I’ve received today an email from Linden Lab™ informing me of the news about the LEA project evolution. I don’t hide that the answer satisfies me since the decision of LL is oriented to give everyone equal chances to be involved in the active part of the project. Here is the text of the e-mail.
Dear Oema,
Thank you for your expressed interest in the Linden Endowment of the Arts (LEA) program. As this program comes to an end we are considering our options to move foward with Arts Program support. Once a decision is made on how best to support the amazing talents within the Second Life community we will post a public blog so that everyone will have an equal opportunity for involvement.
Thank you for your support of The Arts in Second Life,
Linden Lab™
I think it is essential people who have been part of the SL artistic community for a long time have the opportunity to apply for the new project (what will be its name? To understand each other, we keep calling it “LEA”). In my previous article, I highlighted the thoughts of the community and some ideas about the new project. I also expressed my views about the importance of an employee of the LL like a supervisor. This involvement would be useful to avoid disagreements in the management team and would allow choices in line with the quality standards that an important project like this requires.
We have to wait for the decisions of the Linden Lab™ and give our availability as soon as possible. I will publish updates about it as soon as I know about it.
The announcement of the LEA project closure has alienated those who, for various reasons, work in the SL artistic field. I tried to understand the reasons for this bitterness, what went wrong in the LEA project, and what the artists expect from a new one. To do this, I asked the question in my group dedicated to art and artists on Facebook, named “Art and Culture in Virtual Worlds Community.” Exciting answers emerged that made me think about different aspects. In this article, I want to talk about the LEA project, what it was, its criticisms, and the expectations that the community has for the future.
The LEA project
The original project involved a collaboration between some SL members and LL. The praiseworthy initiative started from some passionate art people and LL itself. The result of this collaboration was the management of 29 regions. Nine called CORE and destined to rapid projects, with short residence time, and 20 areas intended for the Artists In Residence (AIR), that hosted longer duration projects (up to at six months). The statute highlighted the artists’ ideas of hospitality and collaboration with the gallery owners. Significant projects that have worked very well for a long time.
What went wrong
Then later, something has changed. The presence in the LEA Committee of bothering people added some Committee members had abandoned the project. Plus the tendency not to be accountable to the community for the decisions taken by the Committee has given the impression of a closed group, whose decisions seemed inscrutable. Even the official LEA project website seemed to have been poorly managed from a communicative point of view. It did not allow people to be aware of ongoing initiatives and installations. The weaknesses of the LEA project have emerged very well from my conversation with Roxy Gellar, a very active user in the relevant LEA conversations on Facebook. Here is our conversation: Oema: What do you think about LEA closing? Honestly, please. Roxy Gellar: Closing LEA isn’t necessary, going that far goes to show just how distant from the community the volunteers managing LEA became, through ego and control issues. They were removed from the community and accountability. That said, Eliana (Oema’s real name), it doesn’t have to stay that way. I’ve suggested quarterly “town hall” meetings open to all during which ideas could be discussed, perhaps a vote was taken on a policy if say, 2/3rds of the inworld group are present. If really pro-active? Survey Monkey votes could be an option. Transparency and accountability should be a part of the foundation for a possible revival of LEA. Besides, shorter periods for volunteers on the board as well as for artists in residency. Again I suggest four months turnovers. Board member/volunteers and artists both could go on the bottom of a volunteer list that is kept open and growing. Fresh blood and shorter terms would help prevent things from going stale and also prevent egos from becoming unresponsive to the greater community. Oema: true. What do you think about the LEA 2.0 project? Can be a solution? Or you think more can be done? Roxy Gellar: I think if they revamp the idea towards less authoritative management and more community involvement, it might be a good thing. On the other hand? It could be that SL has had its day, hopefully not the case. If an active community involved in actually maintaining art in virtual reality isn’t possible? At least we still can enjoy the Mavericks who largely work independently in SL. Oema: excuse ignorance, who are the Mavericks? Roxy Gellar: Cherry Manga for one. And although they may have participated in LEA, Byrn Oh continues far beyond, Nina Camplin (no longer in virtual reality) could perhaps be courted, Kimeu Korg who I’ve largely seen outside of SL, Silas Merlin. I’d also try to incorporate TheEye Gallery, Diotima, among others. Come to think of it, if six to eight regions were supplied to galleries to manage it could provide additional support and lessen the burden on a LEA volunteer board. On a rotation basis as well.
