A good time to discuss these issues would have been before a tender was
concocted, rather than it being merely opportune now.

The framework of the Tactical Media conference would have been an
interesting one to pursue, as it is essential that we retain access to
alternative possibilities and particularities if we are to avoid the
marshalling in of a mono-culture -- as in Blunket�s oxymoron that we can
have �Cultural Diversity� but only as contained within a dominant
culture.  And if we are to discuss the role and support of publications
(plural) now, we should at least disclose what stake we hold.

Variant ran an editorial piece a couple of issues ago precisely on the
issue of ScotInform's consultancy and the concerns raised by (the few)
artists who were 'invited' to attend.  We still don't know if their
concerns have been addressed.

I can't see how we�re 'throwing stones at all and sundry' (which, maybe
I'm wrong, but take as a stereotyping of Variant) when I'm explicitly
advocating a pluralism of funding: that is a funding body which 'funds'
at arms length, and the funding of an actual diversity of
publications/forums/whatevers -- and I would include looking at funding
Film Video Workshops, an International Film Festival, IndiMedia
Scotland, community radio projects, new media resources... rather than
consultants, a communications department, �enterprise� officers, et al.

Re: �...a good thing for the sector and for the framework of
publications that already exist, adding more support rather than
undermining it...�

What and whose framework -- the dole?  The myth is that there is a
process in motion that we not only advocate but equally have access to
and are able to influence.  On past experience we can see just how well
that works -- otherwise would we still need to (even rhetorically) ask
the question: What do �we lack here to make things a bit more happening�?

There needs to be something beyond a simple reshuffling of titles,
personnel and funding �within� institutions -- everybody can see through that.

Given recent discussion of the role of independent media as a result of
the last Gulf War, just what would an �embedded� magazine look like? 
Are these discussions on the importance of independent, critical voices
distasteful in the art world today, when clearly much of what seems to
constitute the domain of the �Visual Arts� is in fact an effect of other
kinds of forces and relations of power?

Without going into the issue of transparency, disclosing the �60,000
figure ScotInform received for their part in this is what Variant -- any
critical, dare I say it, Visual Arts magazine -- does. 

Leigh


-------------------------------------------------
a m b i t : networking media arts in scotland
post: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
archive: http://www.mediascot.org/ambit
info: send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and write "info ambit" in the message body
-------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to