conversations continuing on http://etherdump.constantvzw.org/p/unboundlibraries_marcru.raw.txt
(post-conversation) Proposals and thoughts (pre-session)
========================================================
Practically...
--------------
Possible interventions
* Make the MARC record readable
The OPAC (online public access catalog; i.e. the catalog website) visualizes books information by extracting it from the record. Several OPACS (at least open source ones, evergreen/koha) have a tab visualizing the MARC form (https://catalogue.rietveldacademie.nl/eg/opac/record/8631?locg=1;detail_record_view=0;page=0;query=author%3AP%C3%A1l%20Pelbart%2C%20Peter%20creator;expand=marchtml#marchtml ) But it is not readable. What kind of readability can be interesting? Standard fields/numbers descriptions? Labels? Arrows?
* Questioning Cursor (?)
An option to turn the cursor into a questioning mode (https://i.stack.imgur.com/VeZqP.png )
It used to be more common now it is probably considered a mark of bad design (the interface should be readable without need of a help function)
Would it just allow you to read answers to implicit questions or also to raise questions? E.g. you can point it to a MARC field number and it will translate/explain its meaning and function or can it also mark/open up a writeable pocket within the record/website?
Cursor [ "a running messenger," from Latin cursor "runner," also "errand-boy," from curs-, past-participle stem of currere "to run" (from PIE root *kers- "to run"). From 1590s as "part of aslide rule or other instrument that slides backward and forward upon another part." The computer screen sense is a 1967 extension of this.]
Pointer / ? F1 help used to be very common (Before there was also a "Help" function key), now always more hidden or done away with - both in hardware and software -by a different paradigm of "user friendliness"
HELP menu as separate window of documentation --> It's normally one-directional --> You get there searching for an answer but then you are within a documentation structure which presents more questions and answers but never links back.
* Tracking movements/relocations/negotiations of books through changes of coding/classification
In our catalogue we decided to keep the call number in the record (in 999) when we "translated" our records from Aura to Evergreen, so we have the possibility of comparing current call numbers with old ones. What kind of stories would this foregrounding tell?
As a forward proposal rather than backward study--> dedicating a marc field to these movements which are normally overwritten digitally and physically (relabeling erases these traces which can afford a critical reflection)
Example:
Compare field 999(old) to 084
https://catalogue.rietveldacademie.nl/eg/opac/record/12241?expand=marchtml#marchtml
* A heterogeneous reader about/through/in the catalog
A reader that talks about library choices, all the little interventions in the infrastructure and website and catalog (with examples) and that lives in the catalog as well. A path through records, external materials, other possible spaces on website, to bring together the theoretical/political reflections and the design/technical choices. A combination of the 'Help' idea, a collection of references that inform the practice, capable of moving between different layers.
A different approach to "foregrounding" --> keeping the context of some choices (discussions/readings/affinities) nearby the results of these choices. Unpacking the density, the collective engagements and contaminations, the way a practice is continuously informed by these back and forth. "No such thing as "technical" choices" !
We need a new vocabulary for these things!
* Make the MARC record writable
Questioning the different 'layers' of standards/protocols/systems that constitute the OPAC and the various assumptions and implications:
Different layers in place imply different levels of porosity to modification ---> record database is normally the untouchable --> for good reasons --> taking care of not messing up the catalog.
different layers/ zones of interaction:
---> Interaction on the level of the website only (not touching records)
SPLOTR is a separate entity which lives in the library and interact with the catalog
Locally -within school network - digital books, materials contributed by students appear as linked to the record
"This record has external materials associated to it" Pops up linking to SPLOTR. In that way you move from the catalog (online remote server) to SPLOTR (offline local server)
--->Interaction in a mediating database (e.g. Vufind)
E.g. in Rebal you can add comments and keywords to records but this does not go to modify records, it's a separate database. It's a good mediation between close/open, order and possible messiness, but?
---> Writable MARC records
Opening up some spaces/fields in records ---> engagements and contribution go really to modify the bibliographic record
- But how does it work?
- Responsibility
- Authority
- Mediation
- Care
- ---> avoiding random hashtagging
An interzone? Modifications and additions proposed live in some interzone/liminal space and can then be confirmed and incorporated by librarians into the actual catalog?
