Live performance by sound artists Machinefabriek and Wouter van Veldhoven at Duivenvoorde Castle on June 26, 2010.

Taking the vast and rare collection of family portraits as our starting point, we will concentrate future activities in and around the castle’s richly decorated grand ballroom, aka ‘the Marotzaal‘ after the famous French architect Daniel Marot (1661–1752). The walls are covered with life-size portraits of former residents dating back to the 16th and 17th century. They will serve as a backdrop for an innovative art installation and series of events that focus on the use of portraits in the arts and science throughout the ages.

The grand ballroom, aka ‘The Marotzaal’ at Duivenvoorde Castle, serving as an exhibition space and events platform in October.

For the design and realisation of the art installation we have teamed up with Jarrik Ourburg and Paulien Bremmer, two young Dutch architects who both work at the intersection of architecture, heritage and art.  They recently won the 1st prize in an international competition for their daring design for the transformation of an old military barack, the UNESCO-listed Genieloods at Kunstfort Vijfhuizen near the Dutch city of Haarlem, into a center for contemporary art.

Winning design for the Genieloods at Kunstfort Vijfhuizen.

At Duivenvoorde they will develop a temporary spatial intervention that on the one hand will intensify physical qualities and aesthetics of the the existing interior and at the same time will add radically new forms and viewpoints. Drawing inspiration from different ideas and examples, ranging from SANAA’s design school at Zollverein and Jan de Cock‘s and Krijn de Koning‘s art installations to technological breakthroughs in face detection and recognition software and social media applications, we will try to push the limits of what museum innovation can be.

Curious? Save the date: the art installtion opens on Thursday 14 October and the grand finale takes place on Saturday 23 October..

Tweet This Post

Related posts:  Introducing Digitaal Duivenvoorde  |   Duivenvoorde Night on June 26: when ancient heritage, contemporary art and online media converge  |   New project: opening up an ancient castle  |   Digitaal Duivenvoorde  |   With online game, museum goes viral  |

Although in Dutch, it resembles many of my long-standing views that I already expressed (in English) in my article and Time Out. Basically, I dare Amsterdam to position the city as a testing ground for innovative projects in an ancient environment and challenge, ignore or even violate the UNESCO regulations if necessary.

De grachtengordel is Werelderfgoed geworden. De stad moet nu niet verkrampen en niet meer toeristen verwachten meent Michiel van Iersel.

.

UNESCO, de onderwijs- en erfgoedtak van de Verenigde Naties, heeft de Amsterdamse grachtengordel op de Werelderfgoedlijst geplaatst. Maar de titel heeft niet de effecten die een ieder verwacht en is eigenlijk een wassen neus.

Voorstanders, waaronder de gemeentepolitiek en de behoudzuchtige Vrienden van de Amsterdamse Binnenstad, zien de UNESCO-titel als de hoogst haalbare onderscheiding. En sommigen zien er een kip met gouden eieren in, die voor veel extra toeristen zorgt. Het internationale adviesbureau PricewaterhouseCoopers heeft echter in 2008 berekend dat de gemiddelde stijging van het aantal toeristen bij een UNESCO-benoeming hooguit een paar procent is. In een ander onderzoek laat de meest gunstige berekening een stijging zien van zes procent, maar dat betrof het Canadese vissersdorp Lunenberg waar voorheen amper toeristen kwamen. In het wereldberoemde Amsterdam zal het effect aanzienlijk kleiner zijn.

Voorstanders voorzien ook een verandering van het soort toeristen dat de stad zal bezoeken. De ‘brallende Britten‘ zullen plaatsmaken voor kapitaalkrachtige kosmopolieten. Onderzoek weerspreekt ook dit: maar weinig toeristen zijn zich bewust van het UNESCO-predikaat van door hen bezochte plekken. De keuze voor een reisbestemming hangt hier nauwelijks van af.

Bovendien: was de titel vroeger nog voorbehouden aan de meest bedreigde natuurgebieden en de meest uitzonderlijke en kwetsbare architectuur en steden, inmiddels staan er meer dan 900 namen op de lijst en komen er ieder jaar gemiddeld 26 bij. Deze wildgroei zorgt voor een devaluatie van de benoeming.

