RE: [-empyre-] original form

["Kim Machan" <kim@maap.org.au>]

Hi Mike
You wrote:" Was this because MAAP was a new commissioning body with 
a fairly open slate as to what its engagement with media was to be, 
without a reputation and tradition to uphold, no risk assessment to 
make, without a list of key indicators against which to score? To whom 
was the account rendered?"

I would not get too entangled in justification of art commissions. We had a
panel of 3 people to discuss selection, all above board and everyone was
happy at the end, including funding agencies. Artists were not pressured for
'product'. However, this strategy was not because we were new org, in fact
we expanded this strategy selection last year for a similar program and
*insisted* that artists had no experience in internet production and didn't
have to produce a new work. A bit of 'blue sky research' attitude, but I
must say that we definitely are looking to support artists without
prescriptive outcomes. Artists generally love to create, so by saying that
that don't have to produce a 'product' sets up a much better environment. In
any case, the world has enough 'product'.

The 'unconditional love' comment was a little cranked up and
(tongue-in-cheek)romantically maternal. YHCHI application document to MAAP99
was also backed up by some very interesting video and solid installation
work (that may be lost forever as the corporation seems to have jettisoned
this chapter of artistic history) 
MAAP perceived Young-hae Chang as an accomplished artist...that could use
email, that was enough tech base for our interests. Remember also, 1999 was
still young days for internet art, and (as is today) we need to enlist
thoughtful artists that can challenge and dislocate expectations ... in
whatever way ...

Best
Kim



-----Original Message-----

On 11/05/2005, at 11:41 PM, Kim Machan wrote:

> there was no demand for a commission, it was very open and we were
> happy whatever the outcome... The Perfect Artistic website was born 
> out of
> unconditional love!

Without wanting to move too far away from Young-hae and Marc's work, 
I'm still left wondering about the 'external structures' that caused 
this series of work to be made, as they seem to be also about passion:

Young-hae and Marc sticking with ideas and concepts rather than 
technology as starting points seems to be a sure way......

Kim as the founding director of MAAP,  feeling free to respond openly 
to 'this amazing document'. Does this suggest "document preparation 
talent"? A left field proposal that could be regarded as 'emerging', in 
the parlience? Was this because MAAP was a new commissioning body with 
a fairly open slate as to what its engagement with media was to be, 
without a reputation and tradition to uphold, no risk assessment to 
make, without a list of key indicators against which to score? To whom 
was the account rendered?


Many years ago, upon emerging I suppose, I was approached by a small 
regional funding body with the suggestion that I submit a proposal for 
a film - new media in arts circles back then. It would only require a 
paragraph and a budget on one sheet of A4. The proposal for a 30 minute 
film was accepted without comment and the commission/grant in effect 
funded four years of art production activity and eventually, three 
hours of film, much of which is still being rented.

It would seem MAAP's initiatives affected Young-hae and Marc similarly. 
But maybe they were set on this track already? Maybe other commissions 
by Kim and MAAP99 had 'no outcomes'?
Again, to whom was the account rendered?

Mike


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.10 - Release Date: 13/05/2005