Martin John Callanan
Since 2005
m@greyisgood.eu
Works in London United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

PORTFOLIO (8)
BIO
Martin John Callanan (1982, United Kingdom) is an artist researching an individual's place within systems.
Discussions (45) Opportunities (2) Events (8) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

Re: RHIZOME_RAW: second life dramas


It's not what you are doing (after all, we've all fucked around in SL and
even, back-in-the-day, in online chat etc), but the time - during someone's
organised event.

As for damage - someone has to sit there and spent time rebuilding the
server, reorganising the event. That's the only problem I see.

Just consider when and were you do it - and why.

On 7/10/07 11:14, "salvatore iaconesi" <xdxd.vs.xdxd@gmail.com> wrote:

>>
>
> :)
>
> you people take yourselves oh so seriously.
>
> the fact that you do it on second life related issues is just plain
> interesting.
>

DISCUSSION

Re: RHIZOME_RAW: second life dramas


It's just rude and lacks any respect.

Salvatore's own argument fails. If he did this under a bridge no one would
pay any notice. If he did the same in an gallery, event, (or anywhere public
that isn't his mother's house)...

The Frieze Art Fair is in London next week - I'll pay your entrance to see
you have your teeth kicked in after you try your crazy shit there.

On 7/10/07 02:16, "Lee Wells" <lee@leewells.org> wrote:

> Lets just say I would rather hear you modified the IBM Plaza in SL than
> caused trouble within a local creative autonomous zone.
>
> I don't believe Marcel Duchamp ever vandalized other artists works.
> What Pierre Pinoncelli did to the urinal last year with the hammer was and
> now he is stuck having to deal with over $200,000 in fines.
> Will he make the dada history books? Maybe...
>
> All in all its a negative in my opinion.
>
>
>
>> From: salvatore iaconesi <xdxd.vs.xdxd@gmail.com>
>> Reply-To: <salvatore.iaconesi@fastwebnet.it>
>> Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2007 02:56:57 +0200
>> To: Lee Wells <lee@leewells.org>
>> Cc: Rhizome <list@rhizome.org>
>> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: second life dramas
>>
>> Lee Wells ha scritto:
>>> Good point....but I guess it would all depend on if Odyssey a free for all
>>> collaboration zone or if its someone's art project in secondlife that they
>>> have dedicated time and effort to produce and now need to spend more time
>>> and effort to fix your alterations. I say do it in real life if you really
>>> want to be avant garde.
>>>
>>
>>
>> and maybe i do. have a doubt?
>>
>> just a point i need to assess: either you embrace a perspective or you
>> don't.
>>
>> the "immaterial" brings on concepts. It is plain narrow-minded to take
>> only the things you like.
>> it's like liking water because it quenches your thirst, but closing your
>> eyes to the fact that you get wet with it if you spill it.
>>
>> it's like all the issues on copyright, and on peer2peer, and on netowrk
>> neutrality.
>> Or, going back to art: artisans vs artists and everything that came back
>> after that "stuff" duChamp brought inside the galleries.
>>
>> technologies+society (don't get me wrong, a paintbrush is a technlogy,
>> too) enable ways of thought.
>>
>> a cute story, which has just a little to do with the "second life drama" :)
>>
>> maurizio cattelan was once invited to a collector's house to make a
>> proposal for a commission. While chatting and discussing he was shown
>> into the private exhibit of the collector.
>>
>> having seen all the paintings and other artworks, as soon as they
>> stopped he placed the proposal: "open up your exhibition room's windows.
>> Flies will enter it. I will smack them on the paintings with my trusty
>> fly-squatter, and that will be the artwork: the flies splatted on the
>> canvases"
>>
>>
>> (don't knw if it's true or not. could be just a little legend. but i
>> like it in more than one way.)
>>
>
>
> +
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.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
>

DISCUSSION

Re: RHIZOME_RAW: illogical and costly new entry conditions


Dear Short Film Festival Oberhause, and Ms. Thyes

In reality, no physical format of any kind should be employed in either the
pre-selection or screening of a major short film festival.

- Physical formats are heavy, cumbersome, and most importantly; obsolete.
- Physical formats are labour intensive for reviewing, especially such great
numbers.
- Physical formats are fragile, and degenerate easily if handled
incorrectly.
- Precious global resources are wasted on manufacturing one-time use media.
- Re-use and recycling are troublesome.
- Freighting 6000 entries across the world is both staggeringly inefficient
and wasteful of time, money, and shared global resources.
- The world is already too full of physical objects.
- The above is expedited by the fact the festival is of short films; waste
per gram is higher due to less data on standard sized media.
- the Internet is open to all: if you can make the film you have access to
the Internet. The internet is efficient, paper-less and object-less, and
more importantly allows instantaneous communication of data.

