No subject

Sat Oct 8 08:16:18 EST 2011

ht
be better historicized as the art industrial inheritance of a critical
transnational post-WW2 liberal humanism (a discourse), co-operatively and
strategically pursued by post-war nations and acknowledged as the
=91intercultural=92 beyond (as peacetime hope) of nationally structured
=91political=92 subjectivities and so on. That is definitely the history of=
 the
art industrial architecture here in NL. But there are many other ways to go
about it; the actual history of media art=92s enabled experimentalism would
of course be written quite differently.  In any case, any present
historical purchase on artistic production is really quite lost if we just
conceive of art as loosely =91free=92 and utterly deserving.

The links between hyper-financialization (of culture and, indeed,
everything else previously bracketed 'free' from economics), the neoliberal
non-sovereignty of states, and of more recent regressive nationalization,
have been formed over a twenty or thirty year period, and now we "see" it
going remarkably awry (being already ordinarily awry). But a cognitive
mapping shows that what we know of art=92s 'support' today is partially or
fully (depending on where and how you sit and work) embedded in the
circuits of this. Those links increasingly made no real case for culture
despite taking significant advantage of it, and had no vocabulary for the
social and societal value of art (insert Thatcher=92s famous statement abou=
t
there being no such thing=85), only its role in economic wellness. Telling
here is the fact that the Netherlands could hardly be seen to be the most
at-risk European economy (and its art=92s budget was really quite tiny in t=
he
scheme of things as most are), but its art is still nevertheless
already-indefensible in a regime of governmentality (and its associated,
regressive, manipulated culture) that thinks the social =96 the welfare of
others and of specific or specially organized collectivities actually
interested in pursuing other-than-economic goals - is quite literally bad
for business. And therefore should be inoperative/elsewhere. The success in
NL of the =91creative industries=92 as a conglomerate of practices, and as =
a
rhetorical thing, directly points to the withdrawal of support for media
art in this regard.

What is perhaps the greatest shame in NL (and I could be
projecting/transacting  a bit here, because I'm still an outsider) is that
this culture=92s ecology of remnantly modernist =91autonomous=92 art, criti=
cal
productionist (=91public=92) art, creative industrial =91art=92, and progre=
ssive
commercial practices (design and media) was unprecedentedly nuanced, and is
so fundamentally misrepresented and obliterated by this simplifying and
polarizing =93art or commerce=94 (=93choose or die=94!) situation we are in=
.
Nevertheless, the vocabularies of neoliberal boomtime (whether or not that
boomtime actually came or was well or evenly distributed), and art as
cultural privilege, set us up for this 'losing'. Artists and cultural
workers in the Netherlands are very much working against this now if not so
much before and the culture has become even more terse, amazingly
articulate and vibrant across a whole range of new initiatives and
strategically more (and also strategically less) collective, speculative
and pragmatic thinking.

What has become obvious to them - and most politically important beyond a
short-sighted politics of self-regarding 'loss' - is that the government do
not have any conceptions available to care about what is being lost, which
makes their austerity politics easy to enforce. i.e. they don=92t care abou=
t
care in the neoliberal setup. It is this fact of economically manufactured
ignorance of what is valuably social and political about art that art
industry professionals really (belatedly) need to deal with in their actual
work and politics. Incontrovertibly, some will decide not to be the same
art industry professionals. Perhaps for some, having the decision made for
them through job losses will obscure the politics in =91loss=92, but I very
much doubt that actually.

While the robust new contemporary museum that I recently, uncertainly, left
(in order to do this thinking) continues to thrive amidst Australia's weird
continuing boomtime, the Australian media art festival event that I came of
age within, This is Not Art, which was at one time the major funded
festival of the Australia Council=92s new media art board, has just been
defunded. As the story goes, it was initially funded on raw meat raffles on
Friday afternoons in its regional town local pubs, because the initial
collective of organizers didn=92t even know arts funding existed; it is now
resorting to crowd funding. While mourning that news of its new found
=91political=92 disregard (via funding), I don=92t really know the full ext=
ent of
what I feel about its funding 'loss'. I write that because I wouldn't wish
my own writing to be interpreted as chastizing or even so politically
self-assured (especially in its encounter with this big broad range of
things that we like call art). My own perspective has accrued from a
specific combination of losses and privileges (more of the latter), and
each has their own different combination to bring to the table.

 Rachel O'Reilly
writer editor curator |  +31(0)615217953

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Julian Oliver <julian at julianoliver.com>wro=
te:

>
> I will post here an article I wrote in July, called The State Of Art.
> Intended
> for a general audience, it is entirely focused on this topic and was
> re-posted
> on various mailing lists and blogs. Reading your introductory text it
> comes to a
> couple of similar conclusions but problematises the root expectation of
> state
> support altogether.
>
> It can be read online here:
>
>    http://julianoliver.com/state-of-art
>
> Here is the text:
>
>
> //-----------------------------------------------------------------------=
------->
>
> The State of Art
> Introduction
>
>
> In 2004 Eleonora Aguiari made an art intervention on a larger-than-life
> statue
> of Lord Napier on Queens Gate, West London, by wrapping it in 80 rolls of
> red
> tape. Transformation of this prominent monument took 4 people, 4 days.
>
> Perhaps an unintended poetic dimension to this work is the vast amount of
> bureaucratic red tape the artist had to navigate to gain permission to
> perform
> her intervention. She had to ask the Victoria and Albert Museum's
> conservation
> department, the RCA conservation department, acquire permission from
> English
> Heritage (owners of the statue), the City of Westminster council, the
> councils
> of boroughs Chelsea and Kensington (whose boundary falls under the
> statue), the
> RCA Rector and even the current Lord Napier himself.i
>
> Regardless, this 'authorised intervention' was a resounding success. Bein=
g
> in a
> very prominent position it was visible by countless commuters and drew a
> tremendous amount of attention to the monument, one that'd become so much
> a part
> of the landscape it struggled for visibility. In this way, the interventi=
on
> achieved what the artist set out to do: =93[...] statuary that symbolizes
> military
> past, or imperialism should be covered to make the topics of the past
> visible.=94ii
>
> All said, it's unclear who was the primary actor in this intervention.
> Certainly
> we could say that if the state were painting a heritage statue and a
> member of
> public complained in protest, it would be difficult for that protest to b=
e
> heard
> to effect. Yet if the artist had not asked for permission and her
> intervention
> was thwarted, the work would not have seen light and her personal
> investment in
> time and red tape would be lost.
>
> Would this intervention, in fact, be better described as a collaboration
> between
> the artist and the state?
>
> The long history of artistic intervention has been troubled with court
> cases and
> scuffles with authorities, even scuffles between artists themselves. As
> such
> this history represents a valuable practice of 'edge detection',
> delimiting the
> point at which critical action is not tolerated or readily appropriated.
> Intervention art always leaves us with a handful of important questions
> but in
> the context of Eleanora's piece, they become ever more interesting:
>
> What is the modern relation between the artist and the state? What do we
> mean by
> state support in the context of art? Should we always invite and encourag=
e
> the
> state as a partner in creative endeavours? Should artists have a role in
> relation to the state and state interests?
>
> Throw in arts funding and further questions arise... Does public arts
> funding
> imply need for a tangible return for tax-payers? [1] If funding is
> involved then
> clearly some sort of expected outcome is implied. When we talk of the sta=
te
> investing in art, what is the expected return from that investment?
>
> Art as Investment
>
> Arts funding is widely considered to be a measure of the relative
> prosperity and
> cultural health of a given region or nation. It's safe to say a state tha=
t
> invests in the arts, even in areas of diverse experimentation for which a
> vocabulary may not yet exist, is certainly to be admired. Arts funding is
> not
> without its practical rationales however; funding is economically
> rationalised
> as an investment with very real capital and social returns.
>
> Richard Florida, the influential American Urban Studies theorist, positio=
ns
> technology workers, artists, musicians, lesbians and gay men as part of a
> creative class that he believes provably stimulate economic development i=
n
> metropolitan areas. Many seem to believe him. His book The Rise of the
> Creative
> Class has arguably had a deep impact on policy decisions as relates the
> arts
> throughout North America with Florida himself sitting alongside the
> Director of
> the National Ballet of Canada and Investment Banker Robert Foster in
> advising
> the Creative Capital Initiative, a plan to upgrade Toronto's cultural
> expenditure. Other cities have followed his advice, so much so one wonder=
s
> whether artists are strategically positioned as the vanguard of
> gentrification
> by providing low-rent incentives for them to move into poor neighbourhood=
s.
>
> The term Guggenheim Effect (or Bilbao Effect) refers to the economic and
> cultural transformation of an entire city through the addition of a museu=
m.
> Frank Gehry's landmark Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao (1997) has become
> famous for
> its deep impact on the economics and image of the city.[2]
>
> Charters for investing in the arts are not shy of these effects, citing
> cultural
> tourism, the stimulation of new markets, revitalization of struggling
> post-industrial regions, contribution to industrial R&D and projection of=
 a
> positive, progressive state image as incentives. None of these things are
> intrinsically bad in themselves but nonetheless they strategically
> position art
> and artists within a productive role, one of value to the state as a whol=
e.
>
> Submitting for Funding
>
> It's here that we can run into a sort of chicken-and-egg problem that not
> only
> impacts on the primary, critically transformative potential of art itself
> but
> sets the frame for a dangerous habit of dependence.
>
> Let us first consider the former problem, that of critical rigour in the
> arts.
>
> The artist has always been a somewhat fantastic, even romantic figure in
> public
> imagination, a character that decidedly positions him or herself outside
> utility, social responsibility, even civil life. Despite the radical
> transformations of what we mean by 'art' since the Enlightenment, the
> popular
> figure of the artist has (rather curiously) remained relatively consisten=
t.
>
> While often attributed to poverty [3] and anti-social behaviour, the
> figure of the
> artist is afforded respect as one that has has the courage and insight to
> ask
> deep and troubling questions about who we are and how we live. It is this
> self
> appointed role as a stranger of the state and civil society that frames t=
he
> value of the artist, even before their work is made public. Just as
> Diogenes The
> Cynic was valued in his time, we figure artists as those that reserve the
> right
> to refute, deny and reverse-engineer civil society and the state that
> provides
> for it, to ascend these obligations and expose their assumptive logics.
>
> With such a legacy, one still very alive in rhetoric around art and artis=
ts
> today, the state can make a troubling patron of the arts..
>
> The funding call (typically known as a Call for Proposals) invites
> applicants to
> provide a body of text describing their ideas, perhaps with sketches and
> images
> of their respective submission. Many artists are familiar with this
> process, one
> often resulting in rejection by jury appointed to filter applications.
> Here the
> state is ineluctably positioned as not just facilitator but as a curator =
of
> artistic intent; providing for the possibility of the work itself within =
a
> pre-existant agenda. Furthermore, under the ontology of the artist as an
> entity
> within and cared for by the state, arts funding also doubles as an
> important
> recognition, that society in general values the creator's work. That valu=
e
> is
> equivocal to cultural importance, that the artist's work is a deep
> contribution
> to the given culture and how it understands itself. This is a very
> desirable
> thing for artists indeed, one that captures the attention of a great many
> practicing today..
>
> What I wish to argue here is not for an end to that thing we call arts
> funding,
> for fear of negative effects on critical, creative practices more
> generally. Far
> from it. Rather, I wish to draw attention to what I see as a
> less-than-critical
> relationship, even dependence, on state funding itself. Arts funding has
> been a
> boon for a great many artists, including myself, who have found themselve=
s
> able
> to adapt existing works to fit the brief or even create whole new works i=
n
> a
> commission like frame. State funding has seen older ideas of mine being
> realised
> where otherwise they may very likely have fallen aside. Complex works
> (technical
> complexity is almost a characteristic of works of media-art) require
> plenty of
> time to research while high material costs often make bringing such ideas
> to
> light without funding difficult, sometimes impossible.
>
> Suffice to say, a few of the works I have made would not have been possib=
le
> without state support, given my own economic condition at the time.
>
> However, it needs to be said a great many artists practising in Europe
> today
> increasingly appear unable to conceive of making work at all without stat=
e
> funding (or outside of an institution that has), even if they already hav=
e
> money
> themselves. Rather, the state is the de facto desired partner in
> production. The
> Netherlands, Britain and most of Scandinavia especially are countries wit=
