Paradigme critice în performance‐ul digital interactiv
ND: Video art is important for integration of cultures. And this comes in two sides:
Video art contributes to culture, at regional level. This is important for citizens, to be
able to visit cultural and artistic venues. Experiencing video art is, besides a personal
interpretation of what you see, a social experience because it invokes conversation.
Conversation is essential for any kind of integration. Secondly, the means are the
purpose. Video artists connect, on local, European and global level, to start
collaborations, organize festivals and comment each other’s work. This means that
video art connects all that share that passion. When you want to apply for a subsidy,
you have to meet certain requirements. That can narrow down your liberties as an
artist. That is why it is important to maintain an ‘underground’ scene that is not
subsidized. The two can easily coexist. When, for example, a government, in order to
stimulate art, organizes a contest, all entries will be within a government context. When
looking at civil initiatives with no connection to government, totally other videos arise.
It is always giving and taking. When a government supports an artist, it expects the
society to benefit from the outcome. Even more so in these times when arts have to
prove their use and function. Projects that receive funding, often are required to be
useful to a larger audience. When working independently, like an underground
movement would, the artist will have to deal with less restrictions and expectations
which can definitely benefit the eventual artwork. However, you do see an overlap in
issues that are present in subsidized and underground video art. Addressing social
issues and putting questions on society in general are to be found in both domains.
Secondly, we cannot clearly distinguish two groups. Working independently does not
per se eliminate the option of entering a European supported contest.
Through what social policy can video artists be supported in the future?
ND: I do not believe in a causal connection between governmental subsidies and the
quality of a video. However, subsidies do have the ability to contribute to the situation
around the video. Subsidies can improve the visibility of an exhibition, create awareness
on the presence of the exhibition. In video art venues are important. The majority of my
fellow graduates from art‐school are now unable to practice their profession as a video
artist fulltime. They have jobs beside. You could say that this is not necessarily a negative
thing, since it gives them new impulses for art. There have been some programmes
started to link art to business, or to link art to entrepreneurship. To create more under‐
standing for the art form, it is also important to address education. All children need to be
introduced to culture, philosophy and art for it is tremendously important for society.
nr. crt. : 11
Nume artist: Karin Bandelin
Locul și momentul interviului: ***
Grupul de lucru: 28 [Bo van der Wolf, Martijn van Luenen, Samuel van Steen, Busra
Durmuskaya, Nina de Korte]
Is video art still an instrument for expressing militant views on various contemporary
issues?
KB: Video art is not an instrument for expressing militant views on various contem‐
porary issues. It is very doubtful’ whether video art is a political instrument. I make
244
Anexe
video art primarily for myself and people who are interested in video art and not to
change the contemporary society, policy or governments. I do not wish to change
society or cause uproar with my work.
What are contemporary issues in Europe that artists find important?
KB: Integration, differences in the Central European image‐development strategies, but
also the Berlin Wall and Moroccan market turmoil.
What were the predominant issues in video art in the 1960’s and has the discourse in
video art changed since the 60’s and how?
KB: In the 1960s video art was more about the technique itself. Personal expression was
on a very low esthetic level.
Do video artist want to express an opinion or (political) view?
KB: Video art for me is mainly to experiment with lighting, installations and video.
However, my personal video art always contains a deeper meaning. In my current
exhibition ‘Raumerinnerungen – Erinnerungsräume’ there is a deep personal meaning
concerning time and life passing by and fleeting emotions, and how it has always been
like that for humans before us, and after. It is an exhibition about grief, despair and
comforting’. I want that the visitors of the exhibition achieve a sense of The Hague
University of Applied Sciences 29
‘reflection of their own emotional state and acceptance, of intensity and differences and
of other peoples states and wellbeing’. The visitors should be touched.
How does the EU subsidize video art and should it do so?
KB: I never get into the circles of subsidization. Therefore I cannot give any information
regarding funding.
nr. crt. : 12
Nume artist: Maud Houssais
Locul și momentul interviului: ***
Grupul de lucru: 29 [Annemiek van Zeijl, Florin Stet, Hysni Haxholli, Joanna Kurek,
Margaux Mira, Pieter van der Oest]
Maud is 21. She is a Master 1 student in the National Art School of Bourges,
France. She is currently in an internship in Lʹappartement22 art centre.
