TUESDAY May 23rd Part D
photo: Panel Latitude 53Part D: DOING DOMESTICITY
Panel Discussion
8-10 pm
Thirty-five people joined the talking circle.
We covered topics about art and culture
including notions of:
1. wild/domestic ie. animals, spaces
2. urban sprawl & loss of rural
3. safety/refuge
4. claiming/controlling space for self
5. public/private
6. gender/race & economics
7. oppression in the domestic
8. owning/renting/losing domestic space
9. transient space
10.. blogging/FRIENDSTER/E-families & communities
11. fractured/disparate/isolated domestic life
12. tribes/fear of others/religious-extreme
We also discussed evolving performance art practices
of relational performance and intervention performance
in terms of the domestic.
I really liked the high school students who shared.
They are aware, smart, & observant.
And active volunteers at Latitude 53.
***
Exhausted, we stagger back to Dayz Inn.
Zoe and I are punch drunk with fatigue
of social intercourse/panel discourse and can't stop
giggling and talking about art until finally we turn
out the lights and at last sleep
sharing borrowed (temporary) domestic space.
posted by admin at 11:30 PM
3 Comments:
Margaret, the thing I keep coming back to is the idea of the individual versus the collective. Domesticity means something very individual to me (perhaps because I live alone?).
But much of the talk around the group was also around feelings & ideas of belonging, identity, ownership, safety, self care, etc. I kept thinking of the word "participation." Where does participation fit in here? Does a domestic focus mean a self-interested / internal focus? Is the domestic essentially private?
It is also interesting to think about the idea of virtual space, as several people mentioned. While participating (in terms of finding & reading info, etc.) the internet can be in many ways "anonymous" (other than IP address). But in the movement towards social connectivity / computing there is a demand for identity, recognition, and personalization of the web (myspace, blogs, etc.).
I work in a university library, and we talk about things like allowing users to add their own subject headings / reviews to catalogue records, to allow them to make library space their own for learning / socialization (meeting rooms, 'talking' floors, cafe) in order to make us more "essential" to them and less intimidating. Domesticating a public space.
These are good things, and it's about reconfiguring a space to be more conducive to education / connection. It's encouraging a group feeling of "ownership" over public space.
At the same time, I wonder about how increasing individualization encourages public participation. They are not mutually exclusive, I know. But in early internet days, there was much talk about the power of the internet to be a tool for social change: e-petitions, demonstration organizing, etc.
Now it seems most talk (that I hear) is about making the web one's own. What does it mean to have your own web space, when Canadian cities (incl. Edmonton) are becoming less and less affordable (rent and buying)? To what extent will we make choices to claim "free" space online (for which you still need access to somewhat expensive technology) rather than grappling with the issues of affordable housing.
This isn't meant to be so absolute -- the choice between online space and "real" space isn't that delineated. But I did feel some dismay at the fact that the words used to describe domesticity in the discussion were very much about rest / stasis, rather than action/ participation.
thanks for the room to post -- and good to read the ongoing responses to the festival.
What a great site, how do you build such a cool site, its excellent.
»
Hi! Just want to say what a nice site. Bye, see you soon.
»
Post a Comment
<< Home