The Employee by joshua schwebel
About this project
arrow-left

The Employee MBL Text_Revised

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

New activity in the following document

3 resolved

Suggestions

Lauren Wetmore

• 10:40 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add paragraph

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:01 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 10:41 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Format: indent first line

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:02 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 10:48 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “l”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:03 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are a participant in the updated discussion threads. Change what Google Docs sends you. You cannot reply to this email.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

New activity in the following document

3 resolved

Suggestions

Josh Schwebel

• 4:21 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Format: highlight

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:18 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Rejected suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:17 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “,”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:21 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:17 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete space
Add: “-”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:21 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are a participant in the updated discussion threads. Change what Google Docs sends you. You cannot reply to this email.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte replied to a comment in the following document

1 comment

a large-scale federal bureaucracy

Josh Schwebel

• 4:21 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
I find this paragraph a bit muddled, since you mention federal cultural bureaucracy a couple of lines earlier, referring to the Canada Council. Is there a way to rearrange this paragraph so that the Canada council emerges once, rather than twice?

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:41 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Thanks for this. I've added some text to further explain what I mean and changed the use of "federal cultural bureaucracy above". Essentially, I'm trying to explain how the 50s when the CCA was founded and the late 60s/early 70s represent two different moments in cultural policy, with a marked evolution of how culture and the rationale for policy were  conceived.

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are a participant in this thread. Change what Google Docs sends you. You can reply to this email to reply to the discussion.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

New activity in the following document

9 resolved

Comments

problématique

Josh Schwebel

• 4:37 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
how do you feel about using problematic rather than problématique, are you committed to the french?

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:50 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Marked as resolved

Suggestions

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:20 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “.”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:48 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:23 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete space

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:49 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:23 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add paragraph

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:48 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:23 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Format: indent first line

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:49 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:25 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “sanctitude” with “sanctity”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:49 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 4:39 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “)”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:52 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 4:33 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “on display”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:48 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 4:33 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “on display”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:48 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are a participant in the updated discussion threads. Change what Google Docs sends you. You cannot reply to this email.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

New activity in the following document

2 comments

added normative emphasis

Josh Schwebel

• 4:42 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
I'm not sure here what added normative emphasis means, does it mean that it sets cultural norms?

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:03 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

I've removed the word normative... doesn't add much and it confuses things... normative here meaning the standard thoughts and values of the time.

Josh Schwebel

• 10:21 PM, Jun 19 (CEST)
what is interesting for me about this transition, in moving from a centre-outwards hierarchical model of culture to a decentralized one, is how the soft power it exercises achieves totally different goals. Whereas previously the public was intended to be the consumers of culture for its civilizing and normalizing force, now in the more recent model wherein everyone is creative, the governance effected by culture or "creativity" is a self-chosen precarity towards a loosening of public or social services.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:05 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Exactly! It's really interesting to look at the ways in which culture/aesthetics/creativity are co-opted as tools of governance.

17 resolved

Suggestions

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:51 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “,”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:06 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:44 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “s”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:03 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:45 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “the”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:03 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:47 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “to” with “for the”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:03 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:47 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “e” with “ation”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:03 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:47 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “the” with “of”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:03 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:49 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “, Ontario,”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:07 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:50 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “s”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:06 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:51 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “s” with “d”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:06 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 4:42 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “approach towards the”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:03 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 4:42 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “approach”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:03 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 4:43 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “the”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:03 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 10:54 AM, Jun 6 (CEST)
Add: “it”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:06 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 10:54 AM, Jun 6 (CEST)
Replace: “As” with “Like”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:06 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 10:55 AM, Jun 6 (CEST)
Replace: “pin down a single material or medium” with “identify the material object produced by his work”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:06 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 10:56 AM, Jun 6 (CEST)
Replace: “and” with “, rather,”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:06 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 10:55 AM, Jun 6 (CEST)
Add: “a single material or medium”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:06 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are a participant in the updated discussion threads. Change what Google Docs sends you. You cannot reply to this email.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

New activity in the following document

1 comment

depended

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:27 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
dependant?

