After the meeting ended the other night I was chatting with Jerome about last year's events and how much we all enjoyed participating in Nuance. Thank you Henry and Betsy for the great idea and the sweat equity in making it happen. The process was wonderful and the show gave us all a chance to see each others work and talk a bit about our art and our processes. For me, as a new member, it was a great experience in that I was really not too familiar with everyone's work.
I would like to propose the idea of Nuance become an annual event with a member performing essentially the same role as Henry in visiting with the members, talking about their work and curating a show each Spring. Each curator could name the show if that is recognized as a good idea by all. My vote would be to maintain the name Nuance as a tribute to Henry and his initiative and brilliant concept that addressed the concerns of those in the group who wanted more dialog about process and work in addition to the more "grand" collaborative efforts we undertake as well as the role it performs in introducing new members through our work...What do y'all think?
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Hello everyone!
I was trying to copy and paste the email I sent to you all but it seems that I can't paste things into this browser?
I'll sum it up, anyway-
For a first project to get us started with this idea, I humbly propose that we acquire some of those folding construction barriers (like the one in this painting) and adorn them with our own signs, (or alterations, interpretations, interventions) relating to the history of the sites.
At the meeting, we seemed to be wavering between having a set format, or everyone being free to express themselves as they see/feel fit. I think this might be a compromise to that, as we have this unified platform of the construction barrier, but you are free to interpret your intervention to it. The only limitation would be that we shouldn't do anything to it that can't be undone. All attachments should be take-apart-able. We'll likely have to give them back.
Options include all of us selecting one site and leaving all of our signs at the one site, with many interpretations of the same information, or for us to choose our own sites and spread these signs around the city. Or... (your turn, any ideas?)
I am compelled toward these construction barriers because of what they communicate, and especially how they are used in Savannah. There have been 3 at the end of my block, in the middle of the road, for weeks, indicating a piece of plywood over a gaping hole in the earth. They have been hit by cars, driven over, weather beaten, toppled, righted, toppled, righted. But there's still a big hole in the street.
Also, if you guys are interested in this idea, we would need to decide between a sanctioned borrowing and installing, or a geurilla stealing and planting. And many other things: when, how, why... I'd love to hear your ideas. This is just a wee germ.
I was trying to copy and paste the email I sent to you all but it seems that I can't paste things into this browser?
I'll sum it up, anyway-For a first project to get us started with this idea, I humbly propose that we acquire some of those folding construction barriers (like the one in this painting) and adorn them with our own signs, (or alterations, interpretations, interventions) relating to the history of the sites.
At the meeting, we seemed to be wavering between having a set format, or everyone being free to express themselves as they see/feel fit. I think this might be a compromise to that, as we have this unified platform of the construction barrier, but you are free to interpret your intervention to it. The only limitation would be that we shouldn't do anything to it that can't be undone. All attachments should be take-apart-able. We'll likely have to give them back.
Options include all of us selecting one site and leaving all of our signs at the one site, with many interpretations of the same information, or for us to choose our own sites and spread these signs around the city. Or... (your turn, any ideas?)
I am compelled toward these construction barriers because of what they communicate, and especially how they are used in Savannah. There have been 3 at the end of my block, in the middle of the road, for weeks, indicating a piece of plywood over a gaping hole in the earth. They have been hit by cars, driven over, weather beaten, toppled, righted, toppled, righted. But there's still a big hole in the street.
Also, if you guys are interested in this idea, we would need to decide between a sanctioned borrowing and installing, or a geurilla stealing and planting. And many other things: when, how, why... I'd love to hear your ideas. This is just a wee germ.
Monday, August 23, 2010
Some thoughts on collaboration
There are several different ways that artists collaborate. The most common is the type incorporated by Sol Lewitt or Matthew Richey who plan complex wall drawings and three dimensional installations and then call on other artists to contribute or take overall responsibility for the execution.
Another would be the explorations of Art & Language in the 1970's, which were the beginnings of conceptual art and the redefinition of the "object" in art. In London and New York these artists were collaborating in not only the theoretical precepts of their dialogs and methods of execution but also the media, materials, installations, etc. to promote their ideas as well as the marketability of some type and/or availability of artifact with which to advertise and at least live from the sale of their art. Taking out advertisements in newspapers, etc., using media outside those normally associated with the current institutions of art was a focus of their ideations, collaborations and installations that were offices and conference rooms, libraries, in other words places that collected words and language other than the traditional language of art. These collaborations were not just about doing but were genuinely collaborative, if only for a short while (New York and London).
As a part of our Mission discussions earlier this year I looked up "Colab," a New York based Artist's Collaborative originating in the mid seventies that included Kiki Smnith and Jenny Holzer. This is an interesting group with intriguing and controversial approaches to community challenges.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colab
I would suggest that ours, like others, are a bit "of all of the above." My profession is inherently collaborative. I must work with photographers, illustrators, filmmakers, software designers, typographers, printers, web developers, writers and of course clients in achieving solutions and accomplishing goals.
Establishing goals, I would forward is the key component in designing a successful collaboration. This summer I read "Collaboration" by Morten T. Hansen (a guide to establish efficient collaborative environments in organizations and the barriers that stand in the way as well as the negotiation of those barriers). I also read both Harrison's Art & Language books as well as Siegelaub's book about publicity and conceptual art. Next on my list is "The Third Hand", Collaboration in Art from Conceptualism to Postmodernism.
