Supplement 2

Micro Directors Talk Document– 30th October 2012

Contents

2 Introduction

3 Microresidence Directors Talk

10 Round Table Discussion1

Micro Directors Talk Document – 30th October 2012

On 30th October 2012 as part of the “MICRORESIDENCE!” program, and to coincide with the
Res Artis General Meeting being held in Tokyo, Youkobo Art Space held a special discussion
event dedicated to examining the issues of microresidencies around the world, inviting 7
microresidence directors from across Asia, Europe, Oceania and Central America to provide
insights into the key factors and challenges of their own residence programs while also gatheringa significant range of audience members, from artists, directors, curators and funders to reflect
critically upon the role and function of microresidencies, while also providing a platform throughwhich to foster new links between such residencies and other arts associates. It was hoped thatby bringing together such a diverse group of directors and interested parties a step further
towards greater recognition of the significant work of microresidencies could be made. It istherefore hoped that the points of discussion and various connections made through this event
may be just the start of something to be even further deepened and developed into the future. In
this supplement is included an overview of each of the presentations by the invited
microresidencies, along with a record of the comments shared as part of the following roundtable discussion.

2

Microresidence Directors Talk

Youkobo Art Space
It is over 20 years since Youkobo’s founders, in a
response to their own experiences, initiated a space
not only for artist in residencies but also for learningand the fostering of opportunities. While there are
the motivations of artists to take up residencies arewide ranging, from wishing to concentrate on t heirproduct ion to actively seeking an environment
different from that which they are familiar to in orderto gain a fresh perspective, A IR are fundamentally creative spaces. Youkobo believes it is of theup most importance to provide the opportunity for artists to enter another culture, where they
may engage in their work as “residents”. Through providing such a space Youkobo hopes towork towards the greater appreciation of“ artist” as a career, the means by which art can change
society, and how AIR may be a social vessel.

Caravansarai
Caravansarai is a multi-functional building in a
hardware district in the center of Istanbul. The
residence is not so much about Turkey specificallybut our (the co-directors Julie Upmeyer and Anne
Weshinskey) experience as foreigners, and as
observers and participants in our daily lives in the
Istanbul arts and culture scene.
Guests get involved in our lives, going
together to friends’ houses, etc. It is more like staying as a guest, rather than as a residence
artist. We decided to initiate this residence independently, so we have no agenda in relation to
cultural policy etc. Our goal was to create a positive space for creation. One advantage is wehave the right to do nothing; we can make a decision whether or not it is productive to act or be
quiet.
Just the two of us are running the residence, so it looks messy, we don’t have goodaccess to publicity, and this means that we have more recognition internationally than locally.
This constantly forces us to question the notion of audience, and we try to be very conscious tosee what reaction there was on a local or international level.

3

Everything we do is very personal. We have a high personal level of communication
with our guests, and our priority in evaluating each residency goes to how the communication
went, and whether the artists’ experience was worthwhile.
Our residency works in three different ways:
1. Applications by artists.
2. Collaborations; Involvement in someone else’s project.
3. A project we come up with ourselves which we invite artists to participate in.

My dreams for the future:
1. That residencies are not only considered service spaces, but residencies themselves could berecognized as producers of artworks and research through working in new ways with other art
spaces.

2. The whole field should professionalize. We should be able to pay artists for their work.

3. Keep the flow of energy going. With the right mix, it is not just us posing but we realize ourslogan: “Caravansarai can be an oasis of ideas and energies, carrying the productive hub of thehistorical bazaar into contemporary art practice”.
Homebase
I would like to thank Youkobo for acknowledging
me both as an artist and as a director of an artist
residency.

The model of Homebase
I have been based in New York since 2001. I felt
overwhelmed by this incredible city, where
people would stay to realize their goals and thenleave again. I was trying to find what was outside of the gallery world.
I had an interest in the formulation of identity, and in looking at how we formulate thenotion of home. And, as artists, what connection we have with society. In 2006, we started an
independent artist-run residency and research program about “home”. The project itself isconsidered an artwork. It’s also all about challenging the role of artists in meaningful urban andsocial change.
I consider art as a tool for interconnectedness. It is a group of artists who arecollaborating and creating homebase. We inhabit empty spaces in changing neighbourhoods,
and we bring together a group of 20 international artists and social interpreters who participate ina month-long residency and research program, and then a month where we open our doors to
the public in a full cultural program.