She said she did not choose this centre randomly, but because it matched her
ethics and peculiar point of views about art, and the way to show art. This centre was
created by Abdellah Karroum in 2001. It is an independent and private place that
organizes exhibitions, residences and expeditions. In one word, the Appartement22 key
thought is that an art work is created in relation to a peculiar social context, and that it
does not exist (anymore) without this context.
Maud was then asked if this centre thought art could have a social role, and was
asked about her own opinion. She answered that the social role may be the only role art
could have. She said in her opinion, it was its only role.
245
Paradigme critice în performance‐ul digital interactiv
About how art could take this role, she said she wanted to come back to the fact
that a piece of art could not be separated from the context it was created in. She said
that in a classical exhibition, the artist creates the art work, a gallery buys it, exhibits it,
and then it will be shown in different exhibition places. Even if the piece has been
created regarding a special social or cultural context, if it is uprooted, it loosed all its
signification. And this is what this centre is trying to avoid.
As Maud mentioned the residences process, she was asked to tell us more about it.
She explained that it consisted in a stay, during which the invited artists live in
the centre, and immerse themselves in the Moroccan context. The only condition they
have for such residences is that the artistic work the artist will come up with have to
match the critical and political position of the centre. She explained that they were not
forced to adopt this position, as they had already been chosen by the centre, for their
positions and the social or political aspect of their art. During these residences, the
artists are financially supported, and their work is produced by the production studio
of the centre, with the help of artisans and local savoir‐faire.
She was then asked about the differences with the French system of residences.
She answered that it was a complicated question, because there were as many different
types of residence as there were different art centres in France. She summed it up by
saying that the difference may be the intransigence regarding the choice of the artist
and his/her project. That some people could do such a thing as the Maroccan centre
does, with the cultural and political positions, in France, but that they do it really
wrong, because of ethics and ʺof course, moneyʺ.
She was then asked about the public support in Europe, and her opinion about its
accuracy.
She needed more details about the questions, so I explained that I was talking
about the public support to artists and artistic structures, by public actors as the States
or the European Union. She said she wanted to talk about Morocco again, because in
her opinion it was quite a chock for French people, as it is really different from what
they had been taught, because no funding comes from the State in this centre. Which
“makes a huge difference with French centres”? She added that the fact that no money
comes from the State is a guarantee of independence. She then mentioned the fact that,
in France, in her opinion, the financial support was not important enough, because of a
present politic that did not see education and art as priorities.
She was then told about the budgets analysis carried out for this report, and the
fact that the culture budget was 1st and 2nd biggest budget in these French cities. Maud
took the example of Paris, explaining that, indeed, a lot of money was allowed to bug
structures and big exhibition that could bring back a lot of money. But she asked about
how much money was allowed to small structures, working on precise projects,
collaborating with young people, or with the suburbs, for example. She said that in her
opinion, not much money would go to such projects.
We then went to the social function of art in Europe. Maud Houssais said that the
problem was that the biggest amounts of funding were dedicated to collections,
museums and fairs that make a lot of money, but that these projects did not fulfil any
social function and had no relation to art either.
246
Anexe
I then asked Maud if she thought that money was going to existing things instead
of supporting the creation of new things, and she answered that it was not necessary
what she meant, because new galleries and museums were opening and growing
bigger “every day” because of public “and even private” supports. She said that money
was going to what could bring more money back, in a nutshell.
We then went up to the central question, asking Maudʹs opinion about the link
between financial support and creativity distorting.
She first said it was complicated, because it was too wide, statement to which I
answered that I knew it, and that it precisely was my problem. Maud Houssais then
chose to take “two examples that were going to contradict everything she had said
before”. She took the example of two huge structures: Le Musée du Quai Branly and La
Trienale de Paris. She said that the Musée du Quai Branly was at first a big deception,
witnessing the colonial look about primitive arts but that it was now fulfilling a
salutary role for certain people, regarding a certain history.
