Posts by chris
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Um Russell? The Medici family were famous for what (among other things?)
-
ya could say we are off our Med(ici)s...
Don't patronize me.
-
Sorry. Maybe I should stop focusing on us manifold failures and rejects and join in the celebration of the handful of successes. We are simply collateral damage. an inconvenient byproduct of the system.
-
But if you're looking at Rhian's non-commercial work, I don't think NZOA is the agency to deliver support for that. It just ain't. And maybe that's okay
Why on earth not? The mandate is simply to put more New Zealand work on Air. They've given grants to 100s of recipients without a product to sell or a gig lined up.
Surely the whole reason these commie groups exist is because very little New Zealand music is commercially viable in the strictest sense.
what Rhian Sheehan does for a job. The same is true to some extent about Sean Donnelly and Don McGlashan. In Rhian's case it's an export business.
I don't know how this would sit with the Broadcasting Act as it stands, but it makes sense to me for a the broadcast funding agency to support the development of artists whose work we hear in this way
why? These artists have found their niche in the market, they're making a living, why should the government start developing more artists to compete against them? Did they require the development you're proposing to get where they are?
Why not just take the bureaucratic fine print and interference out of our faces and stop trying to meddle in spheres you make no direct contribution to? (heated words, not specifically aimed at you Russell). But try this show on. Public Address is successful, the government should offer grants to developers to produce similar websites to compete against you.
etc etc -
Most of nearly everyone will be the passionate and powerless ones at the bottom who enter the industry, innocent with goodwill, seeking to promote art and culture, thinking it's a level playing field and their art or services will be judged on merit by people whose goodwill also extends to the desire to capture and preserve art and culture.
Exactly. I recall my single experience with NZOA was when out of the blue, a member of NZOA suggested to a friend of mine that I apply to NZOA (a thought I'd never considered) which I duly did, and naturally I was rejected. I never applied again. What's the point? An organization that goes round eliciting and then rejecting art is simply fucking evil. There's no need to draw people out of the woodwork to spit on them. If you don't want it, don't pretend.
Maybe Robbie is not simply playing, perhaps he is another victim of this kind of number generating, I know I played my part in helping to provide the numbers on something like "every period we receive 450 applications*". 450 applications sounds good, it sounds like NZOA is popular, that it serves the a need in the community. But as NZOA members are breeding their own numbers, what do those numbers mean. Naturally the Establishment specifically asking citizens to submit art so they can reject it is a kick in the pants. Naturally I left the country not long after. Though I didn't fly out until we'd already joined the war machine in Afghanistan, 2 days before the invasion of Iraq, when it was clear we were going to continue to support the US war effort in Afg regardless of the illegality of the invasion of Iraq. I'm happy to lay claim to your victim label Russell. And I think the fact that you'd use the word, is a comment on the establishment (whether unwittingly or not).
I think a telling feature of this whole NZOA argument, and the fact that there is even an argument, illustrates how divisive arts and culture are. The fact that Robbie is quite specific in his attacks on Brendon indicates the necessity and historical precedent for a leader of sorts in this kind of patronage.
We expect someone to be there to take the fall when things don't quite turn out the way we expected. If you ask me and Robbie what should be selected, there will naturally be disagreements. The same with any 2 people. If you ask 4 people then multiply that number of conflicts of taste. How many members on the NZOA board?
So all you're ever going to get is watered down compromise. Strangley the great work on the Sistine Chapel by greats such as Michelangelo, Raphael, Bernini, and Sandro Botticelli, wasn't patronized by the group Italy On Ceiling IOC, because the players weren't able to form that group,
1 because Julius II was a bit of a motherfucker
2 the acronym had already been copyrighted by some sports outfitAlone, Pope Julius II pratonized some of the greatest decorative art in known history. Just one man. Sure he had helpers, but if the Fresco had been shit he would have taken the fall and been duly judged. Naturally he couldn't have allowed that to happen. He was accountable.
and what we have with NZOA is a total lack of accountability.
You'd have a purer more rational system, if you split the single recording grant say from the video grant, and put one individual in charge of each on a on year contract to be replaced the following year. You'd have your 2004 vintage singles and your 2005 vintage videos. It'd be a connoisseurs dream. But least of all, you'd have some fucking accountability.
enthusiastic vitality- recorded 12/2000 (prior to NZOA exp)
dispirited washed out pap- recorded 5/2003 (post NZOA exp)
*number from ass. -
A lot of acts re-apply over and over. ....That does, I guess, swing the argument back around to the gatekeepers.
heh, not on from an environmentalist's perspective.
-
I've always been amused at the regimental regularity of the grants decisions, as if there are as many songs written in the summer months as in the winter months. and every regulated period will produce the same quantity of worthy recipients.
-
...
-
eg having their own Freeview channel- both to air content the commercial stations won't, and to ginger-up the commercials with some thoughtful competition.
...This I like, if every video gets played at least once, assuming it meets broadcasting standard requirements.
democracy ffs.
-
There are some good ideas there Rob, but i'm always left pondering how The Government marginalizing artists benefits the greater good?
Manufactured culture? Oppressively conditioned social responsibility? Successful precedents always outweigh the failures.
This overriding sense that cultural pantheons of days gone by can be reproduced with a bundle of money, that the glory days of New Zealand music in the 70s and 80s weren't as much a product of their surroundings as much as a definite, quantifiable vein that needed only to be mined, is simply passé and ignorant of the function and responsive role of music.
conditionality can't be faked (for long).
NZOA specifically with regards to music is not unlike Союз композиторов СССРhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_of_Soviet_Composers
In 1936 Dmitri Shostakovitch was victimized for his opera Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk. He was criticised in a series of critical articles in Pravda, the newspaper of the Communist Party, starting with ‘Muddle Instead of Music’, which was rumoured to have been written by Stalin himself. This critical stance was supported by the leadership of the Composers' Union.
Nothing good will ever come from systems like these, but some good can exist despite/with/without their assistance.
Never let the Government stand between you and a good time.
You and I both know Robbie, that your time would be better spent plotting the next big thing. They have sucked you into their game.
Which is it going to be? Politician or artist?