Meeting Minutes 19. 11. 2012

From Critical Practice Chelsea
Revision as of 01:52, 20 November 2012 by Metod (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

Meeting Minutes

DATE Monday 19th November 2012
LOCATION Room 305, E block, 5.30pm till 8pm, Chelsea College of Art and Design, Millbank

Appoint chair: Kuba
Appoint Minute Taker: Metod
Present: Kuba, Metod, Neil, Sharon, Karem, Marsha, Scott

Item 1: Evaluation of Spaces of Values

The group talks about the past "The Brokers: People, Spaces and Values" teaser. What we can learn from it, where we can improve future guided walks.


Kuba: has an issue with the Skype meeting. What has been debriefed...?
Sharon: reads notes on the minutes...
Masrsha: (on produced video by Blanka and Neil) doesn't think it is watchable.
Neil: worked for hours with Blanka on the video. He learned a great deal about the video techniques and editing both video and sound.
Marsha: Can we shorten it to up to 3min?
Neil: it has an CC license, so you can do whatever...
Sharon: Can we have two documents: 15min version + 3min snippet version?
Kuba: Next walk would be better documented. It is important capture the dynamics.
Sharon: We need to decide about our needs re documentation: What we want to record? What we want to use it for?
Kuga: Moving to Item 2...
Neil: (still on Item 1) First two walks worked best because they addressed the given topic...
Metod: (adding to Neil) ...what we talked about we also saw...
Neil: Addressing the theme was what made the two work much better.
Kuba: Keeps identifying the differences between Jack, Warwick and Owen...
Neil: How we talk about the topics with talkers in advance.
Kuba: Meetings, facilitating, explaining the needs to talkers...
Marsha: (directs to Kuba) We need to pass this obligation if unable to communicate in person.
Karem: Likes Jack's and Warwick's walks...
Marsha: (on the video) How do we narrate the documentation. (still on unwatchable video documentation product)
Metod: Delegation needs to be delegated, and followed consistently. Not to pass a camera from one hand to another. This may mean one or two won't have much of the walk.
Neil: Recognizes Sharon's hard work for the walk.
All: We need to be smarter in scheduling the walks... Conversation goes on about the schedule: about brakes, about too much fitting in a day, etc...

Item 2: Future development of our research in Value

The discussion continues from the Item 1...


Kuba: Where did these walks lead us? What is the development of it? Are they to become self-contained events?
Sharon: It would be a shame if they were only for something else like a research.
Marsha: Talks about the format...
Kuba: Identifying what came out of the walks and broader on the research... >br> Marsha: (continues on Kuba's point) ...identifies the amorphous values that came out of the walks.
Neil: More Walks?
Metod: Regarding the plan >> 2 year plan: what are the aims, objectives, testing new formats, developing for a bigger project at the end of the two years.
Kuba: (jumps several points in finding parallels) How do we prevent "Dortmund" (New Industries Festival that was stopped due bearucracy: more in Item 4) not to happen again? What is the value of the work now?
Kuba: Talks about the process of mapping the research: different experiences of in value through out the 2 year period...
Sharon: (on video document) I think the walks' documentation would be a great tool for inviting people in the future.
Metod: What is that "something bigger" that walks generated? What is the timeline, what are the projections, even desires?
Neil+Sharon: Both disagree that walks serve a purpose.
Marsha: We need a sustained research in depth.
Neil: 2 year = provisional time frame.
Kuba: Draws parallels with the Parade which took about 2 years.
Kuba: What is our agenda in S[aces and Value? Is there a need to capture and transmit this work / research? Does this mean different events, different tools, different focus?
Karem: Same walks repeated for additional "leyers"...
Metod: (on Karem's comment) No freaking way! Super conscious of limited time, energy, resources!
Marsha: Future work on "Waste" – amorphous value. Excited about Superflex art group. I would like to think big and invite collaborators...
Kuba: (on Marsha's comment) Worried about limited resources.
Marsha: (still on documentation) We shall feedback on SSW (Scottish Sculpture Workshop) documentation methods. (Marsha, Kuba, Scott and Metod are testing some new methods of documentation over an intense working weekend in Lumsden, Aberdeenshire.)
Kuba: Brings us back on track...
Marsha: Winter walk...?!?!
Kuba: We could organise a walk on Waste?
Neil: Waste = Value
Kuba: "One man's waste is another man's most possessed value."
Neil: Waste is the theme for January / February Walk?!
Marsha: "Accursed share" produces excess and eruption as a result...

The Accursed share:: The Accursed Share presents a new economic theory, which Bataille calls "general economy," as distinct from the "restricted" economic perspective of most economic theory.

Item 3: New UAL post-doc post devoted to the development of CP

  • Details of application process and the post
  • Implications for CP
  • CP's stance

Item 4: Lessons for the future from CP, HMKV and UAL partnership and failed EU application

Item 5: Brief about SSW plans

Item 6: AOB