"Submission" form? Template? --> Interzone/discussions/negotiations --> Catalog
* Elaborate the comparison/cross-checking tool- maybe integrate a similar function?
https://catalogue.rietveldacademie.nl/class/?r=9781857026986&l=9780385482608
* WHAT IS THE RELATION BETWEEN CLASSIFICATION (CODING/LOCATION) AND BIBLIOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION (RECORDS DATA)? How do they represent different forms of power-knowledge structures? Do they live/act parallel or they meet and interact? Where and how?
- The issue of (siso) classification (relation of position in shelf and in system of knowledge) in relation to bibliographic description in MARC record has to be elaborated before simply jumping into the possibilities of the catalogue as a porous interface. I mean articulating a reflection on how the catalogue relates, and can relate, to classification/call number (siso) - besides simply showing a (call) number - before deciding to concentrate on the catalogue as a place for contamination (keywords, links, conversations etc). Else you risk to reinforce the hierarchy: classification=stable/fixed/librarians vs sandpit of participatory keywording (that easily becomes just accumulation of metadata)
- * location/classification fundamental for orienting in the library (difference between a physical lib and a digital one)
- * location/classification cannot be 'participatory' - theoretically interesting but practically impossible
- * in the catalogue (siso) only appears as number, would it make sense to connect numbers to categories? as in our siso reference? (i feel quite ambivalent on this..)
- * how do the two different systems (siso and marc) interact in daily flows? e.g. there are cases in which records descriptions in catalogue have a direct agency---> recurring keywords putting pressure on classification, asking for new categories/shelf consistency (e.g. lots of books tagged with maps/cartographies etc--> it becomes a theme/new category; or many books on philosophy of technology--> start destabilizing the chronological/alphabetical structure of the section, asking for subcategories)
- ---> one could say that this is more about new books coming in, but in fact I think it's about keywords/catalogue descriptions because books need to be recognized as dealing with a certain topic or partaking a certain tradition in order to have an agency on classification (e.g. some books are almost unfindable unless you are searching for them specifically or stumble upon them, because of lack of keywords---> they are also not problematic until you realize (or someone does) they deal with certain issues which could/should become keywords which could eventually lead to relocating (e.g. oulipo, convivial tools, cybernetics)
- * The assumptions of (siso) classification are unreadable by students besides broad categories (pillow-signs), and so also the librarian struggles with classifications are hidden --> making them visible may be interesting and possibly become a site for interventions but at the same time we are often more concerned about giving them a nice place, nice neighbors, rather than giving them a proper/correct subject or category 'name'. We use and need to use classification subjects but we don't necessarily think they define a book. Or better, they define contextually rather than specifically. Also we constantly revise labels (we change the reference of numbers, we squat unused numbers giving them a local meaning instead of the standard one from reference book etc )
- * Nevertheless, if indeed catalogue descriptions (subject headings, keywords) have an agency on classification besides being fundamental for researching and finding materials, the intervention on the MARC record can become also a way to negotiate classifications and categories ------> hence it becomes interesting to explicitly connect call numbers to its class name in the catalogue (e.g. 708.5 quee ---> Art history by genres and motives/ Motives / Queer ), and to keep track of eventual changes (of location or renamig of fields) within the MARC record.
- -->as we approach the catalogue and records as sites of local knowledge and negotiations - rather than 'simple' bibliographic description - then the classification code and its possible changes become important traces of these processes, making records themeselves, besides books and materials, as readable cultural objects and the catalogue as a site of critical engagement
Notes from conversations
========================
Monday 18 May 2020
11h- 12h30: Infrastructural Manoeuvres
Martino (double role:Infrastructural Manoeuvres)
Anita (Infrastructural Manoeuvres, Rietveld Library librarian)
Eva (participant worksession, guest in workshop Infrastructural Manoeuvres before)
Elodie (coorganizer worksession)
An (coorganiser worksession)
Roel (participant worksession, interested in Infrastructural Manoeuvres & Eva's work)
The Recorder
Introduction Infrastructural Manoeuvres
started in art academy Amsterdam, Rietveld Academy
during physical renovation of library, workgroup started on infrastructures of the library with Anita
Martino entered as extended collaborator
concern of librarians to make library better:
- catalogue could be changed, instead of cloud solution, set up free software solution
- it is not necessarily a project but should be understood as a process, which makes it harder to explain
- sharing the experience & process: Infrastructural Manoeuvres
changes in infrastructures
series of workshops with students & librarians on cataloguing & classification
theoretical reflection on practice
specific to the Rietveld situation: internal, small
but reflections are part of larger program of school
How it operates:
- Evergreen: free software developed by Library of Georgia in US, https://evergreen-ils.org/, for the catalogue: setting up software, migrating all the records; this started from the need to move to another catalogue system
it allows for different type of work, it became more visibly part of the library
internal IT resistance/negotiations, eventually managed to set up their own server and did everything themselves, get familiar with all technical aspects
- SPLOTR Semi-Permanent Libraryof Rietveld: Raspberry Pi, running version of Biblioteca and series of small tools
- holds other type of content, files/books that are not structured via cataloguing system of library, different legal status
- creates another local space
- brings up difference between catalogue and system and a digital library
- it is mobile, can move to places/events and come back with new materials
- a way to integrate materials in library materials that are read in the school
- through workshops: establishing relations with the catalogue of the library
- Roel: do you also use the SPLOTR as offline device?