4

Model:Occupy the space/mark as a temporary home → residency and research program → cultural
program → other documentation
We consider “home” in relation to the individual, the neighbourhood, and the community.
Homebase is an expanding aspect of exploration, like a journey moving from space to space. We
try to inhabit spaces that are in remote neighbourhoods. We also function as a community center,not only organizing installations, but inviting the community to reflect on their neighbourhood andits challenges through workshops, cooking, game-playing etc.

Challenges
How does art plug into existing systems, how does it change the social paradigms, and how do
we challenge ourselves more on questions of group dynamics and sociology. At the end of theday, the artists, the community and the challenges and conflicts are at the heart of our work, so
we need new tools not only for funding but for working with other people. We need to look forways to empower our work knowing that there is a lack of resources within this new platform of
microresidencies which we are considering.

Arquetopia
The Arquetopia framework was created in 2009
based on global leaders in the 1970’s. We usedtheir recommendations concerning the status of
the artist, creative diversity, investing in cultural
diversity and intercultural dialogue (UNESCO),
andcultureandsustainability.

There

are

wonderful ideas in these guidelines, but how do
we bring them into reality; how do we eat, how
do we pay the staff, etc.
Our focus in 2009 was on the promotion of development and social transformation, andat that point we were mainly organizing an educational program. By the end of 2010, we decided
to make a shift to sustainable development as the core of our operations. We decided tointegrate four main principles: social awareness, social responsibility, innovation, and local
networks.
We have two different sites, one in Puebla and one in Oaxaca which are both rooted inthese areas. What follows is a summary of figures which show the changes occurring between
2009 and 2011 as we made shifts in our program.
We have the privilege to be completely independent; only 2% of the budget in 3 years

5was from public funding. The main income comes from our own activity, while the board of
directors are also responsible for finding funding. Our income developed rapidly over one year,with a 150% increase between 2011 and 2012. The number of collaborations, jobs we offered,and the number of artists staying at Arquetopia also increased significantly in this short period.
So how was this achieved? We identified resources within the cultural field in Mexico
which were once the main source of income for many years but lost their market because they
couldn’t find any use. Some examples are natural pigments, ceramics, gold leaf, and wood
carvings which had been part of the economy for 300-400 years.

We then exchanged ideas orservices for goods until they became money, as in the following example for ceramics.
・From Arquetopia’s perspective:
Offer an artist residence opportunity → industrial design → patent license → money
・From the artist’s perspective:
The artist has knowledge → residence opportunity → a design created – art work produced
・From the community’s perspective:
Collaboration with ceramic factory → new ideas → licensing the work leading to income

This led to a reinterpretation of local ceramics while also generating income which went back into
the community.

Big CiEach letter in Big C stands for something - ‘Bilpin
International Ground Creative Initiative’. We are an
independent artist-run not-for profit art organization,
welcoming our first residence artist last year after 4
or 5 years of research and planning.
We are flexible in a range of creative
initiatives, and very open to suggestions and otherinitiatives. We are not just a residency but also
provide the grounds for creative projects, welcoming curators, artistic directors and different
organizations to use our space in whatever way they choose. Our role is to facilitate their projects,
and make them happen.
We encourage multicultural and multidisciplinary collaborations, which means we liketo mix different nationalities of artists from different disciplines. We are focused on supporting
serious artists, working with them in a very personal way to make them feel at home and to feel
important. We believe in their projects and we go out of our way to realize them. However, wedon’t expect outcomes, we don’t have our own agenda. What we are focused on is theirprofessional development, providing a place where they can take their projects and careers
further.

6Our best compliment to ourselves is when artists take a new direction to create
something that could not have been created anywhere else. We are located an hour and a halfoutside of the city on the edge of one of the most extraordinary national parks. In fact it is one of
the biggest wilderness areas in Australia. What this means in real terms is that almost 95 percent of the park is total wilderness; it hasn’t been walked on by people. There are probably not
many places in the world that can claim this. It’s our great interest to see what happens to artists
when they are put in this location, very often different from the urban environment they camefrom.
The park not only has landscape but also extraordinary flora which cannot be found in many
places. Therefore, we also have strong commitments to environmental issues. Our residents canaccess a range of unique nature experiences, and we have a particular interest in local
Aboriginal cultural traditions. My partner is a very experienced environmental researcher, and heis a well-known explorer of the area. He can take residents to places that would not otherwise beaccessible.
We have 8 acres of land, and we have some facilities such as a mud-brick house whichcontains a studio, living space, and a place for public lectures and performances. We are also
involved in various environmental projects, and our residents do a lot of ephemeral work outside.
I myself am also an artist, and having a busy schedule with solo exhibitions and projects, I
understand the needs of artists. In this respect, I feel it is important that a lot of artist residencies
are run by artists.