I believe Roxy has highlighted two important points:
The LEA project failure may be due to the lack of involvement of the art community and to “keeping to oneself” the project and its choices;
LEA could close an era that has run its course. If there is a new project, it is important that the committee is at the service of the art community and not aimed at its ego.
What the art community expects from a new project
I believe the art community expects to be heard and involved in decisions.
This aspect is possible above all through a rotation of the committee members.
I think those who are on the LEA staff should have at most a 1 year stint. That’s it. Every January 1st an entire new staff is elected. Those who were on staff before can remain as volunteers, but if you were elected before you cannot be re-elected again.
I read the comments and I agree with many of them. The “committee” led by the LEA should not be perpetuated for years. LEA should be a participatory entity. All of us who work for years with virtual art are likely to be able to comment or participate in the project. Artists (all kinds of artists, 3D, photographers, musicians etc) gallery owners, bloggers, virtual art collectors. We have ALL helped virtual art remain in SL. Therefore, I think it would be very important to listen to all who had an opinion and choose among them the representatives of the LEA, and above all, for a limited time.
About her proposal:
My proposal, more concrete, for a future LEA is: Invite ALL who have collaborated with virtual art during these years (I repeat, artists of all kinds of arts, bloggers, gallery owners, collectors) When the group has a sufficiently large number of participants to be representative of the SL art world, ask all of them to voluntarily introduce themselves to those who would like to be part of the LEA work team. If there is a larger number of candidates than the positions to be filled, take a vote (one vote per avatar) only open to the participants of the group, to choose which people would be in the working group.
My ideas and proposals
By now, I have been dedicating myself for several years to articles and videos about artistic events in SL. I believe that one of the essential aspects of a new project similar to LEA is communication.
In addition to inviting artists, being available, helping them in what is needed, it is essential to write and document, perhaps through videos, the artistic installations hosted. This activity will have the double positive effect of paying tribute to the artists and documenting the work carried out over time (which justifies the collaboration between LL and the artistic community).
I believe in particular that:
One month is enough to prepare the installation; you can always agree on more extended periods, if necessary, with each artist;
A month is more than enough for the show. A more prolonged period is useless because the visits begin to diminish;
It is essential to ask the artist to be original and not to propose copy-installations of others already made;
The creation of a professional site, rich in videos and content, is essential. The artists themselves could be given a voice, through interviews, surveys, etc .;
Listen to the art community that expresses itself mainly on Facebook and the official SL page;
Flexibility, or ability to quickly change one’s ideas to the needs of the artists;
Advertising and promotion: the committee should take responsibility for promoting the installations, as well as the artists it hosts. Once again, communication is an important aspect.
The LEA 2.0 initiative
It was born from the idea of Tansee Trillium who wants to collect ideas and suggestions for a new project to be presented to the LL.
To send your suggestions to Tansee, go to LEA 2, where a box for ideas is.
Ask LL to join the new committee
If you want to present your ideas directly to LL asking to be part of the new committee, write to editor@lindenlab.com, to the attention of Derrick and Patch Linden.
Conclusions
I believe a project similar to LEA should be having a Linden employee as a supervisor, to prevent the committee from being used to satisfy its ego.
Periodic rotation of members is also essential.
I gave my availability to the LL for the realization of a new project. I hope that many do the same.
Second Life described superficially like “role play” or even as “platform where people give free rein to their fantasies” by Italian Press.
Once again, the Italian press does not miss the opportunity to cast a shadow over the gaming platform of Linden Lab. The pretext of so much denigration is the murder of Paolo Vaj, shot dead by Angelica Comaci, Patrizia Armellin‘s virtual daughter.
