JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives


NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives


NEW-MEDIA-CURATING@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Home

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Home

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING  January 2018

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING January 2018

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Antw: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] New Media Public Art Conversation

From:

Oliver Grau <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Oliver Grau <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 22 Jan 2018 18:03:11 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (1785 lines)

Dear Christiane, dear Colleagues,

I couldn't agree more regarding Co-collecting networks. They are a
great strategy, we could easily share in Europe, since most museums are
tax-payed and would be natural partners..

I am pleased to see this important and necessary discussion. In
November 2017, we also held an international panel on this issue with
colleagues like Giselle BEIGUELMAN, Howard BESSER, Patricia FALÇAO (UK),
Sarah KENDERDINE (CH), Marianne PING HUANG (DK), Christoph
THUN-HOHENSTEIN (AT) at Re: Trace, our 7th International Conference for
Histories of Media Art, Science, and Technology.  This discussion on the
precarious situation of media art research was based on our
international MediaArtHistory (Liverpool) declaration, signed by more
than 450 scholars and museum directors from 40 countries to date – you
find it on the platform of the field. There is urgent need to create
stable international platforms of interoperable archives, to share
resources to built expertise for collection and research.
http://www.mediaarthistory.org/declaration 

As we know, digital art is not collected systematically and in a
concerted strategy by museums/archives etc, because the basic structures
of the 200 year old institution date back to a time when different
artistic media prevailed. That is why we as citizens are facing a
massive problem in terms of democratic discourse via art. Although in
Europe most museums are financed by our taxes, they can´t fulfill their
official tasks in the range of digital contemporary art. A systematic
preservation requires the conjunction of museums and archives to bigger
expert networks. But this possibility isn´t even discussed yet. 

As we know, there are many challenges: fundamentally context-dependent,
processual, and ephemeral works of art; the rapid obsolescence of their
variable media substrates; unsustained strategies for migration,
emulation, and reinterpretation; and the lack of inter-institutional and
inter-national standards.  A concerted collection policy would be
located over the level of a single museum, and this meeting is a
remarkable glimpse of such a development to overcome single museums
limitations to preserve art in the 21th century due to its little
personal, budgetary and technical facilities. A regional or nationwide
network of expertise could help to preserve digital art with the
systematic help of main strategies developed in many case studies,
strategies such as emulation, recreation and interpretation. But it
depends on the will of those who are responsible for cultural policies.
This way our federalism in Germany and other countries could help
through a practice of shared responsibilities. In Germany for example
Bavaria could build such a network of expertise and then be responsible
for the preservation of – say - interactive Installations. Saxony one
for Bio Art, Brandenburg one for net art and so forth. 

First of all, art preservation remains by law responsibility by the
state alias (our) museums. But with media art, also the owners of soft-
and hardware companies, of new social networks, today are in a position
and responsibility to help museums/archives/libraries to preserve art on
the communication tools, which made them rich. For Media Art Collection
& Research a significant commitment has to be made: Let’s recall the
enormous and sustaining infrastructure that was developed for
traditional artistic media, painting, sculpture, architecture, even
film, photography and their corresponding archives over the course of
the 20th century. What is needed is an appropriate structure to preserve
at least the usual 1–6 per cent of present media art production. 

To achieve that, we need a concerted policy of collection and
preservation on a much larger scale, appropriate to serve the culture of
the 21st century. If we compare the world-wide available budget to
preserve and explore traditional art forms, then we understand how
inadequate the support for our present digital culture is; it is almost
statistically immeasurable. The faster this essential modification to
our cultural heritage record can be carried out, the smaller the gap in
the cultural memory. When we develop systematic and concerted strategies
of collecting, preservation and research we will be able to fulfill the
task which digital culture demands in the 21st Century. 


Here are also two recent contributions in german re our topic:
Archivierung von Medienkunst liegt brach"Museen sind auf Medienkunst
nicht vorbereitet", Interview Deutschlandfunk
http://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/archivierung-von-medienkunst-liegt-brach-museen-sind-auf.1013.de.html?dram%3Aarticle_id=408295


FAZ, 9.1. 2018 Wer stoppt den Verfall der Gegenwart? Von Nadja
Al-Khalaf
"Grütters’ Behörde verwies bisher auf die föderale Kompetenzregelung,
nach welcher die Erhaltung von Kunst- und Kulturgut in Deutschland Sache
der Bundesländer ist; und auf bestehende Modellprojekte wie das 2007 ins
Leben gerufene „Programm zur Konservierung und Restaurierung von mobilem
Kulturgut“ (KUR). Allerdings ist es solchen Initiativen nicht möglich,
flächendeckend und langfristig gegen den Verfall digitaler Kunst
vorzugehen. ... Ein von Bund und Ländern getragener Finanzierungsplan,
wie er zur Digitalisierung des deutschen Filmerbes mit Unterstützung der
Filmförderungsanstalt ab 2018 für zunächst zehn Jahre angesetzt wurde,
wäre ein erster Schritt. Je länger abgewartet wird, desto schwieriger
wird die Herausforderung, das kulturelle Erbe der unmittelbaren
Vergangenheit für die Zukunft zu bewahren."
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/kunst/erhalt-digitaler-kunstwerke-wer-stoppt-den-verfall-der-gegenwart-15380631.html


Many regards, Oliver 



>>> "Christiane Paul, Curatorial" <[log in to unmask]>
04.01.2018 04:56 >>>
Thanks, Richard! I couldn't agree more regarding efforts to increase
the percentage of digital works in museum collections. Co-collecting
networks are a great strategy. I finally was able to officially launch a
Digital Art Acquisition Committee at the Whitney Museum last year. We
had our first meeting in September, in which we purchased early works by
Chuck Csuri and Joan Truckenbrod, and — due to generous gifts by a
collector / committee member — we were able to also add works by
Rafael Rozendaal, Casey Reas, Jim Campbell and Siebren Versteeg to the
collection. I think museums have begun to make more of an effort to
build their collections in the digital area. Onwards...



________________________________
From: Curating digital art - www.crumbweb.org
<[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Richard Rinehart
<[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 3, 2018 6:20:05 PM
To: [log in to unmask] 
Subject: Re: New Media Public Art Conversation

Hi everyone,

Jon, you wrote about the secret to successful long-term digital
preservation, “...as much as I long for an officially funded
infrastructure, it's not that either. The secret is protocols that
ensure that a dedicated community has access to and permission to
re-create their cultural heritage, so that each generation acts like a
human Rosetta Stone.”

Perhaps it’s not surprising that I agree with you that - in addition
to considering technological solutions - the long term demands that we
also consider large scale social factors; the people that form those
dedicated communities and laws that grant them permission to re-create
and re-perform (digital) culture as necessary. You provided a compelling
allegory of one dedicated community in the form of a grassroots
indigenous Cambodian public preserving Khmer dance in the face of a
malevolent state. Of course, the public and the state comprise a complex
relationship and are not always opposites. This brings up a question
relevant to Sara’s discussion of the role of the public - which public
are we talking about? For instance, I can think of another relevant
dedicated community in the form of the global cultural heritage
community that spans private, non-profit independent institutions that
that act as part of society’s canon if not state apparatus per se, and
fully state institutions that see themselves as benevolent
manifestations of the public rather than it’s opposite.

