Well that was a pretty all-encompassing justification, defense & explanation.
I get pretty emotional about people getting the credit they deserve, though Im not sure how far Id take it. I certainly wouldnt expect everybody involved with SIAB to be credited every time someone uses it or makes reference to it. Its quite natural for someone to thank those that turned them on to something, rather than all those behind the movement. So can we have a conversation about the manifesto as it doesnt seem to have been discussed here much in the past, and you seem to welcome debate? Some of my urge to rip it apart is offset by your explanation that a manifesto is there to encourage debate and thought, and that you dont agree with all of it, but I'll have a go anyways. It certainly does seem like an interesting way to approach issues about people hopes and aspirations for vlogging, their disappointments with previous visual mediums. Its a topic that gets hot when people attempt to define what videoblogging should be, and what constitutes legitimate vlogging. I seem to recall accusing you of being elitist in the past withsome of your academic definitions about what vlogging is, so I suppose I shouldnt be surprised by new attempts to bring about freedom through rulemaking. I think lumiere stuff is a very interesting thing, with the potential to sometimes do some of the stuff the manifesto seeks to promote. Some of the rules may sometimes be at complete odds with the mission however, for example to blanket ban on audio is surely cutting off an important dimension of observation and 'collective conciousness'. Thrown baby out with the bathwater. Arbitrary rules and self-imposed constraints are certainly sometimes a useful personal tool, to enable you to get things done, by eliminating much of the noise and distraction, filtering the possibilities down to an extent that decisive action is possible. I just think it goes a bit wrong when mixed with other aims. The manifesto seems to tread an ueasy line between claiming not to be about competing with alternatives, but at the same time not missing many opportunities to diss all that has gone before. I am in conflict with myself because I have such an ambivalent attitude towards labels, definitions and rules. I complain that there are not enough different terms for various shades of vlogging, and that we will argue too much over attempts to constrain the definition of wider terms like vloging itself, leading to possible elitism or illegitimising of certain types of vlog. So maybe I want a thousand manifesto's that nobody quite believes in with enough zeal to do any real harm. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Cheryl, it is fine that you have other issues with me, us or the > manifesto, but I would like it if you could take a moment to reflect on > what my issue is before jumping on to other things. First off Brittany > doesn't participate in this group - she quit it before you started > videoblogging. That is most likely the same reason why you have received > any promotional materials or encouragement from her. I was on Twitter back > when the lumieres started and I used that to promote the project. Brittany > has pushed it in other circles. As I held your hand when you started she > held others. You have read the manifesto: how could you think that we > would write a manifesto together if we were not both working on the > project? Is it surprising that I reacted? Would you not like it if those > you work with make sure that you receive credit for what you do? > > That is my one issue: Give credit where credit is due. It takes no effort > at all to look up a name, but it means everything to that person. You > would not feel very good if you never received any acknowledgement for the > work you've done on Show in a Box to grab one example. That is why I see a > "bio" page coming on the SIAB website - so others know how to acknowledge. > The fact that I'm closely involved in the lumiere videos means that it was > a no-brainer for me to spot it this time, but it doesn't mean you can > ignore my request. Is it not a fair request to receive proper > acknowledgement for the work you do? > > As for everything else: > I am happy that Rox made a lumiere, at the same time we can't write back > to everyone who makes one of those anymore. We had to stop when we reached > a couple of hundred videos because it was taking too much time. You must > understand that 425 lumiere videos have been made since you posted your > last one. It was also clear that Rox hadn't seen the website as she linked > to one of my blogposts instead of videoblogging.info (and there is a clear > link to vb.info from that blogpost). I can't and won't take full credit > for the lumiere project and that's why I had to write back in the way I > did. > > Regarding the manifesto: > It's a manifesto for crying out loud! It's supposed to be strong and > without compromise to grab your attention and make you think about what > you are creating, for whom and with what purpose. The fact that you have > not removed your videos makes me think we were being too nice in writing > it. > > It's written as a reaction to the type of video and behaviour both of us > were seeing and still are. It's an open disagreement and that's the whole > point of writing a manifesto. To make the obvious comparison the dogme95 > manifesto was a reaction towards filmmaking as it was taking place in the > 90s, the lumiere manifesto is a reaction towards the general state of > videoblogging. If you feel attacked by the manifesto, that's a good thing, > you should. I feel attacked by it and I co-wrote it! It is unfortunate > that you did not go anywhere with your frustrations - the goal was to make > you reflect on your practices rather than sit with a stiff upper lip and > not react because you don't agree. > > I personally don't have much patience with constant backpatting. There > needs to be constant challenge or we can't evolve (that goes in general > and in regards to videoblogging). Sitting around in a circle > congratulating ourselves on how great everything is moves us nowhere. It > is my responsibility and your responsibility to challenge the status quo. > This forces us to think about where we are, where we want to be and how we > can get there. > > It is curious to me that the comments stating strong disagreement with the > manifesto (in the "I don't want to participate anymore because the > manifesto is criticizing things I like" kind of way) have all happened on > Twitter. They are spoken into a void using fragmented sentence in a room > where it is impossible to carry a conversation (because all arguments are > limited and each one is forgotten in a microsecond as it moves off the > page). At the same time those who have taken the manifesto as a manifesto > and used it to look at themselves in a new way have all written e-mails > (where it is possible to carry on a conversation). These people do not > agree with everything we say (just as I don't always agree with everything > we say), but they are doing something constructive. Sam from patalab is > one who has been involved in countless conversations and had the following > to say about the lumiere project just last week: > > "...the Lumiere project can be regarded as a beacon. Itâs actual, > progressive potential for liberating âsightâ might not have been that > apparent when the project started. It probably was conceived more out of > conceptual concerns, as an inoffensive game to play. But it seems to be > one of the very few projects on the net - that I am aware of â" that might > have the inherent potential of actually re-installing a gaze of freedom." > > Regarding insults: > I cannot choose not to be insulted when I read Rox's mail, just as you > cannot choose not to be insulted when you read the lumiere manifesto. Our > actions have consequences and this time I chose to act on the consequence > Rox's mail had on me. You chose not to react on the consequence the > manifesto has on you (though I wish you had). > > - Andreas > > PS. If you want to have your videos removed simply delete them from your > website. We don't host any videos at all. We link to everything so you are > 100% in control. I'm always sorry to see links go dead of course, but it's > not my choice. > > > Den 13.01.2008 kl. 11:49 skrev Cheryl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > You have *got* to be kidding, Andreas. > > > > When you and Brittany started getting into lumieres, the only person I > > saw talk about them or promote them was you. It was you encouraging me > > to try doing them. You picked up the ones I made without tagging them > > properly, and gently taught me how to tag them if I wanted them to be > > picked up for the lumiere showcase site. If I choose to relate those > > facts of my personal experience, will I suddenly be a jerk for not > > looking up Brittany's involvement and finding some way to mention it, > > even though it's not what called my attention to lumiere video? > > > > Rox writes genuinely and lovingly about why she decided to try a > > lumiere, and you could have chosen to comment in a positive way to > > honor Brittany for her contributions and encourage Rox to continue to > > experiment with the form. Instead you choose to be insulted, and tell > > us that Brittany does, too (though surely she can speak for herself?). > > You choose to answer negatively instead of positively. > > > > I started with lumieres because it was *fun*, and because of your > > encouragement, and because some of Brittany's work was inspiring to > > me, though I didn't know at the time she was your collaborator. The > > second the manifesto appeared, I stopped, because it doesn't represent > > my thoughts or feelings and I don't want to be associated with it. I > > don't even want my work appearing on the same site with it! I didn't > > say so publicly or ask you to remove links to the lumieres I made > > because I didn't want to insult you and Brittany. I just decided to > > quietly stop producing lumieres and let my actions speak for > > themselves. But because you feel it necessary to treat Rox in this > > manner, I think it's time to tell you the manifesto *does* put people > > off, and suggest it as one possible reason lumiere video isn't getting > > a lot of discussion in the group. You manage to suck all the fun out > > of making them. > > > > If I've learned anything in the past 30 days, it's that I can't insult > > you, Brittany or anyone else. No one can. You have to choose to feel > > insulted. I recommend choosing something more fun to feel. > > > > Cheryl Colan > > > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen" > > <solitude@> wrote: > >> > >> Rox, > >> > >> I know the lumiere videos have not been discussed in this group (they > >> don't have ads and there's no web 2.0 start-up involved, I guess), but > >> it's still not very nice not to give credit where credit is due. > > Lumiere > >> videos have been posted since May/June last year. Since the > > beginning it > >> has been a two-person effort where Brittany and I have been > > collecting the > >> videos, encouraging people to create the videos and writing our > > reasoning > >> for pushing these types of videos. That's why both our names are on > > the > >> front page of the website: http://videoblogging.info/ > >> > >> You may think this is a small mistake and in the amount of letters > > missing > >> from your email and blogpost it is. At the same time not doing this > > very > >> basic research and thus leaving out the name of half the people > > behind the > >> project is extremely discouraging to those left out. Over the past 8 > >> months Brittany and I have put in a large amount of work handling the > >> lumiere videos and acknowledging my work, but not hers, is insulting > > to > >> both of us. > >> > >> The collection of lumiere videos currently consists of 548 videos > > from 78 > >> different people. You can jump straight to the videos at > >> http://videoblogging.info/lumiere/ If I must say so myself it is an > >> amazing repository of creativity. > >> > >> - Andreas > >> > >> Den 11.01.2008 kl. 05:17 skrev Roxanne Darling <okekai@>: > >> > >> > A little public gushing here, I hope you all will indulge me. I > > learned > >> > about Lumiere from Rupert. > >> > I finally made one today, and I want to thank you publicly, > > Rupert, (and > >> > Andreas too) for illuminating me about this art form. > >> > > >> > > > http://www.beachwalks.tv/2008/01/11/beach-walk-567-first-lumiere-for-rupert/ > >> > > >> > Love, > >> > > >> > Rox > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen > >> http://www.solitude.dk/ > >> > > > > > > > > -- > Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen > http://www.solitude.dk/ >