Alleen al in Nederland stijgt het aantal kandidaten gestaag. De Wadden zijn net toegelaten en rondom Amsterdam bevinden zich al meerdere UNESCO-plekken, waaronder de Stelling van Amsterdam en droogmakerij De Beemster, die nauwelijks meer bezoekers trekken met hun titel. De reislustige Amerikaan kan Nederland ook overslaan en Aken, Keulen, Brussel, Brugge of Bath bezoeken om UNESCO-erfgoed te ervaren. Nog even en UNESCO is de Starbucks van de erfgoedwereld.

Volgens  tegenstanders, de schreeuwerige actiegroep Ai Amsterdam voorop, is de benoeming de doodsteek voor de binnenstad. Amsterdam wordt één groot Begijnhof, als een overgereguleerd openluchtmuseum. Men vreest dat Amsterdam steden als Brugge achterna gaat en eindigt als uitgestorven erfgoedstad, zich niet realiserend dat Brugge pas in 2000  op de lijst is gezet, lang nadat deze stad haar dynamiek verloren had. De benoeming was een poging om de stad nieuw leven in te blazen.

Gemakshalve gebruikt men de benoeming vaak ook als bewijs voor de ‘vertrutting’ van Amsterdam. Maar  wat de bescherming van erfgoed betreft is de hoofdstad Roomser dan UNESCO. Mede als gevolg van de bewonersprotesten tegen de sloop van oude wijken als de Jordaan in de jaren ’60 en ’70, ontwikkelde de stad zelf zijn strenge regels. De revolutionaire geest van weleer waart nu als een spook rond over de grachten en zorgt ervoor dat iedereen met (ver)bouwplannen snel wordt afgeschrikt. UNESCO doet daar amper iets aan af en draagt daar ook weinig aan bij.

Ook de angst voor verder toenemende regeldruk en bemoeizucht van de overheid  is ongegrond. UNESCO is geen Paard van Troje dat ongemerkt ervoor zal zorgen dat gevelreclames en nieuwbouw verboden worden. Het reglement van UNESCO blinkt  uit door vaagheid en laat veel ruimte voor interpretatie. Zelfs in Venetië, het prototype van de platgelopen toeristenstad waar sinds 1950 het inwonersaantal meer dan is gehalveerd, is ruimte voor vernieuwing en commercie. Zo werd twee jaar geleden, ondanks felle protesten vanuit de  bevolking, een opvallende nieuwe loopbrug van de postmoderne Portugese architect Santiago Calatrava in gebruik genomen. En al enkele jaren ontnemen metershoge billboards met reclames het zicht op de bekendste architectuuriconen aan het Canal Grande en het San Marcoplein. En dit allemaal ondanks (of dankzij?) UNESCO én met steun van de lokale monumentendienst.

Dus hoe nu verder? Gewoon doorgaan, alsof UNESCO niet bestaat. Je moet het echt bont maken, of slecht spelen, wil UNESCO je van de lijst halen. Toen Dresden in 2009  van de lijst werd gehaald  als gevolg van de bouw van een nieuwe brug, schreef de Frankfurter Rundschau terecht: “UNESCO is dan wel tot een besluit gekomen, het heeft geen oplossing gevonden.” Dresden koos voor innovatie ten koste van een plek op de lijst. UNESCO raakte een aanwinst kwijt en verloor de grip op een deel van de achterban.

Amsterdam moet zich spiegelen aan Dresden en zijn plek op de Werelderfgoedlijst gebruiken om deze ter discussie te stellen. Laat alle Amsterdammers, toeristen en bovenal UNESCO zien dat je als historische stad met een ‘uitzonderlijke universele waarde’ ook eigentijds en eigenzinnig kunt zijn. Amsterdam moet zich niet laten weerhouden van de hoogbouwplannen voor Overhoeks in Noord, volgens het UNESCO-reglement verboden, of voor de bouw van een nieuwe brug naast het Amstel Hotel, enkel vanuit een misplaatste eerbied voor UNESCO. Als men zo had gedacht in Parijs, waar het hoofdkantoor van UNESCO is gevestigd, dan zou er nu geen Centre Pompidou of glazen piramide bij het Louvre zijn. En dat was eeuwig zonde geweest.

