Thursday, April 21, 2011
It keeps thinking. It becomes a non-lemming?
FURTHER DETRITUS TAKEAWAYS TO PONDER (from the ERPA: Next Gen Debate):
1. Digital natives versus Digital immigrants? (Sarah A.O. Rosner: often the immigrants have the most impact on the culture itself!)
2. The widening gap in the haves and the have-nots (Mathew Heggem: the open source revolution that must be paid attention to!)
3. Social media is still in the womb! (Mathew again!)
4. Marketing is changing in leaps and bounds! Do you still even need or want an old-fashioned paper review in the NYTimes? If you have a Board and institutional funders do you need these kinds of validators to prove your worth?
5. Pina Bausch didn't blog and look at her! (uh, uh, uh??)
6. Do audiences differentiate between "experts" and non-experts? Who/what drives your audiences ticket buying/donation practices?
7. Authority! It is all changing so fast. Who are the gatekeepers now?
8. Generation gaps? Sarah A.O. Rosner: “my brain is developmentally different from yours.” Social media changes the game. We engage differently. We create our identities differently now (online!). We are different.
9. "Why aren't they commenting on my blog post?" Because one minute they are commenting on your blog and the next on Facebook and the next on Twitter and the next on......It's not just one place and it's not just your place. Follow the bouncing verbiage......
Isn’t it amazing what cooks when you leave the pot on the stove?
Thursday, April 14, 2011
No you don't. You are not a lemming. You have free will. Think about it and make strategic choices.
FIVE THINGS I LEARNED ABOUT HYPERMEDIA (or how not to be a lemming):
1. From the effervescent and salty-throated Matthew Heggem: hypermedia is not new! Just like so many things that "we" think "we" discovered. Hypermedia was coined in 1965 by Ted Nelson. 1965!!! Where were you in 1965? The real question is: what are we going to do with hypermedia now? The debaters pushed for conscious and strategic choices about blogging, tweeting, etc-ing. Who are you and why are you doing what you are doing? Is all that work impacting your goals? What are your goals? Think about it. Don't be a lemming.
2. From the articulate and sage Eva Yaa Asantewaa: “you can use the "I" without writing from the "I"”. Both Eva and Wendy Perron brought their years of writing experience to the debate. They encouraged (uh, demanded?) that young writers NOT use the first person when writing a review. It takes a rigor and a muscularity to write from the wider perspective. (And yet it seems most blog journalism is all about the I—as I am demonstrating here!)
3. From the assertive and sassy Brian McCormick: he is an early adapter (adopter?) of social media tools BECAUSE he is innately and organically a network kind of guy! He's a teacher. He likes to connect the dots. Social media is all about networks. So it works for him without struggle and pain. But many of his artists/clients are struggling because it isn't innate for them! So he has to work around that: even if the artist isn't into Facebook or Twitter etc., can they use these tools to their advantage? Does it help them achieve their goals? (Don't be a lemming part three!)
4. From the self-identified maximalist Sarah A.O. Rosner: creating a dance and writing her blog posts and Facebook updates and marketing her work is all the same decision-making process! It is all part of her choreographic and aesthetic development. (Wendy Perron and Ms. Rosner have had some heat on this matter in the past and it sizzled at Abrons!)
5. And from the cool and astute moderator, Kay Takeda (of the LMCC): strategy strategy strategy. She told me later that the paradigm is shifting for her! Hypermedia is shifting it! She didn't think it was! But it is!
Now, watch out for that cliff!
...But you saw that coming. You're not a lemming.
Friday, April 1, 2011
-Community Economies Collective
For the past two years, I’ve organized Trade School (a popular education program where students barter with teachers) and OurGoods.org (a barter network of creative people) with collaborators Rich Watts, Louise Ma, Jen Abrams, and Carl Tashian. Both projects demonstrate the social nature of exchange and have been met with an enormous amount of generosity and enthusiasm. What is the larger context for these barter projects? Something called the solidarity economy, the social economy, the intentional economy, or "community economies".
Activists, households, and artists alike participate (knowingly or not) in diverse, community economies. Taking care of others, volunteering, cooking, and making things are all valuable activities that involve production, exchange, and distribution. While this labor is not tracked or calculated via GDP, it is as crucial to the function of society as any paid job. The dominant economy runs on a scarcity principal that does not serve creative people well. Most artists are motivated by a combination of curiosity, risk, craft, a desire to speak truth, produce beauty, and gain community respect- not monetary gain and atomized self-interest. We participate in economies of abundance, where respect is harnessed between peers. This does not mean that artists should not be paid (we should demand payment!), or that money is antithetical to creative labor, but it does mean that the artists who continue to work "for free" (in exchange for exposure, respect, passion, etc.) should spend more time thinking through the diverse economies that they participate in.
For example, SolidarityNYC promotes “people over profits” by mapping and connecting NYC-based worker co-ops, time banks, barter clubs, CSAs, land trusts, open source projects, and other commons initiatives that foster values of mutualism and cooperation. As a broad platform for grassroots economic initiatives, SolidarityNYC has introduced me to people who make more change in the world with less personal recognition: social workers, facilitators, holistic healers, activists, and community-based economic development leaders. Connecting with these people has helped me see how much artist collectives can learn about consensus decision making, re-distribution of opportunities, and the power of organized self-management within a culture of interdependence.
Is this all too abstract and theoretical? Well, here's some direct suggestions for dealing with a non-monetary exchange:
#1) Bartering is an experiment in value.
What is a fair exchange? You two decide. Time, money, effort, or mutual support can be used to gauge what’s fair.
#2) Get information.
Look at their profile/ratings from other users, Google them, and trust your gut.
#3) Be clear.
Speak up and be specific about ...
- needs: what do you need?
- haves: what can you give?
- skills: how much expertise do you have?
- time: how much time do you have? how long will this take?
- deadline: is it fixed, negotiable, or not important?
- outcome: is it specific or flexible?
#4) Keep the dialogue open.
Communication is key. “I don’t care” can mean “I feel uncomfortable”—be brave.
(Tips taken from the updated OurGoods.org barter process).