seems to be a common greeting in mails these days.
Most of you may know me even though I do not post on this list too much
For those who dont:
For the biggest part of my involvement in oudeis, I am html - programmer
and status quo editor. I have kept out of the discussion on the idea
list for so long because I trusted the people who design and form oudeis
to do well. Among these, I primarily count (in no order): Mon, Lee,
Santi as long time veterans and lately Juli and Jim, who provide quite a
lot of input. Do not flame me if I have not mentioned you: this is my
opinion of who the project is centered around on this discussion list.
But ever since Among Immortals II in the AEC, just about the only two
things going on on this list seem to be
- doing Freiburg
- hacking, biting and virtual shouting at each others
This is IMHO a bad joke, it makes me sad and angry and I will try to
point out why. The following is my opinion and does not (even though it
might, which I am not to judge) reflect or try to look like the opinion
of kispro Vienna.
First, I am sorry that I was not at the MOO meeting on Freiburg. Still,
I want to say that I think it is a fairly bad idea to go there because
it just takes time and concentration away of the real project which we
can not afford. If we still have to try out things by the time Freiburg
takes place, oudeis will never happen.
Even now it is subject to severe dissolving, with people getting off and
others posting out - of - place deadlines after which their involvement
into oudeis will be over.
It seems to me that the most important thing to remember about oudeis is
that it is a world wide Internet project even in its development. This
is not some senseless promotion phrase to sell to big companies, but a
crucial part of the oudeis concept. It means that there is input by many
many people sitting behind their computers in different parts of the
Western world saying what they might think is a good idea to take into
oudeis _and_ that there is _noone_, no _one_ person to decide about
their ideas. There is no dictator or leader or boss or whoever sitting
on a higher hierarchy level than the others saying _this will be done
like that_.
If you properly understand this organizational structure (and no, oudeis
is _not_ missing an organizational structure - it is organized as
described above), then cries for a _project leader_ (like Johnnys)
become senseless (Yes, it might turn out that this is a _bad_
organizational structure. This is a risk we have taken - the risk of
failure). If you can not work under these circumstances, then you have
not understood oudeis when you agreed to be in it.
Now we all see the problems arising from that, and we had them pointed
out quite often enough recently, too:
There is no decision making going on. Oudeis until now remains in a
state of continuous development, because there are so many
possibilities, so many ways to go that we could go on forever just
coming up with good ideas.
But I suggest, instead of calling people names and whatever else might
be going on on this list in the near future if the deterioration of
collaborative, constructive discussion continues in the pace that it
went at from a month ago, to see that problem, focus our minds on it and
take actions, not set deadlines or call for a leader. It is the group
that has to decide about the things that will happen. It is the group,
and in this group, it is the person with the biggest knowledge of a
certain aspect, be it the text, the music, the tech or whatever, who has
to make suggestions and proposals of what he / she thinks would be
easiest and best. If that is done, an agreement can surely be found. If
our tech people stopped banging things to pieces and started
constructively criticising the ideas, along the lines of _this will not
work because..._, the artistic people would be able to adapt their
visions to the technical reality.
Christian Schallhart says
_It's easy to say, let's make this and change this. But you never ask
yourself or anybody wheter this is possible_
and he is IMHO wrong. You, as part of oudeis tech staff, should say
that. You are asked if something is possible by the mere posting of its
idea. You are the one to tell the artistic people that they can not do
certain things.
As does Johnny Zyka, he says
_Is there anybody who knows what is necessary to realize hardware and/or
software ?_
Isnt that what you agreed on doing? If you are not prepared to do that
for the amount of money kispro / oudeis can provide, then oudeis will
have to find somebody who does. We know that.
My suggestion:
Let us open another, and the last, oudeis list called _oudeis
decisions_. I think that the amount of ideas in oudeis should be frozen
at the current level and that none should be added. Somebody should make
a summary of what people came up with (like the choros, the MOO, the
light cones etc.), what we have. Then we should decide on what should be
included into the final performances and then start to set our minds to
making that reality. I know that many good future ideas will be lost
this way, but I think it is the only way a performance can take place.
