Simon makes a good point which also reminds me of another observation I made gradually yesterday ie that with a couple of notable exceptions there appears to be a connection between being cut and being research orientated. Rather than viewing collaborations and connections with the higher education sector as an advantage and positive factor in terms of assessment it would appear (and I say this tentatively as am interested in a broader analysis) that it has been disadvantageous. How accurate is this? If it is then it would seem to run the risk of ACE building its own form of conservatism that can only deal with the established avant garde and in failing to grasp why research matters fails also to allow any sort of space for critical practice to grow...in which case it makes sense to be outside the regularly funded portfolio or indeed the system....
When we made a successful case for regular funding in 2004 for onedotzero,forma, proboscis, mongrel and arts catalyst we said they needed core funding to underpin their research and development periods which would then inevitably produce results in future years and also argued that these and other organisations like them brought new partnerships into the system, working nationally and internationally across domains and with very small office base. It seems that recent assessment have demanded quantitative outputs over very short time periods with no regard for the overall life cycle of companies....
Mar 31, 2011 10:48:54 AM, [log in to unmask] wrote:
One example I'd like to put forward is New Media Scotland. They lost their
core funding as the Scottish Arts Council morphed into Creative Scotland,
which no longer "funds" the arts but "invests" in creative initiatives and
start-ups (they hope to get their money back).
NMS still has devolved responsibility for running Alt-W, which is the main
revenue stream that artists can apply to in Scotland for developing new work
with digital media. But NMS receives no funding to run itself, pay staff or
rent. It is expected to be responsible for these devolved funds for no
reward (Creative Scotland are indeed very clever).
NMS solved the problem by going into partnership with the University of
Edinburgh, who needed somebody to run their new Inspace art/science
facility. This provides NMS with a physical home, salary costs and a venue
for supporting artists developmental work and to present exhibitions,
performances and other events.
This has worked brilliantly as Edinburgh now hosts one of the most dynamic
and best resourced venues in the country for new media work across the
creative arts and at the juncture of art and science research. In this sense
the loss of State funding has led to a better outcome than otherwise might
have been the case. Mutual need led to something greater than the
Whilst it is bad that organisations and groups south of the border have lost
funds it might be possible that a few can find a silver lining and develop
new ways of functioning through various novel partnerships.
On 31/03/2011 14:42, "honor" wrote:
> Dear all,
> Like Marc, I have been reeling from the news of yesterday and conferring with
> colleagues about what has happened, and what we should do.
> Drew Hemment (director, FutureEverything), and I touched base yesterday, and
> Marc and I touched base this morning, and we feel we need to reach out to all
> the organisations hit so hard.
> It seems clear that nationally, the media arts / digital arts landscape has
> completely ravaged with funding cuts to a wide range of significant
> organisations who have helped shape and define the field over many the years.
> onedotzero, folly, Proboscis, Lumen, Mute, Isis, Lovebytes, SCAN,
> Labculture/PVA, AccessSpace, Vivid, Picture This, and several others have lost
> funding, as far as we know. Several other organisations who have been very
> influential in the digital art space, including our friends, ArtSway in the
> Forest, Quay Arts on the Isle of Wight, and Moti Roti in London, have also
> cut. In addition, many other organisations who have been doing valuable work -
> including Animate Projects - were not funded.
> It seems to us that that half the digital visual arts organisations active in
> the UK have been cut.
> This is a massive shock and loss to us all.
> It is clear there will be more need than ever to form partnerships, and work
> collaboratively, and there will be huge pressure on those organisations who
> have emerged in one piece.
> We am not sure yet how precisely we deal with this, or whether we need to
> formalise our solidarity, but I think it is so important for us to
> recognise that media and digital has been a serious loser in the past two
> We believe now is a time to stand up to be counted, and to extend the
> collaborative ethos and goodwill that already characterises our sector.
> Do people feel we could usefully swap notes on tangible ways we can better
> Best wishes,
> Honor Harger
> Director, Lighthouse
> Quoting marc garrett :
>> Hi Sarah & all,
>> I have been discussing the subject myself on other lists such as
>> netbehavour & to others privately through email...
>> I am extremely angry.
>> Yesterday was a significant day. A big shift politically, where the
>> ideology of an neo-liberalist agenda successfully disarmed half of the
>> media art orgnizations in the UK. Some excellent groups who were grass
>> roots, doing amazing stuff were attacked. I can't even bring myself to
>> mention their names at present, because it feels too raw. Already in the
>> UK, artist groups have been just about surviving on minimal amounts of
>> income. Yet due to generous dedication, enthusiasm and imaginative
>> approaches we have all witnessed an expansive and valuable contribution
>> to society, as well as towards the arts across the board. Our endeavors
>> collectively and separately have influenced many of the younger
>> generation to take on and consider the practice of media art in their
>> own practice. But also, (of course) it has been watered down by the less
>> critically engaged sectors of art culture also. This more reflects the
>> vulnerability of media arts (related) practice, in respect of its
>> presence and status in the art world and every day culture.