Additionally, to take museums as an example, both AAM and ICOM define
museums as having an inextricable public component. We must be
open/accessible to the public and, in a more indirect way, we preserve
our collections not just for their current legal owners, but for
posterity, for the broader public. For me, discussions around the
long-term disposition of digital art (access, preservation,
presentation) in museums and other public entities are bound together by
history - not history as in the past but history as in ongoing social
memory.

But let’s bring it back to a more practical level and to the case
study of preservation as has been discussed. Christiane mentioned how
museums have spent millions of dollars/euros/etc. on preserving
collections. Oliver recounted the number of museums, internationally,
spending these sums (just one quick update; AAM recently upgraded the
number of museums in the U.S. from 14,000 to 35,000 using more accurate
tax records.) In these figures, we may see not only those dedicated
communities, but also that officially funded infrastructure. The public
has already gathered and directed vast resources in the form of museums
and cultural heritage institutions for the express purpose of preserving
(and presenting, describing, etc.) art. We certainly have a challenge in
altering the course of these behemoth institutions, even slightly, to
further incorporate digital art into our practices, budgets, and
collections, but we’re not starting from scratch either. Add to this
the ground work already laid by previous initiative such as the Variable
Media Initiative, Media Matters, etc.

I’d like to call upon the museums of the world to dedicate a small
percentage of our operations to collecting and preserving digital art.
And, following Oliver’s suggestion, perhaps1% is a reasonable figure
to aim for. It’s above where we are now.  At the recent Media Art
Histories conference, Patricia Falcao reported on the Tate’s efforts
to preserve digital art, showing a slide that indicated the Tate has
collected around 15 digital (software based) artworks, out of the
Tate’s 70,000 works. This proportion seems pretty standard between
small and very large institutions (please correct me if I’m wrong
here; I’m working from anecdotal evidence gathered over the years.)
For instance, it’s about the same proportion of digital works in my
own much smaller museum collection. So, for anyone on this list with a
modicum of influence in a relevant organization or institution; let’s
just up those numbers a bit. Let’s get 1% of museums forming active
co-collecting networks and let’s get 1% of all relevant museum
collections comprised of digital art. As Christiane suggested, this will
not only support digital artists, but it will serve public social
memory.


Richard Rinehart
Director
Samek Art Museum
Bucknell University
Lewisburg, PA 17837
570-577-3213
http://museum.bucknell.edu 



On December 16, 2017 at 2:57:02 PM, Timothy Conway Murray
([log in to unmask]) wrote:

Hi, everyone,

I’ve been following this thread with great interest since my
curatorial and preservation work has been caught in the vexing,
conflictual vortex of access and obsolescence. When I founded the Rose
Goldsen Archive for the New Media at the Cornell Library in 2002
(http://goldsen.library.cornell.edu -- I apologize that this website
is absurdly in need of updating), we enthusiastically brought together
large collections of art on CD-Rom, net.art, and documentation of
digital art and installation. Soon thereafter, partially due to the
influence of a few collecting opportunities, we expanded the parameters
of the archive from digital art to the broader history of electronic
art, with special emphasis on video art (with the result of now holding
the archives of the Experimental Television Center (ETC) and the
archives of the Film and Electronic Arts funding program of the New York
Council of the Arts [NYSCA]). Unlike some of our peers at the time, such
as Langlois in Montreal, V2 in The Netherlands, Database of Visual Art
in Berlin, and Asia Art Archive in Hong Kong, we placed as much emphasis
in collecting work as in building documentation, with the expectation
that researchers and artists could walk into the Cornell Library to view
materials on the hardware we made available.

Well, we know where this story headed in an incredibly short period of
time. Not only did access to most of Goldsen’s large collection of
CD-Rom art became dependent on aging machines and software, but software
for some of our net.art also became obsolete and very soon access to
flash via traditional browsers promises to disappear. Indeed, even
institutional priorities resulted in the downscaling of the Library’s
media center through which our users could have almost immediate access
to Goldsen’s art works on our aged machines. Although we have been
engaged in a systematic (but slow) digitization of the 3,000 titles of
ETC tapes we hold, we’ve been encouraged by the relative stability of
the tapes themselves (they were predicted to disappear far more rapidly
than access to CD-Rom). Throughout this perilous period, moreover,
we’ve taken some measures to maintain access and improve
documentation. In partnership with Helen Thorington and JoAnne Green of
Turbulence.org, for example, we profited from three successive grants
from the US National Endowment for the Arts to archive selected works of
Turbulence net.art off-line and established an artist’s questionnaire
along the lines of Variable Media Questionnaire regarding the work and
best practices which we preserve in the Archive. To date, we’ve
managed to keep almost of all the works we published on CTHEORY
MULTIMEDIA available (http://ctheorymultimedia.cornell.edu) contingent
upon the users update of flash. Most significantly, those pieces of
net.art continue to remain embedded in the conceptual design and
discursive frameworks for the exhibitions that I articulated with Arthur
and Marilouise Kroker.

Regarding the CD-Rom art, initially we worked with a handful of our
participating artists (almost the entire Goldsen Archive has been
assembled through the voluntary efforts of participating international
artists, collections, and centers) to replace their CDs with updated
versions (usually migrating from OS 9 to OS 10). But thanks to a
significant preservation grant from the US National Endowment for the
Humanities, we circulated similar questionnaires to artists and were
able to shift the emphasis from migration to emulation which has
provided us means to make available the vast majority of our CD-Roms on
emulated software platforms. Indeed, Simon Biggs would be able to come
back to Ithaca to enjoy his pioneering CD-Roms. At all times, however,
the emphasis has been less on strict standards of presentation than on
more ephemeral means of doing the best we can to provide current users
with the best possible access to “historical” digital art. You can
access the white paper from the grant at:
https://ecommons.cornell.edu/handle/1813/41368 

This flexible preservation goal (including preserving net.art off-line)
fits with Goldsen’s initial emphasis on “digital discourse” and
access to broad swaths of media in contrast to emphasis on successful
individual artists and the kinds of ideal standards sought by our museum
colleague’s intent of staying true to the intentionality of their
smaller stables of monetized artists. At every turn, the aim of Goldsen
has been to enhance digital discourse and the understanding of digital
artistic culture, which has given the young and unknown artist as much
credence as our most successful participants. In this context, our
hosting of the –empyre- listserv, managed by Renate Ferro of
Cornell’s Art Dept for now close to ten years, fits our commitment
to pairing original art into discursive conversation about its place in
the broader spectrum of digital culture. Even when access to Goldsen’s
holdings in CD-Rom and net.art becomes more difficult than it already
is, we hope to maintain continued access to the 15 year archive of
–empyre- since Melinda Rackham founded it in 2002 (actually,
although we run administration and the home page from Cornell, we’re
still fortunate to depend on the College of Art and Design at University
of New South Wales (formerly COFA of UNSW) for –empyre-‘s server and
online archive. It’s astonishing how detailed –empyre-’s many
postings are of both the artistic and cultural interfaces of the
hundreds of artworks discussed over the years. My sense is that as time
marches on we will benefit as much from these kinds of peripheral
discursive traces as from access to the artworks themselves.

For a sense of how Goldsen has tried to balance the triad of
artworks—discourse & networks—preservation, you can check the
online catalogue of our 2016 exhibition, “Signal to Code: 50 Years of
Media Art in the Rose Goldsen Archive”
(http://rmc.library.cornell.edu/signaltocode/). It was interesting
how a strong a place preservation ended up having in this exhibition
initially intended to foregrounding our collections and partners.

I hope this rather lengthy overview is helpful to the discussion at
hand.

