I would say I am in agreement with Douglas here --- I would prefer to
see groups gather according to interest levels raised. Self-organised
would be ideal... (!)... though more likely might be just talking to
the people running these existing spaces, or the one offered in
wellington (fabulous Leon!) -- and seeing where/if there might be some
interesting opportunities for collaboration and interest crossover.
Locals to that city would be giving the workshops generally, with some
others feeding in where possible. To build in a regularity where
possible (e.g. 'something tuesdays' at makerspace) could help with the
social aspects of community building and easy knowledge sharing for
experts and newbies as discussed.
An easy contact mechanism to trigger (likely via an online space)
might allow some self-organisation and might also form a way for
interested & interesting visitors to hook into the local scenes.
I myself would be interested in allowing for spaces for the potential
for crossover of a wide variety of knowledge sets -- with completely
other disciplines also -- such as scientists, social scientists..
economists... whatever!... though this is a little bit of a harder
problem... ! :).... but maybe it might be possible with the right
line of topical interest or concern.
In response to Rachel, could we say the basic/rough goals might be
something like:
-- creating social spaces for skill-sharing
-- creating social spaces for cross-disciplinary discussion
-- sharing of inspiring or emerging/developing works (i.e. exhibition
spaces mentioned)
-- creating something that is sustainable beyond one person's energy
-- sharing opportunities for engagement across NZ cities and regions
-- doing it all on a shoestring so we don't have to fit in with any
strategic plans :)
Sound about right? What to alter/add?
//t.
Trudy Lane Intercreate Research Centre
.- --- - . .- .-. --- .- .-. .- .-. .- -. --. .- - .- -. --. .- - .-
http://www.intercreate.org/ e: [email protected] m: +64 21
528 321
On Oct 7, 2009, at 12:41 AM, Douglas Bagnall wrote:
I'm going to rain on this one too. A bus? Why?
You are clutching to the dimensional qualities of the lab, and leaving
behind the rationale (which was: a place that is always there to work
and meet in; something young people can find; a place to make media-
art
tourists feel at home). The reason for the box was locatedness; now
you've put wheels on it and its rolling away.
Why a bus? What is so big and unitary that requires a bus? People
are
mentioning arduinos, but you want room for a mainframe.
For at least a decade bogans have been performing electronically
coordinated convergences. A gathering of 200 cars will coalesce in 5
minutes and stay for half an hour, before evaporating and reappearing
somewhere else. They live a networked life. Their life is a
networked
performance. Meanwhile here are the digital artists aspiring to a
bus.
So, OK, I get the nostalgia. And the taking-it-to-the-people aspect.
As Damian put it:
fill a bus/van with some basic tech and go and confuse smalltownfolk
with new media.
But it doesn't work like this anymore. They're not all sitting in the
town square waiting for entertainment. They're at home tweaking their
facebook profiles. That's including the ones who live on buses.
Buses are actually not fun to be on for long. So why not a train?
Why
not a flash mob? bicycles? boats? backpacks? why not catch public
transport? why must it be a lab on wheels?
But, you know, I don't really mind. It's not that I want there not to
be a bus, like I wanted there not to be a lab. A bus would be good,
probably. At worst, harmless. I do wonder, though, if all our relief
at reaching consensus hasn't dented our rigour.
I'd rather go by helicopter.
Douglas
_______________________________________________
Ada_list mailing list
[email protected]
http://aotearoadigitalarts.org.nz/
_______________________________________________
Ada_list mailing list
[email protected]
http://aotearoadigitalarts.org.nz/
