30×
MFRU
Three decades of worrying about technologies
Q9/10
What do you think are the key insights gained from 30 years of documenting the MFRU—examining its archives and observing the historical narratives of the festival?
Q9/10
What do you think are the key insights gained from 30 years of documenting the MFRU—examining its archives and observing the historical narratives of the festival?
MFRU has consistently fulfilled its role as a hub of innovation in Maribor and across Slovenia. It has served as a window to the world, bringing creators and theorists such as Isabelle Arvers, Patricia Gouveia, and Maurizio Martinuci TeZ to MB, and as a glimpse into the future. However, this record also reveals that festival narratives have always been more or less successful adaptations to resistance and resource constraints.
1/4
The festival introduced concepts that we encountered for the first time as schoolchildren and then as students—I believe it was a great opportunity that this small place on the Drava offered us.
I am a native of Maribor, and I could say that I am a child of the MFRU and Kiblix. Maribor has two computer, intermedia, new media, transmedia open-source festivals, and I was actively involved in both. When I was in high school, MFRU started, and I was a regular attendee. Even before the trilogy, I curated part of the festival and was involved in several editions in different forms. For example, Metka (Golec) and I, as SONDA for two years, took care of the overall look of the festival. I say "child of the festival" because I was influenced by the two festivals while growing up in Maribor. The concepts that we saw and were introduced to for the first time as schoolchildren and then as students—I think it was a great opportunity that this small place on the Drava offered. Marko Ornik and I were very passionate about bringing the MFRU and Kiblix together into one common event. Until a year ago, there was the KONS story, which I brought into the MKC as the Maribor Partner of the KONS network.
I throw things on the table in a fragmented way, but the truth is that I regularly observe the festival from all angles. In Koper, at the Philosophy and Theory of Visual Culture course, I submitted a proposal for a PhD under the supervision of Bojana Kunst, entitled "Festival as Cultural Performance: a Comparison of Ars Electronica and MFRU." I had to halt this process early because the department was being closed down at the turn of the Bologna system, and because I had to survive on art, I didn't finish the thesis. I couldn't bear it. I conducted quite a few interviews about this difference, and the topic interested me enormously. I studied new media at the Weibel Institute, before that ethnology and cultural anthropology. From this academic background, I came up with the idea of Hyperfilm and browsing through the festival archive, which is basically very disorganized, both online and physically. We ourselves, years and years after we started, at least forcibly organized the four or five boxes of the archive by year, photographed all the CDs, all the documents, and created publicly accessible video works from this material. The online platform was also accessible to the blind and deaf. The problem was that it was programmed in Flash. Flash is a story that no longer works.
When we approached the Hyperfilm, we understood that none of us were archivists or librarians—and as a result, we had no ambition to perfect the archive. Such an aspiration requires a very different approach. Hyperfilm is a conceptual idea—a creative, artistic examination of a specific archival entity.
We approached the hyperfilm project knowing that none of us are archivists or librarians - and consequently, we had no ambition to perfect the archive. Such an endeavor requires a very different time. Hyperfilm is a conceptual idea - a creative, artistic exploration of a specific archival entity. While I understood that the history was not perfectly organized, I knew what we were getting into. I recall old versions of websites that were not preserved. There were servers here, servers there, but no physical media, nothing. From that perspective, the archive was lost. We organized the material by year, at the very least. We didn't manage to create catalogs or lists, nor was that the intention. With Hyperfilm, we aimed to narrate the story of the MFRU archive and to inspire someone, anyone, to undertake this task, perhaps as part of a research project. Unfortunately, many aspects remain lost. With every new curator, curatorial assistant, colleague, the need for an archive becomes apparent, but we're disheartened to find that there's practically no archive at all.
1/4
The search for the MFRU archive was always there. But no one ever knew where or how this archive existed.
Today, the computer narrative has evolved into the intermedia narrative; we now have festivals like Pixxel Point and ROR, both in Nova Gorica, as well as two in Maribor, all focusing on intermedia. However, the approaches can vary significantly, let's be clear about that. I believe it's beneficial to revisit the archive from time to time and attempt to narrate its contents.
When I was involved with MFRU, locating the archive was challenging. It was always a subject of search; nobody ever knew where or how it was stored. Given that we are in the digital age and MFRU is part of the computer narrative, it's imperative that its history is digitally accessible. As we approach the 30-year mark since its inception, and soon it will be 60, it will be intriguing to reevaluate. This is our last chance to access the archives before we lose contact with the initial participants. I may be exaggerating, but I strongly believe we should initiate this process now.
Regarding Hyperfilm, I recall that it requires regular updates. When it's rediscovered, it often doesn't function properly, prompting updates, and the cycle continues. It's a bit of a humorous situation, updating it, discovering it again, and updating once more. (laughs)
1/4
Nostalgia doesn't make much of a difference. But I think it's good for the festival to have a background, to be aware of it and to show it. To see that the concept is not of today, but that it actively and transparently builds on its history.
1/3