The idea of defined goals is critical to success. If the goal is to raise awareness then that goal needs to be commodified: is the awareness a one-time event or a time-based campaign? What do we want to accomplish" Raise a little hell or get some permanent signage of some form in the community...which? I am not advocating either approach. I am only using this comparison to make the point that "awarness" is not quite a complete goal. What level of awareness and once raised then what? If we all agree on an ultimate goal, then the collaborative process of ideating strategies has a barometer with which to measure relevance, effectiveness and appropriateness
In jest I mentioned the SCAD QEP Program. What this entails is that you need students, professors and a third party to work together on a project. If the project is approved then space, students and professors will be provided to work with the third party. Suppose CFAC or the City (possibly an alternative we might suggest to the City once a certain level of awareness is accomplished) was the third party. Then the facilities of SCAD (Film, Sound, Industrial Design, Interactive Design, Service Design, Architecture, Urban Planning, etc) students might be involved depending on the goals of the proposal. If we become the third party, and have input, would collaborating with outside parties to achieve a greater goal than we can provide be a possibility? The answer to that question would be a result of measuring it against the defined goals.
The idea of a plan that evolves (CFAC and local artist's exhibitions, press, social media) makes a lot of sense to me. What doesn't make sense was the proposal that only those who want to be involved, be involved. If the group decides on a direction I would hope that as a commitment to collaboration and the Mission/Vision of CFAC, all participate.
Thanks for listening all...and looking forward to working together on this project, which to me is the reason I joined this group, to make a difference in the Community in which we live, work and love through our dedication and talents in art, design and communication.
Another would be the explorations of Art & Language in the 1970's, which were the beginnings of conceptual art and the redefinition of the "object" in art. In London and New York these artists were collaborating in not only the theoretical precepts of their dialogs and methods of execution but also the media, materials, installations, etc. to promote their ideas as well as the marketability of some type and/or availability of artifact with which to advertise and at least live from the sale of their art. Taking out advertisements in newspapers, etc., using media outside those normally associated with the current institutions of art was a focus of their ideations, collaborations and installations that were offices and conference rooms, libraries, in other words places that collected words and language other than the traditional language of art. These collaborations were not just about doing but were genuinely collaborative, if only for a short while (New York and London).
As a part of our Mission discussions earlier this year I looked up "Colab," a New York based Artist's Collaborative originating in the mid seventies that included Kiki Smnith and Jenny Holzer. This is an interesting group with intriguing and controversial approaches to community challenges.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colab
I would suggest that ours, like others, are a bit "of all of the above." My profession is inherently collaborative. I must work with photographers, illustrators, filmmakers, software designers, typographers, printers, web developers, writers and of course clients in achieving solutions and accomplishing goals.
Establishing goals, I would forward is the key component in designing a successful collaboration. This summer I read "Collaboration" by Morten T. Hansen (a guide to establish efficient collaborative environments in organizations and the barriers that stand in the way as well as the negotiation of those barriers). I also read both Harrison's Art & Language books as well as Siegelaub's book about publicity and conceptual art. Next on my list is "The Third Hand", Collaboration in Art from Conceptualism to Postmodernism.
The idea of defined goals is critical to success. If the goal is to raise awareness then that goal needs to be commodified: is the awareness a one-time event or a time-based campaign? What do we want to accomplish" Raise a little hell or get some permanent signage of some form in the community...which? I am not advocating either approach. I am only using this comparison to make the point that "awarness" is not quite a complete goal. What level of awareness and once raised then what? If we all agree on an ultimate goal, then the collaborative process of ideating strategies has a barometer with which to measure relevance, effectiveness and appropriateness
In jest I mentioned the SCAD QEP Program. What this entails is that you need students, professors and a third party to work together on a project. If the project is approved then space, students and professors will be provided to work with the third party. Suppose CFAC or the City (possibly an alternative we might suggest to the City once a certain level of awareness is accomplished) was the third party. Then the facilities of SCAD (Film, Sound, Industrial Design, Interactive Design, Service Design, Architecture, Urban Planning, etc) students might be involved depending on the goals of the proposal. If we become the third party, and have input, would collaborating with outside parties to achieve a greater goal than we can provide be a possibility? The answer to that question would be a result of measuring it against the defined goals.
The idea of a plan that evolves (CFAC and local artist's exhibitions, press, social media) makes a lot of sense to me. What doesn't make sense was the proposal that only those who want to be involved, be involved. If the group decides on a direction I would hope that as a commitment to collaboration and the Mission/Vision of CFAC, all participate.
Thanks for listening all...and looking forward to working together on this project, which to me is the reason I joined this group, to make a difference in the Community in which we live, work and love through our dedication and talents in art, design and communication.
Welcome to the CFAC Discussion Group
Greetings...and welcome to our discussion group. Once we get all members who are interested in participating in this group registered we can make it private or public based on a general consensus. You may participate in several ways, generating a post or commenting on a post. Images may be uploaded as well as audio and time-based file formats. Hopefully this blog will serve as a meeting place where ideas can be shared, evaluated and forwarded as we pursue our collaborative efforts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)