Module 4 questions

19 Comments

1. Swedish art student questioning race and identity by breeding
   a hybrid frog http://bit.ly/dyaNTw

2. It seems to me that the future of art and culture hinges on the cultural and political issues we’re currently struggling with. As Lacy put it, the ‘multivocality” of many newer art forms and practices allows a wider population of voices to be heard, and Ivey and Tepper describe how the advent of radio, newsreels, and other ‘old’ media suddenly allowed viewers/listeners access to voices that had previously been silenced (“Our knowledge of poor people, rich people, white people, black people,urban life, rural life, art, and culture was increasingly colored by what we heard on the radio, saw in newsreels and movies…” (Ivey 2)).
   Clearly, we stand to gain a lot by developing transmedia technologies/experiences that embody multivocal perspectives. In a sustainable society (whether culturally sustainable, environmentally sustainable, socially/politically sustainable, etc.), acknowledgment of multiple voices would be a necessity. Hyde’s site describes this acknowledgment in terms of “common assets”; in order to create progress, we cannot value one voice over another.

3. I think the key to a vibrant arts and culture presence in the future relies on how arts and culture are woven into the social structure. In this context, the term sustainability refers to the longevity of the arts; and specifically how can we (as arts administrators) keep/increase the amount of people interested and excited about the arts.

   One way I believe this can be done is by incorporating art into pragmatic functions. Lacy cited Bourriaud’s distinctions of art and I found his concept of “usefulness” quite applicable in today’s society. I do not think that all art should be thought of for its practical function, but I believe by using this perspective we can incorporate more art/forms into habitual life. The designboom website showcases many examples of art for everyday use- one example being the product design of the “moon rabbit” cup and plate. This product has both a functional use and incorporates part of Chinese culture through a popular fairytale of the rabbit on the moon.

   Additionally, I think another way arts and culture will thrive in the future is with the help of design thinking. Although this approach doesn’t necessary focus on pure design aesthetics (although it’s still important), it incorporates the processes of design into problem solving. The design consultancy firm, IDEO (www.ideo.com) is the forerunner of this school of thought. In addition to designing artistic products for the 21st century, IDEO uses its approach to aid participation in humanitarian activities such as blood donation and art education. Overall, a combination of thinking about art for its function and how the art/design process can aid society will help maintain and increase the number of people interested in art in the years to come.

4. Perhaps it is cynical of me, but I am concerned about the future of art and culture. While technological tools have evolved and, maybe, become more accessible to the public, I still find issues of access to be paramount when considering how art and culture might thrive in a sustainable society. Ivey and Tepper’s “Cultural Renaissance or Cultural Divide?” article illustrates the tensions of access and participation very well. The majority of art (in the article, they spoke specifically of CDs) is distributed through a corporate intermediary – Target, WalMart, Best Buy – which lowers the price and increases the possibility of consumption/participation, but which also limits the public to what is available in the store. The tension between elitism/high quality and equal access/low quality means that this cycle continues. Is it more preferable to encourage people to consume/participate in culture on ANY level (buying CDs of Top 40 music at WalMart) or to preserve the “quality” (clearly, subjective) of culture by making it available only to those who have the means to appreciate it? (Tangential, but clearly related – Does quality even matter? Who decides what defines “quality”?)

   Transmedia materials certainly have the potential to encourage participation, but, even if MORE people have access to those tools, not EVERYONE has access to them. Maybe in the future open source will become the norm, and the ubiquity of the internet will mean that everyone really does have the means to engage with art and culture. In that case, though, I worry that art and culture might lose some of its perceived value – perhaps taken for granted, even – sort of the way we (used to) think about paper or water or the internet or public school. And although I am an advocate for redefining the way we think about participation in order to include more avenues, methods, variations, etc., I believe there is danger is reducing the definition too much – again, mostly because participation might be taken for granted. The Edge posed the question: “Is the internet changing the way we think?”. An Editor at “Wired” magazine said that “Anything I learn is subject to erosion”, and the former chairman of the Electric Frontier Foundation stated that “most of what we get on the Internet is empty calories”. Arguably, we could not have anticipated the uses of the internet when it first became available, but now it seems like there is just so much ridiculous crap out there. Admittedly, there is great stuff online too, but is it harder to find now? With transmedia materials providing more ways to create/participate/consume culture, will it be harder to find “good” art/culture amidst all the rest? Or will rise in access also lead to natural competition, increased quality and a more engaged citizenry?

