|=-&^

i am a net.artist and professor of electronic engineering from karachi, pakistan and have been following the text messages on rhizome.org regarding the nungu controversy. allegations and counter-allegations continue unabated. as a south asian new media artist functioning out of the indian subcontinent, i have the following points to make -

|=-&^ if beatrice gibson and vishal rawlley have co-authored the above projects based on which they have won grants, the commission at nungu and the powers at rhizome should split the funds into separate trajectories and allow both parties to continue with their own versions of the said projects. A funding agency member of an organization that pays rhizome to exist had proposed this solution. (i forget his name but you will find it somewhere down the line).


|=-&^ mark claims to have 'looked into the issue' and claims everything is fine. everything is not fine. the idea of mark having contacted the parties in question does not arise because the only party that might have been contacted seems to be nungu. and are they going to say they are wrong? who would do that?

this sort of attitude is detrimental to the reputation of rhizome. it reveals a lackadaisical approach to what is being seen as a serious neo-colonial and now neo-imperialist appropriation of third world talent (neo-imperialist since an american organization is turning a blind eye to a disgruntled third world artist complaining about a british citizen)

|=-&^ it is important that rhizome look into this matter more seriously since it is brewing serious controversy in the subcontinent and also the net.art community in asia. from the looks of it everybody but rhizome seems to be okay with this and i find this disturbing.

|=-&^ also in the future, when a similar matter springs up, i recommend that rhizome not turn a blind eye to such grievances. even though issues such as authorship are hip, malleable constructs in first-world netart circles, paltry funding from project proposals means much to artists in smaller, poorer nations such as india, and pakistan where funding for new media is severely limited. ethics and sensitivities are important in the development of art canons, even if they be virtual ones.

|=-&^ it is precisely these ethics and sensitivities that separate movements from cults, communities from cliques, art from trash. mark having thus checked on the issue is rubbish and endangers the reputation of rhizome as a serious new media art resource.

|=-&^ it is essential that rhizome.org as an organization maintain a certain code of ethics and not brush aside the grievances of artists such as vishal rawlley because there must be some truth to his claims, even if his arguments come across as badly worded, poorly edited, and unfashionably passionate.


|=-&^
sincerely,
hussain vakil
|=-&^