Patrizia and Angelica played the roles of mother and daughter in Second Life. Those who live in SL know that many situations of family relationships exist. These roles are distinct. People who pretend family relationships in SL are aware that it is a fiction. Patrizia and Angelica had probably crossed the game’s limits, confusing a role played with real Life.
However, the Italian press does not make differences or clarifications, and hastily defines the virtual relationship between mother and daughter as “sick,” a “mental disorder.”The one between Patrizia and Angelica was probably sick (I am not sure since I don’t know them). I read in the press that the magistrate will ask for a psychiatric examination to ascertain the mental illness.
The Italian press speaks about Second Life as a “role play” and subsequently, not satisfied, defines it as a “platform where people give free rein to their fantasies.” In those” fantasies,” it suggests a world of frustrations, of unexpressed libido, violence, and masochism.
In fact, in Italian, there is a noticeable difference between saying “gives free rein to the imagination” and say “gives free rein to his fantasies.”
Italians are aware of the negative propaganda that the press gives to SL. We know that the reporters describe SL players as “mentally disturbed.” Reporters don’t think Imvu or High Fidelity players are “mentally ill,” they instead believe SL players are problematic people.
Perhaps because reporters see SL as a “platform to express one’s unexpressed fantasies.” Imvu and High Fidelity offer the same opportunities in Second Life, but those who populate these virtual worlds are not mentally ill. A Second Life player however is. Why? Maybe because SL is not just a game, but a place to vent your frustrations, in their opinion.
I do not want to talk about Patrizia and Angelica. I don’t know them, and I don’t know if there was any confusion between the role played and real Life. I do not know anything about the victim, Paolo Vaj, nor if there was a legitimate defense, a negligent excess in self-defense or intentional murder.
What I know is that the sad crime story has little to do with SL. Some events are unfortunately part of Life, of complex emotional dynamics and disorders, such as Vaj’s alcohol abuse.
Second Life was an opportunity for Patrizia and Angelica to meet. A bar, WhatsApp or other makes no difference.
To say that whoever plays in Second Life is a mental disturbance is like saying that who plays The Sims is a voyeur. Nonsense.
Finally, I suggest LL read with attention to the Italian press and how it describes SL. I am not sure their way to express opinions are legal.
This issue of ECLIPSE Magazine, we feature Cajsa Lilliehook on the cover and share “The Storyteller’s Tale.” We also showcase the Beta Omega Iota Zoo and FeverFete: A Shopping & Live Music Event. On the Home & Garden front, we pair it “At Home With” and “SL Fiction” to showcase the home of character’s Denna and Rylan. Our bimonthly “Tour of Homes” returns with resident’s opening their homes until the 29th of July to visitors. Be sure to check out “Through the Lens” with Grace, Taylor & Tempest, “Proust Spotlight” with Kimmy Ridley, “Voices from the Grid” where residents share what they value most in Second Life friendships and “The Wayfarer” featuring Copper River.
Flipping through the pages of Flickr, today I found Michelle Halster. I think this photographer deserves special attention for her ability to create expressive and emotionally portraits.
“Leonardo 500” is the project created and curated by Astral Dreams Project to celebrate the 500th anniversary of the death of Leonardo Da Vinci. It is an artistic installation that hosts photographers and sculptors, I remember their names:
Nabrey Aabye
Caly Applewhite
Sergio Delacruz
Desy Magic
Lara Tommaso
Ciottolina Xue
Aqua Aria
Many have visited and shared their images on social networks. I remember that “Leonardo 500” will be open until the end of August. In the meantime, I recorded a video for future reference.
Please note that I Love Events(TM) is not associated with Linden Research, Inc. or any of its affiliated companies or products, including Second Life (collectively known as "Linden Lab"). The opinions and views expressed on this site belong to the content creators and do not represent the views or opinions of Linden Lab or its employees, directors, officers, agents, or representatives. The usage of the SLBN logo by I Love Events(TM) does not indicate endorsement or representation by Linden Lab.