- only accessable from Rietveld intranet, network of the school
- also for strategic reason, to avoid legal problems
Eva: reflections on SPLOTR gathering of people in a room? agency compared to online digital libraries?
- people don't need to come together in group, what they are sharing is locally published, space for 'interzone': shared but not made public
- it raises issue of art school network and infrastructural: every move goes with negotiations/sabotage with internal departments of the school, is always discussed within the school, SPLOTR takes on that discussion role in the school, object in the room that creates tension - has been removed by ICT dept during a workshop...
- -> raising needs & questions
- Eva: 2fold: students learn layers of device they're using, understanding politics of the developers &
- catalogue is not service what technicians provide, but we need to build it together
- in UK: students paying 9000£ feel entitled to have a service!
- -> work towards something that 'is unstable' but it cannot be just an experiment, it needs to work and be reliable
- workshops are essential: create situations where these questions/discussions start to circulate
- role of user + role of expert/technician need to be questioned
- this takes time, assume the role + questiont hem at the same time
- What happens in a workshop:
some were technical, f.ex. testing the relation between SPLOTR and catalogue system
how the SPLOTR can be modified to fit with the catalogue
some were more on practical visibility of books: how the physical books appear, understanding reality of digital and shadow libraries, how to scan a book/remove DRM
one workshop was focused on republishing of a book (Reference Guide to Convivial Tools, Valentina Borremans), as a way to look at epub structure for books, trying to discuss content of the book/reference guide for conviviality
from the perspective of 'breaking things up', there was also a need to name the practises so they can be found & shared, but you run into the 'limits of categorisation'
cfr reader indigenous classification
everything is nicely packaged & made efficient, becomes problematic
contradictory tendencies in power & politics of classification
IM has diagonal/transversal position: they can undo the authority they give to classification systems, the smaller scale allows this + the fact they're involved in the technical system
this is not a case in other librarians, f.ex. KBR or Muntpunt: a modification of a keyword asks for interaction with IT department
the foregrounding possibilities of IM, able to intervene at level of catalogue/website, the discussions come to the foreground
student usually don't see the dramas of cataloguing
is interesting to make it more visible in knowledge that can be encountered in alibrary
in physical library a book needs to go into 1 place only
in digital libraries there is more freedom, it could be in different places, maybe it doesn't even need descriptive part of book
how do 2 systems go together in the project?
digital library presents more possibilities of grouping/regrouping, is not their concern
focus on level of the catalogue (MARC records, how information is organized in library), they accept that the book needs to be placed with a code
make struggles/problems of this practise more visible as part of the library
but the one place of the book is the MARK record
with MARK records allows the books on the shelves to be organised differently? According to dates of acquisition?
important that books are placed in good context on the shelves, rather than opening up the location of the book - would make work of librarian impossible, there is not 1 good position of the book
the catalogue system enforces separation between MARK record (meta-data) and the item (physical book), creates a tension
physical embodiement of the record influences the record
taking digital books into account would highten tension
artistic practise leading to new infrastructure
obliges you to naming/framing + becoming proper infrastructure
how to create community infrastructures that challenge standard practises
but you can only go so far, at some point you have to be willing to move into position of becoming proper infrastructure
-> it would not work if it was not allied with more educational part of project
combination of pedagogical, artistic and technical validity
it is also economic question: IT is often outsourced to companies outside of the school
no one in school had Linux experience, gave the freedom to install themselves vs their proposal that they would find the suitable company that would install it for them
then they spent one year of testing how this could work - finding the technical knowledge
what about the future?
new people coming in need the knowledge of Evergreen, new relations
how to build knowledge you're developing into something solid?
