[Nettime-nl] DEMAND FOR NEW SELECTION OF VIDEONALE 9

["darko fritz" <fritz.d@chello.nl>]

********************************************************
PLEASE DO NOT REPLY THIS MESSAGE. JUST FORWARD IT TO info@videonale.org
********************************************************


DEMAND FOR NEW SELECTION OF VIDEONALE 9

The Videonale 9 [Bonn, D] selection jury consisting of five members announce
that they made selection of more than 1500 entries of video and internet
artworks in six days, working in two groups.
I found that is physically impossible.
This is demand that Videonale 9 make selection again, with respect to
artworks and effort that artists invest in their works and application for
festival.


my e-mail address is my signature


********************************************************
PLEASE DO NOT REPLY THIS MESSAGE. JUST FORWARD IT TO info@videonale.org
********************************************************

PLEASE DISTRIBUTE!



********************************************************
PS: A small discussion was held at Syndicate mailing list, showing that few
colleagues share opinion on unreliably Videonale 9 selection.

Syndicate network for media culture and media art
information and archive: http://www.v2.nl/syndicate
********************************************************

supplement:
correspondence of D.F. and Videonale 9, published at Syndicate list

1. D.F. -> videonale 9
Subject: selection of time-based works
Date: Fri, Feb 23, 2001, 18:05

2. s�ren grammel [videonale 9] -> D.F.
Date: Tue, Feb 27, 2001, 15:45

3. D.F. -> s�ren grammel [videonale 9]
Date: Tue, Feb 27, 2001, 17:41


_______________________
1. D.F. -> videonale 9 + syndicate
Subject: selection of time-based works
Date: Fri, Feb 23, 2001, 18:05


from http://www.videonale.org/selectjury.htm

>the videonale 9 selection jury, consisting of georg elben, s�ren grammel, maria
Lind, silke otto-knapp and nicolaus schafhausen chose 31 productions by
altogether 36 artists (some working in teams) from over 1500 entries

>the selection jury took six full days for the viewing and discussion of the
tapes. an additional week�s time was taken for making the final decisions.

my question is: how jury consists of 5 members can look 1500 + videos in 6
days?
[and 14 urls, if belived fwd-re nn mail @ syndicate; urls are not mentioned
at videonale public reports]
jury suppose to work together, is't it?

my point is that video and net art are time-based works ... fast-forwarding
or fragmented look of the video works or urls misses that point ...

first round:
6 days = 144 hours = 8640 minutes !!! with no sleep !!!
8640 minutes : 1500 entries = less than 6 minutes

theoretically !!! with no sleep !!! ... what about practically?

in contrary, second round 'additional week�s time was taken for making the
final decisions' sounds ok for me ...

so, i put under question first round of selection.
can we belive that jury took a look at works and not at names?

d
_______________________
2. s�ren grammel [videonale 9] -> D.F.
Date: Tue, Feb 27, 2001, 15:45

> dear Darko Fritz:
>
> you wrote:"so, i put under question first round of selection.
> can we believe that jury took a look at works and not at names?"
>
> yes, i think - and hope - you believe this. if you don't, i am afraid that i
> can not change it.
> but i try to explain you the jury-process a bit:
> first of all, a jury never views eveything together, but in little groups .
> as for the videonale, it
> was quite important to split up in two groups and to consider then what was
> chosen
> by the little groups. in this case, 6 minutes are 12 already.
> however, it makes no sense to calculate this.
> the point is, if you watch media-art - which is time-based, i agree - if you
> have
> to watch everything? and i don't think so!
> for example if you see a loop that goes for 60 minutes but repeats after 2
> minutes, then its ok
> to look some time more at it, to get the feeling of what happens throughout
> the repetition. but
> you don't have to look 60 minutes. don't you?
> Another example: did you ever discuss with somebody about a work that you
> have not seen at whole length ...
> maybe because after a few minutes you recognized that you did not think that
> it was a good piece for any reason?
> i think it is normal to do this, because you develop - and you have to
> develop - criteria to choose, to select and deselect.
> otherwise you end up like Sartres Autodidact, who - i forgot which book by
> Sartre it was - sits and reads in the library every day. the system in which
> he chooses what he reads next is the alphabet: he reads the books from "A"
> to "Z". he has no other idea. he does not stop because he does not know what
> he is looking for.
> I don't know whether this is an appropriate metaphor - i hope you get the
> point of it.
> let me just add one more think: to me, a lot of the names on the list are
> not popular or even known enough, to indicate a jury-process which looked at
> names. we found a lot of works that were surprising for us. for us - maybe
> not for you.
>
> best regards
> s�ren grammel
>

_______________________
3. D.F. -> s�ren grammel [videonale 9] + syndicate
Date: Tue, Feb 27, 2001, 17:41

dear s�ren grammel

thanks for your answer. you made your statement about videonalle 9 selection
process and thank you for making it transparent and public.
i partly agree and partly disagree with your approach of selecting
time-based works. specially i think of unpredictable and nonlinear
narrations and using of different aesthetics in a single work .
also, there is wide range of different aesthetic which can't be perceived
without time participation - if you for example listen fragments only of
steve reich music, there is no way about getting an idea on variations, but
only having an idea of repetition - which is just a part of the work! or
like willingly [or not caring of] being 'boring' or making use of errors -
as expressed in new austrian video scene, or more in the past in warhol or
1960's structuralistic films]
who knows does after 3 minutes video-loop something else happened if not
seeing whole work?
i think that selecting the works is not an easy job and that is necessary
time-consuming - because of necessary patients and calmness and approaching
each work individually. -> and that was my point in first letter: i still
think that videonalle 9 selection was not possible in that sense: seeing
1500 + works in 6 days in two jury groups, even with no strict criterium of
seeing every single second of applied works. sorry about my calculations!
it doesn't make a sense that i comment further on that or discuss it because
it was not my intention to make public my personal preferences approaching
such a work, i.e. to superimpose my working criteria to others, but only to
pointing the work's physical frame. [aesthetic criterium i'll keep it in the
frame of myown work, when i am busy with other authors works].
as i address my question to both you and syndicate list, i felt free to
forwarded it to the list, incl. my comment.

regards

darko fritz



______________________________________________________
* Verspreid via nettime-nl. Commercieel gebruik niet
* toegestaan zonder toestemming. <nettime-nl> is een
* open en ongemodereerde mailinglist over net-kritiek.
* Meer info, archief & anderstalige edities:
* http://www.nettime.org/.
* Contact: Menno Grootveld (rabotnik@xs4all.nl).