New Zero
Most people don’t know about the artof Myanmar, and when they hear thename of our country, An San Tsu Chi
is the only thing that comes to mind.
We started to organize our space in
1990, but adopted the name New
Zero since 2008.
Our

first

major

activity was to assist victims of thesevere Nargis cyclone in 2008 whichleft 10,000 dead in Myanmar. The government provided little support, and so New Zero members
gave financial and food aid, going on to hold a memorial in the New Zero space one monthafterwards for those who had been lost.
Since its initiation, New Zero has held children’s art classes every year in summer withexhibitions of work held at the end. We also organize regular seminars by foreign artists. In 2009,
we organized an art exchange with artists from South-east Asia which included a symposium,

7

workshops, and an exhibition. We have also been organizing the Japan-Myanmar Performance
Art Exchange since 2001, going on to hold it in 2003, 2007, and 2009.
We have two spaces; one is an exhibition space and the other is a studio, library, andresidence space. We initiated our artist residence program in 2010 for international artists whostay at New Zero for a period of one month.

In Myanmar, censorship is very strict, and applications need to be made for every public event. If
a work is not acceptable then it has to be removed or hidden. Having been under military rule foralmost 50 years, art has yet to be conveyed to ordinary citizens. And so it is the strong wish of
the New Zero members to nurture a new generation of artists.

Kulttuurikauppila
Kulttuurikauppila is located in the north of Finland in the very small town of Ii which has less than
10,000 inhabitants. It was founded in 2006 by local artists including Antti Ylonen.
At present, Kulttuurikauppila is a non-profit organization. It is a very small
microresidence, with only one artist or artist couple at any one time. Every year, we choose 5 to 6
international artists who stay for 2 to 4 months.
We have a tailored residence program
which means that we plan together with theartist what they want to do, discussing whether
they wish to have an exhibition, or hold aworkshop in local schools. There are many
opportunities for the artists, but we do expect
them to do something which can either take theform of an exhibition, workshops, or open
studio.
As my time is shared with Art Break, I will talk about a particular project. This summer
we invited a guest artist Olivier Fokoua from Cameroon to participate in the Ii Biennale, anenvironmental exhibition which we are organizing bi-annually. His residency was organized incooperation with the Africa Center. Our projects take many forms, but in this case Olivier
produced a permanent artwork. Six other artists were also invited, and they realized theirprojects through cooperation with each other and also members of the local community.
As our residence is so small with only one artist at a time, we place a lot of importanceon communication with locals. We organize a lot of social events, such as dinners or fishing trips.
One of the benefits of our residence program is that artists really get to know Finnish culture,
meet the local people, and have collaborative projects with local artists. But because there areno other international artists, the residence artists may also feel lonely in such a small town.

8Art BreakArt Break was initiated after the full establishment ofKulttuurikauppila. Inspired by Antti’s experience as thefirst residency artist at Youkobo Art Space in 2002, hedecided to start Art Break together with his wife Kaisa
Keratar using their own home. They work together withKulttuurikauppila, providing accommodation in theirhouse and a shared workspace in the home studio for
artists who are unable to stay in the larger art centre. They have also been close partners with
Youkobo since they initiated Art Break, organizing a number of artist exchanges.

Studio Kura
Studio Kura is an art space based in Itoshima,
Fukuoka. It was established by artist Hirofumi
Matsuzaki who as a result of his 5 years working
in Europe and encounters with various artist in
residence programs was inspired to establish his
own program in Japan, having also met many
artists in Europe with an interest in undertaking
such a residence. The studio is based in a
traditional rice storehouse “kura”, hence its name, and it is set in a rural area overlooking rice
fields. The studio kura team consists of 5 members who between them, run a three strand
program of artist in residence, art education and design production as a company. Since its
establishment studio kura has welcomed 21 artists from 12 countries around the world. The
financial model of studio kura’s residence is based on the premise that artists source their own
funding from various foundations etc. in order to cover the costs of the facilities. In addition toregular exhibitions and live events studio kura is also providing an education program throughthe local university, inviting artists to give workshops and lectures here, which also become asource of income. Studio Kura also takes care to provide opportunities to introduce traditional
local crafts and provides introductions to various local craftworkshops where artists may learn
more about the processes and thinking behind such traditional arts. Studio Kura also works withvarious other organizations and arts/community centres realizing various programs depending
upon the plans of the visiting artists.
Studio Kura is not only well networked locally but also nationally and internationally it isengaging in various exchange programs and collaborations. For