All my best,

Tim



Timothy Murray
Director, Cornell Council for the Arts and Curator, CCA Biennial
http://cca.cornell.edu 
Curator, Rose Goldsen Archive of New Media Art
http://goldsen.library.cornell.edu
<http://goldsen.library.cornell.edu/>
Professor of Comparative Literature and English

114 West Sibley Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, New York 14853

2017-18 International Sea-Sky Scholar, School of Architecture and Fine
Art, Dalian University of Technology, China


On 12/15/17, 7:04 PM, "Curating digital art -
www.crumbweb.org<http://www.crumbweb.org> on behalf of
NEW-MEDIA-CURATING automatic digest system"
<[log in to unmask] on behalf of
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

There are 3 messages totaling 1360 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

1. New Media Public Art Conversation (3)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 22:14:37 +0930
From: melinda rackham <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: New Media Public Art Conversation

good point Sean

but when i think about it a lot of that work was made specifically to
have instant access to an audience and route around the artful
institutions of curation and collectability, in a post punk DIY way.. It
wanted to utilise windows of opportunity, software glitches or exploit
hardware , stretch new programming languages, it was 'of the moment'
unconcerned with longevity. personally one 1998 very beautiful web-work
only exits in my memory while older very basic HTML have mostly
survived.

I recall John Klima in an -empyre- forum maybe 15 years ago, proposing
that updating his web work would be his superannuation— that future
hasn't arrived for 99% of those artists or artworks. art careers are
mostly made by those who come to formats/technologies when they become
unexperimental, safe, mainstream, have an invested stable critical mass.
Pioneers if you can bear to use that word - perhaps players is a better
description - moved sideways to continue playing or went off elsewhere.
There are of course a few exceptions who've adapted and grown their
experimentalities into monetised art products.

there have been a lot of conversations on
archiving/migration/duplication over the past two decades, and i’ve
shifted from pro to no. Coming from a conceptual and political
haertland, some artists have taken their work offline to deliberately
disappear it. Simon mentions Alzheimers - Amanda mentions the end game
of capitalism, both lossy states. To me now conservation is a broadly
cultural lament. digital loss and ephemerality feel a bit like the
scattered photos of teenage years - of bad perms and forgotten love
interests.

maybe it's only productive to sentimentalise those follies cloaked
under ivy to prevent them from fading from glory in our own minds,
rather than as useful to another generation who could never even imagine
what it was like before ubiquitous connection.

M

> On 15 Dec 2017, at 7:29 am, Sean Cubitt <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Hi Simon, Amanda
> greetings from icy Boston MA
>
> As someone who contributed probably to that ‘inappropriate
documentation’ a little thought on the archive and the experiential.
What we reviewers and critics like to do is parade our concepts: this
has become increasingly the case I think as a distant observer of
artworld publications. Good clean fun if you’re in the game, but
lacking the archival outcome of documentation
>
> When we write, there’s a good rule of thumb: that a dscription of
the experience of the work is a great place to start, which too many
times we leapfrog. The look and feel sentences are crucial to future
readers (and to many contemporaries who may not be able to visit a
site-specifc or temporary installation). A verbal sketch of size,
volume, colour gamut, location, interaction is at least as valuable as
the conceptual elements (though these too form part of the archaeology
of the present: I don’t want to disparage my own profession too much)
>
> Archives like Rewind collect documents and oral histories as well as
what we can save of the early electronic arts. Simon reminds us that
what Amanda aptly names ‘experiential’ works need us writers too to
supply some sense of the smell, tactility, heat signatures and
audiovisual actuality of the things and events we experience
>
> Archiving starts today
>
> sean
>
>> On 14 Dec 2017, at 16:44, Amanda McDonald Crowley
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Interesting thoughts Simon,
>>
>> I am not sure that it is quite an existential threat, as a curator,
as you
>> might think. Particularly as New Media Curators, many of us think
of
>> ourselves as curating platforms that are experiential, rather than
>> collections of objects or works. (Apologies to my museum curators on
this
>> list, and for this very broad generalization.)
>>
>> Though I was having an email conversation with my colleague Fran
Illich
>> recently about the archive. As you are right, many of the projects
I've
>> developed and institutions I have led have had their primary
documentation
>> on the interwebs rather than in printed publications. So, like you
as an
>> artist, a lot of the projects I have developed as a curator also no
longer
>> exist. Internet platforms become obsolete, hard drives die, new
people
>> choose new ways to document histories and archives. So yes: like
you, I
>> have also gotten used to the idea of losing stuff; and I agree that
it
>> feels a bot like losing bits of yourself.
>>
>> Today, sitting in the USA as the FCC overturns Net Neutrality
rulings, I
>> fear that you're right. The internet, at least as we know it, might
indeed
>> be gone sooner than we think.
>>
>> Amanda
>>
>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Simon Biggs
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Until a few years ago I spent a good part of my time each year
migrating
>>> old projects to new versions of the platforms they were produced
with, to
>>> ensure they remained technically contemporaneous.. I’ve stopped
doing that.
>>> I don’t have the time and the changes in the platforms have
become to
>>> radical to migrate between. Some platforms simply don’t exist
anymore and
>>> there is no proxy for them. I do keep old hardware and OS
environments,
>>> with relevant software, to run legacy works - but gradually the
computers
>>> die as the batteries give out and other critical elements retire
>>> themselves. There are quite a few of my works I’ve not seen for
some years.
>>> for me they are just memories and some inappropriate documentation.
For
>>> others they aren’t even that - they may as well have never
existed.
>>>
>>> I guess I’ve got use to the idea of losing stuff. It does feel a
bit like
>>> losing bits of yourself though. Is this what Alzheimer’s is
like?
>>>
>>> Perhaps when the internet is gone (it will be, sooner than we
think) we
>>> will suffer a form of collective Alzheimer’s. Many of us invested
a lot,
>>> individually and collectively, into the net.
>>>
>>> As a younger artist I celebrated the temporal and fleeting
character of
>>> media art. It was part of the rationale for the work - it had no
future (a
>>> bit like the World at the time) and thus couldn’t be commodified
(of course
>>> some artists work was commodified). My current work is no different
though.
>>> I’ve either not learned from my mistakes or I am simply stuck in
my ways,
>>> as I continue to work with systems that regularly become redundant.
It is
>>> the nature of media art and if you are going to work in this field
you have
>>> to live with that - indeed, you need to make it a feature.
>>>
>>> Whilst this is troubling for the artist I imagine for the curator
it is an
>>> existential threat.
>>>
>>> best
>>>
>>> Simon
>>>
>>> Simon Biggs
>>> [log in to unmask] 
>>> http://www.littlepig.org.uk 
>>> http://amazon.com/author/simonbiggs 
>>>
http://www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/staff/homepage.asp?name=simon.biggs

