Hi Tom
The Early Career Fellowship route can include practice based researchers who
do not have a PhD - but they cannot apply for support for their practice.
They apply for support for their research. The objective is not that they do
creative practice in a research environment (something ACE could support)
but that they are mentored as an emerging researcher, if they aren't
already. In that respect what I wrote is consistent. So, you can get, and
will continue to get, support for projects that include practice but not
because they include practice. It might seem a fine hair to split but it is
the key to a successful bid (and congratulations - they're hard to get!).
Best
Simon
On 31/03/2011 17:35, "tom.corby" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I'm not sure that's strictly right Simon.
> While the AHRC have pulled the particular funding stream for
> "practice-based" research, my understanding is that there is still space
> within research bids to include art practice as a means to an end.
> We've just received substantial funding for 2 projects that include
> practice so unless something has changed within the last 2 or 3 weeks
> AHRC are still committed to supporting art-making as part of a research
> process.
> Unless you know otherwise, in which case we might as well pack the whole
> thing in....
>
> bw
> tom
>
>
> On 31/03/2011 17:14, Simon Biggs wrote:
>> The AHRC has been clear that they and ACE are working together to better
>> distinguish their activities and the things they fund. That means ACE funds
>> art and the AHRC funds research. Both may involve practice and creative
>> activity but art and research are considered mutually exclusive, in respect
>> of funding, not complementary. If you are supported by one route do not
>> expect to be supported through the other.
>>
>> However, looking through the list of ACE awards, I note a number of research
>> based organisations being funded, even some HEI's. This raises the question
>> whether there is a policy in place or not?
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Simon
>>
>>
>> On 31/03/2011 16:09, "[log in to unmask]"<[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 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....
>>>
>>> with best
>>> Bronac
>>>
>>> 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
>>> constituent parts.
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>> Simon
>>>
>>>
>>> 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
>>>> been
>>>> 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
>>>> New
>>>> Forest, Quay Arts on the Isle of Wight, and Moti Roti in London, have also
>>>> been
>>>> 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
>>>> collectively
>>>> recognise that media and digital has been a serious loser in the past two
>>>> days.
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>> work
>>>> together?
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>> marc.
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>> artform.
>>>>>> Hurried thoughts from London... If any non British based readers on this
>>>>> list have thoughts or need an explanation, do speak up!
>>>>>> Sarah
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>>>>> portfolio!
>>>>>>> gt
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 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:
>>>>>>>>>
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/mar/30/arts-council-cuts-list-fu
>> >>
>> n
>>>> ding
>>>>>>>>> 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?
>>>>>>>>> Ele
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>> Curator
>>>>>>>>> Lecturer, MFA Curating, Dept of Art, Goldsmiths College, Uni of
>>>>>>>>> London.
>>>>>>>>> m: +44 (0)7989 502 191
>>>>>>>>> www.elecarpenter.org.uk
>>>>>>>>> www.eleweekend.blogspot.com
>>>>
>>>> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>>>> honor harger
>>>> email: [log in to unmask]
>>>> r a d i o q u a l i a:
>>>> http://www.radioqualia.net
>>>>
>>>
>>> Simon Biggs
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>> http://www.littlepig.org.uk/
>>>
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>> http://www.elmcip.net/
>>> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/
>>>
>>
>> Simon Biggs
>> [log in to unmask]
>> http://www.littlepig.org.uk/
>>
>> [log in to unmask]
>> http://www.elmcip.net/
>> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/
>>
>
Simon Biggs
[log in to unmask]
http://www.littlepig.org.uk/
[log in to unmask]
http://www.elmcip.net/
http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/
|