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:27 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

I'm trying to say that the institution depends on the labour... I've changed the sentence a bit to make it clearer, but feel free to make changes as needed.

59 resolved

Comments

Josh Schwebel

• 11:01 AM, Mar 21 (CET)
This is a great point, and I have been thinking about something related to this, on the ARC cultural worker side of this, which is that even though ARCs rely on funding bodies to provide their operational, funding bodies are not employers, and are not responsible for the employment conditions within ARCs, which is a gap of accountability that I think is also part of what produces the current situation.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:23 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Marked as resolved

Josh Schwebel

• 8:14 PM, Apr 8 (CEST)
I wish that you also mentioned the labour of the staff working behind the scenes here… since you mention the dependency that the galleries have, but that isn’t followed up. They neither subsidize the artist`s labour, nor do they subsidize the staff’s really.

mbourche

• 6:45 PM, May 5 (CEST)
See added at beginning of following paragraph

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:18 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Really good resolution

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:23 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Marked as resolved

Josh Schwebel

• 8:24 PM, Apr 8 (CEST)
Marked as resolved

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:23 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Marked as resolved
Whereas

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:11 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Repetition of the word "whereas" - could it read "while" instead?

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:22 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Marked as resolved
disability

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:12 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
I am not certain of the right language here. Should this read "ability"?

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:22 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Marked as resolved

Suggestions

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:10 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “as”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:21 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:10 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “,”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:21 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:06 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “,”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:21 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:10 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add space

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:21 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:13 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete space
Add: “-”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:22 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:13 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “class,”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:22 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:16 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “poking”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:22 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:16 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “e” with “at precarity is”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:22 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:16 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “precarity”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:22 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:16 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “in which” with “that”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:22 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:24 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Format: italic

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:24 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:24 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Format: italic

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:24 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:25 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “’s”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:24 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:25 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “the”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:24 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:26 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “fieldwhat” with “a field”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:24 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:27 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “s”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:25 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:27 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “the”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:25 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:28 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “le” with “the”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:27 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:05 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “than”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:06 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “s”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 1:31 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “’”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:27 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 1:48 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “as”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:27 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:07 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “working in”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:07 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “o” with “is”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:07 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “f”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:07 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “…” with “.”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:07 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “Rr”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:08 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “’”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:13 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “t”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:13 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “a”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:38 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “,”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:38 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “,”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:38 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “on” with “out”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:30 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:34 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “is”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:34 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “s”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:37 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “to” with “with”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:37 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete space
Add: “-”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:38 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “and”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:40 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “via”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:30 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:41 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “livestream”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:30 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:41 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “livestream”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:30 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:42 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “swears” with “curses”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:30 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Lauren Wetmore

• 2:42 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add space

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:30 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 5:27 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “s”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 5:27 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “adopted”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 5:27 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “have” with “hold”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 5:26 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “waves of”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 5:26 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “waves”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:29 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 5:30 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “DATE” with “September 29, 2021”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:30 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 5:30 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “X” with “3”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:30 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 5:02 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “normally”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:25 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 5:02 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “over-” with “beyond the”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:25 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 5:02 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “of its staff”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:25 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 5:04 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Replace: “draws” with “proffers”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:27 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are a participant in the updated discussion threads. Change what Google Docs sends you. You cannot reply to this email.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte replied to a comment in the following document

1 comment

For those at the helm of the Massey Commission, the N.E. Thing Co. Environment must have appeared as the result of Canadian Post-War cultural policy’s failure to embrace, for the good of the Canadian nation-state, a vision of the arts as morally superior because of their disassociation from the realm of commerce

Josh Schwebel

• 4:17 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
I find this sentence difficult to parse, maybe break it into two sentences, if possible?
Canadian Post-war cultural policy disassociated the arts from the realm of commerce, a decision the Massey Commission undertook for the good of the Canadian nation-state, positing the arts as morally superior for this separation. For those at the helm of the Massey Commission, the N.E. Thing Co. Environment must have appeared as a result of this policy.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 12:50 AM, Jun 30 (CEST)

New

I've edited it for more clarity

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are a participant in this thread. Change what Google Docs sends you. You can reply to this email to reply to the discussion.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte rejected a suggestion in the following document

1 resolved

Suggestions

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:55 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Format: italic

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:00 AM, Jun 30 (CEST)

New

Rejected suggestion

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are subscribed to all discussions on The Employee MBL Text_Revised. Change what Google Docs sends you. You can reply to this email to reply to the discussion.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte replied to a comment in the following document

1 comment

Schwebel turns institutional contexts in expanding parergons

Josh Schwebel

• 11:00 AM, Jun 6 (CEST)
This is amazing but I find also quite compact. Since you pose that the medium of the work is the institution, and then jump to institutional contexts as examples of the parergon. It might be useful to add one sentence to connect institution with context. For instance, how institutional critique often takes the framing conditions of art as its subject, reversing the relation between object (of art) and framing conditions.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:24 AM, Jun 30 (CEST)

New

I've restructured and rewrote the 2nd half of this paragraph. Hopefully this addresses your concerns.

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are a participant in this thread. Change what Google Docs sends you. You can reply to this email to reply to the discussion.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte replied to a comment in the following document

1 comment

Schwebel turns institutional contexts in expanding parergons

Josh Schwebel

• 11:00 AM, Jun 6 (CEST)
This is amazing but I find also quite compact. Since you pose that the medium of the work is the institution, and then jump to institutional contexts as examples of the parergon. It might be useful to add one sentence to connect institution with context. For instance, how institutional critique often takes the framing conditions of art as its subject, reversing the relation between object (of art) and framing conditions.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:24 AM, Jun 30 (CEST)
I've restructured and rewrote the 2nd half of this paragraph. Hopefully this addresses your concerns.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:42 AM, Jun 30 (CEST)

New

Also, see footnote inserted below... not sure if it's necessary as it's bringing up a lot of theory, but it might help clarify how I'm approaching concepts of institution and institutionalization.

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are a participant in this thread. Change what Google Docs sends you. You can reply to this email to reply to the discussion.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

New activity in the following document

1 comment

governmentality

Josh Schwebel

• 4:52 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
do you mean governance, or governing mentality?

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:06 AM, Jul 1 (CEST)

New

No, governmentality, based on Foucault's theory of governmentality as a mode of governance concerned with managing populations

4 resolved

Comments

Josh Schwebel

• 11:16 AM, Mar 21 (CET)
Yeeeeeeaaasssss

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:07 AM, Jul 1 (CEST)

New

Marked as resolved
as culminating

Lauren Wetmore

• 12:00 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
as "a" or "the" culminating project.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:08 AM, Jul 1 (CEST)

New

Marked as resolved

Suggestions

Josh Schwebel

• 4:50 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete: “in the”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:07 AM, Jul 1 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 4:51 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Format: highlight

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:07 AM, Jul 1 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are a participant in the updated discussion threads. Change what Google Docs sends you. You cannot reply to this email.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte accepted a suggestion in the following document

1 resolved

Suggestions

Josh Schwebel

• 10:59 AM, Mar 21 (CET)
Delete: “their”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:27 AM, Jul 1 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are subscribed to all discussions on The Employee MBL Text_Revised. Change what Google Docs sends you. You can reply to this email to reply to the discussion.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

New activity in the following document

1 comment

adherence to fee schedules that set minimum remuneration standards for the public use of an artwork or its reproduction in exhibitions, screenings, performances, and publications. In the Canadian visual arts sector, the CARFAC-RAAV Fee Schedule – jointly issued by the Canadian Artists Representation/Front des artistes Canadiens and the Regroupement des artistes en arts visuels – is recognized by arts funders as a national standard for the payment of copyright royalties. However, under current federal Status of the Artist Act, the majority of visual arts presenters follow the Fee Schedule on a voluntary basis, resulting in countless instances of artists being underpaid or not paid at all.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:56 AM, Jul 1 (CEST)

New

I've added this to contextualize the CARFAC Fee Schedule. If it's too long here, it could be inserted as a footnote.

3 resolved

Comments

Josh Schwebel

• 8:50 PM, Apr 8 (CEST)
and this is exactly the problem, since employees of ARCs, like employees of other non-profits, are seen more as creative entrepreneurs, than as salaried workers, when in fact, if an ARC is an extension of artistic pursuit, the staff are like artists’ assistants, paid extensions of the artist, rather than autonomous creative individuals themselves. But they are paid and expected to internalize the goals of the ARC without distinction between the institution and their own survival.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:59 AM, Jul 1 (CEST)

New

Marked as resolved

Josh Schwebel

• 8:14 PM, Apr 8 (CEST)
In sum: the instrumentalization of creativity as a form of self-managed precarization combines with pre-existing forms of structural marginalization to produce the institutionalized precarity, which the creative individual manages, as part of their own self-production.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:52 AM, Jul 1 (CEST)

New

Marked as resolved

Josh Schwebel

• 8:24 PM, Apr 8 (CEST)
Re-opened

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:52 AM, Jul 1 (CEST)

New

Marked as resolved

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are a participant in the updated discussion threads. Change what Google Docs sends you. You cannot reply to this email.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte added a comment to the following document

1 comment

Romantic dialectic between art and economy in which embracing culture in the aesthetic sense of the term is conceived as a form of anti-capitalist critique in reaction to the industrial revolution. In this sense, Terry Eagleton (2000) writes: “Kultur or Culture thus became the name of the Romantic, pre-Marxist critique of early industrial capitalism.” (p. 10).

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:16 AM, Jul 2 (CEST)

New

I added the explanation of Romantic here to frame the use of the concept throughout the text.

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are subscribed to all discussions on The Employee MBL Text_Revised. Change what Google Docs sends you. You can reply to this email to reply to the discussion.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

New activity in the following document

4 resolved

Comments

added normative emphasis

Josh Schwebel

• 4:42 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
I'm not sure here what added normative emphasis means, does it mean that it sets cultural norms?

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:03 AM, Jun 28 (CEST)
I've removed the word normative... doesn't add much and it confuses things... normative here meaning the standard thoughts and values of the time.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:54 AM, Jul 2 (CEST)

New

Marked as resolved

Suggestions

Lauren Wetmore

• 11:46 AM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete space

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:51 AM, Jul 2 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 4:43 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Add: “a”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:52 AM, Jul 2 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Josh Schwebel

• 4:43 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete space
Add: “-”

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:55 AM, Jul 2 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are a participant in the updated discussion threads. Change what Google Docs sends you. You cannot reply to this email.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

New activity in the following document

1 comment

institutionalized

Josh Schwebel

• 10:52 AM, Jun 6 (CEST)
Here the word institution means something different than structural frameworks for exhibiting and distributing art, but indicates that precarity is normalized.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:02 AM, Jul 2 (CEST)

New

Also, see footnote inserted below... not sure if it's necessary as it's bringing up a lot of theory, but it might help clarify how I'm approaching concepts of institution and institutionalization.

1 resolved

Comments

Josh Schwebel

• 8:15 PM, Apr 8 (CEST)
I think that the subject of this is a new paragraph, asking the question, where does this precarity come from and how has it been institutionalized?

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:07 AM, Jul 2 (CEST)

New

Marked as resolved

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are a participant in the updated discussion threads. Change what Google Docs sends you. You cannot reply to this email.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte replied to a comment in the following document

1 comment

Josh Schwebel

• 8:32 PM, Apr 8 (CEST)
You mention this dichotomy in your introduction on NETco, maybe tie this together more clearly?

Lauren Wetmore

• 1:53 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
I would add on to this note that as the term "Romantic" comes up several times in the text, it could be useful to give it a bit more definition in the first mention.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:27 AM, Jul 2 (CEST)

New

See definition that was added earlier in the text

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are subscribed to all discussions on The Employee MBL Text_Revised. Change what Google Docs sends you. You can reply to this email to reply to the discussion.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte replied to a comment in the following document

1 comment

in this work-life continuum, accepts to work overtime and to be underpaid in exchange for the “privilege” of being creative

Josh Schwebel

• 5:09 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
The New Spirit of Capitalism charts this transition of power from the social union structure to the creative individual very well. It might make sense to cite them (Boltanski and Chiapello) here.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:47 AM, Jul 2 (CEST)

New

I've added a footnote to this effect. I'd rather not add too many references that need explanation... I feel that I would really engage with their concepts if I was to bring them up in the text.

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are a participant in this thread. Change what Google Docs sends you. You can reply to this email to reply to the discussion.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

New activity in the following document

2 comments

in this work-life continuum, accepts to work overtime and to be underpaid in exchange for the “privilege” of being creative

Josh Schwebel

• 5:09 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
The New Spirit of Capitalism charts this transition of power from the social union structure to the creative individual very well. It might make sense to cite them (Boltanski and Chiapello) here.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 2:47 AM, Jul 2 (CEST)
I've added a footnote to this effect. I'd rather not add too many references that need explanation... I feel that I would really engage with their concepts if I was to bring them up in the text.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:49 AM, Jul 4 (CEST)

New

But you can integrate the footnote in the text if you feel it's appropriate.
“the pursuit of passionate work is both a line of flight and a site of tension and ‘capture’ for the reason that this cultural landscape becomes a space for both labour struggle and labour reform”

Josh Schwebel

• 5:13 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
An important point that needs to be made here is that it is difficult to enact labour reform when you are self-employed. The infrastructures that govern self-employment are difficult to perceive and do not resemble authority-figures, so it seems that failure or lack of economic stability is the fault of the individual artist or 'creative', this leads to people blaming themselves for their success or failure, and also poses a challenge to forming any social structures such as unions. Again, since arts council are not employers, creative and cultural workers lack an authority figure outside of themselves. This leads to people pushing themselves to work harder, since they believe themselves to have agency to achieve success, which instead just leads to burnout.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:52 AM, Jul 4 (CEST)

New

The labour reform she is referring to is a neoliberal reform where workers accept unstable working conditions, less or no benefits, and self-entrepreneurship as a given.

1 resolved

Suggestions

Lauren Wetmore

• 1:54 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
Delete space

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:50 AM, Jul 4 (CEST)

New

Accepted suggestion

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are a participant in the updated discussion threads. Change what Google Docs sends you. You cannot reply to this email.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte replied to a comment in the following document

1 comment

“the pursuit of passionate work is both a line of flight and a site of tension and ‘capture’ for the reason that this cultural landscape becomes a space for both labour struggle and labour reform”

Josh Schwebel

• 5:13 PM, Jun 15 (CEST)
An important point that needs to be made here is that it is difficult to enact labour reform when you are self-employed. The infrastructures that govern self-employment are difficult to perceive and do not resemble authority-figures, so it seems that failure or lack of economic stability is the fault of the individual artist or 'creative', this leads to people blaming themselves for their success or failure, and also poses a challenge to forming any social structures such as unions. Again, since arts council are not employers, creative and cultural workers lack an authority figure outside of themselves. This leads to people pushing themselves to work harder, since they believe themselves to have agency to achieve success, which instead just leads to burnout.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:52 AM, Jul 4 (CEST)
The labour reform she is referring to is a neoliberal reform where workers accept unstable working conditions, less or no benefits, and self-entrepreneurship as a given.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 1:57 AM, Jul 4 (CEST)

New

I've added a sentence to clarify.

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are a participant in this thread. Change what Google Docs sends you. You can reply to this email to reply to the discussion.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte (Google Docs) <comments-noreply@docs.google.com> To: Josh Schwebel <privatejosh@gmail.com>

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte added a comment to the following document

1 comment

Wooten, M., & Hoffman, A. J. (2008). Organizational Fields: Past, Present and Future. In The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism (pp. 129–148). SAGE Publications Ltd.

Mariane Bourcheix-Laporte

• 3:59 AM, Jul 4 (CEST)

New

Only use if footnote on institutionalization is included.

Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

You have received this email because you are subscribed to all discussions on The Employee MBL Text_Revised. Change what Google Docs sends you. You can reply to this email to reply to the discussion.

arrow-left Previous Next arrow-right