h
> a
> strong history of state support for the arts; development of a work of ne=
w
> media
> in these countries in particular often comes with an expectation of state
> support.
>
> Deeply engrained in the European arts scene more generally is the ever
> pressing
> topic of money, or resources as it is often (and euphemistically) put. Wh=
en
> these resources come from the state they bring with them conditions that =
by
> their very nature configure the state as an accomplice or collaborator in
> the
> production of the work..
>
> It is thus unreasonable to expect that an artist will submit work that
> challenges the state and its civil, political and legal givens, lest of
> all that
> the state will support work that does.
>
> While not keenly expressed as such, a culture of compliance is seeded, se=
wn
> within a dominant paradigm of economic sense. As such Art, as touted for
> its
> fearless rigour and critical cunning, as a vital cornerstone of a healthy=
,
> self-reflexive society, is made weak. The state becomes patron, censor an=
d
> curator of the arts all at once.
>
> Now to our second problem, of dependence.
>
> In June 2011 Zijlstra, the Dutch minister for culture, announced a 200
> million
> Euro cut to infrastructural funding in the arts sector. It may be the dea=
th
> knell for a great many organizations and initiatives throughout the
> Netherlands,
> some of which are considered to be canonical to the international
> media-arts
> scene (V2_, Sonic Acts, Mediamatic, NIMK, STEIM, to name a few). 4
>
> Many organizations under the axe where born directly out of arts funding
> and
> have benefited from persistent support from the Dutch state since their
> inception. With regular exhibition and workshop programs, theatre,
> concerts,
> mini-festivals, book publishing and public seminars, they are a seemingly
> inseparable part of contemporary Dutch culture. Opposition to the cuts
> have been
> vocal and strong, with petitions, protests and numerous letters from the
> Netherlands and beyond sent to Zijlstra's office.
>
> Most revealing however has been utter surprise at news of the cuts; that
> such a
> thing is seemingly unimaginable points to a root expectation that the
> state must
> support the arts, especially rigorous and experimental areas such as the
> media
> arts.
>
> It's this expectation I'd like to question, going so far as to suggest th=
at
> given contemporary economic conditions, harbouring such expectations is, =
in
> fact, dangerous.
>
> The modern European state is taking on a form increasingly similar to
> those of
> the New World: a geographically-abstracted Capital enterprise whose
> executives
> we vote into power from time to time. With post-crisis economic
> rationalism the
> call of the day, the State-as-enterprise wants competitive capital growth=
,
> first
> and foremost. With exploding populations stressing infrastructure in an
> aggressive marketplace, broad support of the arts may not appear to be in
> State
> interest, may simply not make any sort of capital sense.
>
> More so, the executives that the democratic majority put in power bring
> with
> them their own strategies and interests, each of which may or may not lat=
er
> reflect the terms under which they were voted in. In short, it's always
> going to
> be a gamble..
>
> As such, depending on the state to support Media Arts organizations and
> experimental practice in other fields, is not wise. These areas in
> particular
> will need to be more dexterous than this.
>
> Cultural projects that are believed to not: stimulate new markets, genera=
te
> cultural tourism, revitalise a struggling post-industrial town (Newcastle=
,
> Linz,
> Karlsruhe), contribute to industrial R&D, project an image that fits Stat=
e
> branding will increasingly be dropped.
>
> It's here where a lab that hosts workshops on noise and experimental musi=
c,
> software and bio-art, physical computing or mixed reality may not appear =
a
> sensible investment when appearing in Times New Roman under the red pen. =
It
> doesn't matter how intrinsically important these disciplines and their
> representative institutions may be within the broader human project: it
> appears
> some European countries are following the New World and rationalizing awa=
y
> from
> support of the arts, perhaps ultimately preferring privatisation of the
> so-called Arts Sector altogether.
>
> As a result of sudden and startling changes in economic representation of
> the
> arts as seen in the Netherlands, whole chapters of Dutch media-arts
> history face
> a harsh winter of austerity and vast efforts in restructuring, assuming
> they
> survive at all. Meanwhile the tax-payer's conscious or unconscious
> investment in
> these fields (resulting in projects and vast, specialist bodies of
> knowledge)
> will likely go unarchived, even lost altogether; a shell of documentation
> on
> websites alone.
>
> Strategies
>
> There are no easy, singular solutions to these dilemmas. Rather, a
> combination
> of several contiguous funding strategies may be the wisest direction.
>
> Here are a few, relating most particularly to funding non-profit art
> institutions than artists alone:
>
> Crowd-funding.
> Crowd funding has been used by artists to acquire financial support to
> develop
> as yet unmade artwork for centuries, with systems of Charity and Patronag=
e
> being
> most notable. The Threshold Pledge System is a kind of crowd-funding that
> Mozart
> himself used for the three concertos K413-415.
>
> Typically the artist seeking crowd funding publicly pledges to make a
> particular
> work once a set amount of funding is reached, often within a defined
> period of
> time. If this amount is not reached, all the money is given back. Softwar=
e
> platforms have been developed in recent years to facilitate this more
> easily
> over the Internet, The successful Kickstarter being the most notable
> example.
>
> One common criticism with this model is that the idea to be supported (an=
d
> or
> the artist him/herself) must not only be popular but must be put out in
> the open
> for the model to work at all. Some artists fear this risks the possibilit=
y
> of
> other artists 'stealing' their ideas.
>
> Regardless, this system could be just as readily applied to a media-arts
> institution looking to develop a large project as an artist working alone
> on a
> small project.
>
> Production facility.
> This is a model already used by several experimental and media-arts
> organizations throughout the world. By designating a certain portion of
> their
> skill-base, equipment and other resources to the paid production of
> third-party
> projects, funding is brought in that can be used to support the core
> agendas of
> the institution as a whole. HANGAR in Barcelona is a good example of this
> model
> in practice. Naturally in the case of the independent artist, this would
> manifest as the application of their given skills for commercial work,
> something
> not always desirable for many artists, hence them rather seeking
> light-footed
> philanthropists or relationships with art dealers where their work is
> directly
> positioned as a capital commodity.
>
> Public education platforms.
> Rather than depending on the state to support free public education
> programs
> within given or approved topics, the arts organization might host quality
> workshops on a regular basis, selling tickets as required. Free seminars
> targeting a diverse public should argue as to why supporting experimental
> arts
> and research practices is a good idea in the first place. If voters canno=
t
> see
> tangible value in supporting diverse experimentation, complaints directed
> at
> elected politicians that under-represent the respective field make little
> sense,
> in the long term.
>
> Conclusion
>
> It's my hope that out of the gloom of austerity -one cutting deep into th=
e
> European arts sector at the time of writing- will come a positive shift: =
a
> commitment to the exploration and implementation of strategies that loose=
n
> dependence upon the State and thus reducing infrastructural vulnerability
> in the
> long term.
>
> More so, I suspect such new directions might spur a more courageous and
> rigorous
> critical disposition within experimental arts practices more generally,
> one not
> shy to offend, lest of all the hands that feed.
>
> Julian Oliver
>
> July 2011
>
> 1 See Eleanor Heartney's Art and Money
>
> http://www.artnet.com/magazineus/features/heartney/art-and-money-and-poli=
tics-3-28-11.asp
>
> 2 An economically positivist account of the Bilbao Effect
> http://www.forbes.com/2002/02/20/0220conn.html
> Whilst it has created thousands of new jobs (largely in the tourist
> industry) it
> is important to note it has also doubled property values,
> displaced immigrant populations and raised the cost of living in the area
> overall (See Esteban's El Efecto Guggenheim, Editorial Anagrama 2007).
>
> 3 Rather humorously 'Khudozhnik', the word for artist in Russian, also
> means
> 'skinny' or 'unwell'.
>
> 4 The media-arts is a good case example of a burgeoning field of practice
> not
> considered central to contemporary art history and so is
> arguably more vulnerable during times of austerity.
>
> i
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_intervention#Lord_Napier_in_red_tape.2C_=
2004
>
> ii http://www.kernotart.com/artist/eleonora.html
>
>
> //<----------------------------------------------------------------------=
--------
>
> --
> Julian Oliver
> http://julianoliver.com
> http://criticalengineering.org
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>