This article first appeared in NRC Handelsblad, August 2, 2010.

UPDATE 1 – Belgian daily De Standaard refers to NRC-article

Aug 5, 2010 – In another UNESCO row (after Dresden it is Bruges’ turn), Jan Van Hove, the Culture editor of Belgian quality newspaper De Standaard, refers to Michiel van Iersel’s NRC article on the admittance of Amsterdam on the UNESCO World Heritage List. He suggests that Bruges should follow Michiel’s suggestion for Amsterdam to ignore UNESCO.

Here is the quote in Dutch, suggesting that Bruges should follow Michiel’s suggestion (for Amsterdam) to ignore its UNESCO-status and leave room for new developments in the historic inner city:

Misschien moet Brugge een voorbeeld nemen aan Amsterdam, dat sinds het voorbije weekend zijn grachtengordel op de lijst van het Werelderfgoed ziet prijken. De titel werd niet overal op gejuich onthaald, want sommigen vrezen dat de titel van de Unesco de strenge regelgeving die nu al bestaat, nog strakker zal maken. In de NRC verscheen gisteren meteen een opiniestuk waarin Amsterdam de raad kreeg om de Unesco gewoon te negeren. ‘Nog even en Unesco is de Starbucks van de erfgoedwereld’, schrijft de auteur, die erop wijst dat de titel van Werelderfgoed wel wat aan waarde inboet nu er 900 plekken op de lijst staan, alsof Unesco, zoals de bekende koffieketen, overal zijn filiaal wil.

According to another source, Patrick Moenaert, Mayor of Bruges, seems to agree:

“ To lose UNESCO classification would be terrible. Neither is it the objective to preserve the city like a picture postcard within which nothing can be altered. Bruges is not a shrine but a city which lives and must continue to live in the 21st century”

UPDATE 2 – Article published in 10 different languages

Tweet This Post

Related posts:  Time Out interview on Amsterdam’s UNESCO-listing  |   Duivenvoorde 2: get ready for the next episode..  |   Contribution to Time Out magazine out now  |   Curating the city, a museumnacht marathon on metropolitan museums, responsive heritage and the city as cultural platform  |   Visible Cities #01: Euro Beinat and Ronald Lenz  |

The Hot Seat

‘People Can’t Live in Museums’ wrote Van Iersel in 2007, in a paper opposing the quaintification of Amsterdam’s historic centre,. Now that the Canal District has been listed as a UNESCO World Heritage site, Alice Ramsay checked in with him again.

What was your first reaction when you heard about the UNESCO status of the Grachtengordel?
The preparations started a long time ago (before my article) and I would’ve been more surprised if Amsterdam’s application was rejected. Compared to other listed cities, Amsterdam’s historic centre is not only equally historically and architecturally significant, but is probably one of the best preserved and regulated on the list. Amsterdam already had more than 8,000 listed buildings or national monuments and a protected cityscape before they applied so it was basically functioning as a UNESCO World Heritage city without the official designation.

There have been various reactions to the listing.
I wasn’t (and still am not) afraid that the official designation will really change anything, except causing certain expectations and fears by those who are wrongly informed about the implications. It’s up to the municipality to manage these expectations and inform both supporters and opponents. So, I would suggest that the city establish a very visible UNESCO info centre right on Dam square, designed by Rem Koolhaas or any other experimental architect, and demonstrates that world heritage and contemporary culture can and will coexist in Amsterdam as long as preservationists and innovators work together. But there’s nothing right now. There’s an unattractive website with no updates and a Facebook page with nine fans. It will be listed and nobody will notice.

