Andreas - I am curious, did you let everyone know when you put out your Lumiere video manifesto? I know I made my Lumiere video (July 07) before this manifesto was put onto the site.
I know at that time I learned about Lumiere video's through Verdi and I remember checking the site and just seeing links to videos, I remember reading the site and to be honest I don't remember Brittany's name being on the site, I remember your's. The reason I am curious about you letting everyone know about the manifesto is this, if you didn't let everyone know and I know I don't recall any mention of a manifesto, is that you and Brittany (and whomever else may have been involved) decieded to create this AFTER already having the site up and running under a defined set of rules. Did you give any thought that some may disagree? Did you give any thought that you had a responability to let people know what you were doing in case someone had an issue? Did you feel think that was the viewers or creator's responability? I view it as a change in a "terms of service" kind of thing, and I think you should have let pepole know, but that's just me. And yes I did read the manifesto and I agree with many things you stated, but I would have liked to know that before now, and would have liked the opportunity to remove my link if I did not agree. That simple courtesty would have been nice. Heath http://batmangeek.com --- 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/ >
