Wat te doen? Een ritje over de Kempen, lekker door het bos en over de heide? Of richting Kanne, daar en rondje rijden over bekend terrein – voor het eerst sinds 2006 terugkeren, en dan vanuit Maastricht terug met de trein? Of zelfs stiekem een klein stukje van de Amstel Gold Race meepikken. Ik kon niet kiezen. Het gebied onder Kanne trok, Maastricht minder. Ik reed ‘s ochtends eerst door Genk (vreemde, fascinerende tuinstad) richting zuiden, het gebied rond Bilzen (onverhard, door het bos), allemaal wegen die ik ken. Dan, op het plateau bij Gelik uitkijken richting Pietersberg en ik besloot dat ik zin had om lekker over de Kempen te rijden. Weinig zin in het spektakel van de Amstel Goldrace (de toertocht), weinig zin om net die dag de klims rond Kanne opnieuw te doen. Ik kan alle wegen nog uittekenen. De herinnering was sterker dan het verlangen er opnieuw te rijden. Dus door Gelik, de fietsknooppunten volgend over de Mechelse Heide, langs de Zuid-Willemsvaart terug naar Weert. Vanaf As over wegen die ik niet eerder reed. Fijn rijden. Een zonnetje soms, vooral veel wolken, veel wielrenners en groupe, en de heerlijke fietswegen door het bos. 10.15 – 14.30. Intekenen van de route is wat lastig: ik heb de kaart met de fietsknooppunten niet, en mijn verouderde kaart mist de huidige fietspaden over de Kempen.

Genk – Kolderbos – Zutendaal – Munsterbilzen – Eigenbilzen – Gelik – Heiwijk – Maasmechelen – As – Zuid-Willemsvaart – Neeroeteren – Tongerlo – Altweerterheide – Weert

Eerlijk gezegd heb ik geen idee hoeveel kilometer ik heb gereden. Het was onbekend terrein, dan stap je wel eens af om op de kaart te kijken. ‘s Ochtends nam ik de eerste trein na negen uur naar Weert, om vervolgens per racefiets naar Genk te rijden, waar ik aan het einde van de middag een lezing moest geven. (Grappig: stilstaand op station Eindhoven zag ik aan de overkant Lucas en Gideon van Telcosystems uit de trein stappen).

Eindelijk dan: per racefiets arriveren om een lezing te geven. Dat wilde ik al jaren eens doen. De kaart die ik bij me had was verouderd (ANWB, Limburg, editie 1989), dat wist ik. Dezelfde kaart heb ik gescand, en veel fietspaden die ik volgde staan er niet op. Ik was van plan om ergens de fietsknooppunten op te pikken. De knooppunten kwam ik snel genoeg tegen, maar geen overzichtsbord. Daardoor heb ik tot bij Neeroeteren erg ‘op gevoel’ gereden, waardoor ik niet altijd de beste (= mooiste) route volgde. Noordoostenwind, verrassend koud, bewolkt. 10.45 – 14.00.

Weert – Stamproy – Kinrooi – Neeroeteren – Opoeteren – Dorne – Niel bij As – over de heide en langs de kolenbergen – Waterschei – Genk

It wasn’t looking very good w.r.t. the public funding of art in Amsterdam, but now that the definite decisions have been made for the allocation money by the arts council of Amsterdam – for the next 4 years – I am suprised about my own reaction. Browsing and reading through the evaluation at http://www.kunstraad.nl/ I slowly begin to feel sick and depressed.

Yes I know, not getting the money should never be the end of an organisation and one should look optimistically to the future. Yes I know, not every organisation will be so lucky to get the money. That’s the way it is.

But. Consider this. I love new, adventurous music, I love the forms of electro-acoustic improvised and composed that have been developed internationally somewhere between (classical) contemporary music, electronic music, laptop music (and noise). That is according to me the foremost, most important form of music. It is featured nowhere in Amsterdam, except at DNK.

DNK will receive no money. The written advice is extremely negative. It states that DNK operates too much on its own, is incrowd and is not ambitious. I am chairman of the board of DNK and apparently our subsidy request was not good enough, as we are extremely ambituous – but in order to achieve those ambitions more money is needed, as musicians and ensembles that we’d like to invite, and are not playing anywhere in Amsterdam, cost money. We are ambitiuous and that is why we recently moved to the larger space of Smart Project Space. We’d like to feature sound art too (do exhibtions). Incrowd? Is incrowd a synonym for a steady public? Every monday an audience of 30 to 120. And DNK does collaborate with other organisations (STEIM, Conservatory Amsterdam, Sonology The Hague, N-Collective etc.) – or is ‘working too much on one’s own’ a synonym for curatorial control?

I love music II. Another place I visit regularly for concert is the renowned STEIM. STEIM will get no money.

I love new music and art. Sonic Acts will receive no money. Again the advice is very negative. Curious is that it mentions the lack of a ‘chief curator’ in the organisation (‘hoofdredacteur’), whereas this person is present: it’s Lucas van der Velden.

Again, it can happen that one’s plans are not well received, or that the committees have decided that those plans do not fit the current culture. It might not be my choice, but well, that’s the way it is.

What makes it so depressing is not only that almost all of the institutions for which I have a heart, that I visit, that I would give my money to, and/or for which I work will receive ZERO euro’s, it’s that overall the somewhat more ‘commercial’ (public friendly?) venues and initiatives do receive some money, and the more adventurous one’s don’t. We truly live in conservatives times.

Very depressing is also that a large part of what is erroneously called e-culture over here will not receive funding – though they are without doubt exactly in the centre of todays culture. I already mentioned STEIM, but also De Waag (asked for half a million) doesn’t receive anything. Mediamatic was lucky, after an initial negative advice, they will receive part of what they asked for. Phew.