5. Sustainable is definitely the word of the year and its definition is different depending on whom you are asking. The Asset-Based Community Development Institute at Northwestern University define state, “the word “sustainable” has roots in the Latin subtenir, meaning “to hold up” or “to support from below.” We concur with many in the community-development field who feel that a thriving community must be supported primarily from within—by its members, resources and capacities, for the present and future.” I believe that their use of the word makes sense: sustainability as the ability of a community to fully support their cultural, social, economic and environmental well-beings without outside forces.

   The case studies that Lacy touched on really point to this idea that the community can propel themselves into a fulfilling life if they want to. The mention of Animating Democracy’s policies and projects really show how one organization is completely dedicated to doing this. Culture (and art) is something that has to be kept alive by everyone and not just a select few in order for it to be sustainable.

   I believe that transmedia experiences/material are important in today’s society as long as you include all of the traditional means of passing information. As I mentioned above, everyone must be involved and this means that as arts administrators we have to understand the use of newspapers, community forums, blogs, web 2.0 tools and flyers to get the word out and engage the public. A transmedia mindset is completely necessary when trying to engage a diverse population in order to start community dialogue and sustainable practices.

6. When presented with the challenge of imagining art and culture in a sustainable society I struggle first with even imaging a fully sustainable society, which I think is nearly impossible. While many societies have tried to be fully sustainable and more and more cities are adapting sustainable policies, a fully sustainable society is something that I think is not possibile at this time. Instead I would like to re-think this question and imagine sustainable art and culture practices in society. I think the practices themselves have a greater capacity of being sustainable rather than society as a whole achieving a fully sustainable level.

   I think Ivey’s example of Pro-ams (professional amateurs) is a great example of sustainable arts and culture in that this new class of artists can help shape the new cultural landscape and in turn society by participating in how arts and culture is both produced and consumed. The now almost seamless access for these Pro-ams to create and then distribute their art via the internet levels the playing field somewhat in the world of arts and culture (in both the for-profit and non-profit worlds) breaking the monopoly of the bigger distributors of arts and culture. I understand the point Allison makes about how access to technologies is not universal and a cultural divide (as Ivey refers to it) is created. I feel that this cultural divide would still exist however based on the fact there are always going to be those people who seek out a variety of arts experiences and those people will be on one side of the divide with those happy with status quo arts and cultural experiences on the other.

   I feel it is our role as arts administrators who are grappling with the impact higher participation of Pro-ams in the overall field of arts and culture to identify the benefits of higher participation (or at least perceived higher participation) and use that to help propel a sustainable arts and cultural initiative in whatever arts institution (or non-arts institution, or not even an institution at all) we end up working at.

7. I believe that transmedia materials/experiences have great potential to help art and culture thrive in a sustainable society, but face many roadblocks in the coming years and decades. Allison’s quote about the internet being mostly empty calories is possibly my biggest concern for the future. As a 21 year old with easy access to internet who went through adolescence during a technological boom, I have trouble editing out the sheer volume of useless or flawed information I come across every day. Even if a source has relevant information I might enjoy or need, it may not have the design aesthetic to attract the right viewers. It will be a struggle for even the most innovative and vibrant representatives of arts and culture to get noticed in the current transmedia environment. My second concern is the lack of universal access to technology. Not everyone has constant high-quality access to the internet, phones or mobile-web devices to effectively utilize the opportunities that art/culture in a transmedia world might offer. I choose not to pay for internet access on my phone, and therefore never got interested in using twitter and other mobile based technologies. Just by using a computer as my information and networking source, I feel limited in my access and my ability to participate.
   Regardless of either of my concerns, I think that as long there is a sliver of public interest, quality use of transmedia technology and environments will benefit art and culture.

8. Sustainability, in terms of an ability to endure, comes down to access. This includes access to materials and technology, knowledge and information, communication mechanisms etc. On a more philosophical note, sustainability also comes down to personal access in terms of capacity. T.S. Eliot’s poem the Waste Land explores the idea that with blossoming of industrial and technological progress, there comes an equal and opposite decay and regression on nature and humanity. It is vital that art and culture remain a thriving, integral part of our everyday lives in order that we not remove ourselves too far from the soul of our existence, our passions, curiosities — and get lost in the mundane and mechanical. This also connects to environmental sustainability in that we grow more aware, compassionate, empathetic and in harmony with the world around us when we are immersed in art. Creative problem solving and critical thinking are complex skills and methods of engaging with the world that demand and require attention to issues of such import as the future of our planet and its people. Further, as we continue to globalize and mesh cultures and ethnicities, the arts are what will bind us and drive us forward.

   Forgive the manifesto/soap box tone of this entry — but this discussion demands the impassioned artist and poet in us all to awaken.