--0016364d25bbcf529404b0c2331e
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif">Hi ever=
yone,=A0It is indeed difficult to entertain the protectionist an=
d
short-sighted art industry notion that the politics of art funding (which I
actually interpret in a lot of this debate as =91the politics of art itself=
=92) was &#39;never really a major concern until recently&#39;. The critica=
l awareness of problems with whichever hand that feeds have always been the=
re, as Julian so clearly points out. I suggest that perhaps more recently t=
hese issues have been just _more_ obfuscated by art=92s own (and very speci=
fically) &#39;neoliberal&#39; support during boom time.

<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font-size: 10pt; "><fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif">=A0</fo=
nt></span></p>

<fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif">A key: =
What is interesting in this discourse of shocked priviledge
is how =91art=92 is being made out to feel the effects of the political
present last, when art is normally presumed to grok it first, to lead the w=
ay. That=92s interesting no? (It, or artists, do of course, just not within=
 this discourse, or as disaffected positions are set up to make demands wit=
hin it.)

<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font-size: 10pt; "><fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><br></f=
ont></span></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font-si=
ze: 10pt; "><font class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans=
-serif">Arguably,
art industries are perceived as =91first victims=92 because there is a cert=
ain
persistently modernist liberalism to the privileges of art work
professionalism, which has enabled them/=92us=92 to refrain from making the=
 real
political case for our privileging, our &#39;support&#39; (wherever this co=
mes from). Now our liminial conception of ourselves
as inherently politically valuable has been revealed to be active only in o=
ur
own imaginations. In one sense, yes maybe that is cognitively shocking, but=
 this moment has
been coming and should be held in a much larger view if we are to understan=
d it
in the present.</font></span></p>

<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font-size: 10pt; "><fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif">=A0</fo=
nt></span></p>

<fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif">I=92m c=
urrently doing academic research (between AU and NL) that is making
aesthetic theoretical sense of how the transition to neoliberal paradigms
actually impacted upon the conception of aesthetic encounter itself.=A0 I=
=92m basically making the (hardly
profound) case that the devaluation of art is quite clearly written in to t=
he
assumptive and often politically un-conscious liberalism of art industries =
at
the height of neoliberal transition, pre-financial crash. So as well as
theorizing a kind of neoliberal aesthesis at play in contemporary culture, =
in
the performances of fine art works and spectators (ourselves) keen for art =
as experience, in curatorial texts and reviews, but also,
for example, unbounded from =91art worlds=92 in the reactions of journalist=
s to the
=93senseless=94 spectacle of the London riots and so on, I=92m describing h=
ow the enabling
fiction of art industrial liberalism so easily turns to this historical mom=
ent.
The notion of senseless violence or shocking cultural cuts stand in here a
product of the late liberal habitus. And indeed, a dubiously traumatized in=
nocent (the late liberal spectator) figures prominently in this recent hist=
ory and discourse of art that i am writing about.=A0

<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font-size: 10pt; "><fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif">=A0</fo=
nt></span></p>

<fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif">So goin=
g back to the first post, I would say that the notion that
art was finally =91free=92 after 1989 risks attaching art to a very empty s=
ignifier
(and a dubious fabulated space of post-violence) and lacks structural aware=
ness
of what historical conditions enabled art to be conceived as such. Let=92s =
also
not discount fine art=92s phenomenal imbrication with speculative finance a=
s also
art=92s post-89 =91freedom=92. Or media art=92s participation in what Paul =
O=92Neill has
framed as culture=92s =91educational turn=92 in which =91progressive=92 pra=
ctices
negotiate the receipt of funding to pursue the creation of works in a polit=
ical
milieu increasingly dominated by ideologies of culture-as service, knowledg=
e
production, as education itself is massively privatized and so on. <=
/span>

<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font-size: 10pt; "><fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif">=A0</fo=
nt></span></p>

<fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif">From wh=
ere I write, late liberal discourses of the =91freedom=92 of art might be b=
etter
historicized as the art industrial inheritance of a critical transnational =
post-WW2 liberal humanism (a discourse), co-operatively and strategically p=
ursued by post-war
nations and acknowledged as the =91intercultural=92 beyond (as peacetime ho=
pe) of nationally
structured =91political=92 subjectivities and so on. That is definitely the=
 history of the art industrial architecture here in NL. But there are many =
other ways to go about it; the actual history of
media art=92s enabled experimentalism would of course be written quite
differently. =A0In any case, any
present historical purchase on artistic production is really quite lost if =
we
just conceive of art as loosely =91free=92 and utterly deserving.</s=
pan>

