New director takes over Firstsite (From Gazette)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting GAZETTE NEWS to 80360, or email
New director takes over Firstsite
3:45pm Monday 11th February 2013 in News By Wendy Brading
Matthew Rowe, new director of Firstsite
MATTHEW Rowe is under no illusions.
“I know Firstsite has had its problems. I was aware it was a project fraught with difficulties and, like many publically-funded capital projects, it had a difficult gestation period.”
Matthew Rowe is an intelligent and measured man.
He is also positive, focussed and passionate about contemporary art and his new responsibility, Colchester’s Firstsite contemporary art venue.
Mr Rowe, 43, has taken over as Firstsite director and it is a challenge he relishes.
He has impressive credentials. He studied History of Art at York University before studying for a postgraduate degree at the Courtauld Institute of Art in London.
The Tate St Ives gallery opened in June 1993 and the following month, Mr Rowe began work there.
What he learnt in those early days, has stood him in good stead throughout his career.
“It was an amazing experience,” said Mr Rowe, “in seeing how an organisation could transform a town.
“But I think the Tate was slightly naive in thinking it would be plain sailing.
“I think they took their eye off the ball in terms of the community.”
It is not a mistake he intends to make at Firstsite.
Mr Rowe is all too aware of the importance of community involvement.
He said: “I have great admiration for what has been achieved here.
“There is a journey to go on, as with any public institution, and I am looking forward to working with the team, the stakeholders and partners to enable Firstsite to reach its full potential.
“It has a tremendous reputation in terms of supporting young and emerging artists and giving them the opportunity to develop their work and has an amazing public programme in terms of working in the community.
“We want to make it an inclusive experience here in the building and also through our partnership programmes in the community.
“It is slightly bizarre Firstsite has been criticised as being elitist - the learning and outreach programmes work with thousands of youngsters.”
His optimism is grounded in realism.
He knows the criticisms which were levelled at Firstsite in its early days.
The cost of the gallery almost doubled from the original estimate of £14.8 million to the final figures of £25 million.
Throw in years of delays and Colchester’s iconic gallery had a difficult birth.
Mr Rowe, again, is reasoned in his response.
“Quite rightly there were some robust questions asked but I think the organisation is beginning to answer its critics.”
About 170,000 people visited the venue in its first year - 10,000 ahead of target. It is hoped a similar number will visit this year.
“We want to bring contemporary art to a broad audience,” said Mr Rowe. “That is through outstanding exhibitions and the best challenging contemporary art.”
Mr Rowe’s last job was as the artistic director of the Towner Contemporary Art Museum in Eastbourne.
The similarities between the Towner and Firstsite are striking.
The new Towner opened in April 2009 in an £8.58 million purpose-built gallery. Both are part of Plus Tate partnership and regularly funded by the Arts Council England.
During his time at the Towner, Mr Rowe won plaudits for the gallery’s successes including record visitor numbers and quality exhibitions.
The gallery is also about the same distance from London as Firstsite. Critics have said there is no future to a gallery competing with galleries in the capital. But Mr Rowe rebutts this.
“I don’t think there is such a thing as being too close to London.
“Some of the exhibitions Firstsite is doing, you could not imagine at any venue in London.
“I think we are establishing a profile and it is time to cement that.”
Mr Rowe brings fresh eyes to Firstsite.
He accepts criticism over the swathes of unused white wall space in Firstsite and said he believed it would be possible to better use the “architectural space of the building”.
“I think there has been some disquiet about the amount of white, empty wall space in the building.
“The design of the architecture, which is a landmark in terms of UK centres, is a unique experience.
“It is not a white cube as many galleries are, it is an active space.
“We could use the white sides but not all the time.
“The foyer, too, is a key opportunity for some large installations and there is potential to use space outside the building.”
Mr Rowe also recognises the gallery must earn its keep.
“We have tremendously generous public funders. We have to be thinking about how we can maximise our income and also the private investment.
“Public funding in decreasing across the board and we need to think of innovative ways to deal with that.”
Mr Rowe lives by his balanced philosophies - he has to, he is a West Ham United fan.