2020 would be the year of documentation & publication practises
trying to collect work made & how system can be maintained
keeping active collaborations with students, with ambition to share the knowledge
proposal to make IM into an intracurricular project, also to make 'library' as part of education, expandign what a library is
would be great in terms of expanding the project and assuring its longevity
'institutional memory'
it can become official part of institution as well
it needs a move to give it that kind of solidity
at moment budget of insititution focuses on IT & extracurricular acitvity
you need to choose where you put your energy
Term from participatory design: infrastructuring
you could see kind of work you're doing as participatory design project
if designer moves away from that space, how to not drop everything
how can shifts that happen last?
this is known as 'infrastructuring'
could be interesting to look at: https://sci-hub.tw/10.1145/2661435.2661450
Proposal for the worksession
possibility of a catalogue to be 'porous', with the resistence of longuevity that makes it different as experimental practise
this is a work with consequences, how to assume that
if you don't name it yourself, you get named
starting point for the worksession: work with records (MARC 21) in catalogue to make it porous, open up to external modifications
how to allow students to influence how a book gets classified
is a way to reflect on process of naming/classifying
MARK21 is also used in other projects, can be a meeting point
questions that come with the proposal:
you can make catalogue open/writable, but at same time librarians have resonsability towards the catalogue that it doesn't become littered
this is something to discuss: responsability, authority + caring, maintaining
intervention as a place for discussion, making place fo doubts that librarians have themselves
i'm here :)
heyy :)
hello
wondering whether new questions came up that we could think about together?
and about wiki there s some things i d change (mainly about splotr-catalog relation) but should we do that in wiki or elsewhere/here?
(for me about the name is fineme too), but exactly some technical things , we could maybe respond on the wiki with the system you set up?
The annotation feature? Or directly in the text?
i think the annotation is nice for more discursive elements, but maybe the technical description we can fix together here
Yeah!! Great. I copy the stuff in now and fix the tech things... and then annotation would be so cool for other thoughts..
yes!
getting lost in too many tabs :P
I changed my colour to see the new text
*******
Yes, i think we should better articulate and make ties with that :P Absolutely it became really clear in your intro convo.Maybe we should uodate a bit our lame about page and then you can link to that?not sure i m capable of writing such a reflcion now :P but can try!! Yes sure. I thought I had already linked to it. Will do that. and can reflect myself on it later... Now the technical stuff : )but will do today anyway, also to wrap up and share what we have been thinking/doing and why we do these crazy things that seem useless or backward going. Backward going? Like, instead of 'improving' the catalogue, cleaning the mess, we are constantly making pockets for more chaos chaos also improves the catalog ^^:) i think we really should add something about this marc-record approach/proposal that we better formulated this week. approaching it not as some abstract/functional element (for searchability) but as something that keep record of changes, and makes them readable and invite for writing.that would tie well with drabinsky point you started. Yes its funny that drabinski in the end was desillusioned with changing the records.. and said we have to live with them being flaws... instead she explains the flaws. But perhaps she is wrong? In your small system it could work. at least as an exoperiment. but also it's not that being able to write it will mean to 'fix' it.. but the ability to question / change certain things can support the understanding of the catalog as an on-going object that keeps being modified so less 'monolithic'
i guess the proposal readwrite is in contrast to overwrite/fix etc
'as we approach the catalogue and records as sites of local knowledge and negotiations - rather than 'simple' bibliographic description - then the classification code and its possible changes become important traces of these processes, making records themeselves, besides books and materials, as readable cultural objects and the catalogue as a site of critical engagement ' from somewhere up in this pad, also not well articulated. This is quite clear!:) and maybe creating a space where the discussions inside the library become readable (for which foregrounding hiddenly structuring systems seems a precondition).. also listening to people working in this institutional catalog structures in belgium, it's clear for me that it's not about them fixing the catalog ( ok some things have to be search-and-replaced. but some are just problems much bigger than a catalog.. 'decolonization' ) but at least share in some way that there is a quesitoning about it.. more than adding a keyword. You mean in terms of getting non eurocentric material in? Other voices? yes that is slowly happening, but in their back-catalog they have backward-thinking namings and classifications that need a bigger effort than changing the siso code...I was a bit confused by that conversation->the problem seemed they were asking for changes at the level of the classification reference manual (Siso book!) but why not locally? Local changes can also be exchanged/adopted by different libraries (negotiations of course/interchange information they call it..)