<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font-size: 10pt; "><fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif">=A0</fo=
nt></span></p>

<fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif">The lin=
ks between hyper-financialization (of culture and, indeed, everything else =
previously bracketed &#39;free&#39; from economics), the neoliberal non-sov=
ereignty of states, and of more recent regressive
nationalization, have been formed over a twenty or thirty year period, and =
now we &quot;see&quot; it going remarkably awry=A0(being already ordinarily=
=A0awry). But a cognitive mapping shows that what we know of art=92s &#39;s=
upport&#39; today is partially or fully (depending on where and how you sit=
 and
work) embedded in the circuits of this. Those links increasingly made no re=
al case
for culture despite taking significant advantage of it, and had no vocabula=
ry for the social and societal value of art
(insert Thatcher=92s famous statement about there being no such thing=85), =
only its
role in economic wellness.=A0Telling
here is the fact that the Netherlands could hardly be seen to be the
most at-risk European economy (and its art=92s budget was really quite tiny=
 in
the scheme of things as most are), but its art is still nevertheless alread=
y-indefensible in
a regime of governmentality (and its associated, regressive, manipulated cu=
lture) that thinks the social =96 the welfare of others and of specific or
specially organized collectivities actually interested in pursuing other-th=
an-economic
goals - is quite literally bad for business. And therefore should be inoper=
ative/elsewhere.
The success in NL of the =91creative industries=92 as a conglomerate of pra=
ctices, and
as a rhetorical thing, directly points to the withdrawal of support for med=
ia
art in this regard.

<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font-size: 10pt; "><fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif">=A0</fo=
nt></span></p>

<fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif">What is=
 perhaps the greatest shame in NL (and I could be projecting/transacting =
=A0a bit here, because I&#39;m still an outsider) is that this culture=92s
ecology of remnantly modernist =91autonomous=92 art, critical productionist
(=91public=92) art, creative industrial =91art=92, and progressive commerci=
al practices
(design and media) was unprecedentedly nuanced, and is so fundamentally
misrepresented and obliterated by this simplifying and polarizing =93art or
commerce=94 (=93choose or die=94!) situation we are in. Nevertheless, the
vocabularies of neoliberal boomtime (whether or not that boomtime actually =
came or was well or evenly distributed), and art as cultural privilege, set=
 us up
for this &#39;losing&#39;. Artists and cultural workers in the Netherlands =
are very much
working against this now if not so much before and the culture has become e=
ven more terse, amazingly articulate and vibrant across a whole range of ne=
w initiatives and strategically more (and also strategically less) collecti=
ve, speculative and pragmatic thinking.=A0

<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font-size: 10pt; "><fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><br></f=
ont></span></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font-si=
ze: 10pt; "><font class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans=
-serif">What has become obvious to them - and most politically important be=
yond a short-sighted politics of self-regarding &#39;loss&#39; - is that th=
e government
do not have any conceptions available to care about what is being lost, whi=
ch
makes their austerity politics easy to enforce. i.e. they don=92t care abou=
t
care in the neoliberal setup. It is this fact of economically
manufactured ignorance of what is valuably social and political about art t=
hat art
industry professionals really (belatedly) need to deal with in their actual=
 work
and politics. Incontrovertibly, some will decide not to be the same art
industry professionals. Perhaps for some, having the decision made for them
through job losses will obscure the politics in =91loss=92, but I very much=
 doubt
that actually.=A0</font></span></p>

<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font-size: 10pt; "><fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif">=A0</fo=
nt></span></p>

<fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif">While t=
he robust new contemporary museum that I recently, uncertainly, left (in or=
der to do this thinking) continues to thrive amidst Australia&#39;s weird c=
ontinuing boomtime, the Australian media art festival event that I came of =
age
within, This is Not Art, which was at one time the major funded festival of=
 the Australia
Council=92s new media art board, has just been defunded. As the story goes,=
 it was initially funded on
raw meat raffles on Friday afternoons in its regional town local pubs, beca=
use
the initial collective of organizers didn=92t even know arts funding existe=
d; it
is now resorting to crowd funding. While
mourning that news of its new found =91political=92 disregard (via funding)=
, I don=92t really know the full extent of what I feel about its funding &#=
39;loss&#39;. I write that because I wouldn&#39;t wish my own writing to be=
 interpreted as chastizing or even so politically self-assured (especially =
in its encounter with this big broad range of things that we like call art)=
. My own perspective has accrued from a specific combination of losses and =
privileges (more of the latter), and each has their own different combinati=
on to bring to the table.=A0

<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font-size: 10pt; "><fo=
nt class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><br></f=
ont></span></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font-si=
ze: 10pt; "><font class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"arial, helvetica, sans=
-serif"><br>

</font></span></p>

Rachel O&#39;Reilly<div>writer editor curator | =A0+31(0)615217953 =A0<div>=
<br></div><br>
<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Julian =
Oliver <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:julian at julianoliver.com">jul=
ian at julianoliver.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_qu=
ote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex=
;">