The internet, and online, is a perfect solution for pre-selection, and even
suitable for transmission of data to compile screening versions. The
festival would need suitable technologies, but these would both make the
festival more efficient and have less negative impact to international
communities. Many of your administrations could be automated into the same
system; such as reviewing pre-selection, automatic checking of correct
submission formats, keep all submission materials in one place, sending
emails to applicants, sharing clips online to engage visitors... The list is
only terminated by a lack of imagination.

Please discuss with other international short film festivals already engaged
in online practices for several years.

Please clarify your procedures for reuse of the media, from this year's
festival, minimising the negative impact on global resources. For example;
they should be blanked and donated to your local university or media
college, and not returned across the world.

Please take steps to review your produces for submission in physical formats
for the future.

regards

Martin John Callanan

On 30/9/07 22:32, "Myriam Thyes" <myriam@thyes.com> wrote:

> Dear Mr. Gass, dear festival team,
>
> the Intl. Short Film Festival Oberhausen is big, important, well
> known and popular - and I know that you receive more entries every
> year - last year it seems you got around 6000 films.
>
> In order to reduce this amount of entries though, I think you chose
> the wrong way by favoring old-fashioned technical standards.
>
> I understand that for preview you accept DVDs only.
> But the following is not logical and too costly:
>
> On the one hand, you accept ONLY DVDs as entries, but you DON

DISCUSSION

Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Media Arts for the ICA Web Site


The lottery has been raped:
http://arts.guardian.co.uk/art/news/story/0,,2157927,00.html

At least this highlights a previous over dependence.

Sustainability and knowledge are more important than vaporous marketing.

DISCUSSION

Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Media Arts for the ICA Web Site


You missed the key points I was trying to make though fictional - arbitrary
- examples.

If the ICA was engaged in supporting and promoting open-source work or CC
licensed work, my arguments would be a bit different. But this discussion
was originally started because the are not doing so.

If they support everyone, open to all, no quality control, you end up with a
useless mess: http://saatchi-gallery.co.uk/

You have to be selective to promote quality. Selections being made by those
with the knowledge to. You have to be selective to promote an idea or a
message. Publish everything and what you have is value-less and meaningless.

Recognition; I suggest you meant endorsement. A endorsement that what has
been created is better than others; that it adds to contemporary discussion
more so than most...

A token payment because in a consumerist society everything has a value and
requires money. A token payment allows survival/ resources for the
development of more ideas. (or enough to treat friends who let you sleep on
their sofas).

An organisation, such as the ICA, should wish to help [financially] support
an individual as an investment - and sign of belief /faith - in the reasons
for having originally chose to endorse them. If the artist's work develops
more, then the orgisation's prestige increases in the future, having
supported the artist early on. So the token amount can be seen as an
investment. It also helps develop the future, which the ICA claims as it's
role: "A belief in the new. An enduring faith in the creativity of
tomorrow."

Positively supporting an artist opens the door for the organisation to work
with that individual more in the future. Otherwise, they will favour an
organisation that did.

Ultimately, it's up to an individual to chose to submit work to the ICA; or
not. My suggestion is that the way they have chosen to do this, undermines
their own aims of spotting and supporting the best. The best isn't going to
be submitted in the first place.

On 26/9/07 23:07, "Lee Wells" <lee@leewells.org> wrote:

> Even if they were to get that much together that only allows for 12 artists
> to receive the award.
>
> In reference to your energy to conceive and develop something worthy....well
> I don't think you are the person they are looking for. They are after those
> that have already created something with their blood sweat and tears and now
> just need the recognition. 500 pounds would be great but again its only 3-5
> days wage any way so what does it really matter to receive the token payout.
>
>
>> From: Martin John Callanan <m@greyisgood.eu>
>> Reply-To: Martin John Callanan <m@greyisgood.eu>
>> Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 22:24:01 +0100
>> To: Pall Thayer <pallthay@gmail.com>, rhizome raw <list@rhizome.org>
>> Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Media Arts for the ICA Web Site
>>
>> The ICA get points for trying; points for doing something. But it's plainly
>> wrong for an organisation such as the ICA to offer no fee; even tokenistic.
>>
>> Sa, they have one new web project a month for a year, even a token 500
>> pounds (3-4 days work for on average London wage) is an annual budget of
>> 6000. If they can't secure a grant for that amount then they simply have
>> employed the wrong people. I'm sure a corporate hire for a night generates
>> more income than that. There must be a corporation willing to donate 6000
>> against their tax bill. It's the ICA's responsibly to secure funding to
>> nurture and develop new talent and new ideas. Their aim to to support "the
>> best".
>>
>> If I'm working 9-5 for the average wage [to survive]; I would not have the
>> energy to conceive - then develop - something worthy of the ICA.
>>
>> Prestige works both ways if the ICA do their task correctly and pick the
>> right works: "ICA is home to the best new art and culture from Britain and
>> around the world." prestige flows back to them in the medium-long term. The
>> artist gaining the short-term prestige.
>>
>>
>>
>> My only fear is destined to become something ridiculous - and ultimately
>> pointless - like the saatchi-gallery website. That, my friends, is a
>> shameful website in every respect.
>>
>> Sadly, certainly in the last five years, the ICA has been following trends,
>> not creating / supporting the contemporary ...
>>
>>
>> M
>>
>>
>>
>> On 26/9/07 21:18, "Pall Thayer" <pallthay@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Actually lots of competitions do have prize money - why
>>>> don't the ICA do that?
>>>
>>> That was my thought. I guess, in retrospect, perhaps it wasn't fair of
>>> me to slam them for wanting to show the work without remuneration. A
>>> lot of institutions do that but what's really pushing the limit is
>>> their, albeit non-exclusive, right to show the work as often as they
>>> please. Perhaps my perspective on this has been distorted after having
>>> spent time in Canada where they have the excellent CARFAC fee system
>>> requiring galleries to pay artists a fee for exhibiting their work.
>>> But none the less, I am still disappointed in the ICA. My art practice
>>> is more than a hobby and prestige doesn't feed my kids.
>>>
>>> Pall
>>>
>>> On 9/26/07, dave miller <dave.miller.uk@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> It's great you're having this debate. Lots of new media arts
>>>> competitions work in the same way- they call for work and don't reward
>>>> the artists for including it in a show or festival, so I don't think
>>>> the ICA are behaving very differently. The ICA probably feel they are
>>>> helping artists enough by selecting and showing the work (it's a
>>>> privelege) but it would be great if they supported artists
>>>> financially. Actually lots of competitions do have prize money - why
>>>> don't the ICA do that? They can certainly afford it, with all their
>>>> corporate sponsorship.
>>>>
>>>> On 26/09/2007, Joseph Gray <josephgray@grauwald.com> wrote:
>>>>> The ICA is supposed to be so important that you should be willing to shell
>>>>> out money to them to show your work. It's a prestige thing (?!).
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course, most of us have our own websites and methods of sharing the
>>>>> work with the rest of the world.
>>>>>
>>>>> The call looked interesting at first, but then I, as you did, became
>>>>> turned off by the particular verbiage. The ICA will use the net.show as a
>>>>> way to secure more grants and such. The artists won't see a penny.
>>>>> Typical.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The writer Pall Thayer writ:
>>>>> E Sounds great, just one thing. As I was looking through the text at the
>>>>> E site linked to from the post, one line in particular caught my eye.
>>>>> E
>>>>> E "Please note that there is no fee for the work that is accepted for
>>>>> E inclusion on the web site."
>>>>> E
>>>>> E At first I thought, oh good, there's no submission fee. But then as I
>>>>> E re-read it I thought, no, they want artists to give them their work!
>>>>> E Is the ICA really so cheap that they can't pay artists for the work
>>>>> E that they exhibit? Someone please tell me I'm reading this wrong.
>>>>> E
>>>>> E If it is the case, that they're not going to pay the artists anything,
>>>>> E then this line *really* tops off the insult:
>>>>> E
>>>>> E "The ICA will retain an indefinite non-exclusive license to make the
>>>>> E work available through its website, and retain an archive of all
>>>>> E chosen submissions."
>>>>> E
>>>>> E Pall
>>>>> E
>>>>> E On 9/26/07, neme.org <nemeorg@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> E> The ICA is launching a call for submissions of web-based Media artworks
>>>>> E> to be shown on the ICA website: submissions are currently open until 24
>>>>> E> Oct.
>>>>> E>
>>>>> E> To complement our existing Live and Media Arts programme, we are
>>>>> looking
>>>>> E> for work that is innovative, either in technique or ideas. The work we
>>>>> E> are looking for doesn't necessarily have to be 'interactive', but it
>>>>> E> must be work that engages with the user.
>>>>> E>
>>>>> E> Submissions are open to anyone who wants to show a piece of web-based
>>>>> E> work that they are proud of or that exemplifies their skills as an
>>>>> E> artist. It should be a relatively recent or new piece of work that
>>>>> E> hasn't yet been launched or shown on an institutional or gallery
>>>>> E> website.
>>>>> E>
>>>>> E> More info can be found on
>>>>> E>
>>>>> E> http://neme.org/main/700/media-arts-for-the-ica-web-site
>>>>> E> +
>>>>> E> -> post: list@rhizome.org
>>>>> E> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
>>>>> E> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>>>>> E> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>>>>> E> +
>>>>> E> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>>>>> E> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>>>>> E>
>>>>> E
>>>>> E
>>>>> E --
>>>>> E *****************************
>>>>> E Pall Thayer
>>>>> E artist
>>>>> E http://www.this.is/pallit
>>>>> E *****************************
>>>>>