Maud then described La Trienale as “a huge event, a huge amount of money, very
conventional, with always the same artists and no big risks”. She explained that this
year, the invited curator was Okwui Enwezor, specialist of the post‐colonial issues,
who came up with a risky bet, open on the African and South American scene. She said
these were two examples for which money was not distorting the social and creative
role of art, but that it was a very small thing, in the huge whole of international
exhibitions with huge budgets, going away from the initial role of art.
In Maudʹs opinion, everything depends on the involvement of certain persons in
big projects. It is a matter of individuals and personal awareness, and not a matter of
money.
She said that Okwui Enwezor could change the art world with money, and that
Lagardere (French businessman) could destroy it, or at least make it worst.
As we were going by the end of the interview, Maud Houssais was asked about
how the ideal financial support policy would look like. She answered that it would be
embodied by “people with real ideas about art and a real gutsy position, which does
not reflects in term of money, but in term of project about how to occupy the world”.
She then confessed that she was not against private support at all.
I asked her if she meant that people who are dealing with this support, within the
European Union in particular were not close enough to the art scene to support it
accurately, question to which Maud answered that it was complicated, and that she
thought it was not the case in France. She said that in her opinion “they were incapable
of doing so”, that the budget was not going to the right structures, to the right actions.
She mentioned again the fact that the Moroccan centre did not accept any money from
the State, because it would mean accepting to avoid talking about politics or religion.
She added “What about France? It lets me wondering...” Maud Houssais thinks that
where most of the money can be found, is not usually where most of political protest,
liberty and creativity can be found.
The last question asked to Maud Houssais was about (way too?) many people not
being interested in art, question to which she answered “Why does art (too often) not
care about people?”
247
Paradigme critice în performance‐ul digital interactiv
nr. crt. : 12
Nume artist: François ROUX
Locul si momentul interviului: ***
Grupul de lucru: 29 [Annemiek van Zeijl, Florin Stet, Hysni Haxholli, Joanna Kurek,
Margaux Mira, Pieter van der Oest]
François is 24 and he works in an art centre as well as for some artists in Vancouver.
He makes photos and videos, often dealing with urban landscape. He takes his
inspiration from “some 70ʹs artists such as Robert Smithson, Bruce Nauman, William
Eggleston or Jeff Wal” and “80’s action or horror movies like Halloween or Die Hard”
and as suggested before, “in some special places such as suburban landscapes. “He
stated that he cannot evaluate his own work, especially because art “ is based on so
many subjective standards than you cannot really know”.
In his opinion, the public does not get so much choice, when it comes to getting in
contact with art, the only option are “the art institutions”, which is to say museums and
galleries, and sometime books and internet, but he thinks it is always better “to see the
work in front of you”. Besides, when asked about his own favourite artwork, he
answers that it is the one he had the chance to exhibit, because it meant “ the work
could really exist in a space”.
When asked about what he tries to express through his work, he just answered
that he just tries to earn his living with it. François thinks that art cannot have a positive
influence on society. In his opinion, art can only help the ones who are already
interested in it “to enjoy life”, to make their life “more interesting”. He thinks that art
cannot have a positive influence on society because a lot of people do not care about it,
and that people do not care about it for two reasons. First because of a lack of
knowledge and sensitivity. According to François, art requests a knowledge people do
not want to, or cannot, learn. Because some people are not sensitive to art. And second
because of Art itself: “because sometime, theyʹre right, art is really boring.”
When asked about what multimedia art is and when it began, François said it
should mean “art made with new media or hybrid techniques” and that it started “as
soon as artists could use those new materials”. He also said that “nobody has a real
definition of “multimedia art”.”, before wondering if it started with video, or if an IPhone
can be an art tool. In his opinion the Multimedia art is still on its beginning, artists are
trying to do some things with it, but “nobody did something really amazing yet”.
François Roux does not consider himself as a multimedia artist. To describe his
work, he would say he does “some photographs and some video with some recent
technology”. This recent technology is “a Canon SLR”, a tools he likes because “that
allows to switch from photo to video so easily that it become almost an hybrid object.”
