Network Curators

Act II                “Data­base Aes­thet­ics“
Project: Group-Curating Wrap-Up

 

M 02-Mar    read/discuss: Cramer, “Post-Digital Aes­thet­ics” e-permanent (video lec­ture)

  • focus/issue: Dis­course Com­mu­ni­ties (scholarly/discipline; artists / “art world” / crit­ics; pub­lic)
    discuss/question: Group­Site audience(s)…? (as dis­cussed Fri­day)

 
 
Blog entry (due Tues. night): share Group­Site with 2 dif­fer­ent audi­ence groups

  • just iden­tify to whom and note how you shared (brief post)
     
    » reminder: Project Com­po­nent (task/assignment): Activ­ity Log (page) — create/update

 
 
 
W 04-Mar    view/discuss: Amerika, “Museum of Glitch Aes­thet­ics” (Review)

      note: can split among group, view/read 2 (of 6) sec­tions each
       
  • focus/issue: Insti­tu­tions, Writ­ing, and Net­work Cura­tion/Archiving
    » dis­cuss: Amerika MoGA re: materials/examples & recent curat­ing strate­gies regard­ing audi­ence (imag­ined and real) — dis­cus­sion part 1, con­tin­ued Fri­day

 
 

AtlasMarch
 

 
F 06-Mar   Hybrid Activ­ity: dis­cuss group curat­ing materials/examples & rhetor­i­cal strategies

  • Dis­cuss below: post (brief com­ment) by 1230pm
    reply to group mem­ber (by 130pm)
    *use/discuss one CFP (see page): “Col­lab­o­ra­tion in Tech­nol­ogy and the Arts,” “Art­sIT,” “Strange New Worlds,” “Dig­i­tal Embod­i­ment,” “Visual Art and Mate­ri­al­ity,” “Vir­tual Con­fig­u­ra­tions in Con­tem­po­rary Art and Museums”

  • as a group, use one as relay to write col­lab­o­ra­tive a “Call for Sub­mis­sions” to your site (match­ing your new Cura­tory Vision & Edi­to­r­ial State­ment)
    dis­cuss, even if not pro­duc­ing CFW, rhetor­i­cal fac­tors and strate­gies (con­sid­er­ing your intended audi­ence & pur­pose)
    –or– imag­ine you were apply­ing to present as “net­work cura­tors”…? (at con­fer­ence — and/unlike museum?)

 
 

 
» reminder: Optional Exer­cise (extra credit): Cri­tique Rewrite

  • use an exist­ing cri­tique you’ve writ­ten or received; re-compose for net­work audience(s):
    250 words → 25 words / 140 char­ac­ters → image
  • Prompt elab­o­rated here (instruc­tions from class)

 
 
Optional Blog entry:

  • dis­cuss one of 12 essays — Hyper­Al­ler­gic “Tum­blr Art Sym­po­sium” in terms of lessons for Cura­tory GroupSite

 

 
 


Lake Dis­trict Walk I : Aug­mented Video Real­ity from glitch­mu­seum on Vimeo.


 
 


 

 
Optional Exer­cise (extra credit): Cri­tique Rewrite
 

» the prompt for the optional exer­cise (for assign­ment points) is an activ­ity in “econ­o­miz­ing” and adapt­ing for Web audi­ences (prac­tice for the group’s site).

Essen­tially the activ­ity is: take a cri­tique, one you’ve writ­ten or received (or a student’s from another class?); revise/re-compose it to 250 words max (or fewer)
→ then, to 140 char­ac­ters (a tweet / text mes­sage) or 25 words
→ then, adapt the cri­tique to an image (one you cre­ate, find, edit/remix, etc.) con­vey­ing the con­tent
→ then, to a tag (like for the blog, for Tum­blr users to find; or a hashtag).

    So, 4 brief parts, using the same cri­tique (which you need not include), for new/different read­ers.
    This should be posted to your per­sonal site, any time before break.

 

GHink posted this in Blog, Class and tagged it , , on .

Comments

  • GHink says:

     
    » Zine-making at an aca­d­e­mic con­fer­ence (as post-digital class com­pos­ing exercise):

     
    → snip­pets: http://cwzine.tumblr.com/
     
     

  • GHink says:

     


     

  • Andy Cole says:

    On wednes­day we ana­lyzed the MOGA (Museum of Glitch Aes­thet­ics) web­site. One thing we dis­cussed was how they made a museum on the inter­net appeal­ing to an audi­ence. A cou­ple of ways they did this was by using the title of the web­site to sound appeal­ing. They could have titled the web­site “Museum of Infor­ma­tion Aes­thet­ics.” Just by chang­ing one word, the web­site already seems bor­ing. I think by chang­ing lit­tle things on our web­sites, like the title, so the audi­ence will be will­ing to dig deeper, we can real in way more people.

