Difference between revisions of "TransActing: A Market of Values Publication"

Members of the Working Group: Sissu, Metod, Amy and Eva Co-ordinator: Marsha

February 2015 - A Few Formative Thoughts

Neil challenges us in our 9th February meeting to frontload some important thinking about the publication:
Q: Who is it for?
A: It's for past/present and future audiences and partners interested in CP's work. Differently put: It's not only for CP. Or for the CCW community/art research community, though these are audiences, for sure.

Q: What are we producing it?
A: Metod: Could you refrain the question? It's not clear.

Q:How will we manage the printing/distribution, etc.?
A:This hasn't yet been determined. But as Marsha has applied for and received money for this aspect of the Market, and as CCW understands the publication as being part of her fellowship, her stake in the process needs to be acknowledged for the sake of transparency...some kind of editorial position.

Some thoughts by Metod based on current knowledge and previous experience:
Q: Are we doing Market publication separate to the Market, or alongside it, but publish it afterwards? Parade was separate, but minutes on the 9. Feb and previous discussions suggest alongside the Market.
A: While this was the initial plan, it now seems to make more sense to realise the bulk of the publication retrospectively, after the market has been completed. This isn't idea for many reasons--not the leas to which because we'd like to have something to distribute at the market. Could we be creative about this?. Could it be something that also features in the publication but is released in advanced? A kind of teaser?

Q: Are we producing the publication independent from Chelsea? This will determine how much I will get involved in the publication (this is based on experience).
A: This is also something can't be answered--yet. At the moment, the money is coming from Chelsea. And as we know, money typically comes with strings. We should have more sorted in due course.

Q: Publication's visuals should be tied in with the curatorial pack, press, open call, invitations, market promotion (FB, TW, blog posts, newsletters...) and its material, and market visuals? We need to start thinking about market's visual look and feel now. Should we come up with a design brief together, or do you want me to design a few design concepts and present it to you in due course?
A: Yes, this sounds like an excellent plan. Could we schedule a dedicated meeting to do this? There is a sense that the market's aesthetic needs to be highly flexible in some respects, with other aspects demonstrating strong continuity. In all likelihood, the images will need to be flexible - they'll be a combination of found visuals and photographs and drawings and patterns, etc. Perhaps it could be the case the fonts played a stronger role in tying things together? It would be good to hear Metod's take on this. We spoke about possibly using the 'Critical Practice' letter image as a bit of guide?

There are meeting minutes that are missing here...

Eva, Sissu, Amy and Marsha

• Perhaps offer a peer-reviewed essay for a journal
• We talk about contacting Ra Ra and Minor Compositions - we could offer both them
• We talk about how to write the proposal
• We talk about previous conversations with Critical Practice - documentation of the process leading up to it. Another one is a research-led section thinking about markets - systems of exchange and then documentation of the event itself.

• Second part: What makes a market a market? Not something else... We don't want 'the market' to become too generic a thing! So the idea is to really drill and focus on one thing. Looking into the historical/conceptual line. Thinking about a diagram or glossary. If people were interested in pursuing that, could we make it an open thing and anyone in Critical Practice could contribute.

Return to Main Page