>>> http://www.eca.ed.ac.uk/school-of-art/simon-biggs 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 14 Dec 2017, at 21:34, Mike Stubbs <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>> co-design
>>>> better contracting and understanding of contracts (both sides)
>>>> stop using the term perpitutity
>>>> acceptance of temporality
>>>> a plan for legacy or limited duration
>>>> budget accordingly
>>>>
>>>> id love rafas input here ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 13 December 2017 at 20:18, Diamond, Sara <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Paul,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for responding. These stories are hair raising. What do
you
>>> think
>>>>> would be a solution? Shorter term exhibitions that then can be
>>>>> decommissioned elegantly? Required budget for maintenance? Whose
>>>>> responsibility is this? How do you manage (and your family!)
platform
>>>>> change?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Interested to know....
>>>>>
>>>>> DR. SARA DIAMOND
>>>>> PRESIDENT & VICE-CHANCELLOR,
>>>>> O. OF ONT., RCA
>>>>> T 416 977 6000 x300
>>>>> E [log in to unmask] 
>>>>> OCAD UNIVERSITY
>>>>> 100 McCaul Street, Toronto, Canada, M5T 1W1
>>>>> www.ocadu.ca<http://ocadu.ca/>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://facebook.com/ocaduniversity 
>>>>> http://twitter.com/OCAD 
>>>>> https://www.instagram.com/ocaduniversity/ 
>>>>>
>>>>> IGNITE IMAGINATION!
>>>>> OUR MANDATE IS NOT SIMPLY TO IMAGINE THE FUTURE,
>>>>> BUT TO HELP CREATE IT.
>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>> From: Paul Brown <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> Sent: December 4, 2017 6:50:50 PM
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask] 
>>>>> Cc: Diamond, Sara
>>>>> Subject: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] New Media Public Art
Conversation
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Sara
>>>>>
>>>>> 3. What makes a new media public art work fail?
>>>>>
>>>>> In my experience - as someone who has made several major public
art
>>> works,
>>>>> some dating back to the 1960’s - is that it’s fairly easy to
get big
>>> chunks
>>>>> of upfront money to commission a public artwork but very
difficult to
>>> get
>>>>> recurrent funding to maintain them. This is a particular problem
for
>>>>> non-static artworks and it’s also true for most art projects
not just
>>> ones
>>>>> in the public domain. I am full of respect for Changi Airport’s
policy
>>> in
>>>>> this regard - they have a number of extremely complex artworks
that are
>>>>> rarely out of order:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.changiairport.com/en/airport-experience/ 
>>>>> attractions-and-services/kinetic-rain.html — this is just one
of
>>> several.
>>>>>
>>>>> My own worst experience is with the artwork pictured below.
During the
>>>>> commissioning process the local council public artwork managers
insisted
>>>>> that the building developers included a clause in the eventual
building
>>>>> managers contract insisting they take out ongoing maintenance
cover for
>>> the
>>>>> work. It now turns out that they didn’t and the artwork has
stopped
>>>>> working (after 5 years) with no plans to repair it. I am, of
course,
>>>>> disappointed but there’s nothing I can do about it.
>>>>>
>>>>> My partner Wendy Mills has made many public artworks that are
now
>>>>> decommissioned or in storage like this one:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://wendy-mills.com/public/occasi.htm 
>>>>>
>>>>> … and my son Daniel has similar experiences as for example with
his
>>> Video
>>>>> Wall Installation for W Hotels
>>>>>
>>>>> http://danielbrowns.com — and scroll down or search for “W
Hotels" to
>>>>> view.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you’d like to know more please get in touch.
>>>>>
>>>>> All best
>>>>> Paul
>>>>>
>>>>> The image was rejected by the listserv so use this link instead:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.paul-brown.com/GALLERY/PUBLICAR/fourdragons-01.HTM 
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul Brown, Four Dragons, LED display, 1750 x 1750 mm, 2012
>>>>> Art Management: Brecknock Consulting
>>>>> The time-based version is here<http://www.paul-brown.
>>> com/GALLERY/TIMEBASE/
>>>>> fourdragons/index.html>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ====
>>>>> Paul Brown
>>>>> http://www.paul-brown.com == http://www.brown-and-son.com 
>>>>> UK Mobile +44 (0)794 104 8228
>>>>> Skype paul-g-brown
>>>>> ====
>>>>> Honorary Visiting Professor - Sussex University
>>>>> http://www.cogs.susx.ac.uk/ccnr/research/creativity.html 
>>>>> ====
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> @MikeStubbs
>>>> Director
>>>> FACT
>>>> www.fact.co.uk<http://www.fact.co.uk>
>>>>
>>>> 88 Wood Street
>>>> Liverpool L1 4DQ
>>>>
>>>> + 44 (0) 151 707 4444
>>>>
>>>> skype name: mikestubbs45
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> *Wu Tsang: *
>>>>
>>>> *Under Cinema* <http://www.fact.co.uk/undercinema>
>>>>
>>>> *26 October 2017 – 18 **February 2018*
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> *Future Aleppo
<http://www.fact.co.uk/projects/future-aleppo.aspx>*
>>>>
>>>> *9 November 2017 - 7 January 2018*
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *The contents of this email and any attachments are intended
solely for
>>> the
>>>> original recipient(s). If you have received it in error please
contact
>>> the
>>>> sender immediately by returning the e-mail or by telephoning a
number
>>>> contained in the body of the e-mail, then please delete the
e-mail
>>>> immediately without disclosing its contents. No responsibility is
>>> accepted
>>>> for loss or damage arising from viruses or changes made to this
message
>>>> after it was sent. The views contained in this email are those of
the
>>>> author and not necessarily those of the authors employer or
service
>>>> provider.*
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Amanda McDonald Crowley
>> curator/ cultural worker
>> publicartaction.net
>>
>> instagram/ twitter/ facebook
>> @amandamcdc
>>
>> Current Exhibition:
>> MaryKate Maher, View Finder
<http://publicartaction.net/view-finder-2/> at
>> Little Metal Print, Nov 3 - Dec 3, 2017
>>
>> Recent Writing:
>> Grow Food Make Ar
>> <http://www.voca.network/blog/tag/amanda-mcdonald-crowley/>t,
Juanli
>> Carrión's OSS Marble Hill on Voices for Contemporary Art blog
>>
>> Public Art Projects:
>> Soundview Market Place
<https://www.facebook.com/soundviewmarketplace/>
>> with YMPJ <http://www.ympj.org/>, Bronx NYC
>> Agrikultura <http://agrikultura.triennal.se/>: art + agriculture in
>> southern Sweden
>> Swale <http://swaleny.org/>: Mary Mattingly
<http://www.marymattingly.com/>'s
>> floating food forest on NYC waterways

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 15:13:24 +0000
From: "Christiane Paul, Curatorial" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: New Media Public Art Conversation

Thanks, Melinda! You know how much I respect your work and you make a
coherent argument, but I also feel obliged to completely disagree.


Granted, not all art (across all media) needs to be preserved, and
there also are works that need to be ephemeral, and perhaps live on in
oral history. I know (art) history is a construct but we would be
writing a very obscure and culturally irresponsible history if digital
art — in all its manifestations, from physical to highly conceptual
and ephemeral — would be omitted from it. Over centuries art
institutions have gone to great lengths and spent millions of $ to
preserve artworks in different media, including highly fragile,
ephemeral, and conceptual works. They collected and took care of them
because they believed in their cultural value. The problem has been that
digital art from the 60s onwards has been 'undervalued' and only in
recent years has begun to enter collections and be preserved to tell a
more inclusive history.


We already had moments in the 60s/70s when conceptual, digital, and
other practices existed side by side (I'm thinking of the New Tendencies
exhibitions) and digital work then dropped out while conceptual art
became a dominant narrative. We are just beginning to rewrite forgotten
histories.


There have been artists who have been recognized by the art world who
have also engaged with digital media, which immediately put their work
into more of an institutional context. With all due respect to their
work, would you think a digital art history that consists of Jenny
Holzer's web-based work, Laurie Anderson's VR projects, Jeff Koons AR
piece and Cindy Sherman's selfies is a good representation of digital
media art practice?


