I think you and Liam raise some really interesting points about evolving terms of engagement between industry, the arts and artists. There have been a number of pertinent discussions, presentations and toolkits that have been generated over the past few years that aim to articulate how the arts and industry can engage effectively.
An excellent example of this is ‘Artists & Brands: Defining Rules of Engagement’, A workgroup initiated by Julia Kaganskiy of NEW INC and artist Sam Hart (http://hxrts.com/) On his website, Sam states that the workgroup was initiated ‘to produce a guide for productive and equitable relationships between creative professionals and the brands that increasingly funding their work. Notes can be found here.’
Within the notes you will find a resource of other presentations, guides and opinion pieces around best practice by artists, creatives and companies and others on how industry and artists should work together in an increasingly collaborative environment. I’ve pulled out a few I had come across throughout my own research
HOW CONVERSE SUPPORTS MUSICIANS WITHOUT THE BRAND-SPONSOR ICK FACTOR
GOLAN LEVIN'S PRESENTATION FROM FITC
AN INTRODUCTORY FIELD GUIDE TO DEALING WITH BIG BRANDS IN PARTNERSHIP WITH AN AD AGENCY
(FROM WEIDEN & KENNEDY)
ONE ARTIST'S TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT
Collaborating with Professional Artists for Original Content - CCO Talks with Thomas Hawk
It is interesting that Victoria mentions that she has sketched out some tips for artists participating in hacks during the Yorkshire Hack at the Digital Utopias Conference, Hull 2015 in a similar way: 'Victorias Rules for Hack Participants'
It would be interesting to hear the lists thoughts on these activities in relation to those tool kits and resources that, for example Emma and her team are developing to support the arts sector.
e:[log in to unmask]
Curator & Arts Producer
Thinking Digital Arts
On 16 Mar 2015, at 16:21, Johannes Birringer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> dear all
> sorry for hoping for more discussion time,
> Liam, could you tell us a little more about your making process in regard to your ideas on "organic developmental process", involving labor and
> participants, and how to avoid pressure on outcome
> in the discussion at hand, is the outcome driven methodologies of those who are both commissioning and funding creative endeavors. In all of the projects that I have been involved in, there is an overwhelming inference placed upon final, deliverable product with little or no interest or value placed upon processes or the development"
> It seems that in the brief discussion between Danny and me, regarding "Thinking with the Body", and also I suppose in regard to (overwhelming spread!) various projects that Irini mentioned (fostered by her programming at V&A and Watermans), this may not be entirely true, and that some curating indeed focuses on process and development, and other "values," as I tried to point out in mentioning Ralph Lemon's series at MoMA.
> Liam's point about the pressures of the industry is well taken, however, and here he is raising questions about precarity, and the lack of jobs or opportunities to survive creatively independently, something absolutely scary for most graduating in the performing arts.
> This pressure, for early stage identification of end product, is also at odds with a more the much more organic developmental processes that are form part of the core methodologies of fine art and design higher education. Meaning that many graduates are poorly equipped to engage with creative/tec industries that are perusing a marketable, commercially realised concept.
> After Liam, Simon Bowen came on and spoke about Knowledge Exchange Hub for the Creative Economy
> and 'digital making projects, with academic and creative/cultural industry partners" - but I could not really understand what it is that is digitally made
> and (earlier point in the discussion) who sets the agendas for collaborative learning and what is learnt? What is brokerage?
> You speak of a "mismatch", Simon, and that made me smile.("mismatch in terms of the pace of academic and industrial life (academia tending to be slower and more reflective/abstract, whereas industry tending to be quicker and more action-oriented and specific). This can be problematic in brokering and running such collaborations")
> Come and visit us some time, in our lab, our pace is very fast and we have to reflect on the fly....
> Johannes Birringer