9. The future of art and culture in society is a million dollar question. In terms, of “sustainability” and whatever that means exactly, I would say that it will be sustainable in the regard that more and more people will have access to information and art endeavors via their home computer. Everything seemingly goes through an internet connection now. I believe that can only be a positive thing.

   The downside to that however (my opinion), as was mentioned in the Ivey/Tepper reading by Charles Leadbeater, was that the future would be shaped by the “pro-am revolution” in which professional caliber amateurs would use the tools at hand, mainly at little to no cost to them, to create art. I tethered that with an article I read recently on the rising cost of a college education:

   http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/story?id=6654468&page=1

   and believe a strong case could be made for someone not entering school because of it simply not being cost effective. Case in point in our new media environment: Justin Bieber
   The kid used YouTube to showcase his singing and BAM, now he’s a worldwide phenomenon.

   I think the discussion about art going into the future should be more centered around value. How and why we will value art will be paramount in my opinion. I would like to think that we will continue to value the work of professionals with credentials, otherwise what point would there be in having art schools? Or art administration schools?

10. What do you imagine the future of art and culture to be in a sustainable society? How might transmedia experience/materials shape the future?

    Along with Arielle, it’s been difficult for me to separate the idea of “sustainability” from its trendy eco meaning, but the Ivey/Tapper piece really resonated with me, and I agree that the key to sustainability in arts and culture is creating access for more people to create/participate/soak up the arts in the digital age. I agree that lack of access has created a cultural “underclass” and think that it’s important for arts administrators to aid in creating avenues to participation for those who might not have the resources otherwise.

    I do agree with Jesse that the other side of the access coin brings a lot of useless digital “noise” that we have to sort through to find the good stuff. The mountain of choice that we face everyday when engaging in transmedia resources can force many of us (like me) to retreat from engaging in the digital world – as arts administrators, how do we rise above the digital clutter to get our message out into the community?

11. I think that art will, in an effort to become more sustainable and accessible, move to an ever more transmedia nature. Artists might still use traditional art materials, such as paint, wood, clay and stone, but will also digitally document the art in a way that it could be experienced online by a larger audience.

    I also consider how mediums like photography and film/video have become much more sustainable, with the invention and adoption of digital technology, and even how prints are created. I think that photography and film/video are leading the way for sustainability and transmedia art, and that others will follow in that direction.

    I think that the issues of sustainability and access are leaning artists and arts administrators towards a more transmedia aspect for all areas of art.

    Two issues that will need to be addressed in the future will be copyright and experience. If pieces of art are to be accessible on the internet, how will that art be protected? If art patrons and audiences eventually mostly experience art online, how will that alter the experience of art, and the understanding of art?

12. I was very intrigued by the article about “pro-ams.” The article observed that there has been a rise in professional amateurs:

    “Pro-ams typically make their livings in other work but are sufficiently committed to their creative pursuits to view them as a possible career later in life. The International Music Products Association refers to such amateurs as ‘weekend warriors’ – people who play music seriously in their free time as part of bands, chamber groups, ensembles, etc.”

    My field guide on chamber music will explore this particular phenomenon. While I think that cultivating the pro-am culture is important to the sustainability of art in our current society, I have to raise a question about the idea of “curatorial me.” The negative criticism for pro-am culture is the notion of the “dilettante” – a person having a superficial interest in art. In other words – the dabbler. Would the standard for art decrease if all the artists are dabblers? Can art survive without hierarchy?

    • @Grace – Some good questions regarding pro-ams and dilettantes, both culturally-coded ‘roles’ that crop up a lot lately in light of concern/debate/celebration/critique of a more ‘accessible’ domain of cultural production purportedly enabled by the Web. I’d like to tap into @Gretchen’s optimism and utopian scenario in order to answer your last question with a resounding “Yes and no!” If we can understand ‘art’ as engaged expressive practice that encourages people to think/talk about ideas (a populist definition, I know…), then we might imagine that art needs hierarchy in order to destabilize hierarchy. I’m not talking necessarily about a universal hierarchy of categories that objectively determine art/not-art, but about the hierarchies of value and ideologies that individuals bring to questions of interpretation, aesthetic appreciation, commodification, etc. Just like an anarchist needs government in order to rail against it, creative types need hierarchies of valuation in order to push the edge and keep us coming back for more…

      Great comments so far, everyone! I’ve seen a lot across the themes/examples that I could address here and somewhat arbitrarily mentioned Grace & Gretchen in order to connect a few ideas…

13. This is a really big question to try and answer. While I agree with some previous posts about the use of technology allowing for more people to have access, there will (and always has been) a “cultural divide.” among populations. The issue at hand is whether or not we feel that gap should be filled and why.