“As a student, I took advantage of the superb student discount and went every week. I also travelled with them.
“Anyone who supports West Hamm is not in it for the glory. You are there for the art and the craft of the playing.”
Comments(93)
roger bacon
says...
6:05pm Mon 11 Feb 13
Barside1
says...
6:30pm Mon 11 Feb 13
This includes verification of visitor data.
Firstsite have never responded to my requests for data and I have instructed Arts Council England to look into this and a number of related matters.
As for visitor figures we are working from the following template that indicated the most severe drop in visitor figures for any art gallery in the country in any given year - well, any of the 24 that we contacted.
Year 1.
Weeks 1-6 50,000
Average per week - 8,333
Weeks 7-26 72,000
Average per week - 3,600
Weeks 27-52 50,000
Average per week - 1,923
This data was supplied by Firstsite to ACE.
We actually think these figures may indeed be correct, but what they are showing is a reduction from 172,000 visitors in Year 1 to a projection of 52 x 1,923 minus an unknown factor.
This is coming out at somewhere between 90,000 and a 100,000 for Year 2, and that would be a disaster.
I have visitor figures for Year 2 that run up to last week.
I would be quite willing to meet up with Matthew Rowe to discuss my findings.
Despite my angle, I would be quite happy to help Firstsite if they thought I could be of any value ( non fee ).
hughie-s
says...
7:23pm Mon 11 Feb 13
"So it took two years longer than it should have done.."
"It has to be said the Towner Art Gallery has nothing but contempt for the local art community.
Not only have they excluded the two long-standing Eastbourne art groups from their new building, they now expect the same people as rate payers to dig deeper into their pockets to find a huge budget increase for what should have been a vibrant focal point for local artists, but is in fact, an unwelcoming, soulless, elitist environment."
"The enterprise has been clumsily managed, shrouded in unnecessary secrecy, patronisingly overhyped to the local community – and now its’ ever-increasing cost threatens to sabotage any attempt to develop a long-term strategy for Eastbourne’s wider cultural development. "
Barside1
says...
7:26pm Mon 11 Feb 13
However, it's about time someone from the council, funders or media fronted up to Firstsite and asked them some tough questions.
The Firstsite visitor counting system has in effect been paid for by the public, it's a sophisticated piece of kit that gives hourly, daily, and weekly breakdowns. In fact, any kind of breakdown you require..
So let's stop **** footing around and allow people see what is going on.
And just to confirm, my concerns are not so much for the data in weeks 1 to 52, but the 'unreleased' visitor figures up until last week - now that is going to take a lot of explaining by someone!
I'm not sure how many followers are aware, but Firstsite's target for 10 years was 1,500.000. That breaks down nicely to 150,000 per annum.
We even have the model for that data too - and to be fair to Firstsite, that target came about from a think tank / 'blue sky thinking' initiative in Westminster ( by way of a big house on Lexden Road, Colchester ).
Actually, and again in fairness to Firstsite, up until yesterday morning, I was missing one of the first pieces in the jigsaw.
Further, I would like to thank some of those who are currently employed by Firstsite for their openess and assistance in answering some probing questions.
Firstsite is fortunate to have some very decent guys on board.
Barside1
says...
9:31pm Mon 11 Feb 13
At the latest count, we had 234 replies from visitors on their reasons for entering the building.
Here are some of those replies -
'To praise the Lord'.
'To ask the way to the castle'.
'To use the ladies'.
'To get my guitar'.
'Dollop'.
'To meet my girlfriend'.
'To hide from the police'.
'To get first aid'.
'Salsa'.
'To meet Jesus'.
'Potato printing'.
Some even went in to see the exhibitions.
This all leads to something.
Of the 172,000 claimed visitors, how many went into the building to see what was on view?
Our findings suggest that this number would be of concern to some, certainly the guys at ACE were very surprised to learn of the sunday morning gospel group and a large number of activities that are a very long way off centre of art.
We have a projected breakdown of these initial replies that fall into the following groups.
Exhibitions and art / changing & static.
Art related workshops etc.