Why is it important that people notice?
There was a reverse trend years ago – people almost fled from the historic centre. It was dilapidated; there were lots of rats; people were living 15 to a room – and then they wanted to tear down the Jordaan, which is part of the area that will be listed. A few real estate investors stepped up and then you had this whole process of gentrification. Now it’s one of the most attractive parts of the city.

Was that at the same time as the listing procedure?
It started back then. The city thought it could do with more tourists so it became more like a promotional tool. You don’t have to use the listing to promote the city because it’s already very well known across the globe.

Will the listing help change Amsterdam’s reputation as a sex and drugs capital to a cultural destination?
You have to make a distinction between people with an interest in culture – as in Rembrandt and the old art – and people who are interested in more alternative and experimental forms of art. Attracting a good cultural life has nothing to do with the number of monuments you have in your city. It has to do with whether the Stedelijk Museum will reopen, for example, or whether there are good galleries here. It’s up to us to reactivate this historic city.

How do we do that?
It’s a matter of striking a balance. Having rough edges is important. Don’t get rid of the Red Light District and make sure that some of the DNA of that place doesn’t disappear; make sure you don’t sanitise every single part of the historic inner city. Once you lose the rough edges there’s nothing left but an old spot and old people who come for old stuff.

Are you still concerned that the historic centre will become an ‘open-air museum’?
The biggest threat for Amsterdam now is not that it will become an open-air museum, but that it will become an amusement park. Every single day there is a new event, roads are blocked, and that has increased enormously even since I started living in the centre five years ago. It comes from the same ambition: to attract more tourists, instead of going back to the core value, the unique selling point of the city, which is atmosphere and architecture and this combination of contemporary culture and ancient buildings.

Some people are concerned that the UNESCO listing will make the historic centre more expensive. Does that worry you?
It is interesting to see that happen in other UNESCO-listed areas in Europe and elsewhere, but Amsterdam is different. It has the highest percentage of social housing in the centre of the city, so this whole argument that Amsterdam is getting too expensive and people are getting pushed out isn’t really relevant here. Prices have risen over time but 35 per cent of houses are still reserved for people making minimum wage or less.

Should there be some restrictions in the historic city centre?
No more hotels. If you want to develop new hotels, why not try building them in other areas, like the Indische Buurt – or in Noord, where there’s a good connection to the airport and Central Station?

But what if people say, ‘I’ve travelled all the way to Amsterdam, I want to stay near a dreamy canal’?
Well, then you have to pay more. I’ve just returned from Paris and it’s the same there. If you want to be in the middle of everything, you have to pay the top price. That’s normal elsewhere and we have to learn from other cities that went through the same developments. We have to grow up. We shouldn’t leave the inner city just to tourists. Maybe from a promotional point of view it would be even more interesting not to be listed. And to do stuff that will threaten our place on the list.

What sort of things?
Build high-rise buildings – as they are doing in St Petersburg, which will be the next city to be removed from the list. I mean, be brave. I dare Amsterdam to position the city as a testing ground for innovative projects in an ancient environment and challenge, ignore or even violate the UNESCO regulations if necessary. We can live without them and still be a vibrant historic city.

-

Tweet This Post

Related posts:  Opinion article in Dutch daily NRC Handelsblad  |   Duivenvoorde 2: get ready for the next episode..  |   Amsterdam Creative Metropolis #1  |   Contribution to Time Out magazine out now  |   Competition entry: Collection of Crowds exhibition  |

Here’s a random and short observation I wanted to share with you. I have been subscribed to the e-flux newsletter for a long time now to stay informed about what’s happening in the art world, and being a man of music first and of art after, I cannot help but notice how self-aware  protagonists of art can be. Not a week goes by without another exhibition opening or another book being published that tries to reboot our understanding of what art is or should be.