<br>
I will post here an article I wrote in July, called The State Of Art. Inten=
ded<br>
for a general audience, it is entirely focused on this topic and was re-pos=
ted<br>
on various mailing lists and blogs. Reading your introductory text it comes=
 to a<br>
couple of similar conclusions but problematises the root expectation of sta=
te<br>
support altogether.<br>
<br>
It can be read online here:<br>
<br>
 =A0 =A0<a href=3D"http://julianoliver.com/state-of-art" target=3D"_blank">=
http://julianoliver.com/state-of-art</a><br>
<br>
Here is the text:<br>
<br>
//-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----&gt;<br>
<br>
The State of Art<br>
Introduction<br>
<br>
<br>
In 2004 Eleonora Aguiari made an art intervention on a larger-than-life sta=
tue<br>
of Lord Napier on Queens Gate, West London, by wrapping it in 80 rolls of r=
ed<br>
tape. Transformation of this prominent monument took 4 people, 4 days.<br>
<br>
Perhaps an unintended poetic dimension to this work is the vast amount of<b=
r>
bureaucratic red tape the artist had to navigate to gain permission to perf=
orm<br>
her intervention. She had to ask the Victoria and Albert Museum&#39;s conse=
rvation<br>
department, the RCA conservation department, acquire permission from Englis=
h<br>
Heritage (owners of the statue), the City of Westminster council, the counc=
ils<br>
of boroughs Chelsea and Kensington (whose boundary falls under the statue),=
 the<br>
RCA Rector and even the current Lord Napier himself.i<br>
<br>
Regardless, this &#39;authorised intervention&#39; was a resounding success=
. Being in a<br>
very prominent position it was visible by countless commuters and drew a<br=
>
tremendous amount of attention to the monument, one that&#39;d become so mu=
ch a part<br>
of the landscape it struggled for visibility. In this way, the intervention=
<br>
achieved what the artist set out to do: =93[...] statuary that symbolizes m=
ilitary<br>
past, or imperialism should be covered to make the topics of the past<br>
visible.=94ii<br>
<br>
All said, it&#39;s unclear who was the primary actor in this intervention. =
Certainly<br>
we could say that if the state were painting a heritage statue and a member=
 of<br>
public complained in protest, it would be difficult for that protest to be =
heard<br>
to effect. Yet if the artist had not asked for permission and her intervent=
ion<br>
was thwarted, the work would not have seen light and her personal investmen=
t in<br>
time and red tape would be lost.<br>
<br>
Would this intervention, in fact, be better described as a collaboration be=
tween<br>
the artist and the state?<br>
<br>
The long history of artistic intervention has been troubled with court case=
s and<br>
scuffles with authorities, even scuffles between artists themselves. As suc=
h<br>
this history represents a valuable practice of &#39;edge detection&#39;, de=
limiting the<br>
point at which critical action is not tolerated or readily appropriated.<br=
>
Intervention art always leaves us with a handful of important questions but=
 in<br>
the context of Eleanora&#39;s piece, they become ever more interesting:<br>
<br>
What is the modern relation between the artist and the state? What do we me=
an by<br>
state support in the context of art? Should we always invite and encourage =
the<br>
state as a partner in creative endeavours? Should artists have a role in<br=
>
relation to the state and state interests?<br>
<br>
Throw in arts funding and further questions arise... Does public arts fundi=
ng<br>
imply need for a tangible return for tax-payers? [1] If funding is involved=
 then<br>
clearly some sort of expected outcome is implied. When we talk of the state=
<br>
investing in art, what is the expected return from that investment?<br>
<br>
Art as Investment<br>
<br>
Arts funding is widely considered to be a measure of the relative prosperit=
y and<br>
cultural health of a given region or nation. It&#39;s safe to say a state t=
hat<br>
invests in the arts, even in areas of diverse experimentation for which a<b=
r>
vocabulary may not yet exist, is certainly to be admired. Arts funding is n=
ot<br>
without its practical rationales however; funding is economically rationali=
sed<br>
as an investment with very real capital and social returns.<br>
<br>
Richard Florida, the influential American Urban Studies theorist, positions=
<br>
technology workers, artists, musicians, lesbians and gay men as part of a<b=
r>
creative class that he believes provably stimulate economic development in<=
br>
metropolitan areas. Many seem to believe him. His book The Rise of the Crea=
tive<br>
Class has arguably had a deep impact on policy decisions as relates the art=
s<br>
throughout North America with Florida himself sitting alongside the Directo=
r of<br>
the National Ballet of Canada and Investment Banker Robert Foster in advisi=
ng<br>
the Creative Capital Initiative, a plan to upgrade Toronto&#39;s cultural<b=
r>
expenditure. Other cities have followed his advice, so much so one wonders<=
br>
whether artists are strategically positioned as the vanguard of gentrificat=
ion<br>
by providing low-rent incentives for them to move into poor neighbourhoods.=
<br>
<br>
The term Guggenheim Effect (or Bilbao Effect) refers to the economic and<br=
>
cultural transformation of an entire city through the addition of a museum.=
<br>
Frank Gehry&#39;s landmark Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao (1997) has become fa=
mous for<br>
its deep impact on the economics and image of the city.[2]<br>
<br>
Charters for investing in the arts are not shy of these effects, citing cul=
tural<br>
tourism, the stimulation of new markets, revitalization of struggling<br>
post-industrial regions, contribution to industrial R&amp;D and projection =
of a<br>
positive, progressive state image as incentives. None of these things are<b=
r>
intrinsically bad in themselves but nonetheless they strategically position=
 art<br>
and artists within a productive role, one of value to the state as a whole.=
<br>
<br>
Submitting for Funding<br>
<br>
It&#39;s here that we can run into a sort of chicken-and-egg problem that n=
ot only<br>
impacts on the primary, critically transformative potential of art itself b=
ut<br>
sets the frame for a dangerous habit of dependence.<br>
<br>
Let us first consider the former problem, that of critical rigour in the ar=
ts.<br>
<br>
The artist has always been a somewhat fantastic, even romantic figure in pu=
blic<br>
imagination, a character that decidedly positions him or herself outside<br=
>
utility, social responsibility, even civil life. Despite the radical<br>
transformations of what we mean by &#39;art&#39; since the Enlightenment, t=
he popular<br>
figure of the artist has (rather curiously) remained relatively consistent.=
<br>
<br>
While often attributed to poverty [3] and anti-social behaviour, the figure=
 of the<br>
artist is afforded respect as one that has has the courage and insight to a=
sk<br>
deep and troubling questions about who we are and how we live. It is this s=
elf<br>