He thinks that internet is “a great tool for artists” because it one the one hand it allows
them to get people knowing their work, “without being famous” and on the other
hand, it gives them “access to a huge amount of cultural content to be inspired by.”.
About his vision of what multimedia art would look like in the future, François
Roux hopes that multimedia artists would stop “playing with that technology “just to
see the effects”.”, and would go further, to create amazing art.
248
Anexe
When asked about financial support, François said that he did not really learn
about it during his art studies, but that he knows “how to cry for money”. He says he
does not know if politics encourage or discourage his social function as an artist, and
that he does not care about it. He thinks he does not really promote his work. He just
makes it available on a tumblr, so that he can show it to people, when some people
seem to be interested in it. When asked about whether he would like to work for a
public command or not, he answered that it would depend on the rules and conditions
it would imply.
About people who deal with the financial support for artists in the UE, François
Roux said that he does not know them but that he hopes “they are passionate about art
and they know what they are dealing with.” He added that if they had to be compared
to other French administrations, then they should be 10 years late regarding techno‐
logy, and so they would not be aware enough about the evolution of multimedia art.
Coming to our main question, i.e., the link between public support and the artistʹs
creativity, François clearly rejected the idea that public support could be blamed for
killing creativity. He stated that “public funding is a good thing” and that it was the
artistsʹ responsibility to prevent money from changing, distorting their work.
To end up the interview, François Roux was asked about how would and should
a perfect public support look like. For him, it could be resumed by “a fair amount of
money”, which is to say, enough “to allow a 0real project” but not too much, because
then the artist would not do anything. He wished “people who run the public funding
would know perfectly the work of the artist theyʹre involved with”, so that they can
achieve this “fair amount of money”.
In François Roux ideal world, “the key sentence would be: give them what they
need but nothing more!”
nr. crt. : 14
Nume artist: Dan Walwin
Locul și momentul interviului: ***
Grupul de lucru: 27 [Natasja Rensen, Dionne van het Kaar, Dagmar Dijkhuizen, Sarah
Loukas]
Mr. Walwin had won the BNG (Best Amateur art) project prize of 2011. BNG is
the bank of and for governments, and institutions for the public interest. This project is
an initiative taken by their BNG cultural fund and it is also one of the main sponsors
for other “Filmhuis” projects.
Workspace (’11) is the annual contest of “Filmhuis” in the Hague for talented artists who
work on the boundary between film and other disciplines such as art, architecture, new (inter‐
active) media, music and design. Dan Walwin is a visual artist and mostly produces short films.
The programming of Zaal 5 highlights the relationship between cinema and visual arts,
and between film, video and other disciplines. It reflects on the diversity of disciplines that are in
some way connected to moving images. ZAAL5 focuses on contemporary dynamics between
media makers and display/exhibition possibilities. In ZAAL5 one may find exhibits, concerts,
film series and festivals. Among exhibits are (video) installations that use moving images by
249
Paradigme critice în performance‐ul digital interactiv
artists from home and abroad. Events include lectures, presentations, live performances and film
shows like Spotlight and Upload Cinema. In the Film Series, short films are created by
filmmakers and video artists, who were unable to find their place in a regular movie theatre. The
festivals have a particular thematic focus and give context to developments in the (new) media.
(Filmhuis Den Haag, 2011)
Tele‐ consisted of two separate movies. The one that is called “Telemotive” was 17
minutes long and the other called “Immortality” was 3 and a half minutes long. The two
movies were interconnected, as the sound effects for Immortality, were used as back‐
ground sound for Telemotive in the 17 minute long film. The sound was repeated after 3,5
minutes, but it would always line up with the cutscenes. The 17 minute video was very
static and it seems that it was recorded with a security camera inside of a car. It created
the feeling that something was about to happen any minute now, some sort of panic.
The next movie, Immortal took place in the forest in the form of a rave and it was
very organic. The camera was in constant movement and filmed from many angles. It
seemed like it was recorded by a MAV (Micro Aerial Vehicle), which kept encircling the
crowd and the environment. The video itself and the way it was set up with the audio
installations, certainly explored the boundaries and possibilities of new media art.
Mr. Walwin was very open to answer some questions that were related to research
question:
“Should a social policy be developed to better support various types of
multimedia performances through the European Union? (Both in terms of funding and
other measures)”
It became clear that Mr Walwin strongly believes that it is not necessary for the
European Union to create a social policy to support multimedia artists. This is due to
the fact that Mr Walwin says that there will always be enough funding to create his
projects. He rather sees the funding come from a closer regional organization or
institution, such as the Art theatres and not from one big ‘art pot’. He has states that he
also expresses some of his projects underground and has never used crowd funding.
Mr Walwin also explained some differences between the funding of art in
England and in the Netherlands. It was mentioned that art in England appears to be
supported differently through the government, it comes from a collective fund from the
department of Culture, Media and Sport.
nr. crt. : 15
Nume artist: Roy Cremers
Locul și momentul interviului: 13 decembrie 2011
Grupul de lucru: 27 [Natasja Rensen, Dionne van het Kaar, Dagmar Dijkhuizen, Sarah
Loukas]
Roy Cremers, an associate/founder of ‘Voor de Kunst’ held a presentation about the
way the crowd funding website works. He claimed that Crowd funding is a whole new
method of financing (of art projects) not only in The Netherlands but over the entire
globe. Roy Cremers used to work at ‘Amsterdams fonds voor de Kunst’(later referred to
as ‘AFK’). (2009) This is an organisation that arranges grants for artists and art projects.
250
Anexe
The process of funding art projects and artists within and through a municipality
is a bureaucratic process (causes rules and restrictions) and Mr. Cremers thought that
this could be made more accessible. This can be described as passive. If artists and ‘art‐
entrepreneurs’ have to be stimulated in the realisation of their projects the bureaucratic
process of realisation doesn’t contribute in the process.
After Roy Cremers did research for the ‘AFK’ to facilitate the process of artists
realizing their projects and ‐ focusing on the financial side ‐ it became clear that this
type of entrepreneurship is not focused on financing but more on the creation of sup‐
port. The idea of transforming the artist’s admirers/fans etc. to financial contributors.
This is more or less the idea behind Crowd funding.
Artists can put their idea on the website and become project holders. They must
create a personal film about their project and add additional information on their
project page. It is important to maintain a close and personal link with the people who
visit the page. In other words: being visible, spreading the word about your project,
promote yourself, posting updates etc. If the ‘project holders’ do this wisely they can
even make their supporters, ambassadors of the project.
“Crowd funding is also a transparent way of doing business because supporters
can also address why they are supporting/funding a specific project” according to Roy
Cremers. Possibilities and impossibilities of ‘voordekunst’/crowd funding can be a very
efficient way to draw attention in an early stage to a certain project. Normally you
present the end result but in this way you are still in the development phase. This also
means that a project can be dynamic; it can shift in its shape.
Compensation can be offered to the supporters and funders of the project by, for
example, attending rehearsals. People who contribute to projects are very involved. By
realizing the project through crowd funding the process that occurs is: real‐time
Marketing.
This project and the main questions are about Multimedia Art and this is not the
primary subject ‘voordekunst’ focuses on.‘Voordekunst’ is open to any type of art and
does not make a distinction between the art projects they support.
Crowd funding (‘voordekunst’) is a new phenomenon and is still developing in
an early stage. In Europe it differs per country what the policies regarding the art sector
are. Funds are also differently arranged per country. In The Netherlands there is no
policy regarding Crowd funding. The lack of policy In the Netherlands has different
outcomes, for example that the concept of Crowd funding has become very dynamic
and shifts shapes in different situations or particular instances such as the regulation
upon which art projects are supported. If someone wants to support an art project with
a large amount of money there has to be a compensation for this person institution,
organisation or company. This can be any type of compensation as long as the
supporting party agrees. The interviewee believes that the overall mentality of the
Dutch Government is not very supportive towards the cultural and art sector.
In the United Kingdom the art policy and art funds are better supported by the
Government than in The Netherlands. The state secretary that is in charge‘Education,
Culture and Science’ has promised to solve the problems concerning the art sector but
has not done anything about it so far. The ministry had given a sole amount of money
251
Paradigme critice în performance‐ul digital interactiv
to support ‘Voordekunst’. This state secretary has promised to start a support fund
especially for art but the interviewee cannot put this in practice. Realising art projects in
The Netherlands is difficult due to all the judicial rules and regulations. The
interviewee believes that the overall attitude of the government towards art must be
more active, actually it should be pro‐active. According to the interviewee, the Dutch
government has lost the belief of how important art is for a country and a culture.
However the art sections will always be dependent on the government. It would be
impossible to create a single art policy and this is not al wat the art sector (in The
Netherlands) is willing for. What is a positive European initiative regarding the art
sector is the European Design Center. They are also investigating the Crowd funding
phenomenon in Europe. Other successful crowd funding organisations are Ulule,
which is a French crowd funding website also promoting art projects focusing on
supporters as well as investors. Or for example Kickstarter, ‐ which is functioning very
well ‐ which is focusing more on product design projects. They had a share in the
Iphone design. Kickstarter is more active with investors and large investments rather
than supporters.
nr. crt. : 16
Nume artist: Kay Perez
Locul și momentul interviului: ***
Grupul de lucru: 26 [Iulia Ilyina, Iper Karaoglu, Matthijs Plijnaar, Kim Welleweerd]
First of all, how would you describe your art in the concept of interactive art? The
idea of combining music, theater and video?
KP: Well, what I do, I’m illuminator multimedia designer from Mexico, what I do is
combining the language of illumination in different basic phases: Conventional
lightening with the moving light with the sound/video programming (live video and
recorded video)
Were the images that we saw today live or were they already filmed?
KP: There were things live and some were already filmed, there were live scenes that
were adjusted.
What is the main influence of using these techniques in order to show the message?
How does it help?
KP: The massive culture, the phenomenon of massive culture, like the rock and roll
concerts, I’m addicted to rock and roll, and I believe that this is the main influence for
me for bringing it to scene. Bring that kind of language which is a massive language in
order to communicate in a big way, heavy. In order to make the message get to the
people not only using the dialogue but using technology… This helps the dialogue, a
support, it is something that enriches, I think for example that a closed rail (camera
structure, camera on stage) gives you the chance to see things that you normally
wouldn’t see. For example the details, that could be on a simple working table, in this
case, or how it would be in a rock and roll concert, when you see the singer magnified,
252
Anexe
in a ten meters screen, you can see his face and expressions, when he’s singing, I think
that enriches the experience of the spectator, and in this specific case’ Amarillo’ also has
the function of multiplying the rolls. At the same time, it makes it a bit anonymous; it
keeps the role in between the anonymousness and the point of reflection.
How long have you experimenting with these techniques? When did you start
combining special effects with theater?
KP: The history in theater is like, how to say, since the history of the show starts. What
really occurs, is that nowadays it is really easy to make a lot of things with your own
equipment, your laptop. This show I make it with three laptops, one is mine, the other
is from an actress and we use our own cameras so that is all very accessible. That
accessibility for us has like 5‐6 years since we started using it. I do this since 6 years
with this level of programming.
Could you give us some examples of other shows that you have realized? What were
the main themes?
KP: I worked on a video dance show and interactive following, it was an exploration
on spirituality. Beforehand I worked for a company “Linea Sombra” a theater which
was divided between ‘the traditional woman’ (Roland Chiperferling) and the structure
was messed up and scenes were repeated and therefore, the playwright, in order to
explain this movement in time, he asked to introduce information on screen, then we
realized a video cover, like a house, and then the information was following. That was
a different way of narrating.
We also saw today that you were combining different languages, the actors were
using one language, it was also translated to French and there were also some
English translation. Is it difficult to manage all these languages at the same time?