I believe that younger generations and artists have a lot to learn from
early digital art and networked practices. Judging from the responses of
many young artists and my students they love that art and still get a
kick out of and are inspired by the net art of the 90s which helps them
to make sense out of and understand today's 'post-Internet' practices.


Christiane




________________________________
From: Curating digital art - www.crumbweb.org<http://www.crumbweb.org>
<[log in to unmask]> on behalf of melinda rackham
<[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 7:44:37 AM
To: [log in to unmask] 
Subject: Re: New Media Public Art Conversation

good point Sean

but when i think about it a lot of that work was made specifically to
have instant access to an audience and route around the artful
institutions of curation and collectability, in a post punk DIY way.. It
wanted to utilise windows of opportunity, software glitches or exploit
hardware , stretch new programming languages, it was 'of the moment'
unconcerned with longevity. personally one 1998 very beautiful web-work
only exits in my memory while older very basic HTML have mostly
survived.

I recall John Klima in an -empyre- forum maybe 15 years ago, proposing
that updating his web work would be his superannuation— that future
hasn't arrived for 99% of those artists or artworks. art careers are
mostly made by those who come to formats/technologies when they become
unexperimental, safe, mainstream, have an invested stable critical mass.
Pioneers if you can bear to use that word - perhaps players is a better
description - moved sideways to continue playing or went off elsewhere.
There are of course a few exceptions who've adapted and grown their
experimentalities into monetised art products.

there have been a lot of conversations on
archiving/migration/duplication over the past two decades, and i’ve
shifted from pro to no. Coming from a conceptual and political
haertland, some artists have taken their work offline to deliberately
disappear it. Simon mentions Alzheimers - Amanda mentions the end game
of capitalism, both lossy states. To me now conservation is a broadly
cultural lament. digital loss and ephemerality feel a bit like the
scattered photos of teenage years - of bad perms and forgotten love
interests.

maybe it's only productive to sentimentalise those follies cloaked
under ivy to prevent them from fading from glory in our own minds,
rather than as useful to another generation who could never even imagine
what it was like before ubiquitous connection.

M

> On 15 Dec 2017, at 7:29 am, Sean Cubitt <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Hi Simon, Amanda
> greetings from icy Boston MA
>
> As someone who contributed probably to that ‘inappropriate
documentation’ a little thought on the archive and the experiential.
What we reviewers and critics like to do is parade our concepts: this
has become increasingly the case I think as a distant observer of
artworld publications. Good clean fun if you’re in the game, but
lacking the archival outcome of documentation
>
> When we write, there’s a good rule of thumb: that a dscription of
the experience of the work is a great place to start, which too many
times we leapfrog. The look and feel sentences are crucial to future
readers (and to many contemporaries who may not be able to visit a
site-specifc or temporary installation). A verbal sketch of size,
volume, colour gamut, location, interaction is at least as valuable as
the conceptual elements (though these too form part of the archaeology
of the present: I don’t want to disparage my own profession too much)
>
> Archives like Rewind collect documents and oral histories as well as
what we can save of the early electronic arts. Simon reminds us that
what Amanda aptly names ‘experiential’ works need us writers too to
supply some sense of the smell, tactility, heat signatures and
audiovisual actuality of the things and events we experience
>
> Archiving starts today
>
> sean
>
>> On 14 Dec 2017, at 16:44, Amanda McDonald Crowley
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Interesting thoughts Simon,
>>
>> I am not sure that it is quite an existential threat, as a curator,
as you
>> might think. Particularly as New Media Curators, many of us think
of
>> ourselves as curating platforms that are experiential, rather than
>> collections of objects or works. (Apologies to my museum curators on
this
>> list, and for this very broad generalization.)
>>
>> Though I was having an email conversation with my colleague Fran
Illich
>> recently about the archive. As you are right, many of the projects
I've
>> developed and institutions I have led have had their primary
documentation
>> on the interwebs rather than in printed publications. So, like you
as an
>> artist, a lot of the projects I have developed as a curator also no
longer
>> exist. Internet platforms become obsolete, hard drives die, new
people
>> choose new ways to document histories and archives. So yes: like
you, I
>> have also gotten used to the idea of losing stuff; and I agree that
it
>> feels a bot like losing bits of yourself.
>>
>> Today, sitting in the USA as the FCC overturns Net Neutrality
rulings, I
>> fear that you're right. The internet, at least as we know it, might
indeed
>> be gone sooner than we think.
>>
>> Amanda
>>
>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Simon Biggs
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Until a few years ago I spent a good part of my time each year
migrating
>>> old projects to new versions of the platforms they were produced
with, to
>>> ensure they remained technically contemporaneous.. I’ve stopped
doing that.
>>> I don’t have the time and the changes in the platforms have
become to
>>> radical to migrate between. Some platforms simply don’t exist
anymore and
>>> there is no proxy for them. I do keep old hardware and OS
environments,
>>> with relevant software, to run legacy works - but gradually the
computers
>>> die as the batteries give out and other critical elements retire
>>> themselves. There are quite a few of my works I’ve not seen for
some years.
>>> for me they are just memories and some inappropriate documentation.
For
>>> others they aren’t even that - they may as well have never
existed.
>>>
>>> I guess I’ve got use to the idea of losing stuff. It does feel a
bit like
>>> losing bits of yourself though. Is this what Alzheimer’s is
like?
>>>
>>> Perhaps when the internet is gone (it will be, sooner than we
think) we
>>> will suffer a form of collective Alzheimer’s. Many of us invested
a lot,
>>> individually and collectively, into the net.
>>>
>>> As a younger artist I celebrated the temporal and fleeting
character of
>>> media art. It was part of the rationale for the work - it had no
future (a
>>> bit like the World at the time) and thus couldn’t be commodified
(of course
>>> some artists work was commodified). My current work is no different
though.
>>> I’ve either not learned from my mistakes or I am simply stuck in
my ways,
>>> as I continue to work with systems that regularly become redundant.
It is
>>> the nature of media art and if you are going to work in this field
you have
>>> to live with that - indeed, you need to make it a feature.
>>>
>>> Whilst this is troubling for the artist I imagine for the curator
it is an
>>> existential threat.
>>>
>>> best
>>>
>>> Simon
>>>
>>> Simon Biggs
>>> [log in to unmask] 
>>> http://www.littlepig.org.uk 
>>> http://amazon.com/author/simonbiggs 
>>>
http://www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/staff/homepage.asp?name=simon.biggs