It could be my ageing eyes, but I don’t see such extensive (yet eloquent) self-gazing in other threads of the arts. This made me go to Google and see if my observation could be supported by data. Here are the results of my lazy, intuitive, non-scientific research:

1. “What is contemporary art?” –   73,100 results
2. “What is contemporary music?” –  15,800 results
3. “What is contemporary dance?” –  11,400 results
4. “What is contemporary literature?” –  6,950 results
5. “What is contemporary architecture?” –  5,650 results
6. “What is contemporary theatre?” –  1,470 results

Not bad, eh? What to make of this? Are people desperate to know what contemporary art really is? Are they clueless? Or does art change its appearance as much as Lady Gaga does in one video?

Let’s have a look at how other contemporaries fare:

- “What is contemporary opera?” –  3 results  (perhaps the answer to this question is so simple it is not worth writing about)
- “What is contemporary design?” – 28,300 results  (between music and art: the proof that designers are half artist, half rockstar)

And last but not least:

- “What is contemporary?” –  508,000 results (and a very good question indeed: I mean, what really is contemporary, man?)

Having given this a longer thought, one hypothesis for the Google difference (besides perhaps the innate critical attitude of art) could be the differences in economic ecosystems of art and music. Whereas contemporary art is sold by bundles at fairs, auctions and in galleries, contemporary music is struggling to find an audience for its concerts and recordings. It would be interesting to compare the economics of it all. My feeling is that a) there is more money flowing around in avantgarde art than in avantgarde music, and b) that this creates a (supply of and a demand for a) peripheral infrastructure for symposia, books and special interest groups. If this is true, is avantgarde art then in better condition than avantgarde music? Following this thought, and looking at other domains in the economy, I would say there is more R&D involved in contemporary art than in contemporary music, creating a widening gap between the two in terms of vitality and adoption.

But this is just ungrounded speculation, without any clear definitions of all the terms or sets of data to wade through. I wish someone smarter and more experienced would help me organise my thoughts and give me some directions. I think there is something valuable to learned from the comparison between contemporary art and music.

Therefore I decided to post this anyway.

Tweet This Post

Related posts:  Contemporary Art: Who Cares?  |   Laying a new foundation for arts funding  |   New project: opening up an ancient castle  |   Non-fiction in 2009 (and we’ve only just begun..)  |   New column in Metropolis M: Museum Manager 2011  |

In our workshop alone, there were people from such renowned institutions as ZKM in Germany, Kiasma in Finland, MoMA, Guggenheim and SFMOMA in the US, Tate in the UK and De Hallen and n8 in The Netherlands.

We talked about how contemporary art can be made accessible to the public and the role of conservators and conservation information in this process. We provided an overview of organisations (in and outside of cultural heritage) that are using new media and emerging technologies to engage with audiences. The second half of the session was dedicated to a short and practical exercise focusing on how new media strategies can be deployed in the domain of contemporary arts conservation. We experimented with the online presence of art works through social media, based on the fictional example of AnnLee (a virtual character taken from a bigger art installation, currently owned by the Van Abbemuseum) and her Facebook profile.

In addition, each day we had a guest speaker who discussed how their museum has attempted to educate the public on issues of conservation of contemporary art. On the first day we welcomed Ton Quik, curator education and events at the Bonnefanten Museum in Maastricht, who talked about a recent multi-media tour on the collection from 2008, taking a documentary of a Sol LeWitt wall drawing as an example. Maartje Swinkels, owner of Akina Art Projects, joined us the second day and discussed how relatively small museums use museum PDA- and smartphone-tours to educate, amuse and let their visitors participate. On the final day our guest was Lúcia Matos, from Faculdade de Belas Artes of Universidade do Porto, who proposed to consider the temporary exhibition as an opportunity to reinvent new strategies for contemporary art survival.

Our presentation and a review of the various sessions and contributions will be available online soon.

Tweet This Post

Related posts:  Contemporary Art: Who Cares?  |   Ljubljana calling  |   Making things public  |   Laying a new foundation for arts funding  |   Making things public in Ljubljana  |

Non-fiction’s Michiel is selected by the Netherlands Foundation for Visual Arts, Design and Architecture, known in the Netherlands as Fonds BKVB, to join a group of artists, architects and curators for a 2-week study trip in October 2010. The trip was given the somewhat cryptical title ‘What’s up, what’s down. Cultural catalysts in Urban Space‘, focusing on the way that culture and cultural infrastructure, both formal (museums, festivals, etc.) and informal (underground art and music), are shaping different European cities.

