[spectre] // The State of Art //

[Julian Oliver]

Hi Josephine,

..on Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 10:09:58AM +0200, Josephine Bosma wrote:
> Unfortunately I do not have the time to go into debate about most of
> the presumptions and insinuations in Julian Oliver's text. Let me
> just say it seems written from prejudice rather than knowledge.
> Prejudice about how funding bodies work, for example. To simply call
> them 'the state' or 'the government' is utterly simplistic. 

Public arts funding is generally distributed over several smaller bodies,
sometimes by a council (as in the case of England). Funding allotments may be
regionally distributed also. Regardless, these government funded bodies are
non-profits working in the state interest as part of its cultural expenditure
agenda(s).

The state most certainly does have a hand in how this funding is allotted, as
you've just seen in the Netherlands. Unlike the Judicial System, culture and
the funding of it is not separated from the state and its interests. 

It is my intention to open up a conversation about the problems of rigorous
critical experimentation, fringe and emerging fields and their dependence on
the state, especially in a time of austerity and political conservatism.

In Australia I was part of a media-arts project called Escape From Woomera that
sought to draw attention to the terrible treatment of refugees, many of them
from wars, arriving in that country.  We received AUD$ 25000.00 federal arts
funding for this project.  The project was a great success, receiving a lot of
attention in the press, both locally and internationally. The Immigration
Minister (who set up and/or supported the detention centers in the desert) was
so incensed by the project that he called for a review of how and which
projects were funded in the country. We are still blamed for that by some
today.

In his words:

"The decision reflects poorly upon the Australia Council and its judgement,
that the organisation should lend its name to the promotion of unlawful
behaviour."

	http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/04/29/1051381948773.html

> There are two statements in this article I want to take out in particular.
> There is NO basis for these at all.
> 
> >The Netherlands, Britain and most of Scandinavia especially are
> >countries with a strong history of state support for the arts;
> >development of a
> >work of new media in these countries in particular often comes with an
> >expectation of state support.
> 
> This is nonsense. Surely you will find artists working this way, but
> for every single one of them you will find at least three or four
> that don't.

Indeed! My experience living in Sweden and Copenhagen (for nothing more than a
year albeit) was that the development of a large work of new media often came
with the expectation of state support, that it probably wouldn't be developed
with out it. 

It makes absolute sense that would be the choice also.

> >In June 2011 Zijlstra, the Dutch minister for culture, announced a
> >200 million
> >Euro cut to infrastructural funding in the arts sector. It may be
> >the death
> >knell for a great many organizations and initiatives throughout the
> >Netherlands, some of which are considered to be canonical to the
> >international
> >media-arts scene (V2_, Sonic Acts, Mediamatic, NIMK, STEIM, to
> >name a few).
> >
> >Many organizations under the axe where born directly out of arts
> >funding and
> >have benefited from persistent support from the Dutch state since
> >their
> >inception.
> 
> V2 was born from a squatters/artists initiative, and worked as such
> for many years before it got regular funding. Similar stories for
> Mediamatic and NIMk. I am less familiar with the histories of Steim
> and Sonic Acts, but I am pretty sure these were also started from
> artists enthusiastically setting up something that became important,
> interesting and influential enough to get funding at some point.

Of course, that's why I didn't say "all". XS4ALL is a fantastic example of the
kind of D.I.Y strategies that we need to be celebrating (and studying) right
now.

> >Meanwhile the tax-payer's conscious or unconscious
> >investment in these fields (resulting in projects and vast,
> >specialist bodies
> >of knowledge) will likely go unarchived, even lost altogether; a
> >shell of
> >documentation on websites alone.
> 
> ???
> 
> 
> It is good to talk about new economic models, but to talk about them
> while kicking colleagues is not a good idea.

I'm far from doing that! I hope for a future where important media-arts
organisations like Steim, V2_ and others are always with us. They are
significant in my field and under no circumstances should a mere change of
government or disinterested culture minister have full sway over their fate. 

I am concerned with realistic strategies for increasing economic mobility such
that media art and experimental practices can continue to flourish. Partial or
total independence from the state, especially as regards infrastructure, can
only be a positive thing, especially now.

Good to read you,

-- 
Julian Oliver
http://julianoliver.com