example it has joined forces9with Singapore based microresidence INSTINC in order to provide a joint “two stop” residence inboth Singapore and Fukuoka for select artists. While also setting up a scholarship with aSingapore based design school providing the opportunity for two artists from Singapore to stay at
Studio Kura each year. It has also entered into collaboration with Youkobo Art Space, in 2012
realizing a joint program for Thai artist Saran Youkongdee who was able to experience urban andrural life in Japan thanks to this program. Studio Kura has also initiated a new arts festival“Itoshima Arts Farm” in collaboration with local agricultural workers, inviting a range of artists to
produce works for the local area, including various forms of product design which may be used topromote local goods.

Round Table Discussion

Commentary by Jay Koh :Jay Koh undertook to contextualize andcritiquethepresentations

of

the

microresidence directors and the frameworkof “microresidencies” themselves, however
he commented that a response narrowed to
the first session of the Microresidence
Directors Talk would be insufficient to deal
with

the

issuesofmicroresidencies,

therefore undertaking a wider perspective of
their function within the art world and society
itself. He at first stressed the importance ofevaluation, an evaluation of the micro also
being essential, in which we do not merely
feedback or offer our thoughts but takeresponsibility for our position which must be
held to account to.

Microresidence itself may be deemed as a
new term but the words which have already been associated with this term must also be carefully
examined, as the definition of these definitions may also be quite ambiguous and we mustquestion the meaning of each. In using a set of vocabulary to define this term we engage in theappropriation of meanings which support and construct our identity, which lay out our position
and may in turn attract partners or funders for example. Such use of language then must be
considered in great detail.

10

If we examine the list of words which have been collated from the previous sessions we mayfind that grounding this concept of the microresidence is the fundamental concept of art andsociety. This is reflected in the use of words such as social transformation, community,
alternative education, independence, here we are always taking the positive value of what art
can do for society.

But we must also be aware that each definition has more than one meaning, we are living in asociety which generates multiple meanings, and here we also encounter limitation. When art is
instrumentalized and used by activist groups for example then it dilutes the possibilities of art toact as a critique. On the other hand when art tries to become pure it becomes on par withnationalism. So it is a balance within complexity. We are asking ourselves how do we want todeal with and interact with society, within which we are inherently criticizing the dominant system.
That’s why residencies are created that’s the reason why we do it. There is a gap, a lack of what
is offered and so there is no choice but to do it oneself. But the danger in this is that one forgets
the critical rhetoric needed in order to really achieve this. For example in Res Artis they tend to
privilege personal sacrifice, lack of money etc. but none of the presentations in the GM say thatthey are criticizing the system, and so it actually creates an atmosphere of normality, so if you
want to make your program you have to sacrifice – its normal. This is just as Foucault said when power at its most it appears normal.

So when microresidencies use certain words we should recognize that we should not consider
the positive of such words but also recognize their limitation. For example in the use of the word
mobile. In the GM 8-9 organizations used the word mobile and they immediately connect it to theword nomadic. Nomadic culture has always been marginalized, ostracized. In a culture where
this is dominant like Mongolia then they do not know how to cope with modernity. I only heard
one organization – ASEF refer to mobility without using the word nomadic so we have to becareful when we use that rhetoric.
Because of the connection between art and society here you privilege human relationships that’s
why a heart has been used in the microresidence program design. This also explains the use ofwords such as intimate etc which Francisco Guevara also referred to in our first session. The useof such words is very important as it indicates a pursuit of micro processes, a subject to subject
interaction and in turn again generating a critique of the dominant structure, top down decision
making that is above you, that you have no control of, the lack of respect of local knowledge,
everyday knowledge which can be aligned against dominant knowledge through signs andmetanarrative.

11

We are moving towards a society of participation – through the internet it seems everyone
wants to talk and share their opinion. We may also see a similar trend even in art education as
artists are being increasingly asked to undertake doctoral programs, being asked to investigate
their art making practice upon another level, being asked to answer for their practice. It is not likebefore when an MA was the terminal degree and an artist just had to produce a body of work.
Today artists are asked to stand up for it and write about it too.

This realization is a matter of linguistics – how to use language to initiate social process,respect for the artist, communication and sustainability. For example if one is to work with
community successfully then one will have developed the agency, so even when the artists moveaway the ideas can grow, they can take over.