>>> http://www.eca.ed.ac.uk/school-of-art/simon-biggs 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 14 Dec 2017, at 21:34, Mike Stubbs <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>> co-design
>>>> better contracting and understanding of contracts (both sides)
>>>> stop using the term perpitutity
>>>> acceptance of temporality
>>>> a plan for legacy or limited duration
>>>> budget accordingly
>>>>
>>>> id love rafas input here ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 13 December 2017 at 20:18, Diamond, Sara <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Paul,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for responding. These stories are hair raising. What do
you
>>> think
>>>>> would be a solution? Shorter term exhibitions that then can be
>>>>> decommissioned elegantly? Required budget for maintenance? Whose
>>>>> responsibility is this? How do you manage (and your family!)
platform
>>>>> change?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Interested to know....
>>>>>
>>>>> DR. SARA DIAMOND
>>>>> PRESIDENT & VICE-CHANCELLOR,
>>>>> O. OF ONT., RCA
>>>>> T 416 977 6000 x300
>>>>> E [log in to unmask] 
>>>>> OCAD UNIVERSITY
>>>>> 100 McCaul Street, Toronto, Canada, M5T 1W1
>>>>> www.ocadu.ca<http://ocadu.ca/>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://facebook.com/ocaduniversity 
>>>>> http://twitter.com/OCAD 
>>>>> https://www.instagram.com/ocaduniversity/ 
>>>>>
>>>>> IGNITE IMAGINATION!
>>>>> OUR MANDATE IS NOT SIMPLY TO IMAGINE THE FUTURE,
>>>>> BUT TO HELP CREATE IT.
>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>> From: Paul Brown <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> Sent: December 4, 2017 6:50:50 PM
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask] 
>>>>> Cc: Diamond, Sara
>>>>> Subject: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] New Media Public Art
Conversation
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Sara
>>>>>
>>>>> 3. What makes a new media public art work fail?
>>>>>
>>>>> In my experience - as someone who has made several major public
art
>>> works,
>>>>> some dating back to the 1960’s - is that it’s fairly easy to
get big
>>> chunks
>>>>> of upfront money to commission a public artwork but very
difficult to
>>> get
>>>>> recurrent funding to maintain them. This is a particular problem
for
>>>>> non-static artworks and it’s also true for most art projects
not just
>>> ones
>>>>> in the public domain. I am full of respect for Changi Airport’s
policy
>>> in
>>>>> this regard - they have a number of extremely complex artworks
that are
>>>>> rarely out of order:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.changiairport.com/en/airport-experience/ 
>>>>> attractions-and-services/kinetic-rain.html — this is just one
of
>>> several.
>>>>>
>>>>> My own worst experience is with the artwork pictured below.
During the
>>>>> commissioning process the local council public artwork managers
insisted
>>>>> that the building developers included a clause in the eventual
building
>>>>> managers contract insisting they take out ongoing maintenance
cover for
>>> the
>>>>> work. It now turns out that they didn’t and the artwork has
stopped
>>>>> working (after 5 years) with no plans to repair it. I am, of
course,
>>>>> disappointed but there’s nothing I can do about it.
>>>>>
>>>>> My partner Wendy Mills has made many public artworks that are
now
>>>>> decommissioned or in storage like this one:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://wendy-mills.com/public/occasi.htm 
>>>>>
>>>>> … and my son Daniel has similar experiences as for example with
his
>>> Video
>>>>> Wall Installation for W Hotels
>>>>>
>>>>> http://danielbrowns.com — and scroll down or search for “W
Hotels" to
>>>>> view.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you’d like to know more please get in touch.
>>>>>
>>>>> All best
>>>>> Paul
>>>>>
>>>>> The image was rejected by the listserv so use this link instead:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.paul-brown.com/GALLERY/PUBLICAR/fourdragons-01.HTM 
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul Brown, Four Dragons, LED display, 1750 x 1750 mm, 2012
>>>>> Art Management: Brecknock Consulting
>>>>> The time-based version is here<http://www.paul-brown.
>>> com/GALLERY/TIMEBASE/
>>>>> fourdragons/index.html>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ====
>>>>> Paul Brown
>>>>> http://www.paul-brown.com == http://www.brown-and-son.com 
>>>>> UK Mobile +44 (0)794 104 8228
>>>>> Skype paul-g-brown
>>>>> ====
>>>>> Honorary Visiting Professor - Sussex University
>>>>> http://www.cogs.susx.ac.uk/ccnr/research/creativity.html 
>>>>> ====
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> @MikeStubbs
>>>> Director
>>>> FACT
>>>> www.fact.co.uk<http://www.fact.co.uk>
>>>>
>>>> 88 Wood Street
>>>> Liverpool L1 4DQ
>>>>
>>>> + 44 (0) 151 707 4444
>>>>
>>>> skype name: mikestubbs45
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> *?Wu Tsang: ?*
>>>>
>>>> *Under Cinema* <http://www.fact.co.uk/undercinema>
>>>>
>>>> *26 October 2017 – 18 **February 2018*
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> *Future Aleppo
<http://www.fact.co.uk/projects/future-aleppo.aspx>*
>>>>
>>>> *9 November 2017 - 7 January 2018*
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *The contents of this email and any attachments are intended
solely for
>>> the
>>>> original recipient(s). If you have received it in error please
contact
>>> the
>>>> sender immediately by returning the e-mail or by telephoning a
number
>>>> contained in the body of the e-mail, then please delete the
e-mail
>>>> immediately without disclosing its contents. No responsibility is
>>> accepted
>>>> for loss or damage arising from viruses or changes made to this
message
>>>> after it was sent. The views contained in this email are those of
the
>>>> author and not necessarily those of the authors employer or
service
>>>> provider.*
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Amanda McDonald Crowley
>> curator/ cultural worker
>> publicartaction.net
>>
>> instagram/ twitter/ facebook
>> @amandamcdc
>>
>> Current Exhibition:
>> MaryKate Maher, View Finder
<http://publicartaction.net/view-finder-2/> at
>> Little Metal Print, Nov 3 - Dec 3, 2017
>>
>> Recent Writing:
>> Grow Food Make Ar
>> <http://www.voca.network/blog/tag/amanda-mcdonald-crowley/>t,
Juanli
>> Carrión's OSS Marble Hill on Voices for Contemporary Art blog
>>
>> Public Art Projects:
>> Soundview Market Place
<https://www.facebook.com/soundviewmarketplace/>
>> with YMPJ <http://www.ympj.org/>, Bronx NYC
>> Agrikultura <http://agrikultura.triennal.se/>: art + agriculture in
>> southern Sweden
>> Swale <http://swaleny.org/>: Mary Mattingly
<http://www.marymattingly.com/>'s
>> floating food forest on NYC waterways

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2017 08:30:08 +1030
From: Simon Biggs <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: New Media Public Art Conversation

There are two ways of seeing this argument (Christiane’s and
Melinda’s). I can appreciate aspects of both - but find neither
satisfying.

If we are to see art as a teleology then it is important that younger
artists have the opportunity to learn from previous practices. In this
context the canonising of art practice, as a form of cultural
accumulation, is important and curators get to keep their jobs. But if
art isn’t teleological (and culture is not a program of progression)
then it is OK for artists to reinvent the wheel in ignorance of prior
activity. In this latter scenario we are all amateurs and none of us
have jobs (except the anthropologists).

Considering the value of these two opposed views depends on whether you
think art is a personal journey or a collective one. I tend to the
latter view - but that’s because I’m a professional artist. The very
definition of the amateur or outsider artist is that of the deeply
personal journey art might be. There’s a lot to be admired about that
approach.

I am in a constant tussle between these polar positions, but know that
neither is satisfying. I started out as a young artist on a personal
journey and somewhere along the line its became codified as a
professional one. Perhaps the problem is that each approach operates
within the same inconsequential box that is the human. Some have
suggested art is a means by which we transcend the human, but it could
be argued art is the means by which we recognise our limits. Within the
context of a post-human world-view none of this seems of particular
consequence.

