[-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?

- Alan

helen varley jamieson: creative catalyst

This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.