Corporate, seminars, weddings and other activities non related to art.
Film, books, talks etc.
The Restaurant / Cafe.
Childrens activities
Ladies & Gentlemens facilities.
Other.
What one is left with is that far fewer people appear to be going to Firstsite to see art than the figures claimed by Firstsite ( 80,000 ) while in their final year at The Minories - although we are not sure what these eighty thousand people were actually engaged in.
All very worrying.
Well, it should be.
Barside1
says...
11:08pm Mon 11 Feb 13
Stuff like this -
'Firstsite will bring life-changing power of art to hundreds of thousands of people, and act as a dynamic new social hub for Colchester...will draw visitors from all over the world'.
'Firstsite will bring hundreds of new jobs to Colchester'.
'Firstsite will bring 500,000 visitors to Colchester a year'.
'Firstsite will develop non-prescriptive tools for learning to look and for understanding something of the production and consumption of visual culture'.
'Organisational and architectural transistion from The Minories to the new site'.
'Sitting in harmonious juxtaposition to the surrounding rich mix of heritage in Colchester's built environment, firstsite / newsite heralds our diverse and vibrant culture offer'.
'We are moving forward on a programme of pro-active strategies'.
'Firstsite will fly the flag for art in the East'.
'We will educate the townsfolk of Colchester in the language of art'.
'We have surfed the waves of our success at The Minories and the gold is now glittering on the horizon'.
Then we have this from 'an advisor'.
'I am confirming from our study that the ( Firstsite ) development will create a financial black hole that you will be unable to plug'.
And this -
'You will wish you passed this on to Norwich, we cannot support this project going ahead in Colchester'.
And this -
'It will be a five minute wonder and you will spend years picking up the pieces'.
So, the guys at the steering wheel were told, but they drove on without even a glance in the wing mirror.
Boris
says...
1:48am Tue 12 Feb 13
jim_bo
says...
8:42am Tue 12 Feb 13
One question I have is who was driving?
Was it council officer led or perhaps an accolade seeking Councillor, are they still serving and what has no one been brought to account for what appears to be a number of very poor ideas.
Barside1
says...
8:50am Tue 12 Feb 13
Firstsite have had their opportunity to provide verification of data - they still have not done so.
We have a pretty good idea of what is going on here now. That's Firstsite up to Westminster!
It is not only the public that Firstsite seem to be secretive about when it comes to revealing data and trends - we were amazed to learn that even their 'Relationship Manager' at Arts Council England could be taking some of the data 'on trust' - just like the media have had to.
Arts Council England were unable to nail this for me in simple language - so I have to be a little careful on that one.
All of those in the loop seem most adept at using language as a mask of the truth and factual information than one can understand.
Still, we are not deterred, we are ahead of the game now.
Barside1
says...
9:07am Tue 12 Feb 13
It's quite a mix!
Some, if not all of those involved really believed in the project at the time.
They were warned! - but certain individuals thought they know best.
Firstsite are being used as puppets to some degree.
jammin
says...
10:36am Tue 12 Feb 13
Cleggeron
says...
10:42am Tue 12 Feb 13
Cleggeron
says...
10:49am Tue 12 Feb 13
Given all the controversy surrounding Firstsite, this sort of article is just propaganda, accentuating all the positives and putting none of the negatives. The whole tone of the article explains all we need to know about why the Gazette has a poor track record in doing any proper journalism on the venue - and why it's circulation continues to drop off a cliff.
And I think Mr Rowe sums it all up perfectly: "Some of the exhibitions Firstsite is doing, you could not imagine at any venue in London."
Boris
says...
10:52am Tue 12 Feb 13
Cleggeron wrote:May be best to let the MP give the names in the House of Commons under parliamentary privilege. If Bob does this, it could help restore his somewhat tarnished recent record.
Fantastic work Barside - will you be publishing all the names and facts at some point in the future?
Boris
says...
10:56am Tue 12 Feb 13
Cleggeron wrote:You are right, this article was very poor considering that Wendy is the senior journalist at the Gazette and Standard. She may have felt obliged to give him an easy ride when Mr Rowe is new in the job and new to Colchester, but she had better take the gloves off from now on.
