[-empyre-] a bank of ideas

Michael Bell mbell at visibleweather.com
Thu Dec 8 03:58:00 EST 2011


I wonder if you get take me off this email list. 


Michael Bell Architecture + Visible Weather 
Professor of Architecture, Columbia University 
Director, Columbia Conference on Architecture, Engineering and Materials
Director, Master of Architecture Program, Core Design Studios 
The information contained in this electronic mail message (including any attachments) is confidential information that may be covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC Sections 2510-2521, intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above, and may be privileged.  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify me and delete the original message. 

On Nov 29, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Johannes Birringer wrote:

> dear all
> trying to grapple with the response sent by Simon
> and am not sure i can disentangle his sentences [see below]
> << simon schreibt>>
> Education and the employment of the young are about the future, have or
> have no future, imply the future, whereas the arts are about funding,
> receive more or less funding, imply and unfold from funding, when and
> where it is rolled out.
> Where it has been, arts institutions are healthier, exist, even, at the
> level of the power. But has-beens are not what they were, existing in a
> perfect past. Wannabes - won't be what we all wanna - from an imperfect
> present - if education has no future, if the rates of unemployment
> continue ... as they are, as they were when punks everywhere around said
> No Future.   It is the futurity of education and opportunities for the young which I
> wanted to draw attention to and the history - the will to recover it, to
> plumb the depths of the past - of the arts, of arts funding: it seems as
> soon as we want to discuss the future of the arts, we are pulled, by an
> undertow, into the past; as if the future of the arts were its history.
>>> .
> surely the arts are not about funding, unless you choose
> to look at it from that angle of material support,
> institutional infrastructure, markets, venues, sales
> and all the other things (distinction, symbolic value,
> educational/pedagogic benefit, etc) that accrue around
> arts' valuations.  
> the notion of an "occupying" (or as it was called 'squatting')
> of an inter-face (towards banking and financing industries)
> is incompletely thought out (I have not had time to think it through
> or observe the action and reaction patterns).
> i felt the interface the activists staged was primarily and symbolic and theatrical one, but
> also a tactical maneuver; 
> arts organizations and artists have
> often used tactical maneuvers to generate work or have an impact
> on the present (the site, the neigbhorhood, the media, the
> scene, the form, well, the audience and the public mostly), 
> and here Geert's commentaries on the "anti- cutback" rhetorics
> used by theatres and art galleries in the Netherlands are of 
> course illuminating, and similar 'protests' will occur in other
> lands and territories, and i remember reading about the
> clowns in Columbia and have forgotten the context within which
> the Mayor of Bogotá asked them to perform or they came outdoors to
> the streets to perform.....
> but not always has the cry been heard.  artists  also
> often have danced (refering now to the form I know best), they
> moved their bodies into place(s) through time, and a distinction
> "artworld / real world" of course would be nonsensical.  
> it's hard to keep talking about the future or past of money
> when you think, for example,  of movement as we tried to
> do it last month here in this place, after the month when many
> here on this soft-skinned space had apparently been traveling to ISEA in
> Istanbul and report about their tourist experiences in Turkey.
> moving or performing in light of
> the question of publicity (the public) or privacy, or in light of
> body and cellular consciousness.  how would that change the
> rhetoric? 
> There must be innumerable creative people working
> in their private and their shared public spaces demanding
> of themselves that they live through their process (without
> that that process is measured through monetary awards,
> claims and stakes). when we demand to get paid for services,
> we can of course charge ticket prices or invite donations.
> but are we not discussing also different kinds of consciousnesses?
> [i am writing this being influenced by having watched a documentary
> about/with choreographer Deborah Hay (who's worked in her
> art since the 60s without institutional support) shown this week at 
> Cinedans Festival in Amsterdam --  "Deborah Hay not as Deborah Hay"]
> In that film, she says at one point that all through the last decades
> she tried challenging conventions of "facing front", through "practicing 
> surrendering the pattern of facing a single direction" 
> and being open to many possibilities of being in the here and now - in relationality, 
> in relation to the audience and the world.*
> regards
> Johannes Birringer
> dap-lab
> london
> http://www.brunel.ac.uk/dap
> * (cited from "Deborah Hay not as Deborah Hay", film dir/ed. by  Ellen Bromberg, 2011)
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20111207/3a89f930/attachment.htm>

More information about the empyre mailing list