This somewhat bizar trip will take us from post-industrial British cities, including Manchester, Sheffield and Liverpool (European Capital of Culture in 2008) to Marseille in the south of France (chosen to be European Capital of Culture in 2013, and curiously combining Corbusier architecture and French gangster rap) and the Albanian capital Tirana. Their will be a fourth, and final destination, that will be selected based on suggestions from the participants. Expectations are high, especially for Tirana.

When former artist Edi Rama became mayor of the city in 2000 he immediately set upon a controversial project to enliven the troubled Albanian capital by re-painting the city’s decaying buildings in a riotous array of colour and pattern. An aesthetic and political act, which prompted social transformation, and much debate, through its visualization of signs of change. Three years later Rama and the project became the subject of Albanian artist (and friend) Anri Sala’s film, Dammi I Colori. Watch the film and an interview with Rama and Sala:

Architecture + Art : Edi Rama & Anri Sala from The Architecture Foundation on Vimeo.

Tweet This Post

Related posts:  Nike launches True City application for iPhone  |   VURB  |   Visible Cities #01: Euro Beinat and Ronald Lenz  |   Architect John Lonsdale at Rijksakademie Beamclub  |   Ljubljana calling  |

Last year we received a request from the Duivenvoorde Foundation to make a contribution to the yearlong celebration of their 50th anniversary in 2010. The foundation controls Duivenvoorde Castle, a stately museum-mansion and unique parkland (see below) near the city of The Hague. For eight centuries, this historic site has remained in family hands. Descendants of the first inhabitants still live here. Some parts of the castle have become a museum.

By accepting the foundation’s kind offer to facilitate new cultural initiatives and artistic interventions, we have set ourselves the task of opening up the castle and its surroundings to a wider audience. For this reason, on June 26 the castle and the estate will become the exceptional setting for a nocturnal mix of art, music, walkshops, food and drinks. This so-called Duivenvoorde Night is a mini arts festival in and around Duivenvoorde Castle. Imagine 1/3 Nuit Blanche, 1/3 Huddersfield Festival and 1/3 Brueghel‘s ‘Peasant wedding‘.

The evening boasts an exciting and diverse line-up, ranging from fashion editor Aynouk Tan and photo journalist Hans Aarsman to American performance artist and self-proclaimed ‘Director of Behavior‘ Michael Portnoy and Machinefabriek, a Dutch sound artist who was recently called one of the most interesting new experimental musicians by the Wire magazine. The programme starts with a farmers banquet in an old barn by Amsterdam guerrilla chefs Hotmamahot.

The entire program and more practical information (location, tickets, etc.) is available online through a dedicated Facebook-page. Conceived and designed by Amsterdam-based interactive design agency Grrr, it radically replaces an ordinary website or weblog and enables us to communicate more directly and interactively. The layout and look and feel were customized to our needs. Our online Facebook campaign will be supported  by a printed leaflet, one-to-one marketing and through (media) partnerships with a.o. Nalden.net and Eventim.

Join us on June 26 for a dinner under the stars in ancient surroundings, along performances by artists and musicans. For more information please check the Duivenvoorde Night Facebook-page.

Tweet This Post

Related posts:  New project: opening up an ancient castle  |   Introducing Digitaal Duivenvoorde  |   Digitaal Duivenvoorde  |   Duivenvoorde 2: get ready for the next episode..  |   Three-day-new-media+arts-workshop-marathon  |

Non-fiction’s Juha has been invited to programme two stages at the 2010 North Sea Jazz Festival, that will take place in Rotterdam from 9-11 July. Having a background and interest in both electroacoustic improvisation and beat-driven electronic music, his programmes consist of musicians – some well-known, others under the radar – who have been at the forefront of their movement for years. The two stages have been branded Hyperrhythm and OK computer.