appointed role as a stranger of the state and civil society that frames the=
<br>
value of the artist, even before their work is made public. Just as Diogene=
s The<br>
Cynic was valued in his time, we figure artists as those that reserve the r=
ight<br>
to refute, deny and reverse-engineer civil society and the state that provi=
des<br>
for it, to ascend these obligations and expose their assumptive logics.<br>
<br>
With such a legacy, one still very alive in rhetoric around art and artists=
<br>
today, the state can make a troubling patron of the arts..<br>
<br>
The funding call (typically known as a Call for Proposals) invites applican=
ts to<br>
provide a body of text describing their ideas, perhaps with sketches and im=
ages<br>
of their respective submission. Many artists are familiar with this process=
, one<br>
often resulting in rejection by jury appointed to filter applications. Here=
 the<br>
state is ineluctably positioned as not just facilitator but as a curator of=
<br>
artistic intent; providing for the possibility of the work itself within a<=
br>
pre-existant agenda. Furthermore, under the ontology of the artist as an en=
tity<br>
within and cared for by the state, arts funding also doubles as an importan=
t<br>
recognition, that society in general values the creator&#39;s work. That va=
lue is<br>
equivocal to cultural importance, that the artist&#39;s work is a deep cont=
ribution<br>
to the given culture and how it understands itself. This is a very desirabl=
e<br>
thing for artists indeed, one that captures the attention of a great many<b=
r>
practicing today..<br>
<br>
What I wish to argue here is not for an end to that thing we call arts fund=
ing,<br>
for fear of negative effects on critical, creative practices more generally=
. Far<br>
from it. Rather, I wish to draw attention to what I see as a less-than-crit=
ical<br>
relationship, even dependence, on state funding itself. Arts funding has be=
en a<br>
boon for a great many artists, including myself, who have found themselves =
able<br>
to adapt existing works to fit the brief or even create whole new works in =
a<br>
commission like frame. State funding has seen older ideas of mine being rea=
lised<br>
where otherwise they may very likely have fallen aside. Complex works (tech=
nical<br>
complexity is almost a characteristic of works of media-art) require plenty=
 of<br>
time to research while high material costs often make bringing such ideas t=
o<br>
light without funding difficult, sometimes impossible.<br>
<br>
Suffice to say, a few of the works I have made would not have been possible=
<br>
without state support, given my own economic condition at the time.<br>
<br>
However, it needs to be said a great many artists practising in Europe toda=
y<br>
increasingly appear unable to conceive of making work at all without state<=
br>
funding (or outside of an institution that has), even if they already have =
money<br>
themselves. Rather, the state is the de facto desired partner in production=
. The<br>
Netherlands, Britain and most of Scandinavia especially are countries with =
a<br>
strong history of state support for the arts; development of a work of new =
media<br>
in these countries in particular often comes with an expectation of state<b=
r>
support.<br>
<br>
Deeply engrained in the European arts scene more generally is the ever pres=
sing<br>
topic of money, or resources as it is often (and euphemistically) put. When=
<br>
these resources come from the state they bring with them conditions that by=
<br>
their very nature configure the state as an accomplice or collaborator in t=
he<br>
production of the work..<br>
<br>
It is thus unreasonable to expect that an artist will submit work that<br>
challenges the state and its civil, political and legal givens, lest of all=
 that<br>
the state will support work that does.<br>
<br>
While not keenly expressed as such, a culture of compliance is seeded, sewn=
<br>
within a dominant paradigm of economic sense. As such Art, as touted for it=
s<br>
fearless rigour and critical cunning, as a vital cornerstone of a healthy,<=
br>
self-reflexive society, is made weak. The state becomes patron, censor and<=
br>
curator of the arts all at once.<br>
<br>
Now to our second problem, of dependence.<br>
<br>
In June 2011 Zijlstra, the Dutch minister for culture, announced a 200 mill=
ion<br>
Euro cut to infrastructural funding in the arts sector. It may be the death=
<br>
knell for a great many organizations and initiatives throughout the Netherl=
ands,<br>
some of which are considered to be canonical to the international media-art=
s<br>
scene (V2_, Sonic Acts, Mediamatic, NIMK, STEIM, to name a few). 4<br>
<br>
Many organizations under the axe where born directly out of arts funding an=
d<br>
have benefited from persistent support from the Dutch state since their<br>
inception. With regular exhibition and workshop programs, theatre, concerts=
,<br>
mini-festivals, book publishing and public seminars, they are a seemingly<b=
r>
inseparable part of contemporary Dutch culture. Opposition to the cuts have=
 been<br>
vocal and strong, with petitions, protests and numerous letters from the<br=
>
Netherlands and beyond sent to Zijlstra&#39;s office.<br>
<br>
Most revealing however has been utter surprise at news of the cuts; that su=
ch a<br>
thing is seemingly unimaginable points to a root expectation that the state=
 must<br>
support the arts, especially rigorous and experimental areas such as the me=
dia<br>
arts.<br>
<br>
It&#39;s this expectation I&#39;d like to question, going so far as to sugg=
est that<br>
given contemporary economic conditions, harbouring such expectations is, in=
<br>
fact, dangerous.<br>
<br>
The modern European state is taking on a form increasingly similar to those=
 of<br>
the New World: a geographically-abstracted Capital enterprise whose executi=
ves<br>
we vote into power from time to time. With post-crisis economic rationalism=
 the<br>
call of the day, the State-as-enterprise wants competitive capital growth, =
first<br>
and foremost. With exploding populations stressing infrastructure in an<br>
aggressive marketplace, broad support of the arts may not appear to be in S=
tate<br>
interest, may simply not make any sort of capital sense.<br>
<br>
More so, the executives that the democratic majority put in power bring wit=
h<br>
them their own strategies and interests, each of which may or may not later=
<br>
reflect the terms under which they were voted in. In short, it&#39;s always=
 going to<br>
be a gamble..<br>
<br>
As such, depending on the state to support Media Arts organizations and<br>
experimental practice in other fields, is not wise. These areas in particul=
ar<br>
will need to be more dexterous than this.<br>
<br>
Cultural projects that are believed to not: stimulate new markets, generate=
<br>
cultural tourism, revitalise a struggling post-industrial town (Newcastle, =
Linz,<br>
Karlsruhe), contribute to industrial R&amp;D, project an image that fits St=
ate<br>
branding will increasingly be dropped.<br>
<br>