The impression one gets is that 1. Amsterdam did not have enough money to fund its art. 2. Old-fashioned institutes with large buildings and organisations do get money – but receive a fair deal of criticism on their programming – which is not adventurous enough! 3. The arts council seems to be unable to allocate funding to truly contemporary culture, it tends to fund what has already a defined and safe place in culture.

Well, to be honest: 1. seems to be the most important issue.

In case you reader, say to me: “but haven’t you got a superb new building for new music?” I have to say: the programming of the big Nieuwe Muziekgebouw aan ‘t IJ is conservative. Nothing against a good Feldman-festival, nothing against nice mouth-harp-music, nothing against a good performance of some Nancarrow, but the current forms of (new innovative) music are not featured there. In terms of new music they have completely lost touch.

DNK fills that gap. But DNK is not funded.

Well. I am surprised that I wrote this, as I am surprised that it makes me feel sick. Of course all this does not signify the end of good art in Amsterdam, not the end of exciting new developments, not the end of laboratories where new art, technology, music is made. But this certainly does not help.

Writing this down though helps to make me feel better.

Ah well, and then the introduction to the advices reads: “Het is verheugend te constateren dat het stadsbestuur Amsterdam wil herpositioneren als een metropool van internationale allure. De stad wil zich een weg terug veroveren in de Top 5 van Europa.” [They are happy that the city wants to get back to the top 5 in Europe]. Ha, with this policy that aim will not be reached…

It’s a pity.

Ah well, let’s end on a positive note: PIPS:Lab, an artist collective that does new media arts and develops technology (they have a studio in the building where I live, Marci Panis) was lucky. They asked for 85.000, and will receive the amount they asked for. From all the advices I read, they are the only ones to get the amount they asked for.

Tomorrow I will be in Genk, in Belgian Limburg. Speaking here: http://www.experiency.be, about story-networks and locative art.

Catching a tiny bit of the ATACD-seminars at V2_: http://www.atacd.net/. ANT, mapping and representations of data. For an idea of what this is about: http://www.demoscience.org/.

Klein rondje, net iets meer dan een uur. 17.50 – 19.00. Nog altijd koud (ik trek nog steeds mijn winterjack aan), maar prachtige zon. NO-wind. Overal staan/hangen nu de fietsknooppunten-routebordjes voor Noord-Holland.

Marcusstraat – Ringdijk – Diemerpark – elektrciteitscentrale – kanaal – brug – Driemond – Gein – fietspad – Hoge Dijk – AMC – Ouderkerkerplas – langs snelweg – Amstel – Marcusstraat

Google knows too much about me, or thinks it does. Searching for pages about Dos Passos, the American writer, I find, on the first page of search results, a page with reviews – in English – of books on cycling: http://www.bobkestrut.com/category/book-review/. Whoa?

Just ordered George Lewis’ history of the AACM, A Power Stronger Than Itself
The AACM and American Experimental Music. Seems to be out, though Amazon still lists it as ‘not yet published’. I have been listening a lot to music from that scene the past year, so I’m craving for some ‘deeper’ information. Also curious what George Lewis has to say. The very first concert of free improv music that I witnessed was George Lewis + Gerry Hemingway and I love his sound on the trombone. Though I am sometimes put off by his writings, he can be heavy-handed (?) when he does theory. Here’s an excerpt: http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/476957.html

I rarely choose to read a book on account of a review in the papers. Of course sometimes (rarely) I’m reminded by a review that a book has come out. But in those case I have already decided I was going to read it – or not. There are other recommendation sources.

Last week I read E. L. Doctorow’s Book of Daniel (1971) because of a nice little essay in the Review-section of The Guardian. I was impressed.

Last year I read Jonathan Raban’s Surveillance after reading a review in The Guardian which made me curious.

No, this is not an entry on ‘recommendation systems’ (friends, blogs, other books, literary history, social networks, Amazon).

No, this is not an entry on the dire state of reviewing (in the newspapers).

I just thought there are 3 types of (good) novels (not counting the bad ones) after realizing that I did not have the desire to re-read The Book of Daniel however impressed I was.

1. novels that you read with pleasure; and as long as you read, you feel that your time is well spent. But after finishing such a novel, you forget about it.

2. novels that you read with pleasure, feeling very impressed. After finishing you will talk about such a novel to others, and you will remember something of it actively for a long time. Yet you do feel that you will never feel inclined to re-read it.

3. novels that after finishing leave you desiring to re-read them. Because you know there is so much more to discover.

Surveillance for me is category 1.
The Book of Daniel is category 2.
The Recognitions (William Gaddis) is category 3.

Then there is category 4. That’s Finnegans Wake. Books you would like to read for ever.

BTW The Book of Daniel is concerned with the history of Leftism in the United States, bridging the Rosenberg-case (and thus socialism/communism) with the Sixties protest movement through a fictional son & daughter of the Isaacsons (= Rosenbergs). Interestingly, the real children of the Rosenbergs did not seem suffer at all from all the psychological ‘damage’ that characterizes the protagonists of Doctorows novel. (See for this Garber & Walkowitz Secret Agents).

Since a few months I work on the Macbook. Ever since I have at least wondered once a day how the design-team of this computer could’ve come up with the idea of the glossy mirror-screen AND implement it. One user-test in a real world situation would’ve shown that it has severe shortcomings. Whenever I write, I look at myself thinking through the the screen that carries the words I am typing. Who wants to look in the mirror all the time while writing, working, looking at webpages?

Or is this supposed to hail a new era of continuous self-consciousness?