    • Sarah Baughman says:

      I think this is a really inter­est­ing point to keep in mind. The lit­tle details in some­thing can make the dif­fer­ence between some­one tak­ing a look at a par­tic­u­lar post in a long string of a news feed and just com­pletely pass­ing it up and never think­ing about it again. We should dis­cuss this more next time we get into our group.

      • I totally agree with the both of you! Like I pointed it out on Wednes­day, it’s about audi­ence per­spec­tive. What you pointed out Andy was also good. We as a group not only have to think about what to post, but also who we are try­ing to com­mu­ni­cate to.

  • I believe the intended audi­ence for our site is meant to be for film­mak­ers in their early twen­ties who are inter­ested in learn­ing more about the his­tory, tech­niques, tech­nol­ogy, and effects of film, par­tic­u­larly in ani­ma­tion, spe­cial effects, per­for­mance styles, doc­u­men­tary, and the hor­ror genre. Some rhetor­i­cal strate­gies we can use is to sim­ply con­tinue to use film lan­guage and terms that film­mak­ers would know and under­stand, and use those terms to aid our blog entries and fur­ther expand on our spe­cific topic and ideas. I think sim­ply using more unique descrip­tive lan­guage could make our site more appeal­ing as well.

    • Jordan Shiparski says:

      Kayla, I too agree that our lan­guage should be put at the fore­front of our focus in attract­ing young film­mak­ers. Aside from that, it may be impor­tant to ask our­selves: how is the site cap­tur­ing read­ers at a con­tent and visual per­spec­tive? It may be impor­tant to seek out trends in the cur­rent indus­try to use as more con­tem­po­rary con­tent. More­over, how are we bring­ing this infor­ma­tion to our audi­ence? We may want to start includ­ing videos and links to rel­e­vant web­sites that will fur­ther val­i­date our posi­tions, instead of just stick­ing to pho­tos. All stuff to consider…

      • Jessica Wilcox says:

        I agree with you both, Kayla and Jor­dan, that our lan­guage needs some atten­tion. We need to work on uti­liz­ing indus­try terms with­out sound­ing edu­ca­tional. Our tar­get audi­ence under­stands this vocab­u­lary, so there is no need for us to explain. Jor­dan, I like your idea of also alter­ing our visual appeal. For a film group, our site has a star­tling lack of film con­tent. I think the inclu­sion of videos and links to other film-related web­sites could greatly improve our site.

        • Keana Cowden says:

          Agreed, a video a week or so might be a good idea. As well as any ground­break­ing films we feel should be discussed.

        • I also agree that post­ing more clips and films would be very ben­e­fi­cial. Some­times it’s dif­fi­cult to not explain things though and not sound too edu­ca­tional because in order to make our point, we have to address the basics in order to com­pare them to what our main point of dis­cus­sion is. Maybe the inclu­sion of clips could sub­sti­tute for this and show/explain what we oth­er­wise have been spend­ing a lot of time explain­ing through vocabulary.

  • Phoebe Mattoon says:

    For the design web­site, we dis­cussed in class on Wednes­day chang­ing the look of our site to be more entic­ing. It’s very basic right now and doesn’t draw the eye. The other thing we can fix is that the “design” cat­e­gory is so broad, we can cre­ate sub-categories and put each post under one of those terms. This would make the site eas­ier to navigate.

    • Phoebe Mattoon says:

      Exam­ples of these sub-categories could be web design, archi­tec­tural design, expe­ri­en­tial design, graphic design, etc.

      • Campbell Fay says:

        Excel­lent idea, I’ll see if I can change that now. This would allow users to nar­row the site to see their par­tic­u­lar inter­ests in an orga­nized, clear way.

        If any­one wants to see our blog it is here:

        https://boulderdesigngroupblog.wordpress.com

        Sug­ges­tions will be appre­ci­ated gratefully.

        • Campbell Fay says:

          I just looked and we don’t have much edit­ing capa­bil­i­ties on this blog: we can’t make pages, I can’t edit the theme. I am won­der­ing if we should make a new page, because I think we don’t have much edit­ing pos­si­bil­i­ties because Nate made this site and he left the class.

          If we could make a new web­site, what do y’all think we should call it?

