This is so contemporary? Mediums of exchange and conservation

What conservation strategies can be used for Tino Sehgal's 2005 work This Is So Contemporary, and what are their relations to oral traditions? Sehgal's art leaves no material traces, as the artist resists the use of photos and videos acting as a documentary surrogate for his work. This paper will explore how Sehgal's non-written documentation strategies connect to the work of Yumutjin Wunungmurra, a contemporary artist and ceremonial leader from Northeast Arnhem Land, Australia. The connection will be tracked through the role of caretaker and custodian that features in the workflow of both artists. The paper asks whether the performance-based strategies discussed can support the notion of conservation as a social process with multiple stakeholders.     

Effective preservation decision strategies

Decisions about preservation issues are made both deliberatively and unconsciously. Heuristics operate as intuitive processes which are rapid and can be reliable and effective. Deliberative decisions require time to complete and can be described by an analytic-deliberative model. The characteristics of these two processes and their relevance to preventive conservation decision-making are discussed. Each of these two processes has its strengths and weaknesses. People naturally make decisions and utilise a range of strategies without necessarily having insights into the process. This paper provides a frame to help examine, describe, and reflect upon our own and others’ decision-making in order to improve both processes and outcomes.     

Breaking up is hard to do: the resilience of the rock group as an organizational form for creating music

Though there is a long tradition of band members quitting the group or taking a hiatus, the rock group as an organization to produce music continues to be both popular and economically viable. The research question addressed in this paper is whether or not it is a good idea to quit or take a hiatus from the group. We begin with a discussion of the framework for understanding why groups are formed and why they may be difficult to keep together. We then discuss differences between groups in the decade of the 1960s versus today. We argue that there is something unique about the output of the group even with the changes in the structure of contracts, compensation, and consumer focus on the artist that explain the resilience of the rock band as an organizational form within which to create music. We compare the charting success of bands that have members leave the group with the charting success of the members who left the group. We identified the groups in five representative years: 1965, 1975, 1985, 1995, and 2005. We then analyzed the entire Billboard Hot 100 charting careers of those groups and the artists who quit those groups. Our main finding is that when charting success is divided equally among members, going solo pays off—there is a clear economic rationale because solo acts have greater average charting success than the original bands they started in. The other ensuing side projects: duos, collaborations, and other groups are not as lucrative as the original bands. These findings are valid for members of charting groups from each of the 5 years examined. Despite the difficulties in keeping a rock band together, there are fewer band breakups today and remaining with the group generally results in a longer and more productive charting career. Thus, the rock group remains an important organization for producing contemporary music. However, there remains a compelling incentive to go solo. Superstars may benefit from solo projects, but for the average, non-superstar group member, in many circumstances it is better for the band to stay together if the income is divided equally.