And, Wendy Brading, what a great puff piece you've written here. Not a difficult question in sight, lots of bigging-up: "intelligent", "measured" , "impressive", etc.
Given all the controversy surrounding Firstsite, this sort of article is just propaganda, accentuating all the positives and putting none of the negatives. The whole tone of the article explains all we need to know about why the Gazette has a poor track record in doing any proper journalism on the venue - and why it's circulation continues to drop off a cliff.
And I think Mr Rowe sums it all up perfectly: "Some of the exhibitions Firstsite is doing, you could not imagine at any venue in London."
romantic
says...
11:54am Tue 12 Feb 13
Would be great to see this information out in the public realm, as there are plenty of us who would certainly be interested to know more. This is, after all, our money which is being spent, either directly through CBC grants or indirectly through ACE and other routes. The Gazette, I suspect, is not going to publish anything, even though this should be one of their major stories. But I´m afraid images of tough investigative journalism seem sadly misplaced, because they are too worried CBC will take all their advertising somewhere else.
Interested also to know that you have contacts on the inside. Always a good thing, but again you´d need to find a way to publish which does not reveal who they are.
Having said all this, I do think we also need to give this new guy a little space to see what he can do. He himself is not connected with anything that has gone before. The Gazette piece is indeed powder-puff, but let´s give him a chance to get the visitor numbers properly up, so they don´t need to fake them. As it´s our money poured into this, we gain nothing by the place failing, so to a certain extent, we need to separate the past from the present and future. Yes, keep digging to get the truth about the dodgy dealings of Firstsite, but also, we do have a stake in the place actually working long-term.
Barside1
says...
12:36pm Tue 12 Feb 13
The article refers to 'West Hamm' - has Wendy got a little confused here with the Nigel Henderson / Eduardo Paolozzi 'Hammer Prints Ltd?
Despite the work we have done, I do find myself wanting to support the Visual Arts Facility, that might seem strange to some.
All I ask is for openess and truthfulness.
As for any legal implications, well, we do seem to have touched on an area which is possibly getting a little close to a form of a 'white collar crime'.
It was not our intention to search for anything of this nature, it just kind of popped up
It's not that we are trying to bring anyone to task - but in the circumstances, we have to probe if a form 'misrepresentation' is at work here.
This aspect refects on a recent observation and another that goes back to the days at The Minories.
Feisty CBC
says...
12:59pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Anyone who ever walks past Firstsite would scoff at the visitor numbers that are given.
jim_bo
says...
1:45pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Perhaps Mr Rowe deserves a chance or some local help?
Bert_Stimpson
says...
2:26pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Unfortunately, it is too embarrassing for anyone associated with this project to admit it has been an abject failure and a financial disaster since its inception.
No one wants to lose face so we continue chucking millions at it each year. It is a Kafkaesque public sector farce. It would be funny if it wasn't our money being frittered away.
The facts and figures published regarding visitor numbers are whatever they need to be to keep the Firsts*ite gravy train rolling.
Imagine you're a sales person that has to hit a target of £1m a year to keep your job. Now imagine that you could say whatever you wanted and no one could look it up, no one could check it and there was no third party that could contradict you.
That's Firsts*ite's position with visitor numbers.
The first public official that says let's pull the plug on this madness will get my vote. The lunatics really are running the asylum.
Barside1
says...
2:54pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Especially the para that begins 'Imagine'.
We were in shock when we realised that those in the loop appeared to be either turning a blind eye to data or even assisting to put falsified stats into the public domain.
And yes, I would say this does amount to a gravy train that needs stopping in its tracks.
Because if someone does not get a grip on Firstsite and do an HMV on it, the train will run even further out of control.
We have one particular funder who has actually said 'I have learned more about Firstsite from you guys than I have from Firstsite itself'.
Hamiltonandy
says...
3:04pm Tue 12 Feb 13
.
A viable financial use for the VAF has to be found and it will not happen whilst the Firstsite parasites are infesting the art gallery. How much more public money is to be wasted before reality dawns on our deluded councillors?
