About this site

I recently asked on facebook if my web presence needed to be updated to be more accessible. I got a flood of responses from other artists, archivists and smart people exploring the confusion of having or not having a website. I feel conflicted about it. Like, really conflicted. I called myself a bad archivist for the past few years as I produced so many projects but could not remember what they are. In a way, this website is to help me communicate to you, and to me, what I have done. I also found this response from Rick Prelinger to be especially helpful:

“I don’t believe any of us can be “bad archivists” because there is no clear model of what a “good archivist” might be at this time. Does it mean saving everything? No, unless you organize it. Does it mean documenting everything? Not necessarily — if your work critiques of rejects concepts of property, then it’s worth thinking about how arts documentation becomes property, and often hotly contested property at that. Does it mean maintaining an ongoing, public record of one’s work? Well, that is not necessarily archival — it feels more like outreach and communication. I would put forward that one of the key attributes of the work many of us do is the tension between the immediate moment and whatever chunk of posterity we might try to claim. The decision to collect, preserve and make the record accessible takes one’s work into a completely new place, a place that can easily be problematic and hard to inhabit, and I think the tension between ephemerality and preservation is highly productive — it’s like a wave on which we ought to be able to ride triumphantly on when we can. Not everything should be saved, and not everything should be pitched. “Archiving” is not an absolute value, anyway, because loss is formative — we construct histories and narratives based on presence, but also on absence, and there is no stronger impetus to build new histories than the sense that something has been lost, stolen or suppressed. Glad you asked!”