Hyperrhythm
In the past few years in various cities around the world, scenes of musicians have popped up with a heightened interest in complex rhythmstructures of changing speeds and intensities. These hyperrhythms are created by producers who have grown up in an ocean of sound of ubiquitous media, from computer games to iPhones, and who are connected through a myriad of online networks. More than once, these producers know the hardware and software better than their developers, mutating into architects of complex, gravity-defying structures. Cities as Los Angeles, Glasgow and London are their main protagonists, with labels as Brainfeeder, LuckyMe and Warp. In Amsterdam, Viral Radio has been active as a vehicle for the dissemination of these new electronic musics since 2007, with regular programmes at Trouw and the Bimhuis.

Programme:
Dimlite (CH)
Hudson Mohawke (UK)
Dorian Concept (AU)
Mike Slott (IRE)

OK computer
A completely wired evening of electronic improvisation with world-renowned musicians and exhilirating young sound artists. Faster computers and more sophisticated software have popped up on stage in clubs and concert halls worldwide, creating a next level for improvised music. This programme draws a realtime map of current investigations into computer music, DJ culture and electroacoustic improvisation.

Programme:
Machinefabriek (NL) / Gareth Davis (UK)
Hild Sofie Tafjord (NO) / Philip Jeck
Bown (UK) / Britton (UK) / Arthurs (UK) / Ohlmeier (GER)
Fennesz (AU) / Brandlmayr (AU) / Dafeldecker (AU)
Knalpot (NL)

We’re delighted to have been given this opportunity to work for such an esteemed festival, with all of our favourite musicians. We look forward to seeing you there in Rotterdam in July.

Tweet This Post

Related posts:  Electronic music, North Sea Jazz and balcony gardening  |   What we do  |   Viral Radio  |   Non-fiction week 10  |   CDR – create, bounce, burn.  |

Museum Manager 2010, the precursor of Museum Manager 2011

It will have been in 1995 that I managed to get my hands on my first copy of Championship Manager 2. CM2 was a computer game in which you could be manager of any of the big (and small) teams in the English, Spanish and Italian football competitions. The first edition appeared in 1992, and by the time its name was changed to Football Manager (FM) in 2005, the game had grown to become the ultimate sport management game, with football competitions and associated players from every continent.

You begin the game by creating a profile and selecting a team from one of the world’s many football leagues. Let us, for example, take FC Barcelona, the most successful team in 2009, with such famous players as Lionel Messi, Thierry Henry and Zlatan Ibrahimovic. When you make up your profile, you are asked to do more than just fill in your name and age. You also make a choice about how you join the team as a manager: as a former worldclass player (a Rijkaard type), a successful manager (a Van Gaal type), or as an unknown rookie with no experience at all (a Van ’t Zelfde type). Let us begin as an unknown trainer: Juha van ’t Zelfde, 30 years old, half Dutch, half Finnish.

The next step is that you are welcomed to the team by Chairman Joan Laporta, Johan Cruijff’s famous friend. On behalf of the Board, Laporta expresses their faith in your appointment and their expectation that you will make their team the champions. With the likes of Messi, Henry and Ibrahimovic in your selection, this of course has to be possible, but should you need a little extra support, you have a transfer budget of €15 million at your disposal. Barcelona has a stadium that seats 98,000 spectators, world-class training facilities, state-of-the-art training for young players and a total budget of €664 million. You also have a staff, including an assistant-manager, coaches, youth coaches, physios and scouts. In short, everything is just as it is in real life, and you feel responsible for the future of the team.

What makes the experience of playing FM so exceptional is the dizzying array of statistics and data that come your way. Players have more than 30 different characteristics, divided into technical, mental and physical qualities that are valued by a number from 1 to 20. The lightweight World Footballer of the Year, Lionel Messi, for example, scores 20 for flair and technique, but only 9 for strength and 10 for aggressiveness. The managers, trainers and scouts also have statistics to chart their qualities. All of these figures fluctuate. They can go up or down, depending on how you deal with the players, how you employ your staff, the shape you give to the training, which tactics you use in the games, whether you win the games, how you respond to the press and how the public responds to you. If you improve, the players improve, and vice versa. The result of all this is that you really get the feeling that you are leading the team, that your choices are deciding factors in the club’s success.