the problem is that the catalog is centralized, in the sense that every public library has to use the call number provided by the central catalog! (it's crazy) so they cannot change it locally.. only they could set local keyword, and I think they did, but that does not appear in the same way on the central catalog.
Mhmm, could you give an example or more concrete? i can also give hte links to the interviews (That would be great!a conversation in three parts: lise from MUNTpunt who proposed the keyword https://sound.constantvzw.org/Unbound_Libraries/Muntpunt_Decolonizationtrajectory/ and rosa and annika from cultuur connect https://video.constantvzw.org/Unbound_Libraries/rosa_matthys_200522.webm https://video.constantvzw.org/Unbound_Libraries/annika_buysse_200526.webm ) thanks, but anyway one person working at this cultuurconnect central catalog, says she was proud before retiring she did a search and replace to remove the word 'negers' from the catalog and substitute it with 'zwarte'. (it's a dutch language catalog). that is an operation that can be done and has to happen, but the surrounding discussions are missing. so when instead the request was to add a keyword 'decolonization', it was much more difficult task in defining what would enter what not, and that was dropped somehow.
yes,clear--you can add whatever you like, but how to use it, how to interprete it to actually bring about changes without arguing how difficult it would be, even the fact that this discussion does not appear anywhere, that's more an issue maybe. so go
ing back to the rietveld library where changes happen more dynamically, still the discussions about
really library-work are very interesting to understand what the library also is.. super important. Just remebered how great it would be to still have this "decolonial library" talk, that was dropped in the worksession. Is there any chance this could still be organised? ah we received an email this morning, it could happen next week.. or as a form of continuation of the session.. This would be really good. we'll bring it up at 14 and see if we can make it a followup for the ones who miss the bbb gatherings :)
line 213 is interesting "name it or get named"and i think it never settles..every situation is different. I would love to read Borremans convivial tools. Could not source it online. ... wher does she speak of the need to name things?i'll search for it or send you something :)https://web.archive.org/web/20111007232451/http://cd3wd.com/cd3wd_40/JF/410/02-83.pdf
wayyyy back machine!!!!!sent you also the epub from the republishing workshop horay
Of course, the success and complexity of such an intervention entirely depend on the take up of the art academy community.
The new collection developing on the Raspberry Pi, accessible on "Splotr.rietveldacademie.nl," is not only hosting digital books sourced from shadow libraries. It also experiments with hosting related materials, discussion notes, bibliographies generated by a book. Martino has also described it as a 'log system' of different events around a book, making the boundaries of a traditional library system more porous for other sources entering and leaving the library. [84]
------FROM HERE
>>>Anita, Martino: Is it okay to include your names? yes, though we still haven t found a way to talk about the tension 'project/process/collectivity/collaboration'. Could u say more about this tension? Its always the question whether to refer to individuals, (re-sponsability (as Femke would say;) or a collectivity/movement: "librarians at Rietveld"/ "a group of culturural practitionners around rietveld" it's a mix of things also in its different phases, with this project. the day-to-day library work, the moments of more technical work maybe with just two people, the workshops as collective moments in which technical choices are discussed and re-opened up
before we 'named' the * as IM there were other attempts and refusals, like SPLOTR as an entity/group of people besides this very object, and then we would esoterically call some practices and gatherings as 'the invisible library department', :)always trying to blur this 'we'. I know this process very well ;).an attempt is making it into a 'it' maybe?