          • Campbell Fay says:

            I’ll start brain­storm­ing now:
            1. boulderdesigngroup2.wordpress.com
            2. designandtechnology.wordpress.com
            3. howdesignischanginginmodernlife.wordpress.com
            4. moderndesignworld.wordpress.com
            5. campbellphoebeandhannahcommentondesign.wordpress.com

          • Campbell Fay says:

            6. bmd.wordpress.com (boul­der mod­ern design)

            I was think­ing about how MOGA calls itself a museum, I think it would be too pre­sump­tu­ous for us to call our­selves a museum because we are so small and really should not be thought of as a museum. if we were a museum we would be a museum of our 3’s writ­ing and posts about design. what i think we should call our­selves is a blog.

            we can make cues that we are an infor­mal yet infor­ma­tive opin­ion­ated blog appar­ent in our site’s design rhetoric.

  • Sarah Baughman says:

    I think that the lan­guage of our site should be extremely acces­si­ble, as opposed to being full of jar­gon. While this is more offi­cial and might appeal to more pro­fes­sion­als in the art world, I think that it is really REALLY impor­tant to appeal to reg­u­lar, every day peo­ple because some­times art can be kind of exclu­sive. The whole point of art is to share and to incite thoughts and feel­ings of as many peo­ple as possible.

    • Jesse Lee Pacehco says:

      I don’t think you’re lan­guaghe needs to be “extremely acce­si­ble”. Part of the appeal of your group is that you’re all edu­cated and expere­inces artisits. Don’t but things into pedes­trian terms, because you’re not pedes­tri­ans. And read­ers who know noth­ing will pre­fer to hear from those with expere­ince, in my opinion.

  • Jordan Shiparski says:

    In the film group, I think we need to pay closer atten­tion to our lan­guage and rhetoric in our effort to engage other young film­mak­ers. I per­son­ally am guilty of struc­tur­ing my first cou­ple posts much like a for­mal aca­d­e­mic essay, with the per­cep­tion that my post were like for­mal pre­sen­ta­tions . It has become clear to me that our desired demo­graphic doesn’t want to be lec­tured by us. Being edu­ca­tional is good, but I think there is a line we need to watch when we become to instruc­tional and monot­o­nous in our posts/writing. Since our audi­ence mem­bers are very close in age to us, I think we can be very effec­tive in com­mu­ni­cat­ing to them if we first ask our­selves: are you per­son­ally intrigued or com­pelled to read this blog/blog post?

    • sarah may says:

      I agree, our audi­ence already has a back­ground in film/video and don’t need to be re-told infor­ma­tion. Also, going along with kayla’s com­ment, our audi­ence is close in age with us so they are eas­ily relat­able for us to con­nect with. After look­ing at the MOGA web­page on Wednes­day, I think orga­ni­za­tion for our site is also use­ful. Hav­ing tabs to orga­nize our posts and not just have them appear by most recent is some­thing for us to con­sider. Maybe by per­son in our group, since we all focus on some­thing dif­fer­ent but spe­cific, like ani­ma­tion, hor­ror, doc­u­men­tary, and tech­nol­ogy. Hav­ing a user friendly web­page that is also orga­nized into rec­og­niz­able cat­e­gories is impor­tant for keep­ing read­ers com­ing back for more.

  • Campbell Fay says:

    Han­nah and Phoebe, please make some name sug­ges­tions today so we can make a new site.

  • John Wittbrodt says:

    I’ve men­tioned this in class before, but I believe that we need to make it clear that we are stu­dents writ­ing these entries. We are stu­dents who are learn­ing in the field that we are writ­ing about, so while we are post­ing, we are also learn­ing and I believe that is a valu­able per­spec­tive. As Sarah said above, I don’t think we can get too bogged down in tech­ni­cal jar­gon, since our site is more broad in scope, I think it needs to be eas­ily acces­si­ble to a broad group of people

    • Yes on the “not bogged down in tech­ni­cal jar­gon” I mean we are all artists in this class, not web design­ers, so talk­ing about web jar­gon isn’t the most use­ful thing any­way; but that is def­i­nitely one of the biggest walls between writer and reader in most of these arti­cles we read.

  • Jessica Wilcox says:

    As a group tar­get­ing young film­mak­ers inter­ested in areas such as ani­ma­tion and spe­cial effects and the doc­u­men­tary and hor­ror gen­res, I think our site could use some updat­ing to improve acces­si­bil­ity. After look­ing at the MOGA web­site on Wednes­day, I think orga­niz­ing our con­tent by genre could be incred­i­bly use­ful. Allow­ing for some­one inter­ested in a cer­tain are to eas­ily find con­tent that is appeal­ing to them could greatly increase our audi­ence base. I also agree with my fel­low group mem­bers that our lan­guage should be mod­i­fied to a more relat­able for­mat, which would also improve our accessibility.

    • I agree, increas­ing acces­si­bil­ity is desir­able. How­ever, I would cau­tion you against tak­ing it too far and hav­ing your con­tent seem generic. There is a fine line between acces­si­ble and basic. Hav­ing looked over your site, I think organ­is­ing by genre is a good idea. Don’t go too far in the MOGA direc­tion though; I per­son­ally found that site dif­fi­cult to navigate.

