialogue with Manchester
>> International Festival – where everything is new – there was a
>> possibility for the first time to actually realise this.”
>> Gosh, is the gap between the Media arts world and the contemporary
>> art world so big??
>> (the list of artists includes the likes of Matthew Barney, Douglas
>> Gordon, Rirkrit Tiravanija)
>> First, none using film and video?
>> Second, the first time this has been possible? What about artists-
>> TV projects? Streaming web projects? make-tv.net?
>> Third, is there no sense here of a history of performance art? or
>> artists interventions in theatre spaces (such as Janet Cardiff and
>> George Bures Miller's videowalks)?
>> It seems as though they've asked artists to become commissioners
>> (or impressarios?). Is it all to be 'live'?
>> Hmmm. If anyone is going, please report back.