Rather like angels on pinheads, we could argue this reductio ad
absurdum - but we know there aren’t really any angels anyway.

best

Simon


Simon Biggs
[log in to unmask] 
http://www.littlepig.org.uk 
http://amazon.com/author/simonbiggs 
http://www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/staff/homepage.asp?name=simon.biggs 
http://www.eca.ed.ac.uk/school-of-art/simon-biggs 








> On 16 Dec 2017, at 01:43, Christiane Paul, Curatorial
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Thanks, Melinda! You know how much I respect your work and you make a
coherent argument, but I also feel obliged to completely disagree.
>
>
> Granted, not all art (across all media) needs to be preserved, and
there also are works that need to be ephemeral, and perhaps live on in
oral history. I know (art) history is a construct but we would be
writing a very obscure and culturally irresponsible history if digital
art — in all its manifestations, from physical to highly conceptual
and ephemeral — would be omitted from it. Over centuries art
institutions have gone to great lengths and spent millions of $ to
preserve artworks in different media, including highly fragile,
ephemeral, and conceptual works. They collected and took care of them
because they believed in their cultural value. The problem has been that
digital art from the 60s onwards has been 'undervalued' and only in
recent years has begun to enter collections and be preserved to tell a
more inclusive history.
>
>
> We already had moments in the 60s/70s when conceptual, digital, and
other practices existed side by side (I'm thinking of the New Tendencies
exhibitions) and digital work then dropped out while conceptual art
became a dominant narrative. We are just beginning to rewrite forgotten
histories.
>
>
> There have been artists who have been recognized by the art world who
have also engaged with digital media, which immediately put their work
into more of an institutional context. With all due respect to their
work, would you think a digital art history that consists of Jenny
Holzer's web-based work, Laurie Anderson's VR projects, Jeff Koons AR
piece and Cindy Sherman's selfies is a good representation of digital
media art practice?
>
>
> I believe that younger generations and artists have a lot to learn
from early digital art and networked practices. Judging from the
responses of many young artists and my students they love that art and
still get a kick out of and are inspired by the net art of the 90s which
helps them to make sense out of and understand today's 'post-Internet'
practices.
>
>
> Christiane
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Curating digital art -
www.crumbweb.org<http://www.crumbweb.org>
<[log in to unmask]> on behalf of melinda rackham
<[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 7:44:37 AM
> To: [log in to unmask] 
> Subject: Re: New Media Public Art Conversation
>
> good point Sean
>
> but when i think about it a lot of that work was made specifically to
have instant access to an audience and route around the artful
institutions of curation and collectability, in a post punk DIY way.. It
wanted to utilise windows of opportunity, software glitches or exploit
hardware , stretch new programming languages, it was 'of the moment'
unconcerned with longevity. personally one 1998 very beautiful web-work
only exits in my memory while older very basic HTML have mostly
survived.
>
> I recall John Klima in an -empyre- forum maybe 15 years ago,
proposing that updating his web work would be his superannuation— that
future hasn't arrived for 99% of those artists or artworks. art careers
are mostly made by those who come to formats/technologies when they
become unexperimental, safe, mainstream, have an invested stable
critical mass. Pioneers if you can bear to use that word - perhaps
players is a better description - moved sideways to continue playing or
went off elsewhere. There are of course a few exceptions who've adapted
and grown their experimentalities into monetised art products.
>
> there have been a lot of conversations on
archiving/migration/duplication over the past two decades, and i’ve
shifted from pro to no. Coming from a conceptual and political
haertland, some artists have taken their work offline to deliberately
disappear it. Simon mentions Alzheimers - Amanda mentions the end game
of capitalism, both lossy states. To me now conservation is a broadly
cultural lament. digital loss and ephemerality feel a bit like the
scattered photos of teenage years - of bad perms and forgotten love
interests.
>
> maybe it's only productive to sentimentalise those follies cloaked
under ivy to prevent them from fading from glory in our own minds,
rather than as useful to another generation who could never even imagine
what it was like before ubiquitous connection.
>
> M
>
>> On 15 Dec 2017, at 7:29 am, Sean Cubitt <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>>
>> Hi Simon, Amanda
>> greetings from icy Boston MA
>>
>> As someone who contributed probably to that ‘inappropriate
documentation’ a little thought on the archive and the experiential.
What we reviewers and critics like to do is parade our concepts: this
has become increasingly the case I think as a distant observer of
artworld publications. Good clean fun if you’re in the game, but
lacking the archival outcome of documentation
>>
>> When we write, there’s a good rule of thumb: that a dscription of
the experience of the work is a great place to start, which too many
times we leapfrog. The look and feel sentences are crucial to future
readers (and to many contemporaries who may not be able to visit a
site-specifc or temporary installation). A verbal sketch of size,
volume, colour gamut, location, interaction is at least as valuable as
the conceptual elements (though these too form part of the archaeology
of the present: I don’t want to disparage my own profession too much)
>>
>> Archives like Rewind collect documents and oral histories as well as
what we can save of the early electronic arts. Simon reminds us that
what Amanda aptly names ‘experiential’ works need us writers too to
supply some sense of the smell, tactility, heat signatures and
audiovisual actuality of the things and events we experience
>>
>> Archiving starts today
>>
>> sean
>>
>>> On 14 Dec 2017, at 16:44, Amanda McDonald Crowley
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Interesting thoughts Simon,
>>>
>>> I am not sure that it is quite an existential threat, as a curator,
as you
>>> might think. Particularly as New Media Curators, many of us think
of
>>> ourselves as curating platforms that are experiential, rather than
>>> collections of objects or works. (Apologies to my museum curators
on this
>>> list, and for this very broad generalization.)
>>>
>>> Though I was having an email conversation with my colleague Fran
Illich
>>> recently about the archive. As you are right, many of the projects
I've
>>> developed and institutions I have led have had their primary
documentation
>>> on the interwebs rather than in printed publications. So, like you
as an
>>> artist, a lot of the projects I have developed as a curator also no
longer
>>> exist. Internet platforms become obsolete, hard drives die, new
people
>>> choose new ways to document histories and archives. So yes: like
you, I
>>> have also gotten used to the idea of losing stuff; and I agree that
it
>>> feels a bot like losing bits of yourself.
>>>
>>> Today, sitting in the USA as the FCC overturns Net Neutrality
rulings, I
>>> fear that you're right. The internet, at least as we know it, might
indeed
>>> be gone sooner than we think.
>>>
>>> Amanda
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Simon Biggs
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Until a few years ago I spent a good part of my time each year
migrating
>>>> old projects to new versions of the platforms they were produced
with, to
>>>> ensure they remained technically contemporaneous.. I’ve stopped
doing that.
>>>> I don’t have the time and the changes in the platforms have
become to
>>>> radical to migrate between. Some platforms simply don’t exist
anymore and
>>>> there is no proxy for them. I do keep old hardware and OS
environments,
>>>> with relevant software, to run legacy works - but gradually the
computers
>>>> die as the batteries give out and other critical elements retire
>>>> themselves. There are quite a few of my works I’ve not seen for
some years.
>>>> for me they are just memories and some inappropriate
documentation. For
>>>> others they aren’t even that - they may as well have never
existed.
>>>>
>>>> I guess I’ve got use to the idea of losing stuff. It does feel a
bit like
>>>> losing bits of yourself though. Is this what Alzheimer’s is
like?
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps when the internet is gone (it will be, sooner than we
think) we
>>>> will suffer a form of collective Alzheimer’s. Many of us
invested a lot,
>>>> individually and collectively, into the net.
>>>>
>>>> As a younger artist I celebrated the temporal and fleeting
character of
>>>> media art. It was part of the rationale for the work - it had no
future (a
>>>> bit like the World at the time) and thus couldn’t be commodified
(of course
>>>> some artists work was commodified). My current work is no
different though.
>>>> I’ve either not learned from my mistakes or I am simply stuck in
my ways,
>>>> as I continue to work with systems that regularly become
redundant. It is
>>>> the nature of media art and if you are going to work in this field
you have
>>>> to live with that - indeed, you need to make it a feature.
>>>>
>>>> Whilst this is troubling for the artist I imagine for the curator
it is an
>>>> existential threat.
>>>>
>>>> best
>>>>
>>>> Simon
>>>>
>>>> Simon Biggs
>>>> [log in to unmask] 
>>>> http://www.littlepig.org.uk 
>>>> http://amazon.com/author/simonbiggs 
>>>>
http://www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/staff/homepage.asp?name=simon.biggs

