|
This page contains
the detailed report written by a retired academic/design historian
from a British University.
Positive points
of NEVAC material:
- Craftspeople filmed
in their home/studio environment.
- Some of the videos
show good close ups of handling work.
- Some of the interviews
encouraged craftspeople to explain things they would not otherwise have
explained. The interviews have therefore generated material that would
otherwise not be documented, (e.g. glaze on a pot).
Positive comments
on the interviewing approach:
- An interview such
as the David Leach group has a varied approach, such as using different
interviewers.
- Some of the best
bits were when two potters discuss a pot not made by themselves.
Critical comments
on the interviewing approach:
- The role of the
interviewer is not clearly defined or specified. Sometimes, it is a
fellow potter, sometimes an historian but we are not told what the different
roles are.
- Often an interviewer
puts words in the interviewees mouth. This happens far too often and
is bad practice.
- There is not enough
encouragement of potters to handle pots.
- Is there a place
for having a different approach if the interviewee is talking about
their life history, etc. rather than referring to particular aspects
of pots.
Criticisms of the
content of the video:
- I'm not sure if
there is any reason for this choice of interviewees. Is the choice random?
- What is the value
of video if the potter is just sitting there and not making or handling
a pot? There might be value for anthropologists or bahavioural scientists,
but is there a value for potters or critics and historians.
General points
about how the web-based video database may be organised:
- At present the
archive is primarily about people, but people through sound and vision,
(not text). This is something very individual about the archive and
should be retained and used, so NEVAC should make as much of this as
possible.
- It concerns me
that there is a danger of the archive becoming unfocussed so that it
ends up not being useful to anyone. There are so many different ways
of structuring it for different users that the danger is that it falls
between two or more stools and isn't useful for anyone.
- At present there
is no 'overt' critical side since Mike, [Mike Hughes: NEVAC's Director,
died October 2000], was insistent that the videos were not edited.
However, by the very choice of people and interest in people, there
is editing, (for instance amongst the users we discussed how sculptural
potters were not represented).
- For the future,
there could be more focus on the making process. This would be particularly
appropriate bearing in mind the 'tacit' knowledge that is involved in
any craft production process.
- Since the demise
of the apprenticeship system and the development of formal taught courses
required by Universities, there has been a decline in 'learning by doing'.
There is a place for this to be reestablished and videos could help
do this.
- There could be
an element of the database that uses clips from the video in a critical
way: since there is a dearth of critical writing on the crafts this
could be a good opportunity to provide some.
- At present the
archive lacks direction. People need to know why they are looking at
the archive, and by having different strands his would enable viewers
to know which 'hat' they were wearing.
- Any interface should
have sound and video at the fore: to emphasise what the site is about.
- When text is used
on screen it should be simple.
Return
to top of the page
|