>> There has been, and still are excellent digital and media art
>> organizations and groups receiving revenue in the UK from Arts Council
>> funding, actively changing things via their own, critical approaches.
>> Media art organizations across the board deserve more attention and
>> appreciation regarding its high output and intelligent production. By
>> closing over half of them down, cutting off the supply of revenue when
>> these organizations have been offering so much quality to our culture,
>> whilst receiving a reasonably modest sum is not only short sighted, but
>> serves in sending us all a message that there exists an active bias
>> towards more established and privileged sectors in the art world. Gone
>> are the days when art was supported because of its challenging contexts,
>> it is now more about what fits in via a top-down agenda, not the
>> criticalness of the art or culture itself, as a whole.
>> As some may have noticed, our funding is at the lower end of the scale,
>> and obviously fails to reflect sufficiently the amount of hard work we
>> actually put into getting everything up and going. A seven day a week
>> job, with thousands of hours missing from our personal lives. We were
>> lucky to slip through and somehow remain funded. But, to be honest - it
>> does not feel that positive when looking around at what's left, as half
>> of our culture has been deleted in one day. I have always valued the
>> networked elements of having peer practitioners out there to share
>> ideas, as well as be challenged, informed and re-educated by them.
>> The recent cuts are unethical and declare a shallow contempt towards
>> others who wish to explore more adventurous solutions creatively.
>> Already the established art world was content with propping up useless
>> and culturally vapid artists via unquestioning protocols and lazy
>> initiatives. It has aways been a difficult terrain to deal with when
>> having to re-educate those who were not willing to engage with media art
>> contexts, even though they ran galleries and art magazines and proposed
>> a (supposed) agenda towards new forms of art practice, hypocritically.
>> It is not only the Government and its neo-liberal onslaught on anything
>> of human value and worth, that has helped in hurting our once dynamic
>> and thriving culture - it was the systemic ignorance of a hermetically
>> sealed art world also.
>> wishing you well.
>>> Hi all
>>> Yes a letter to journalists as soon as possible is the way to go, can we
>> collectively draft it here? With some international input too please from
>> those of you on this list who have been followers and supporters of new media
>> art in England... It would also be good to have some voices from the new
>> media art orgs that were successful, such as furtherfield and lighthouse
>> perhaps, who could comment on what the loss of their extended networks means
>> for their work? Mike, what does it mean for AND fest that one of the three
>> orgs behind it was cut; rebecca what does it mean for AV fest that partners
>> in the city such as Amino or Isis were not successful?
>>> Does anyone have any names of journalists we could contact? it is hard not
>> to see it as massive de investment in a little understood or appreciated
>>> Hurried thoughts from London... If any non British based readers on this
>> list have thoughts or need an explanation, do speak up!
>>> On 31 Mar 2011, at 11:08, Gary Thomas wrote:
>>>> Ditto what Taylor, Mat and Mike said..
>>>> And I think Ele's suggestion of a letter to The Guardian would do no harm.
>>>> (It was only after the guardian's cutsblog mentioned that our gfta had
>> been rejected that ace called us to encourage us to resubmit)
>>>> This isn't just about cuts - it's about a lack of balance in their friggin
>>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>>> From: Ele Carpenter
>>>>>> Date: 30 March 2011 21:50:33 GMT+01:00
>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] ACE funding
>>>>>> Reply-To: Ele Carpenter
>>>>>> Here is the list of organisations to be cut on Guardian blog:
>>>>>> It's such a long list it's hard to comprehend - and as Clive says the
>>>>>> media arts seem very hard hit within the percentage of visual arts
>>>>>> cuts. I'm sure there's someone on this list who can download the
>>>>>> Guardian data and do the maths?
>>>>>> Whilst everyone is reeling in shock, could we draft a letter to the
>>>>>> Guardian? At don't think it's gonna make a difference - but visibility
>>>>>> seems important. Maybe there'll be a Media Arts Block with the
>>>>>> http://artsagainstcuts.wordpress.com protests now.... ?
>>>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>>> On 30 March 2011 20:45, Clive Gillman wrote:
>>>>>>> Don't want to start a new line, but it feels like some comment is
>> needed on
>>>>>>> the complete wipeout of ACE-funded organisations working with new media
>>>>>>> announced today - folly, PVA, Mute, Access Space, Lovebytes, Proboscis,
>>>>>>> Vivid. Been out of the loop in England, but is that it for Arts Council
>>>>>>> England support for new media ?
>>>>>> Ele Carpenter
>>>>>> Lecturer, MFA Curating, Dept of Art, Goldsmiths College, Uni of London.
>>>>>> m: +44 (0)7989 502 191
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> honor harger
> email: [log in to unmask]
> r a d i o q u a l i a:
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]