Charles Leadbeater at Cornerhouse
June 25th, 2009 at 09:26am Creative
The Art of with- an original essay by Charles Leadbetter for Cornerhouse
Yesterday’s seminar at Cornerhouse proved to be a fascinating insight into how different actors in the Artworld see the promised power of Web 2.0 reshaping the balance of power in the cultural landscape.
The afternoon was split into 2 panel sessions (both chaired by Anne Bonnar) opening with Charles outlining the thinkers and doers that had helped shape his vision of “We Think” with responses from Simon Yuill and Laurie Peake.
Much of Charles’ talk went over what can be read in the commissioned essay with the central point for me being…
“We’re all sat in this room discussing the implications of Web 2.0, pre industrial, post industrial and technological tools. But to my 7 year old Ned it’s all just stuff” (I paraphrase but you get the point)
The result of this cultural shift is, the panel posited, that we are facing a new folk culture whereby the live, the experiential, and ‘the performance’ where the audience plays their part will take precedence over the artefact – or to put it in Leadbeater speak talking and doing experiences rather than enjoying experiences.
I’m going to have to consider the notion of the post-tech folk cultural before I comment further but I can’t help think that even within the notion of ‘folk culture’ there has always being those that lead and those that follow.
Tom Fleming, on the second panel suggested that ‘we build paths where people walk’, which, granted, is a good notion for those institutions that serve to sanctify the past. However, the difficulty for us at Urbis, where we are trying to keep at the cutting edge rather than commenting on established cultural collections, is how do we ensure we are part of that leading group rather than simply reporting on what has already passed? And I’m convinced that while having a blog, a twitter and a Facebook page may be part of keeping up to date with the current, it is the underlying infrastructures, relationships and trust between producers that first needs to realign itself with the shift in the ownership of information and possibilities for production.
Entry Filed under: Urbis
7 Comments Add your own
1. julianlstar | June 25th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
I think one of the problems with this type of event is that it can get lost in it’s own aphorisms. The logic of creating the paths where people walk is good, but shouldn’t the job of an institution be one of offering or opening up different paths, ones that are more challenging. I see that the difference between Urbis and many other institutions is that it is not a keeper of archive, it’s value is in that it is based in the now and it is a vibrant place because of this. Trust is key, not only with producers but also with audience and I think the challenge is to encourage the audience to trust the institution to deliver what they believe it should deliver and different institutions have different personalities in this respect. Relevant social media platforms could help this process but if the events that you create don’t match the personality of the institution and the way that you convey yourself online it might all backfire.
2. Creative | June 25th, 2009 at 10:25 pm
Hi Julian,
Really interested if you were at the seminar? And if so what you thought of it…
I think the idea of personality over brand is an important one that I hadn’t considered, but now that you’ve mentioned it I see it as an important distinction that brings back a personal relationship instead of a demographic one.
Especially if we are to respond to our audiences – and in this I am including (crudely) visitors and contemporary institutions – who are able to have a voice in the maelstrom we’re faced with in today’s 2.0 world.
3. Vaughan | June 26th, 2009 at 6:41 am
Julian was at the seminar. I wasn’t, but following through the former’s tweets which were the most coherent out there…
I hope, though we’re far from there yet, that the division between ‘audience’ and ‘institution’ is necessarily less in Urbis, because part of covering those current cultural manifestations is accepting our ‘not-knowingness’.
Part of our challenge going forward is how we work to make inspiring/challenging connections that mirror the sort of happenstance that can be found through 2.0, and allowing those conversations to happen in our physical space without (H&S allowing!) control.
4. Anne Bonnar | June 26th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
I am sifting the threads of the session on Wednesday. We covered a lot of ground so I would like to mark some of the important stakes we put in, inlcluding the long term view – backwards as well as forwards. And that technology is a tool for collaborative creativity, not a subsitute for it.
Lots of food for thought
5. julianlstar | June 29th, 2009 at 10:55 pm
Unfortunately I arrived late at the event so didn’t see Charles Leadbeater speak. I think Vaughan’s comment regarding the ‘not-knowingness’ of an organisation is crucial. If you position yourself as ‘one who knows all’ you already have put up barriers. Creating the conditions that can allow a diverse range of people to contribute is key and is one that was brought up at the end of the Futuresonic Conference in May. It’s something we are trying to address and it might take some radical thinking but the conversations have started.
6. Creative | June 30th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
Definitely lots of food for thought…
All going to take some time to digest but I feel it is essential that we (speaking as an institution) are prepared to experiment, risk failure and perhaps occasional embarrassment while we try to readjust our incumbent structures and catch up with kids like Ned who are simply using the tools available rather than analysing their importance to an older generation.
Reminds me of being the only person in the house who could programme the video when I was 9 and the rest of the house looking at me like I’d split the atom.
I was going to link to one of John’s essays here “Canon Fodder” about why academics get nervous about distributed culture but I can’t get his website to work!
Perhaps this is simply me experiencing not-knowingness
Nevertheless, conversations are crucial to the whole process and, as you’re local Julian, I’d welcome the opportunity to pick it up face to face – get in touch.
7. julianlstar | July 10th, 2009 at 11:33 am
It would be good to meet up. I don’t have your email. I also am involved with the Social Media Cafe Manchester and was thinking of programming a conversation abut the very same issues that are being discussed here. I think it might be a good space for a wider conversation. Get in touch Julian
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed