Categories
Featured Plastique Salon Ramblings

Is institutional collaboration an oxymoron?

So can institutions collaborate?

I think they can collaborate with other institutions but aren’t great at collaborating with the general public as they have to bend and be flexible to what the public desires. This always comes with great difficulty to institutions. An example is why you see so few institutional websites with the opportunity to comment on articles (please commenting system  below)

 

So I have been asked to present at this and I need your thoughts so that i can formulate my presentation, a friend said to just take a bottle of wine and a bag of crisps, which would clearly be metaphors for Institution (wine) and community at large (crisps) 

But Institutions tend to be a bit pants at public engagement unless the public obey their rules.  So the institution needs to change its rules, but by doing so it is lessening it’s own power over the project.

So a few things I see as factors in this intransigence are

Power

Ego

Culture change

Ownership

But what do you think?

This event is on this coming Friday so comment fast.

— I have flouted copyright and reprinted this here –

Friday March 2nd, 2-5pm at FACT, 88 Wood St, Liverpool, L1

In an age where everyone organises their lists of the best stuff – from images and video to music and links – curation has become an important form of public meaning making. What is the role of an arts institution in providing a framework for this kind of meaning making, what are the institutional agendas at play, and how can organisations become better connected to their communities through participatory media?

Join us at FACT for a seminar, public discussion and the launch of Open CuRate It, a new online participation space and three month programme of events designed to experiment with new models of audience-led curation and institutional engagement.

Speakers include Abigail Christenson from the Tate, Liverpool, with the back story on institutional investment in community collaboration, Nina Edge on using participatory media for art and activism and why instiutions need to be more open, Neil Morrin on his work with Defnet Media, Jennifer Welch on her mediated garden project and Wolstenholme Creative Space on the struggles of running a community based arts organisation.

http://www.opencurateit.org/events/cracking-the-curatorial/

EDIT –

 

Check out the presentation I gave below.

Is institutional collaboration an oxymoron? from Neil Morrin
Right then this is an even later edit – I found a set of notes which i either took from someone else’s talk or I wrote (probably the former) they are good so here they are.

Institutions must have a quite clear identity. they can not easily change their minds. they are usually ?forced? in their own frame, quite clearly defined at the moment they were started.

institutions can collaborate, but in quite formal, clearly stated, official ways. they are not spontaneous, they can not be too joyful, and they must be compliant to their serious, grey and strict etiquette.
example: the catholic church can collaborate with some other institution, like the red cross.
example2: the british museum can collaborate with moma for some exchange in a specific event.
example3: two or more universities can define a shared agreement on programs

collaboration in my opinion implies reciprocal availability for change. it is co-education, shared growth, mutual learning, acceptance of unexpected discoveries.

institutions are probably fearing the unexpected, in the forms of behaviours, innovations, critical comments, anti-establishment informalism, tourettic creations.
they need to frame, to classify, to include in already-seen taxonomies.

but maybe we need more fluid institutions. we need to allow quicker change. we need fluid democracy, facebook countries independent from geography. we need to support the unknown sourced contributes, we need to accept even critical comments, in order to improve.

we might need institutions to thrive on opinions evolutions, on ideas change, and on fluid progress, yes, but in this case how would you define the institution itself? how would you assign and define its identity?

the best representation for such ?new? institution could be generative art, or maybe a style, like cubism, or impressionism.
a set of patterns could identify the institution, a behavioral style, a local culture, a fashion, or a trend.

are there social network institutions?
can we have institutions in second life?
or maybe is linkedin an institution?

which is the ultimate goal of an institution?
opinion suggestions?
public wealth?
culture promotion?
sense of belonging?

is there somewhere the ?institute for critical thinking??

By Neil

My names Neil, and this is my blog where I capture what's going on around me, I rave about what i think is super cool and I rant about other stuff.

Stop Thinking about it and just get on and do it.

2 replies on “Is institutional collaboration an oxymoron?”

institutions must have a quite clear identity. they can not easily change their minds. they are usually ‘forced’ in their own frame, quite clearly defined at the moment they were started.

institutions can collaborate, but in quite formal, clearly stated, official ways. they are not spontaneous, they can not be too joyful, and they must be compliant to their serious, grey and strict etiquette.
example: the catholic church can collaborate with some other institution, like the red cross.
example2: the british museum can collaborate with moma for some exchange in a specific event.
example3: two or more universities can define a shared agreement on programs

collaboration in my opinion implies reciprocal availability for change. it is co-education, shared growth, mutual learning, acceptance of unexpected discoveries.

institutions are probably fearing the unexpected, in the forms of behaviours, innovations, critical comments, anti-establishment informalism, tourettic creations.
they need to frame, to classify, to include in already-seen taxonomies.

but maybe we need more fluid institutions. we need to allow quicker change. we need fluid democracy, facebook countries independent from geography. we need to support the unknown sourced contributes, we need to accept even critical comments, in order to improve.

we might need institutions to thrive on opinions evolutions, on ideas change, and on fluid progress, yes, but in this case how would you define the institution itself? how would you assign and define its identity?

the best representation for such “new” institution could be generative art, or maybe a style, like cubism, or impressionism.
a set of patterns could identify the institution, a behavioral style, a local culture, a fashion, or a trend.

are there social network institutions?
can we have institutions in second life?
or maybe is linkedin an institution?

which is the ultimate goal of an institution?
opinion suggestions?
public wealth?
culture promotion?
sense of belonging?

is there somewhere the “institute for critical thinking?”

good luck!
@mgua

Comments are closed.