When I read your initial post, I thought (as you seem to suggest below) that
you were simply informing us that you did a similar project which may have
been made before "Hole in the Sky." Although originality is one of the
factors we consider when deciding whether or not to include an artwork, it
is virtually impossible to avoid all duplication (on a large and small
scale) in the archive. In fact, many artists have explored similar issues
using similar means but, on some level or another, have ultimately produced
projects which each exhibit their own unique characteristics. Although the
Rhizome staff at times does encourage artists to submit their work to the
archive, we rarely solicit the submission of projects with methods similar
to those of museum curators, who, for example, exhaustively vet their
potential purchases for originality and so on.
Moreover, despite the fact that the ArtBase remains to be one of the most
comprehensive archives of new media art, it is by no means entirely
exhaustive. As a result, a number of projects appropriate to the archive
and its aims (as your project appears to be) have not been included in the
archive, simply because artists do not venture to submit their work. Posting
to the list does not automatically initiate this process.
Nevertheless, this duplication is certainly not intentional, and I apologize
for any personal offense you may have taken to our inclusion of "Hole in the
Sky" in the ArtBase. But especially since your project is currently not in
the archive and I did not come across your project as a past submission--I
just checked my records, but please let me know if I am mistaken--to not
include "Hole in the Sky" simply because your project exists somewhere else
seems a bit extreme. It is a more serious matter, of course, if you think
that your intellectual property has been infringed in some way.
+ + +
> Does the artbase have an historicization function?
> Does the artbase have "quality" as distinguishing mark?
> what happened with " Hole in the Sky " by Tom Scarpino (Hi Tom)
> it's not a great thing for the reputation and the reliability of the artbase.
> Above all because it's a "curatorial oriented" process and not an automatic
> 1- Everybody depends from others, but in this case the work it's the same.
> 2- There isn't a duty in knowing my 2001 work (even if it passed through the
> list) but once this thing has been emphasized ,
> why any official voice wrote me back?. ... everybody can make a mistake..
> where is the problem?
> I'm really disappointed from this behavior
> i was expecting an answer from the artbase crew.
> Thank you
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> post: email@example.com
> -> questions: firstname.lastname@example.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php