[-empyre-] chipping in
i think there are definitely things going on that are to do with our
location, culture etc. being one of the most isolated countries, and
also one of the youngest in terms of western culture, gives us both
freedom & limitations. lacking a long-standing established arts
tradition means that the arts are not highly valued, but on the other
hand, we can make up our own rules.
we have a history of artists who have had successful careers overseas
while being more or less unknown at home, with the flipside of that
being the idea that work/artists/anything from overseas are "better"
than what we can do here. as a nation, we are starting to get over
some of these insecurities & there is more flexibility. artists can
be successful both at home & overseas, & there is growing
recognition/valuing of maori & polynesian art.
alan asks about commonalities between nz & australia; certainly there
are commonalities but there are also significant differences. the
population sizes alone mean that australia has greater audiences,
greater tax base & therefore greater financial resources & other
opportunities for the arts. nz suffers from little sibling syndrome &
strives to differentiate itself from australia ("they are sooo
americanised!"). it's perhaps more useful to look at a wider south
pacific sensibility, including the polynesian & asian cultures which
have a strong influence here in nz.
h : )
Maybe there are some things going on here that are specific to our
location: culturally, socially, politically and economically, but
maybe not. My guess is that .nz digital and new media practice is
more likely to be noisy than quiet, and up till very recently, more
likely to be seen at international forums than here in nz.
Also, do you see NZ and OZ art in terms of neighboring - is there a
southern pacific or Tasman sea (whever) sensibility in general?
helen varley jamieson: creative catalyst
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and