I think if you develop a critical rhetoric then you can move away from the kind of language thatwas used in many of the presentations in the first session, such as how many artists, how many
countries, how many visitors, such language should be disposed of as through this you are only
affirming the power structure.

Another aspect of this language is ontology - where we come from. I have to admit that I comefrom a modern art practice – we can’t deny this – but we can find another way – we can moveaway from the artist as author as centre position and we can consider how to transform this intoa network of relationship and communication. I have tried to pursue this relationship sincearound 2006 and I have had to ask myself what was there before? What ideas have alreadyestablished? Where was it happening? We cannot deny that we have taken a lot of this fromwestern art because that was the dominant artistic ideology.

In the report on microresidencies for example it is commented that these are bases forinternational cultural exchange, offering time and space for experimentation but we need toinvestigate this position more thoroughly. It cannot be left hanging in the air. This is because you
will be subjected to questioning as to what is this association and therefore we cannot justmerely take what is positive for ourselves but must also pursue a form of critique.

Through my observation I have visited various residencies in Japan too and there is a lot ofprovision for many different kinds of artists but there is no residence for critics, and so there is aneed for more exchange for critical thinking. In the final discussion in the Res Artis GM there
seemed to be a struggle between east and west and the director of a residence in turkey put out
a question about duality – why do we need duality? Why do we need to define things as good or
bad? Unfortunately not one of the panelists took up dialogue upon this detail. Duality derives

12

from German ideology – it stems from tension and is a very modernist way of thinking which
does not fit with today. Things are not that simple, everything is complex, there is always theemotional in the rational, we have cognitive bias it is not just a case of this or that.

I would therefore like to propose the notion of dialogism a form of post-Marxist criticism which
does not dwell on tension but realizes there are simultaneously many contravening forces. We all
wish to have autonomy but also want to have social connection it is neither one or another andthrough the interaction of these different forces we are made human.

Open Round Table Discussion

After this initial analysis upon the position of microresidencies the discussion was opened up to
the floor and various attending residence directors had the opportunity to share their own views.
Comments included the following:

Daisuke an artist based in Toronto but currently active in Japan is attempting to initiate an arts
program in Tohoku where artists from all over the world may stay in the local area and work
together with the local community. The area he is engaging with was severely affected by 3.11
and a great range of resources and infrastructure were destroyed by the disaster. He is therefore
trying to promote a project which will rejuvenate the area through cultural exchange. He plans toestablish a microresidence in this area and to gradually build up a creative community, hoping in
5-10 years time to establish an art community centre. Daisuke approached Jay Koh for advice on

13what direction he should take in pursuing this objective.

Jay

Koh

respondedbystressingtheimportance of artist selection. In working with
communities two types of artists may beconsidered. Artist activists are strong facilitatorsand have quicker results as they have a clear
objective, but if they become the main leadersthen local people feel that they don’t have
responsibility and will not take charge of the
project in the long term. On the other hand if the artist is more one who pursues an open process
in negotiation with the local people then there is more opportunity for sustainable development. If
an artist comes into the community and imposes something there is always the danger that when
they leave the project will halt as the locals feel they are not members, they don’t own theknowledge. It is therefore better to take time, to build meaningful relationships and to allow local
people to share the knowledge, feel that it belongs to themselves and then this can be developed
into something further by the people themselves, acquiring the knowledge themselves and free
to imagine their own possibilities. Jay Koh stated that it is perhaps best to have both types ofartist so that you may satisfy short term policy but also develop a long term organic process inwhich both sets of artists may learn from each other.
Daisuke responded in stating that it is not at the stage of considering which artists to call but amatter of how to go about setting up a system with locals? Jay Koh commented that this depends
upon how well he knows the locals and what kind of relationship he has built up with them.
However Daisuke admitted that this relationship was still in the very early stages. Jay Koh went
on to outline how awareness in the development of human relations should be heightened andwhat processes we go through to move from stranger to acquaintance to participant tocollaborator. Each level has its own anxiety and the level of trust will determine how much thelocals will be willing to work with him. He reaffirmed the need to always provide a means forothers to pursue their own channel and to consider how to reciprocate the relationship.
Eliza Roberts – Asialink (Australia)

14

“I would like to return to the issue of micro as a reaction tolarge macro systems as we at asialink operate between
the two. Asialink is Australia’s largest international
residency program. Every year we apply to 16 funders
and send 35 artists to residencies around Asia. However it
can be said that we operate on a micro level somehow.
There is just 1 person, myself, running the residency
program and the level of support and partnerships arealso based on that of micro level. Asialink does not havetheir own residence space but has a network ofpartnerships with host organizations around Australia andAsia.
In the Res Artis GM there seemed to be this search for theideal residency but I don’t think that exists. Every artist,every host, every funder has different needs and requirements. Asialink sends Australian artists
to Asia but also makes exchanges and has also started a residency lab, testing methods of
exchange in a more sustainable and meaningful manner.”

Janwillem Schröfer(Ex-Director, Rijksakademie, The Netherlands)
Janwillem also introduced the potential of the micro to issue from the macro and introduced theRAIN network which is a group of art collectives and residencies across Asia, Africa and SouthAmerica which have emerged as a result of artists joining the residence program at the
Rijksakademie. Here the micro stems from the macro and overcomes institutions of power.
He also took up debate upon the word independent, questioning upon what terms such aword is used. What are we independent from? How can we define independent?
Is it independent from government? From funders? From something else? And even if anorganization is not reliant on outside funding and has its own self supporting community thenthere are also dependencies. We should look for these dependencies and care for these and notdeny them, not shade them. He held up the presentation of Julie Upmeyer as a key example ofthis admiring her honesty and openness in identifying the dependencies within her residence
program and making these clear to theparticipating artists.

Furthermore

hestressedtheimportance of continuity and proposedthat a split should be made between the15

life cycle of an organization and a lifetime of an artist. The lifetime of an artist is another lifetime
and will go on in several forms, therefore the power of the artist’s lifetime is very strong and fromthis we build connections such as friendships which will continue to develop beyond the lifespanof the organization in many cases.

Karol Frühauf (Founder, Bridge Guard Art & Science Residence Centre, Switzerland)“I have an engineers run artist in residence but still consider it a microresidency. And I am very
surprised that amongst all these words (key words gathered from the various presentations)
there are only 2 which are emotional. All the rest are going through the head. There is no
encounter, no experience, no joy, no pleasure, no fun and that’s the reason why I am here!”

Kadija de Paula (Residencias en Red, Brazil)“A lot of volunteer work goes into what we do and the greatest thing is to see how many people
still carry on with this years later. We might all complain about it but actually we should value it
more. We should recognize more that the reason why we do it is because we enjoy it. It is notjust about the enjoyment of the artist but also that of the organizers side too. Well perhaps thisdoes not align with the professionalization of the field but I think there is an important shiftingfrom the powers which dictate financing etc. and to show that there is a non-financial value towhat we do. Of course we shouldn’t maintain on precarious way of doing things but we shouldshare the resources we have more amongst people who are doing it.”
Antti Yllonen – artist, member of Kultuurikaupilla and co-director art break (Finland)
Antti raised the question of how to evaluate the work of artists, believing society should change
its perspective in order to appreciate more their contribution. He stressed that although it is partof their motivation artists are not only pursuing their work because it is fun. They also have tosurvive. They are doing valuable work and so it is not unreasonable to be paid in some cases.
There is still a way of thinking towards artists as volunteers, especially in Finland he feels, where
they are often asked to contribute to various things without any payment.
Mari Ishiwata – artist, director of Ishiwata Residence
Ishiwata expressed her curiosity and sense of ambivalence towards the word volunteer whichhas particularly taken on a new meaning since 3.11 where there is a heightened sense ofvolunteering, and the word has been associated closely with doing good for society. But in thecase of arts engagement when one undertakes something for joy and pleasure then perhaps wedo not consider ourselves as volunteers. Here she expressed the point that art and society can
not be separated and need to approached flexibly.

16

Julie Upmeyer
In a closing statement Julie commented that is too much of a simplification to state that payment
and money are same thing, it is up to the individual to define for themselves what payment
means and what is most essential is that everyone understands your needs and what payment
means in terms of art projects.

Tatsuhiko Murata
Tatsuhiko closed the directors talk by reflecting that much of the discussion had focused upon
the role of artists and artist run spaces, which hoped may lend a definition to microresidencies.
He himself has a background as an engineer and has come to appreciate the work of artists, butthere is still much to be done to understand the role of artists in society, especially within
Japanese society. He commented that artists have an important contribution to make to society
and this should be valued and developed further. In this event just a handful of microresidencies
have come together but he hopes there may be thousands more across the world which may
contribute their energy towards this process.

17