After this, football is never the same again. The first time you go watch a real football game, you see it all through the eyes of an FM manager. Worse, you want the real managers to play FM as well, so that they too can make their clubs better.
When I recently played Football Manager 2010, it occurred to me how wonderful it would be to translate this to the museum world, so that you could become manager of the Tate Modern, or to bring it closer to home, the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam. Alexander Ribbink would welcome you, express his faith in you and entrust the collection, the museum building and the staff to you. At the same time, he would make a budget available that you could use as you see fit. Suddenly, you would have to choose between purchasing a new work by Olafur Eliasson, appointing a new head of marketing, or developing the museum’s strategy in the field of Internet and new media. That new work of Eliasson’s is expensive, but it would bring in new visitors and generate a lot of international attention. A new head of marketing could mean an in-depth investment for the organization and make all of the museum’s departments more transparent. The online strategy would make the museum more approachable and accessible, but it would consume a great deal of time and require considerable external (and expensive) expertise.

Just as in FM, Museum Manager – which is of course what this game would be called – would let you begin with a smaller organisation and work your way up to the higher ‘divisions’. In the footsteps of Willem Sandberg, you could make the Stedelijk a unique museum with an exceptional collection that is squarely in the middle of society and actively seek collaborations with other disciplines. This would have consequences for relationships with the city, sponsors and other partners. If you are a success, New York’s MoMA will ask you to become manager of their museum, just as happens in the football world. Suddenly, you are in charge of an immense collection and astronomical budgets and have an international network of experts at your fingertips. But you are expected to produce results. Can you handle the pressure?

I cannot wait to play Museum Manager. Then, the first time I go back to visit a museum, I will observe it through the eyes of an MM manager. Moreover, I will want real museum managers to play MM, so they too can improve their museums.

Juha van ’t Zelfde is half Finnish, half DJ and half co-founder of Non-fiction, VURB and Viral Radio.
–
This article has been published in Dutch art magazine Metropolis M. It was translated from Dutch by Mari Shields. Follow Metropolis M on Twitter.

Tweet This Post

Related posts:  Museum Manager 2010  |   With online game, museum goes viral  |   Curating the city, a museumnacht marathon on metropolitan museums, responsive heritage and the city as cultural platform  |   The networked museum marathon  |   Articles  |

Following our contribution to the ACCESS2CA seminar at the Moderna Galerija in Ljubljana (Slovenia) last year, the Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage (ICN) has invited us to give a number of workshop at this year’s symposium ‘Contemporary Art: Who Cares?’. This international event will take place at the Royal Tropical Institute in Amsterdam this summer and is organized for (up-and-coming) professionals, from diverse disciplines, who are connected to the conservation of modern and contemporary art.

The symposium is co-organized by the Foundation for the Conservation of Contemporary Art in the Netherlands (SBMK) and the University of Amsterdam (UvA). Key note speakers include Stedelijk Museum‘s conservator Bart Rutten, Van Abbemuseum‘s director Charles Esche, Tate‘s Pip Laurenson, artists Eija Liisa Ahtila and Nedko Solakov and various other people from around the world with an interest/stake in contemporary art conservation with a special focus on complex, large scale multimedia installation works.

Our series of workshops will look at how contemporary art conservation can be made accessible to the public and the role of conservators and conservation information in this process. Participants of the sessions will learn about how organisations (in and outside of cultural heritage) are using new media and emerging technologies to engage with audiences. The workshop exercise wil give participants a first hand experience with (online) media, including various social networks, gaming, mobile applications and data visualization.

Eija-Liisa Ahtila, ‘The Wind’ (2002) from reel aesthete on Vimeo.

Tweet This Post

Related posts:  Three-day-new-media+arts-workshop-marathon  |   Making things public in Ljubljana  |   Making things public  |   Ljubljana calling  |   Non-fiction in 2009 (and we’ve only just begun..)  |