KP: The French is because we are in Belgium, it was the subtitles that the theater
required us to have and the English and Spanish is the reality of the person that is
migrating. It is the combination of the shock that the migrant has to face. The other
language, how do you speak to others? It’s all about that.
How did you get to Brussels?
KP: I don’t know. We were invited to the festival, in order to perform this performance.
Do you travel a lot to Europe?
KP: This is the second time we come with this performance, its one of the world tours
we have done so far. The company had worked before in Europe with other
performances.
Do you know what is the main funding source of your projects? Who helps you?
KP: The Mexican government and for travelling there are also foreign governments
that finance us. They help us get the tickets and bring our equipment.
253
Paradigme critice în performance‐ul digital interactiv
Was the Belgian government in this case financing your trip?
KP: I don’t know that. My knowledge does not reach that point.
How do you see the future of this kind of art? Do you think that this is a new
movement that is growing?
KP: I feel that it is already established, I think it is already normal/common. I only
think about it on the same way as I think how to make the scenery, as I think about
lights, objects. I think about it as it would be the image as a part of constructing a piece.
I don’t see it as something special, since all the performances I work with have this kind
of attribute (Multimedia). There is no point in asking if this kind of art is evolving,
simply it is already there, it is expanding. I think the Canadians were the first on
introducing these techniques (they opened the way), more than ten years ago. Robert
Lepage has been doing this for many years. Right now, what we have are different
specialties, people that work on details, like Hotel Modern, they work with very small
scale models and closed rails (closed camera circuit), very detailed, specific.
Is it difficult to coordinate everything? We’ve seen that the cameras are very
important and also that the actors have to been in a specific place at a specific time.
KP: Under a good direction, it is something you live it, it’s a live, you are breathing it,
we’re all breathing it, and we manage to work together. It is hard to build, but it works.
nr. crt. : 16
Nume artist: Bert Lesaffer
Locul și momentul interviului: Media desk Vlaanderen
Grupul de lucru: 26 [Iulia Ilyina, Iper Karaoglu, Matthijs Plijnaar, Kim Welleweerd]
How does your organization decide which artists/projects/festivals get funding?
BL: Concerning MEDIA support for the development of Interactive Work, there are
two readers per application: one of the country from the applicant and one from
another EU member state. They give points following several criteria. In the case that
their opinion is miles apart, a third reader is invited to assess the application.
Can you set requirements for the artists (e.g. the type of narrative of the art) in order
for them to get the funding?
BL: MEDIA supports the development of interactive works that are linked to an
audiovisual work. There should be a European dimension in the application (in
financing, distribution, marketing, partners,…), realistic strategies and a clear business
model. Consulting the national/regional MEDIA Desk is recommended.
In the last three years interactive (multimedia) art in Flanders has not received any fun‐
ding from the MEDIA programme budget available to you. What is the reason for this?
BL: There were already two projects awarded support for the development of
Interactive Work within the MEDIA Programme: Tale of Tales (‘The Book of 8’) and
Caviar (‘The Artists’) in 2009.
254
Anexe
The EU recognizes the significance of art for the economy of the EU. Do you think
that interactive multimedia art will be recognized to receive (more) funding, either
from within the Media programme or as a special segment in the 2014‐2020 culture
programme?
BL: Yes. MEDIA will be implemented within the umbrella ‘Creative Europe’ and the
total budget of MEDIA is going up by 20%. The Culture Programme is the second
strand within Creative Europe. This European Programme supports the cultural sector,
excluding the audiovisual. There will be a third strand, that acts as a bank guaranty
facilitator. One of the subsectors it is trying to reach by this, is the game sector. The
basis of this is not to give out subsidies, but to stimulate banks to grant loans to the
companies, by sharing the risk.
How do you see the future of interactive multimedia art?
BL: Since MEDIA and Culture Programme are put under one umbrella, together with a
new financial facility, the future seems bright for interactive works from a European
perspective.
255
View publication stats
The words you are searching are inside this book. To get more targeted content, please make full-text search by clicking here.
Mocan, Rodica - Paradigme critice in performance-ul digital interactiv
Discover the best professional documents and content resources in AnyFlip Document Base.
Search