But I come to wonder whether it is actually important to assign "authorship". it's funny how already making the about page of IM was a big step somehow for IM (or for us..?). haha. but you can see the agency of even just having a page to point to, with all the difficulties of self-definition.. The agency? of being able to be referred to? to be used? yes otherwise in the school and elsewhere often it was as if the project did not exist. it would just break down in some technicalities and some interesting events or people you may get i touch with 'i think anita and the wierd library crew could be interested in it'hahah yes. it is still a bit like this i suppose, because we don t really make an effort towards visibility and publicity (but a lot of struggles nevertheless concerning that) but the difference is also in organizing/proposing things within the school and making ties outside. like for example participating in a worksession :P even though already we can see how it melts down when we are with others it's just much more exciting to get into shared questions even when we try to focus on IM todo lists hahamelts down? does not make sense this phrase indeed 'IT' melts down :) so i guess it's still and will remain unclear whether is 'it', IM, or it's a and m 'from' IM
In "it" ? haha deviant approaches to technical questions! :) 'IT by other means'haha capital letters
...
I am a bit nervous about this afternoon session....indeed. i think this way of being in pads feels good to meyes!which is quite interesting as something to observe, the different uses of pads, as organizational tools, or as conversations(multiple/backforth/messy/'trying')yes
this can be a shared moment ^^... i mean the wish was to have a situation that could be share with others not present during the week, but try not to make it into a presentation but it's always quite difficult.. it's like with recording or not, you can say you 'would prefer not to'(be recorded/do a presentation) but a certain pressure is inevitable
TO HERE
------
UNBIND! white noise but if you have ideas how to release a bit the pressure we are meeting at 14. please bring up proposals, in a way the sharing of one item/element/moment/question was an attempt to do it but not sure it worked.. i like the UNBIND proposal because it opens up a bit the complexity of the discussion, but i do think you make yourself even more present/visible through abscence/cutting off
I think its different. I dont mind recordings, as a document that could be useful for others. I dont want them to be shared as "final documents" they are working docs... so only for private use. I would not mind making visible this conversation for example.
"Eva: problem is not to work collectivity, is when this work enters systems of monetizing, archiving, academic institution... " does it relate?even though it's an affine environment? Yes complicated. Licences?;)(i ve been struggling with this question a lot with my thesis...'how to create things that have in themselves a resistance to become
products?' not sure i ve found answers, but some attention to approaches...)You wrote about this struggle?not about so much, a bit, but informed/propelled by this .i mean yes, inevitably also about licenses and patents, 'using the system's system' as an option, but eventually i just probed different possibilities (one of which is living hidden 'lathe biosas' :P and we go back to the issues of before ahah) yeah.....may I read your text. comfortable?it's from maaany years ago and a bit uhm :)but yes i can share, i still live by some of the realizations there, however confused!(this will be unbound :)
even there was a presentation non non-un-re-publishing ? if i remember correctly quite performative :D ironically i would love to have some traces of that! me tooo hahahah
i feel the question of license and publishing is still very open with the session. yes we are always muddling through
so it's something to bring up again at 14. i am wondering if the group that was working on 'federated access conditions' have useful insights to share.. cos right now i wouldn't feel comfortable if after this morning brief talk we put everything online on free art license, after all the questioning this mode as default, that somehow informed the session. yes. good. we ask other whether they found a solution. haha. No its important to raise it again.
hah yes a technical solution!
Shall we have lunch break?yes!
yessss i need. i'll be back in 30 minutes or i send you some things by email meanwhile ('confidential' and all..for lack of better words) great
here on the pad or in meeting room?
do we need to plan something for afternoon or just play it by ear... or even be invisible?would be good to have some ideas on how to navigate the situation/the questions/the materials which are urgent Okay so back on the pad. 13.35 : )haha yes good, i'll think a bit while cooking :):)
so i found some food ready so i didn t cook so i guess i didn t think much! I found some zucchine in the fridge that I fried, but didnt think either.slow cooking..slow thinking. yeah it was a fast lane thingy. but i did write/send you some unpublished things :) one sec...for another moment all here! great thaks!