    When I think of art as being sustainable in the future I think it depends on which community it is being created, fostered and exhibited in. We do not all have the same definition of art. Daniel and Philip both mentioned the Pro-ams in their posts and it is clear that they have different opinions on the role Pro-ams will play in shaping the future. What I think is important to be mentioned is that pro-ams have always been around, in some fashion, they just have more access to display their work now than they have before. Does this mean that there has been a shift in aesthetic taste because more people can see their work? I don’t know. Does this new aesthetic have the possibility to change the landscape of arts appreciation and critique? Possibly. But this has been happening since the beginning of time, I think it’s just part of the evolution of the art world.
    I think the future of the arts is a bit scary to be honest, and I wonder if younger generations of people see the value in art (creation, participation, appreciation, etc.) or if they just have a different definition of what art means to them. While I strongly believe that art and culture should be a part of everyones life, I also know that it will be important as an arts administrator to be able and serve the community that I work with in the best possible way, and that means being open to changing aesthetic, ideas and interpretation of what art means to them.

14. These module questions are always such BIG questions!

    I’m a geek. As such, I’m going to liken my idea of the future of art and culture to a Roddenberry-ian Utopia, where money is extinct and cultural experiences are embedded in the structure of society. This is utopian, yes. But today I need a bit of optimism, so bear with me.

    In order for my theory to work, we need to believe that artists are on the forefront of culture. We see artists foregoing traditional monetary models through the rejection of current copyright policies, open-source and creative commons models. The rise of make culture is working hand in hand with trade. Companies such as kickstarter, microfundo and indiegogo, are offering new solutions to funding of organizations which feel more like a trade for goods than donations.

    In keeping with the Star Trek geekery, I would like to point us to this site, http://www.thingiverse.com/
    As 3D printers, laser cutters, and other such resources are becoming more popular, we will soon be able to make all sorts of objects in our home. Thingiverse.com is an open source design portal for digital fabrication. Being readily able to create art or components of art in the home has significant implications for the arts and culture sector. We can already see their uses in stop animation features such as Coraline.

    If artists continue to trust in non-traditional economic solutions, I believe the population can follow. It is a huge leap of faith, which I see as its biggest problem. Eugene is a valuable location to look at this idea of trade culture. I agree with the Ivey/Tepper article in part, in that we are looking at a cultural renaissance. However, in my utopian outlook we are also going to go beyond the cultural divide as we place more value upon skills and trade and less value upon monetary compensation.

15. In reference to last weeks topic, I think that much of the future of art and culture is directly related to the transmedia experience and opportunities afforded to the mash-up artists currently shaping production of arts of different medias. I think that in order to make art and culture progress and stay alive in this transmedia based world, must we choose to either extend the definition of professional artists and valuable art or make it more exclusive. As Ivey and Tapper express, “In tandem with the democratization of cultural production and the establishment of a pervasive do-it-yourself creative ethos, we are witnessing the emergence of the “curatorial me.” Handed the capacity to reorganize cultural offerings at will through new devices like the iPod or TiVo, citizens are increasingly capable of curating their own cultural experiences — exploring new types of culture; choosing when and how they want to experience art and entertainment; searching out communities of like-minded fanswith whom to dig deeper into the substance of what they see and hear. The “curatorial me” is another emerging form of active engagement with art and culture,” (Ivey & Tepper, 2006 cultural renassaince or cultural divide) and it is this cultural trend of arts and culture that need to be addressed if we are to make them sustainable facets of our culture.

16. Given my recent computer issues I became acutely aware of how muchI depend upon the digital in my daily life. Ten years ago these were not facets of my existence. The amount of art that we experience digitally on a daily basis as a society is staggering. I think that the change that we are seeing is how we define culture and art and that is a big pill to swallow for some. Is digital culture as valuable as say ancient culture? What about the traditions of the recent past is it as valuable as the traditions 100 years ago? These are the types of arbitrary judgements that plague discussions of culture.

    Across the world (and yes I did say world! I’m making large sweeping comments again) more and more countries are seeing an awakening of a strongly identifiable youth culture. For many counties this is do to the markets that target youth and market products designed for youth. Denim/blue jeans which came to US popularity from WWII patriotism, and became the major signifier of teen culture have dominated globally. People wear blue jeans across the globe, to liken blue jeans to the colonial mandate of Great Britain under Victoria’s rule one could say: That the sun never sets on denim.