There are so many good ideas which we have that we can drop half of them
and still have a ground breaking performance.
This was the center piece of this mail which I would like to close by
answering some more of the things that were hurled at the members of
oudeis idea recently. Once again, my opinion.
Leopold Zyka poses a few questions.
_* Is there any plan ( I mean really a plan !) for the future of Oudeis
?_
No I dont think so, yet. This is the next thing to be done now that the
developing phase has ended (if everybody agrees that it has). The
outlines of the plan should be:
performances on a number of world wide stages (however many) ASAP
_What is the Concept of Oudeis ?_
As far as I am concerned:
Making a theatrical staging of Homers Odyssey on several stages, using
the Internet for making it world wide and more or less synchronous.
Dont see what is hard to understand about that.
Another important part of the oudeis concept that seems to be forgotten
especially by you, Johnny:
Oudeis does not and never did aim at being a content - lacking,
art-pour-l`art high tech computer show off.
Oudeis wants to _use_ technology to reach the aim of staging a world
wide theatre performance. It does not want to be like the Ars
Electronica where there is nothing expressed at all, no content or
aesthetics except for using as much high tech as possible.
We are staging the _Odyssey_, one of the biggest works of art ever to be
created. Compared to that, all the tech stuff is marginalia, i.e.
exchangable and a mere tool. Nothing more. A tool for making a new level
of theatre - world wide theatre.
_ Who is the project leader of Oudeis ?_
There is none and there will be none. Oudeis is true collaboration,
world wide, one level. Gernot Lechner in Vienna bore the idea and is
therefore in the position that oudeis as it is will not take place
without his involvement or his handing it over to somebody else. But he
is IMHO not project leader in the sense of Father Decisionmaker.
_ Is there anybody who knows what is necessary to realize hardware
and/or software ?_
See above.
Johnny Zyka goes on:
_I totally aggree with Schallhart Chrisitan whom I dont know:
>Now, i read more of them - and i have to say something to all of this
>staff. From my point of view, as student of computer science, in general
>the things you write are nice, but nothing more.
Is there anybody taking this seriously ??_
I for one: No I dont. Not at all. Or, better: I might take it seriously,
but I do not agree at all.
There are many things in oudeis which I consider very good ideas.
There is no thing in oudeis which, technically, cannot be done. Each
Pink Floyd concert involves more tech than all of oudeis. Problem is
money. Nothing else.
Johnny Zyka goes on:
_>You don't think a concept to the end. You don't know what
>you want to show. (Christian Schallhart)
Yes tons of text and links but nobody who has an idea what is
the sense of this project._
What oudeis can show has been developed in a creative process on the
oudeis idea list. What it wants to show has to be decided now.
I have an idea what this project is about. Everybody on the list has an
idea of what the project is about. If it meets the ideas of other people
on the list, then the idea of oudeis is formed - not the other way
around.
Johnny Zyka goes on:
_It is ok if its only ideas of some virtual freaks but it is impertinant
if persons who really have to deliver real results are thrown into this
thoughtless game._
This is the Internet, the least - legislated area of this planet. I can
not imagine a way of throwing someone into oudeis against his will.
The word _thoughtless_ is ridiculous. If anything, oudeis is pregnant
with thoughts and ideas.
Johnny Zyka goes on:
_It is arrogant and stupid that kispro does not realize that
this project never will work if you think that is enough to have
some artists on the one hand and some usefull idiots which are
realizing every unreflected idea._
I am not defender of kispro. Still, the choice of words seems to be out
of place. Try using _kispro is wrong_ or _I think that kispro will not
succeed if..._ instead.
Whoever thinks he is a useful idiot, raise your hand.
Now I burst out with my two euro - cents of thought.
Whatever,
Georg