  • Natalie Romano says:

    For the inter­me­dia group,I’ve noticed that per­son­ally my own posts may read as slightly too aca­d­e­mic or lecture-ish, as they rely heav­ily on ceramic his­tory. I’m going to work on mak­ing my writ­ing more reader friendly to the aver­age work­ing ceram­i­cist, and focus­ing on con­tem­po­rary trends & tech­niques in ceram­ics they would find inter­est­ing & use­ful to their own practice.

  • As Phoebe stated, we do need to change the lay­out of our site. There is a marked dif­fer­ence in the style of post from each per­son, so we could prob­a­bly dis­cuss how to make the con­tent more cohe­sive. We should do that before pos­si­bly issu­ing a ‘call for sub­mis­sions.’ Unlike the Art­sIT CFP, we wouldn’t do a ‘single-blind’ exam­i­na­tion of the con­tent; that’s too for­mal for our site. But if any­one wanted to con­tribute, we’d have to look over it for sure, but the author of it wouldn’t affect our decision.

  • Jesse Lee Pacehco says:

    As I touched on briefly in class this week, I believe the audi­ence for the Inter­me­dia group is any­one and every­one inter­ested in aes­thetic choices of space. Even though we are artisits, and all of our posts will directly con­cern per­for­mance and instal­la­tion spaces, I feel that a per­son inter­erted in design or inte­rior dec­o­ra­tion could find us very inter­est­ing. I believe though mak­ing our post very specifics to our­selves, clear­ing our minds of the con­cept of “mass appeal” and only post­ing things that con­cern us directly, we can draw in a wider audi­ence base. By tar­get­ting no one in par­ti­ci­u­lar, we exclude no one. Actors, pho­tog­ra­phers, per­for­mance artists, instal­la­tion artisits, visual artists, the­atri­cal direc­tors and design­ers, are just a few exam­ples of peo­ple in the indus­try who would find value in our col­lec­tion of anno­tated images. Another fac­tor con­tri­bu­tion to a diverse audi­ence base is the diver­sity of the artit­sts who are post­ing con­tent. Each post will be a reflec­tion of who we are as indi­vidu­las, so the blag itself will be a series of indi­vidula opin­ions, inspi­ra­tions and thoughts. A larger dis­cus­sions with a new artisits chim­ing with a dis­tinct voice. That’s the appeal of us to other artisits: we’re not telling peo­ple what to think or how to make art, we’re aim­ing to treat read­ers like col­leagues in a discussion.

    • Natalie Romano says:

      Jesse,
      I think this is a great approach to our audi­ence, as the indi­vid­u­al­ity of each of our posts is really what draws a diverse audi­ence base. Also by us not always being con­cerned with appeal­ing to a large audi­ence base, our blog can be focused, and use­ful to those in the industry.

  • Keana Cowden says:

    In regards to our film group, I agree with Jor­dan that we really need to tai­lor our lan­guage. After dif­fer­en­ti­at­ing between what we want and how we write cur­rently, I think it will be use­ful to get together and really iden­tify a style of writ­ing and rhetoric. A spe­cific method of orga­ni­za­tion would be incred­i­bly help­ful as well!

  • Jesse put it really well, we are still guided towards these artists and these cur­rent cre­ators, but not ask­ing one kind of artist to fol­low us excludes no artist from fol­low­ing us.
    Our call for sub­mis­sions is actu­ally in our mis­sion state­ment (which I think is cool) but I am think­ing we add on a whole nother drop down page ded­i­cated to sub­mit­ting. just more easy access.

  • juniper says:

    i def­i­nitely think it would be a good idea to include a drop-down sub­mis­sion, as well as peri­odic update posts ask­ing our read­ers to sub­mit ideas for con­tent or intro­duc­ing new artists.

  • sarah may says:

    The Film­mak­ing mag­a­zine web­page I have cho­sen is for film­mak­ers to gain more knowl­edge about tech­nol­ogy and news revolv­ing the film world. There are a few things I have found on the site that I think are great resources for read­ers that could be good for the group site. The main drop down tabs are great for keep­ing orga­ni­za­tion, in the seem­ingly unor­ga­nized front page. Also, there are many videos that are posted like inter­views, how to’s and behind the scenes. These types of videos are inter­est­ing for peo­ple in the field. I think we could post things like this with­out any expla­na­tion but sim­ply just for the view­ers ben­e­fit of hav­ing access to them. Finally orga­niz­ing our cura­tors by topic would be help­ful rather than the clut­ter of them ran­domly being posted based on the lat­est published.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>