    In many countries the rise of denim has displaced what is viewed as traditional dress. In the recent on campus lecture “Sequins, Saris and Skinny Jeans” Anthropologist Claire-Wilkonson Weber (Washington State University, Vancouver, WA) points out the changes in Bollywood film production because of the rise of denim and youth culture in India. Claire-Wilkonson Weber cited in her lecture on the UO campus that dressmen who have in the past been solely responsible for the procurement of Bollywood film costuming have been displaced, not by a language barrier as they believe (all Bollywood directors and assistants speaks exclusively English despite their Indian heritage) , but she postulates that it is their lack of participation in western consumption that has barred them from their former use in the film process. Once the only persons able to produce the intricate costumes through a network of cobblers, tailors, and dealers, they are now seen as the last people you’d want picking out costumes. They are not part of the youth culture that has swept like wildfire through the upper and middle class of India and is in the midst of of a steady trickle down through castes and class.

    When I had the opportunity to meet with the founder/editor in chief of Manushi magazine http://www.manushi.in , Madhu Purnima Kishwar she articulated this concern with the displacement of Indian clothing for the “Western look of jeans and T-shirts”. Like many other cultural leaders in non-western countries, she sees the invasion of denim and T-shirts as a problem that is threatening her culture.

    How we participate in culture is constantly changing and for those who are working to preserve culture it is a tricky task. the US. Congressional Folklife Act (PUBLIC LAW 94-201
    94th Congress, H. R. 6673, January 2, 1976) established the creation of the American Folklife Center and defines American Folklife as ” the traditional expressive culture shared within the various groups in the United States: familial, ethnic, occupational, religious, regional; expressive culture includes a wide range of creative and symbolic forms such as custom, belief, technical skill, language, literature, art, architecture, music, play, dance, drama, ritual, pageantry, handicraft; these expressions are mainly learned orally, by imitation, or in performance, and are generally maintained without benefit of formal instruction or institutional direction” charged with preserving American Folklife the center has the arduous responsibility of caring for a living yet, at times intangible, ever changing thing/non-thing.

    Folklife and Culture in my opinion describe the same things and are both outside of the realm of preservation. If society chooses a new path to express themselves then culture/folklife has changed with them. Does this mean that Folklorists and the American Folklife center are obsolete, no I don’t believe so. It is important in my opinion to learn about, and to document, and to participate in cultural manifestations but I also believe that should societies choose to be led down the denim path then that too will lead to something new. After all the western look of India’s youth culture is a unique and distinct style.

    Sustainability? Well the reuse, remix, and reinvention of culture and art will continue no matter if any entity is perceived as holding the reins.

    Yes, I believe that there is potential to influence culture in particular directions through supply and demand. I do not believe that culture can be controlled absolutely, there is always someone making something new, altering something found, and dreaming.

    As far as the question of a sustainable society? I think that it would be valuable to steer us in that direction and I think that the art and culture would continue in the same ways in which it does not in clandestine encounters and idiosyncratic innovations that spawn admiration and imitation. If specifics were wanted I don’t have them, I’m still trying to imagine the sustainable society.

17. In the last paragraph of my above post the it was supposed to read “”it does in clandestine . . . ” that not slipped in there. But it is a puzzler of a thought to imagine what ways culture would be spawning in other ways.

18. In thinking about the future of arts and culture in a sustainable society, its easy to turn to technology as an answer for sustainability in the arts and culture sector.
    Though I think technology is great and has many benefits, I think a balanced approach is a more sustainable approach. The reason so many of us have an appreciation for the arts and culture is that we remember a time when there was no internet or social media networks, etc. We have a tangible connection with some form of the arts, and through this, we are able to have a much more meaningful connection with the arts once technology is involved.
    Technology has a very valuable place in expanding access to the arts and culture, but also in expanding our connection or engagement with the arts. There are so many ways for participatory engagement with the arts, specifically in creating dialogue and connections between “users” and fans of the art. The internet and social media should continue to play a role in this and be expanded to facilitate more users and contributors.
    However, I think that we need to have a balance, and there should be increased efforts to preserve and expand existing and future tangible arts and culture assets. This could be done through various partnerships within cities and between organizations. There should be a transmedia component to this that allows for increased story telling and access, while expanding the understanding and interpretation of these arts and culture assets. Transmedia forms offer a valuable way to build on and enhance current assets and provide new avenues for people to engage with arts and culture.
    By combining transmedia content, with tangible assets and supplementing that with technology and internet based solutions for participatory engagement, we can create a path for sustainable arts and culture practices in the future.