Should we prepare some stuff for the afternoon? Extract some stuff. Questions? not sure... how
1 things is that perhaps the pad writing works to rebind and keep questions at their 'unpresentable'(?) state . you mean doing a pad writing in a-noon? thats prob too short.. or ? probablydo you mean doing now a rebinding pad writing here? well we could propose to do a re-binding pad writing excercise for 20 min.how much time is there?
i think at somepoint it would be important to do a round (and probably writing works better) of questions we keep from thesession (which does not mean they were supposed dto be answered, maybe new questions emerged) somehow it's less presentation material but is more intimate to what s precious about the session
tru. much better than "presenting".also i just go mute or exponential chaos!! Let's propose it. perhaps there is time, can be made.at 14 session or public moment? you mean at 14 make pad session, or make it after 15?
so if it s a proposal-->is it a proposal as a slot in 'public'session? Yes public session. An "official" part. after 15.00 ok ,good :)
ahaha maybe we gather writing with some people and somepeople have to keep track in audio (i mean some people write/discuss in writing while some people discuss what they read via mic/audio) 2 parallel sessions.no, i m crazy. Hmm in a way I would not like to miss the others. so I guess a dedicated writing session would be better?tes
should we try like yesterday, to start from pasting some things found in pads? and pick it from there? Yes thats good. rebinding! i think with many people it's gonna get fun :P
Okay :) I go and then back to bbb at 14.00
but i think it's clear- the idea- and unpredictable the outcome, so, good !!! bye for now see you in a bit!
I really enjoyed this pad writing before lunch!si! Much more than lots of bbb. There is always such a pressure.
yesss bbb cant stand it anymore ^^ was even harder for you as an organsier. trying to keep everything moving...
well we also proposed it in the first place so we deserve it :Pahah Yes and now is even better, because its amoment of collective reflection... at the end.
****
# EVA
Questions for Martino and Anita for conversation on Monday, 18 May - 11.00
Infrastruc
Okay, here just some contextual questions/topics I would love to discuss. (Perhaps some technical questions will come up in the conversation)...
* It’s interesting that the Raspery Pi requires “bodies in the room” to access Splotr/ the holdings. This is really interesting because this requirement is right in-between how the traditional analog library works (printed books on shelves and physical bodies taking/reading them) and the virtuality of digital libraries ( the url accessible “always, and from everywhere” - given you have access to wifi). Do you have any thoughts/observations on this “situatedness” of the readers/writers in the room/building? compared to a traditional digital library?
* I am also interested in the pragmatics and some examples how Splotr has actually been used by students and staff. In my text I have described Infrastructural Manoeuvres as experiments “hosting related materials, discussion notes, bibliographies generated by a book.... as a 'log system' of different events around a book, making the boundaries of a traditional library system more porous for other sources entering and leaving the library". Could you give, and perhaps show some concrete examples how it has been used? That would be helpful to get a more practical, concrete idea of what’s possible…. examples make it less abstract.
* I have written http://wiki.evaweinmayr.com/index.php/Survey_of_the_field#Infrastructural_Maneuvers.2C_Rietveld_and_Sandberg_Library_Amsterdam
that Infrastructural Manoeuvres’ approach “is rather radical because it redefines both the role of the library as a service provider as well as the character of the student as a service receiver, i.e., user. Instead, Infrastructural Maneuvres instigates a collective effort to expose the catalog and its interface to experiments and collaboration. In the development phase, this takes place in the form of workshops and discursive events. Of course, the success and complexity of such an intervention entirely depend on the take up of the art academy community.”
Could you talk a bit about the “take-up” of the art academy community. I am asking, because my own experience with the Library Intervention at Byam Shaw School of Art in London (that was supposed to be closed due to a merger with UAL) was that it worked very well with the students and staff who were active and involved in the campaign to keep the library open - but as soon as new students came in they were just expecting the library functioning as a service and it was sometimes frustrating to meet their frustrations that this is not the case.
How can you maintain such a project that entirely rests on collective effort?
* How are you two, where is the project situated? It is an infrastructural project within the institution, without official mandate. Could you talk a bit about this conflictous, but interesting position?
* Valentina Borreman, Ivan Illich, CIDOC in the 70s in Mexico city.
Borreman’s “Guide to Convivial Tools”: could you say a bit about it? How it informed your work with Infrastructural Manoeuvres?
In the preface to the guide, Illich notes that "this looks like a book to be used in a library - but the library where it could be used does not yet exist." These were materials that were missing from most research libraries around the world, Illich writes: "This is the champion list of un-listed reference tools; a bibliographic claim to a new kind of territory."
* In my analysis section "How to demonumentalize monuental knowledge" http://wiki.evaweinmayr.com/index.php/Analysis
I try to figure out how limited and restrictive it is to cite "authors".
Do you have any thoughts how the work with Splotr could extend citational practices? Not necessarily refering to authoritative texts, but notes, practices, etc...