>>>> http://www.eca.ed.ac.uk/school-of-art/simon-biggs 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 14 Dec 2017, at 21:34, Mike Stubbs <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> co-design
>>>>> better contracting and understanding of contracts (both sides)
>>>>> stop using the term perpitutity
>>>>> acceptance of temporality
>>>>> a plan for legacy or limited duration
>>>>> budget accordingly
>>>>>
>>>>> id love rafas input here ?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 13 December 2017 at 20:18, Diamond, Sara <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Paul,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for responding. These stories are hair raising. What do
you
>>>> think
>>>>>> would be a solution? Shorter term exhibitions that then can be
>>>>>> decommissioned elegantly? Required budget for maintenance?
Whose
>>>>>> responsibility is this? How do you manage (and your family!)
platform
>>>>>> change?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Interested to know....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DR. SARA DIAMOND
>>>>>> PRESIDENT & VICE-CHANCELLOR,
>>>>>> O. OF ONT., RCA
>>>>>> T 416 977 6000 x300
>>>>>> E [log in to unmask] 
>>>>>> OCAD UNIVERSITY
>>>>>> 100 McCaul Street, Toronto, Canada, M5T 1W1
>>>>>> www.ocadu.ca<http://ocadu.ca/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://facebook.com/ocaduniversity 
>>>>>> http://twitter.com/OCAD 
>>>>>> https://www.instagram.com/ocaduniversity/ 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IGNITE IMAGINATION!
>>>>>> OUR MANDATE IS NOT SIMPLY TO IMAGINE THE FUTURE,
>>>>>> BUT TO HELP CREATE IT.
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Paul Brown <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>>> Sent: December 4, 2017 6:50:50 PM
>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask] 
>>>>>> Cc: Diamond, Sara
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] New Media Public Art
Conversation
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Sara
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3. What makes a new media public art work fail?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In my experience - as someone who has made several major public
art
>>>> works,
>>>>>> some dating back to the 1960’s - is that it’s fairly easy to
get big
>>>> chunks
>>>>>> of upfront money to commission a public artwork but very
difficult to
>>>> get
>>>>>> recurrent funding to maintain them. This is a particular problem
for
>>>>>> non-static artworks and it’s also true for most art projects
not just
>>>> ones
>>>>>> in the public domain. I am full of respect for Changi
Airport’s policy
>>>> in
>>>>>> this regard - they have a number of extremely complex artworks
that are
>>>>>> rarely out of order:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.changiairport.com/en/airport-experience/ 
>>>>>> attractions-and-services/kinetic-rain.html — this is just one
of
>>>> several.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My own worst experience is with the artwork pictured below.
During the
>>>>>> commissioning process the local council public artwork managers
insisted
>>>>>> that the building developers included a clause in the eventual
building
>>>>>> managers contract insisting they take out ongoing maintenance
cover for
>>>> the
>>>>>> work. It now turns out that they didn’t and the artwork has
stopped
>>>>>> working (after 5 years) with no plans to repair it. I am, of
course,
>>>>>> disappointed but there’s nothing I can do about it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My partner Wendy Mills has made many public artworks that are
now
>>>>>> decommissioned or in storage like this one:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://wendy-mills.com/public/occasi.htm 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> … and my son Daniel has similar experiences as for example with
his
>>>> Video
>>>>>> Wall Installation for W Hotels
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://danielbrowns.com — and scroll down or search for “W
Hotels" to
>>>>>> view.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you’d like to know more please get in touch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All best
>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The image was rejected by the listserv so use this link
instead:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.paul-brown.com/GALLERY/PUBLICAR/fourdragons-01.HTM 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Paul Brown, Four Dragons, LED display, 1750 x 1750 mm, 2012
>>>>>> Art Management: Brecknock Consulting
>>>>>> The time-based version is here<http://www.paul-brown.
>>>> com/GALLERY/TIMEBASE/
>>>>>> fourdragons/index.html>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ====
>>>>>> Paul Brown
>>>>>> http://www.paul-brown.com == http://www.brown-and-son.com 
>>>>>> UK Mobile +44 (0)794 104 8228
>>>>>> Skype paul-g-brown
>>>>>> ====
>>>>>> Honorary Visiting Professor - Sussex University
>>>>>> http://www.cogs.susx.ac.uk/ccnr/research/creativity.html 
>>>>>> ====
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> @MikeStubbs
>>>>> Director
>>>>> FACT
>>>>> www.fact.co.uk<http://www.fact.co.uk>
>>>>>
>>>>> 88 Wood Street
>>>>> Liverpool L1 4DQ
>>>>>
>>>>> + 44 (0) 151 707 4444
>>>>>
>>>>> skype name: mikestubbs45
>>>>>
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> *?Wu Tsang: ?*
>>>>>
>>>>> *Under Cinema* <http://www.fact.co.uk/undercinema>
>>>>>
>>>>> *26 October 2017 – 18 **February 2018*
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> *Future Aleppo
<http://www.fact.co.uk/projects/future-aleppo.aspx>*
>>>>>
>>>>> *9 November 2017 - 7 January 2018*
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *The contents of this email and any attachments are intended
solely for
>>>> the
>>>>> original recipient(s). If you have received it in error please
contact
>>>> the
>>>>> sender immediately by returning the e-mail or by telephoning a
number
>>>>> contained in the body of the e-mail, then please delete the
e-mail
>>>>> immediately without disclosing its contents. No responsibility
is
>>>> accepted
>>>>> for loss or damage arising from viruses or changes made to this
message
>>>>> after it was sent. The views contained in this email are those of
the
>>>>> author and not necessarily those of the authors employer or
service
>>>>> provider.*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Amanda McDonald Crowley
>>> curator/ cultural worker
>>> publicartaction.net
>>>
>>> instagram/ twitter/ facebook
>>> @amandamcdc
>>>
>>> Current Exhibition:
>>> MaryKate Maher, View Finder
<http://publicartaction.net/view-finder-2/> at
>>> Little Metal Print, Nov 3 - Dec 3, 2017
>>>
>>> Recent Writing:
>>> Grow Food Make Ar
>>> <http://www.voca.network/blog/tag/amanda-mcdonald-crowley/>t,
Juanli
>>> Carrión's OSS Marble Hill on Voices for Contemporary Art blog
>>>
>>> Public Art Projects:
>>> Soundview Market Place
<https://www.facebook.com/soundviewmarketplace/>
>>> with YMPJ <http://www.ympj.org/>, Bronx NYC
>>> Agrikultura <http://agrikultura.triennal.se/>: art + agriculture
in
>>> southern Sweden
>>> Swale <http://swaleny.org/>: Mary Mattingly
<http://www.marymattingly.com/>'s
>>> floating food forest on NYC waterways

------------------------------

End of NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Digest - 14 Dec 2017 to 15 Dec 2017
(#2017-132)
*************************************************************************

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager