|
Sarai
Mike Caloud
pdf (36 Kb)
[This interview first appeared on Rhizome.org: Part
1 & Part
2]
[Sarai is an alternative, non-profit organization in Delhi, India.
They describe themselves as a space for research, practice
and conversation about the contemporary media and urban constellations.
Sarai publishes an annual Reader covering many issues
relevant to new media art. In a recent email exchange, Mike Caloud
had the chance to interview Sarais Raqs Media Collective
on their unique institution (http://www.sarai.net).]
Mike Caloud: Lets begin with a little background
history. How and when did Sarai begin? What were the interests
and motivations?
Sarai: To understand how Sarai began, it may be necessary
for us to take a brief step back to the summer of 1998, when five
of us, (Ravi Vasudevan & Ravi Sundaram from CSDS, and Jeebesh
Bagchi, Monica Narula & Shuddhabrata Sengupta from the Raqs
Media Collective) began to conceive of Sarai.
The summer of 98 was a time for many new beginnings in
the city of Delhi. The nineties had been a decade marked by doubt
and rethinking on many fronts, all of which seemed to have come
to a head for some of us during that summer. There was a sense
of disquiet with increasing urban violence and strife, dissatisfaction
with restrictive modes of thinking and practice within mainstream
academia, the universities & the media, and a general unease
at the stagnation that underlay the absence of a critical public
culture.
At the same time, Delhi witnessed a quiet rebirth of an independent
arts and media scene. This became evident in exhibitions and screenings
that began taking place modestly in alternative venues, outside
galleries and institutional spaces, and in archival initiatives
that began to be active. Spaces for dissent and debate were kept
alive by clusters of teachers and students in the universities.
New ideas, modes of communication and forms of protest were being
tried out and tested on the streets. The nuclear tests by India
and Pakistan in the summer of 1998 had brought many people out
on to the streets of Delhi in spontaneous protest. There was a
vibrant energy evident in street level improvisations with new
technologies. Public phone booths were transforming themselves
into street corner cybercafÈs, independent filmmakers were
beginning to organize themselves in forums, and a new open source
and free software community made its mark in the citys BBSs
(Electronic Bulletin Boards). The city itself, as a space and
as an idea, was becoming a focus for enquiry and reflection, and
a provocation for a series of creative experiments.
It was from within this ferment of ideas, rough & ready plans,
and fragments of proposals that a series of conversations on film
history, new media theory, media practice and urban culture was
able to mature into the conceptual foundation of Sarai. Sarai
(the space and the programme) takes its name from the caravan-serais
for which medieval Delhi was well known. These were places where
travelers could find shelter, sustenance, and companionship; they
were taverns, public houses, meeting places; destinations and
points of departure; places to rest in the middle of a journey.
Even today, the map of Delhi carries on it twelve place names
that include the word Sarai. The Sarai Initiative interprets this
sense of the word sarai to mean a very public space,
where different intellectual, creative, and activist energies
can intersect in an open and dynamic manner to give rise to an
imaginative reconstitution of urban public culture, new/old media
practice, research, and critical cultural intervention. The challenge
before the founding group was to cohere a philosophy marrying
this range of concerns to the vision of creating a lively public
space where research, media practice, and activism could flow
into each other. It took two years (1998-2000) to translate this
conception into a plan for a real space and to design a workable
interdisciplinary programme of activities.
The third Next Five Minutes conference in Amsterdam was a turning
point in some ways. The discussions between those of us who were
planning (or rather dreaming) Sarai, those in the Waag, and those
who were to become part of Sarais international partners
began taking a more concrete shape at that event. The next several
months were spent in detailing what we wanted to do at Sarai and
on the hammering out a concrete proposal that focused Sarais
interests and objectives.
Today, the Sarai Initiative embraces interests that include cinema
history, urban cultures and politics, new media theory, computers,
the Internet and software cultures, documentary filmmaking, digital
arts and critical cultural practice. Sarai opened its doors to
the public of Delhi in February 2001 and the first year has been
very hectic for all of us, especially as all our projects and
public interventions have begun to take concrete shape. As we
draw towards the completion of our first year we realize that
our strength lies in the collaborative vision that has been the
founding principle of Sarai, and that the space can grow only
by continuing to include and engage with new people and ideas
from across the world.
Mike Caloud: The beginnings of an institution like Sarai
involve gathering resources, raising funds, and setting up a space
to work. What was that initial experience like?
Sarai: We had to spend a fair amount of time and energy
to garner the resources and the funding that made Sarai possible.
In fact it took roughly two years (with some of us concentrating
full time on the task of writing and following up on proposals)
for Sarai to become a reality in terms of funding. The Centre
for the Study of Developing Societies, our parent institution,
contributed the space, which has been a major asset. Additional
funding was raised, through the Waag, from the Dutch government
for a collaboration and exchange programme. And, over time, we
have raised further resources for our other projects.
Having got the funding, we had to spend a lot of time on actually
converting the space that we had (an empty basement) into what
it is today. This meant designing the space, supervising construction,
buying furniture and appliances, and working a lot with our own
hands to create a well-equipped, convivial, and comfortable space.
As we had no precedents to follow, we obviously made a few mistakes
and errors of judgment, and had to learn to deal with realities
like power surges, leaking basement floors, complicated insurance
contracts, and purchase invoices. We think that these mundane
aspects of setting up spaces such as Sarai often get overlooked
in the hype about culture and creativity, but without them, and
without people working really hard to ensure that everything in
a building is working and in its place in conditions that are
far less than ideal, none of the culture and creativity and new
media can flourish. We have enjoyed dealing with all this as much
as we have enjoyed designing our website or creating new media
work, or doing research.
Mike Caloud: Do you have sufficient computer hardware
and software for you projects? Also, how much does Free Software
play a part?
Sarai: We are reasonably well equipped. We have a Media
Lab that has five multimedia computer workstations, including
3 Mac G4s, and two Linux PCs. One of these is equipped with Final
Cut Pro, and so doubles as a video-editing suite. The Media Lab
is the production hub of Sarai, all our creative work in various
media, Internet projects, print and design projects are located
here. The Media Lab has a scanner, a printer, a digital video
camera, a digital still camera and audio mini- disc recorders.
Five people work at the media lab. The Interface Zone - the public
access area that is also used for residencies, workshops, and
exhibitions is equipped with five PCs. The Interface Zone is looked
after by an animator who designs and curates events, and facilitates
public interaction. Apart from this, the research projects have
five computers, which are used by research assistants and fellows
at Sarai. The free software project has two PCs.
Sarais experimental outreach programme - the Cybermohalla
Project - a digital culture lab in a slum settlement in Central
Delhi is also equipped with three Linux PCs, a scanner, analog
audio recorders and a digital still camera.
Sarai has a core team of eighteen people from different backgrounds
and disciplines (filmmakers, academics, software programmers,
lawyers, social workers, activists, designers, writers, researchers,
and media practitioners) who work on a regular basis on different
collaborative and individual projects. Apart from this, eighteen
seed grants and fellowships have been given out this year for
different research and media projects on themes that resonate
with Sarais interests with city spaces, urban cultures,
and media forms. These include architects, theorists, sound artists,
student groups, and a graphic novelist. Sarai has also embarked
on a modest residency programme for visiting artists, practitioners,
and scholars to work and interact with Sarai fellows.
In terms of connectivity, we have recently acquired a 64K lease
line connection. This means that we have now enough bandwidth
to begin thinking concretely about streaming audio, and hopefully
eventually video from Sarai.
To answer your question about the usage of free software at Sarai:
The entire network at Sarai runs on Linux. The PCs are all Linux
machines, and run free software applications, and one of the Macs
at the media lab has been configured to run Linux. Everyone at
Sarai is encouraged to work as much as possible with free software,
and most of us use Free Software (we experiment/use many distributions).
This is certainly a conscious choice on our part. We are interested
in Free Software not only because it makes economic sense in an
Indian context not to spend a lot of money on expensive proprietary
software, but also because we believe there are crucial issues
of cultural freedom and creativity that are at stake here. A mono-cultural
domination of Microsoft, or any form of proprietary software,
is as lethal for the sustenance of the dynamism and diversity
of software culture(s) as the domination of Monsanto seeds is
to farming. We want to contribute to autonomous, collaborative
energies in the field of software culture, which are conducive
to conditions of diversity. Many of these collaborative energies
challenge, or at least are skeptical about the commodification
of digital culture across the globe. That is a characteristic
we would like to see fore-grounded in a lot of the work that we
do.
We are lucky to have on board a team of young, talented, and
enthusiastic free software activists, who also run and administer
the network at Sarai. They have been able to put in place an array
of machines and applications across platforms, which we think
is unique in terms of the variety and number of sometimes conflicting
demands that it effectively addresses.
Mike Caloud: waag.sarai.net is evidence of the partnership
between the Waag and Sarai. How have the Waag and Sarai benefited
from collaboration?
Sarai: The relationship with the Waag has been one of
collaboration at a very practical, concrete level, as well as
one of the sharing of intellectual and creative energies. There
has been a lot of two-way traffic, with exchanges of residencies,
and visits. This has certainly lent dynamism to the creative processes
at Sarai. The programmers and media lab people at Sarai have benefited
enormously from their visits, for instance, to HAL and to tech_2,
both of which took place with support from the Waag-Sarai Exchange
programme. We have also had workshops in design, networking and
system administration, as well as video and audio streaming. The
partnership has also facilitated visits and talks at Sarai by
media theorists from Europe, and starting from this summer, it
will be theorists and practitioners from Delhi who will be spending
time in Amsterdam, doing talks and conducting workshops that will
be organized by the Waag.
The publication of the Sarai Readers 01 and 02 is another instance
of the Sarai Waag collaboration. The readers have been jointly
published, and Geert Lovink from the Waag has been a part of the
editorial team for both Readers.
The level of exchange and collaboration is poised to enter a
qualitatively new phase as both Sarai and Waag as content producers
can envisage the possibility of entering into new collaborative
possibilities, this time with third parties located elsewhere.
This is particularly because the experience gained by both Sarai
and Waag in developing digital cultural interventions in cities
like Delhi may have relevance in many other cities of the South.
Mike Caloud: Do you have other collaborations planned
in the Asian/South Asian regions, and internationally?
Sarai: Sarai has active ties with other international
institutions, organizations and bodies, and these are growing
as we get many requests for collaborations, exchanges, and visits
from overseas. We have especially good relationships with the
new media scene in Australia (through ANAT, the Australian Network
for Art and Technology), the UK, and Germany. We do feel that
we should have a more active relationship with practitioners in
North America, especially in the free software movement. We are
developing partnerships with similar bodies in Eastern Europe
and Japan, (through ISEA) and are actively pursuing a more dynamic
network in the South Asian Region, especially with practitioners
and artists in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nepal. The political realities
of South Asia, particularly the strained relationships between
the Indian and Pakistani governments makes the need for collaborative
energies in the region more urgent and all the more difficult,
but this is certainly an area that we hope we will be able to
forge more meaningful relationships in the future.
Another area of building interesting alliances with artists,
practitioners, and public intellectuals is with similar cultural
and academic initiatives in other Indian cities, particularly
with Mumbai, Bangalore, and Kolkata - where we are now beginning
to be known.
Mike Caloud: The Opus Project seems especially compelling
as a model of collective creation. How far has the collaboration
software progressed? What are your hopes for Opus? Also, if participants
can easily modify nodes within Opus, how do you determine authorship
for nodes? Will authorship even matter?
Sarai: Opus is an acronym; it stands for Open Platform
for Unlimited Signification! In a simple sense, it will be an
online space for people, machines, and codes to play and work
together - to share, create, and transform images, sounds, moving
pictures, and texts.
Once you have published your work, other members of the Opus
community will be able to give their comments and reflections
on your work through the attached discussion boards. You can also
inspire others and allow them to take your work as a starting
point for a new (art)work. Opus follows the same rules as those
that operate in all free software communities. The source(code),
in this case the video, image, sound or text, is free to use,
to edit, and to redistribute.
Needless to say these freedoms also apply to the code, i.e. the
software itself that lies behind Opus.
We are quite excited by the possibilities that we envisage in
the Opus Project. I think it exemplifies for us the opportunity
to evolve a new ethic of creativity, of making work that is collaborative,
playful and involves a series of interactions between practitioners,
technicians, coders, and artists. This involves a necessary re-imagination
of the character of cultural praxis. Opus is less about individual
artists or practitioners, but of laboratories and virtual ateliers
where practitioners develop creative processes, and those cultural
artifacts are available to all those who seek it. This is related
to an idea that we have been working on for some time now, which
is to lay the ground for a digital commons which is
predicated not on the dissolution of authorship, but on its dispersal
and elaboration over time.
We are not saying that authors do not matter, but what we are
saying is that a line of works may be the result of
many authors who enter the process of creation at different points
of time, or who are located in different spaces. This is analogous
to the way a population grows. Authors (or the traces of them
in different works) act in the same way as parents act in a given
generation of human beings. Their children (the works) may attract
other materials and further processes of reproduction will involve
the exchange of the genetic code of different works. The process
of survival and growth of the population of works over time is
dependent on their ability to attract partners (other authors,
other materials) and reproduce. Since each work, at each stage
of its presence - as a rescension in Opus will embody
the signature, or code of its parentage, it will be possible to
construct genealogies of works, making it possible to identify
quite precisely the distributed authorship of a work and its rescensions
over time.
A word about the term rescension - a rescension
is a narrative which can give rise to another narrative (which
is neither a clone nor a copy of the original) without
being a replacement of the first. We see this as being vital to
the development of a collaborative space for creation. Each rescension
stands in relational autonomy to every other rescension, the presence
of one modifies the reading of another without calling for its
replacement.
Curiously, this is the process by which epic narratives have
multiplied. A good example is the way in which the narrative of
the Mahabharata in South Asia has formed and reformed
- as rescensions - allowing for an extensible multiplicity of
meanings and authorial agencies. These new rescensions
and/or threads will not replace the older ones. They will together
form a series of interlinked interpretations.
So authors will matter, but they will matter in a dynamic, rather
than in a static sense of their contribution to a work or works.
We are actually quite pleased with the obvious parallels between
the process of continued creation in an online environment and
the ordinary business of making babies, or ensuring that life
continues in the real world.
At the moment we are working (at a relatively furious pace) the
front end of the Opus Interface and on the code on which Opus
will move. The media lab is quite busy with Opus; we are a fairly
motley crew, with programmers from Delhi, Zurich, and Amsterdam
poring over long sheets of code, while designers and media practitioners
debate the look, the feel, and interactivity of the interface.
Mike Caloud: Sarai does not seem to indulge strictly in
new media. What meaning and importance do old media forms, especially
cinema, have for you?
Sarai: For us, the term new media is not so much about
the novelty of computers, multimedia and the Internet, as it is
about new forms and strategies of practice. Its about innovative
re-combinations between Old and New media,
between and across print, film, video, television, radio, computers
and the internet.
The cinema in India has always operated on an industrial, and
global scale (Cinema from Mumbai, Chennai or Hyderabad, like Hollywood
and the Hong Kong cinema, is not a local media form; it has always
had large audiences is Africa, Central Asia, Eastern Europe, North
America and Britain). The sheer size and scale of the cinema industry
in India does challenge the possibilities of independent creative
practice in all media forms. That makes it all the more necessary
for us to think of ways in which new media forms can both speak
to as well as assert their autonomy in relation to the cinema.
We are interested in this dialogue between the old and the new
media, not only between cinema and the new media, but also between
print, radio and the new media. We are keen to effect crossovers
and transgressions that displace both old and new hierarchies,
which privilege neither tradition, nor novelty for their own sake,
and give rise to a more layered and agile form of media practice
that is more reflective of the contemporary in our spaces. This
means being as invested in the making of print objects, visual
works and soundscapes, as we are in the creation of web content,
and looking for ways in which practices and objects can straddle
off-line and online trajectories.
Mike Caloud: Are there unique Indian qualities to the
media projects at Sarai? Or do you consider yourself part of a
more global aesthetic?
Sarai: For us, the idea of a uniquely Indian quality
is not really meaningful or expressive of anything at all. India
is the name of a nation state, and Indian the term
denoting nationality that happens to be entered in our passports,
but it does not really suggest anything real or concrete in terms
of culture to us, nor do the words French, or Italian or Australian
or American, for that matter. Those who use the term Indian
Culture usually mean a complex of values, attitudes, and
tendencies that have been processed to mark out a space that is
uniquely theirs, and which mirrors an obsession with
territoriality. We are puzzled as to what (in cultural terms)
can uniquely be the possession of any sets of people,
in exclusivity. Culture is something that never respects borders
and territories. It is infectious, nomadic, and volatile. We see
culture and cultural intervention as an agile constellation of
people, practices, connections, and objects that come into being
when different disciplines, histories and attitudes encounter
each other in a global cultural space. This does not mean that
we subscribe to the view that there are no cultural differences,
but that cultural affinities and differences are not reducible
to the mere notations of current political cartography.
A group of cultural workers (in say, a city like Delhi) trying
out new vocabularies with images, text and data like us may have
a lot in common, in terms of concerns and practices, with their
counterparts in Mexico City or Adelaide or Lagos, and very little
in common with dominant aesthetic forms in their immediate geographical
vicinity (or elsewhere). Location has ceased to be of paramount
importance, although located-ness hasnt. We are strongly
located in the city in which we work, in our here and now,
but we do not define ourselves in terms of our location, rather
we define ourselves in terms of the practices that we are engaged
in.
The internet in fact allows us to build everyday and concrete
bridges and collaborative contexts where the origins (or locations)
of the people collaborating together matter less than the destinations
(and the vectors) that they are going towards, or traveling on.
The work that we do reflects the very specific conditions of
a large, chaotic, industrial, cosmopolitan city which is connected
through flows of information, finance, and industrial processes
to the whole world. While we may hesitate to use the term Indian
to describe our work, we are certain that our work speaks to the
specific, simultaneously global and local realities of working
and living in a city like Delhi, and of engaging with the diverse
and complex histories of modernity in South Asia, as reflected
in media cultures and practices.
This means that our work does in fact reflect the popular print,
narrative, visual or cinematic histories of urban spaces in this
part of the world. These are very specific histories, and the
addition of the word Indian detracts from their concreteness
and specificity. These histories emerged out of the global encounters
that people in South Asian urban spaces had with the world throughout
history and particularly from the nineteenth century onwards.
These included interactions of those engaged in forging a new
public culture in cities like Calcutta, Delhi, Bombay, Lahore,
and Pune with lithographers in Hamburg, writers in London, typesetters
in Zurich, photographic pioneers in Paris, engineers in Boston,
miniature painters in Tabriz and Florence, weavers in Sumatra,
storytellers in Zanzibar and ceramic artists in Beijing and Kyoto.
The fabric of contemporaneity in South Asia is a result of an
array of cross-cultural encounters like these, and it would be
unrealistic to see what is happening today (say in the digital
domain) as disconnected from this history.
It is because we are strongly located in a city like Delhi that
we also know that we are part of, and contribute to, a global
domain of aesthetic and cultural practice.
Mike Caloud: English dominates computer culture, and is
also a large part of Indian life. Do you think the languages of
India will be cast aside, in favor of English, within Indias
computer culture? Is an exclusive use of English a possible future
for Indian computer culture?
Sarai: (answered by Ravikant, ravikant@sarai.net)
The proposal embedded in the query is not entirely new. A suggestion
to this effect was made in the colonial period as well. The marginal
success of that legacy can still be traced in the post-colonial
army pedagogical practices. The instructors use Roman English
to conduct their classes held in Hindi. So, we are talking about
a change in the script only, not language per se. There are quite
a few mailing lists running in Hindi today that use roman to communicate
in Hindi. I deploy the same method in writing my mails to people
who have become comfortable with reading/writing theirs in Hindi.
I also believe that Hindi speakers should take up English in a
big way, if they really wish to help the cause of Hindi.
Your question however, suggests a radical language shift, which
is different from the above case, which is actually a contingent,
strategic measure, a stopgap arrangement waiting to be abandoned
as soon as computers become Hindi-literate. The suggestion is
based on an erroneous assumption that English is a very common
language in India. Contrary to the conclusion we might reach based
on the proliferation of English- medium schools, even in small
towns and villages, the fact is that Hindi- medium students would
outnumber those reading in English even in a metropolitan city
like Delhi. Also note that the newspaper with the highest circulation
in the country is a Hindi one (Dainika Bhaskar) to be followed
by the Malayalam Manorama. So I do not see a future exclusively
with English as either bright or immediate or preferable.
It is not a question of cultural identity only that makes people
prefer their own languages to others. It is also a question of
comfort, the sense of feeling at home in their own languages.
It is also a faith in the individual geniuses of languages: you
must have heard this oft-made comment among bi-lingual speakers,
for example: it cant be said as beautifully in Hindi
(or Urdu or English), depending on what is being referred to.
A whole tehzib (manner) cannot be translated instantaneously.
And every translation, while enabling portability also entails
loss.
The idea of exclusive dependence on one language or the other
is unacceptable. People in India are natural at practicing bi-
or multi- lingualism and they have had to add English to their
list of linguistic skills. This is indeed happening. In fact with
the computer and the internet there is a chance that certain languages
that lost out in the print-race of 18th-19th-20th centuries may
now skip the whole intermediary stage and jump straight from the
oral to the digital. So, English (because you cant do without
it) in the company of local/regional languages would constitute
a healthy public domain in India.
Mike Caloud: What are some of the new and future projects
coming out of Sarai, including media projects, social activism,
and community outreach? Where do you want to see your organization
go?
Sarai: At the moment, Sarai is very busy. People at Sarai
are working on a number of different areas and projects. We are
gearing up to produce (at the end of February [2002], to coincide
with our first anniversary) the second Sarai Reader - The Cities
of Everyday Life - which will contain original writing, image-text
essays, and discussions on city spaces and urban culture. There
are plans to publish a Sarai Reader in Hindi in the summer.
Today, Sarai includes under its ambit a media lab which is a
focus of creative and experimental work in various media (video,
audio, print, internet), a programme for the development of Hindi
language resources in cyberspace, a free software development
programme, a public access space (the Interface Zone) which is
a platform for the exhibition of new media projects - and an active
Outreach Programme (The Cyber Mohalla Project - or - Cyber Neighbourhood
Project) which works in a working- class squatter settlement in
central Delhi to create resources of digital creativity for young
people.
Additionally, two inter-disciplinary research & practice
projects - Mapping the City, and Publics & Practices in the
History of the Present - act as catalysts for a variety of intellectual
and creative interventions at Sarai.
Sarai places a great deal of emphasis on developing new and critical
interdisciplinary theoretical work. The research agenda of Sarai
is organized towards two complementary themes - understanding
the place of the media in urban public practice and consciousness,
and reflections on the city as constituted through representations
and technologies. The research on media is directed towards understanding
the rhythms and routines of daily life in the city as mediated
through words, images, and sounds. Our particular concern is with
the possibilities involved in peoples relationship to the
media, the domain of needs, desires, work
and leisure, creativity and communication practices that the media
world opens up.
The analysis of urban life attends to the varied dimensions of
everyday life. These range from planning and housing to geographies
of the city, mediated through work, leisure, transport, and communication.
Technological forms that underwrite contemporary urban experience
as well as the social practices through which the city is imagined
and acted upon will be addressed in our research.
The Cyber Mohalla project at Sarai continues to be active, and
a Cyber Mohalla Diaries will be published in February, which will
render the work of the project and the way in which the young
people who are engaged with the project look at the city, and
use tools of digital creativity to reflect on their lives.
We (the Raqs Media Collective, at the Sarai Media Lab) are also
working on a number of new media projects which examine questions
related to claims and contests around issues of space and access
in the urban environment, and explore the idea of a digital
commons. We hope to realize at least three to four major
new media projects around these themes this year on a variety
of platforms, on the Internet, as installations, and in the form
of publications.
We will also be working on a hypertext project on surveillance
titled the Global Village Health Manual Version 2, which takes
off from where an earlier work, Global Village Health Manual Version
1, left off in terms of its examination of how our bodies inscribe
and are inscribed upon in cyberspace.
The Sarai calendar is full each month with screenings, talks,
workshops, seminars, and exhibitions. We have had seminars and
workshops with students on cyberculture, with artists on digital
art and new media technologies, seminars on cinema and the city,
a number of curated film screenings (including Iranian Cinema,
Hong Kong Action Films, Science Fiction and the Urban Imaginary),
and exhibitions of new media art works arising out of collaborative
artists residency programmes.
This year began with a photographic hypertextual work - The
Street is My Country - by a photographer from Dhaka, Bangladesh,
Syeda Farhana Zaman, who looked at the marginalization of migrants
in the city. Recently, we have undertaken our first experiments
with streaming audio - members of the Sarai community participated
in an internet radio programme for four days in February to coincide
with the World Social Forum at Porto Alegre.
We are organizing a conference on Information and Politics in
March [2002], which will include discussions and presentations
by activists, artists, and researchers on surveillance, censorship,
free speech, cyber laws, and the right to information campaign
in India. Apart from these, this year will see more international
collaboration events at Sarai, and a renewed focus on free software
culture related projects.
As part of its public initiative, Sarai is interested in media
cultures that lie in the shadow of technological and social elites.
We are interested in speaking to critical voices that produce
and live the new media, which may exist in the street, the software
factory, the worlds of the local videowalla, the neighbourhood
Public Call Office/cyber cafÈ, the street photographer,
and the gray markets in music, computers, and other media-ware.
This is the electronic everyday, which resides in the shadows
of the spectacular media space conjured by the media empires in
South Asia, will be very much an area where Sarais work
is slated to grow in the near future.
The Sarai website and the digital interface located in the Interface
Zone at Sarai render all of Sarais work public. This includes
an emerging archive of urban culture, an online gallery of new
media works, and an active discussion list - the Reader-List which
began in February 2001 and has more than three hundred subscribers
at present. The Reader List is archived online at http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/.
We host a number of other discussion lists as well, including
solaris@sarai.net (on IT
and Development) and cr-india@sarai.net
(on the campaign for community radio). The monthly Sarai newsletter
goes out to more than 1300 people.
Sarai is becoming recognized as an important alternative venue
in Delhi for discussions and workshops on the politics of media
culture and urban space, and as a space where many young people
can feel comfortable in an increasingly constricted cultural milieu.
In laying open the possibilities of a new communicative ethic,
and a space for connectivity between different strands of intellectual
work, cultural intervention, technological innovation and a commitment
to free speech and open culture Sarai hopes to create a modest
autonomous space for creativity in Delhi.
All this should give you a fair idea of what goes on at Sarai.
http://www.sarai.net/
http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/
|