It&#39;s here where a lab that hosts workshops on noise and experimental mu=
sic,<br>
software and bio-art, physical computing or mixed reality may not appear a<=
br>
sensible investment when appearing in Times New Roman under the red pen. It=
<br>
doesn&#39;t matter how intrinsically important these disciplines and their<=
br>
representative institutions may be within the broader human project: it app=
ears<br>
some European countries are following the New World and rationalizing away =
from<br>
support of the arts, perhaps ultimately preferring privatisation of the<br>
so-called Arts Sector altogether.<br>
<br>
As a result of sudden and startling changes in economic representation of t=
he<br>
arts as seen in the Netherlands, whole chapters of Dutch media-arts history=
 face<br>
a harsh winter of austerity and vast efforts in restructuring, assuming the=
y<br>
survive at all. Meanwhile the tax-payer&#39;s conscious or unconscious inve=
stment in<br>
these fields (resulting in projects and vast, specialist bodies of knowledg=
e)<br>
will likely go unarchived, even lost altogether; a shell of documentation o=
n<br>
websites alone.<br>
<br>
Strategies<br>
<br>
There are no easy, singular solutions to these dilemmas. Rather, a combinat=
ion<br>
of several contiguous funding strategies may be the wisest direction.<br>
<br>
Here are a few, relating most particularly to funding non-profit art<br>
institutions than artists alone:<br>
<br>
Crowd-funding.<br>
Crowd funding has been used by artists to acquire financial support to deve=
lop<br>
as yet unmade artwork for centuries, with systems of Charity and Patronage =
being<br>
most notable. The Threshold Pledge System is a kind of crowd-funding that M=
ozart<br>
himself used for the three concertos K413-415.<br>
<br>
Typically the artist seeking crowd funding publicly pledges to make a parti=
cular<br>
work once a set amount of funding is reached, often within a defined period=
 of<br>
time. If this amount is not reached, all the money is given back. Software<=
br>
platforms have been developed in recent years to facilitate this more easil=
y<br>
over the Internet, The successful Kickstarter being the most notable exampl=
e.<br>
<br>
One common criticism with this model is that the idea to be supported (and =
or<br>
the artist him/herself) must not only be popular but must be put out in the=
 open<br>
for the model to work at all. Some artists fear this risks the possibility =
of<br>
other artists &#39;stealing&#39; their ideas.<br>
<br>
Regardless, this system could be just as readily applied to a media-arts<br=
>
institution looking to develop a large project as an artist working alone o=
n a<br>
small project.<br>
<br>
Production facility.<br>
This is a model already used by several experimental and media-arts<br>
organizations throughout the world. By designating a certain portion of the=
ir<br>
skill-base, equipment and other resources to the paid production of third-p=
arty<br>
projects, funding is brought in that can be used to support the core agenda=
s of<br>
the institution as a whole. HANGAR in Barcelona is a good example of this m=
odel<br>
in practice. Naturally in the case of the independent artist, this would<br=
>
manifest as the application of their given skills for commercial work, some=
thing<br>
not always desirable for many artists, hence them rather seeking light-foot=
ed<br>
philanthropists or relationships with art dealers where their work is direc=
tly<br>
positioned as a capital commodity.<br>
<br>
Public education platforms.<br>
Rather than depending on the state to support free public education program=
s<br>
within given or approved topics, the arts organization might host quality<b=
r>
workshops on a regular basis, selling tickets as required. Free seminars<br=
>
targeting a diverse public should argue as to why supporting experimental a=
rts<br>
and research practices is a good idea in the first place. If voters cannot =
see<br>
tangible value in supporting diverse experimentation, complaints directed a=
t<br>
elected politicians that under-represent the respective field make little s=
ense,<br>
in the long term.<br>
<br>
Conclusion<br>
<br>
It&#39;s my hope that out of the gloom of austerity -one cutting deep into =
the<br>
European arts sector at the time of writing- will come a positive shift: a<=
br>
commitment to the exploration and implementation of strategies that loosen<=
br>
dependence upon the State and thus reducing infrastructural vulnerability i=
n the<br>
long term.<br>
<br>
More so, I suspect such new directions might spur a more courageous and rig=
orous<br>
critical disposition within experimental arts practices more generally, one=
 not<br>
shy to offend, lest of all the hands that feed.<br>
<br>
Julian Oliver<br>
<br>
July 2011<br>
<br>
1 See Eleanor Heartney&#39;s Art and Money<br>
<a href=3D"http://www.artnet.com/magazineus/features/heartney/art-and-money=
-and-politics-3-28-11.asp" target=3D"_blank">http://www.artnet.com/magazine=
us/features/heartney/art-and-money-and-politics-3-28-11.asp</a><br>
<br>
2 An economically positivist account of the Bilbao Effect<br>
<a href=3D"http://www.forbes.com/2002/02/20/0220conn.html" target=3D"_blank=
">http://www.forbes.com/2002/02/20/0220conn.html</a><br>
Whilst it has created thousands of new jobs (largely in the tourist industr=
y) it<br>
is important to note it has also doubled property values,<br>
displaced immigrant populations and raised the cost of living in the area<b=
r>
overall (See Esteban&#39;s El Efecto Guggenheim, Editorial Anagrama 2007).<=
br>
<br>
3 Rather humorously &#39;Khudozhnik&#39;, the word for artist in Russian, a=
lso means<br>
&#39;skinny&#39; or &#39;unwell&#39;.<br>
<br>
4 The media-arts is a good case example of a burgeoning field of practice n=
ot<br>
considered central to contemporary art history and so is<br>
arguably more vulnerable during times of austerity.<br>
<br>
i <a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_intervention#Lord_Napier_in_r=
ed_tape.2C_2004" target=3D"_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_interve=
ntion#Lord_Napier_in_red_tape.2C_2004</a><br>
<br>
ii <a href=3D"http://www.kernotart.com/artist/eleonora.html" target=3D"_bla=
nk">http://www.kernotart.com/artist/eleonora.html</a><br>
<br>
//&lt;---------------------------------------------------------------------=
---------<br>
<font color=3D"#888888"><br>
--<br>
Julian Oliver<br>
<a href=3D"http://julianoliver.com" target=3D"_blank">http://julianoliver.c=
om</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://criticalengineering.org" target=3D"_blank">http://critica=
lengineering.org</a><br>
</font><div><div></div><div class=3D"h5">__________________________________=
_____________<br>
empyre forum<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au">empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu=
.au</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://www.subtle.net/empyre" target=3D"_blank">http://www.subtl=
e.net/empyre</a></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>

--0016364d25bbcf529404b0c2331e--