Barside1
says...
6:19pm Tue 12 Feb 13
The 'back of house' ops are sucking up money like a turbo powered super hoover.
With each hour that passes the operation racks up more and more expenditure, little wonder when the entire building is open in the evening for activities that pull in just a half a dozen people.
Firstsite have had some epic moments - some due to their own mis-calculated judgement.
Here are a few quotes from Firstsite staff ( current and former ).
'The restaurant was sunk before it served it's first oyster.'
'As if the opening show wasn't flat enough, we had to try and explain the Steven Claydon exhibition to the locals, it got a lot easier after the first week or so, because by then the word got round and virtually no-one came to see it'.
'We did have a lot of people in for the initial show over the first few weeks, but the reaction was very mixed and we feared we had lost some of these people for good'.
'They said the opening hours had to be cut, and we had only just opened'.
'Suddenly, it was like - the exhibition space will be closed on Mondays'.
'They were drilling up the paving slabs right outside the front door, it sounded like a building site'.
'They concentrate on wheeling in the kids for activities, but I think it's taking it too far when they want to engage Under 2's'.
'I did like working there, but I could sense it wasn't going as they had hoped after the first 3 months'.
'There was hostility, not aimed at us, but at certain exhibits, I honestly thought one particular individual would smash up some of the work - he was shaking with rage, just as well he almost fainted and had to go outside for some fresh air'.
'We have found a few people asleep, yes, we thought one might be dead'.
Bert_Stimpson
says...
6:33pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Great quote! Barside1: did you analyse the last set of accounts filed with the Charities Commission? I'm sure the taxpaying public would love to know what percentage of the annual funding goes on the firsts*ite wage bill.
Rules of firsts*ite:
1st RULE: You do not talk about firsts*ite funding
2nd RULE: You DO NOT talk about firsts*ite funding
3rd RULE: If someone says "stop the funding" firsts*ite is over.
4th RULE: Only two people in firsts*ite at the same time.
5th RULE: Sometimes only one person in firsts*ite at a time.
6th RULE: No plebs, no commoners.
7th RULE: firsts*ite will go on as long as we can get away with it.
8th RULE: If this is your first visit to firsts*ite, you probably won't come back.
Barside1
says...
8:24pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Perhaps you were reading through some of these posts.
It was 19.28 on our timer.
You were frowning, but you won't be when you meet us, we want to help!
Jess Jephcott
says...
9:33pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Hamiltonandy
says...
10:18pm Tue 12 Feb 13
.
The Labour group wanted to re-use the abandoned St James/Roman House at a fraction of the cost. Costs would have been further reduced by use of volunteers to refurbish the abandoned buildings.
.
The Mercury theatre and the Colchester facilities could have been improved with the spare cash. Proposed art galleries, such as, in Wivenhoe, Jaywick and Halstead could have gone ahead.
.
But no, the cultural barbarians put the lot on one structurally deficient and impractical building. It is the local rate payer stuck with the impending expensive maintenance on top of the huge running costs for a tiny art elite. I will not rest until the parasites are evicted and financial reality dawns at the town hall. Colchester Council's morally deficient elected dictatorship deserves all the present humiliation and that to come.
Barside1
says...
10:19pm Tue 12 Feb 13
'Run that one past me again, that is a candidate for Top of the Pops'.
**** ******
'They called a meeting and asked if I would cover front of house. It was my first time and it was a bit scarey because I had heard about some of the people that used to wander in'.
Barside1
'Like the Lithuanian bycycle thief'.
**** ******
'Oh yes, he started to draw a picture of a giraffe on the wall once'.
Barside1
'What was it like?'
**** ******
'Actually, it was rather good, only it had 2 heads and too many legs.
Anyway I'm standing there trying to look like I know what I'm doing and this African couple come running towards me waving these tickets in my face'.
Barside1
'And you had no events on that day?'
**** ******
'No, and I had to explain to them that Southend Airport was about 40 miles away'.
Barside1
'That's far out'.
**** ******
'They were really upset, I think they would have missed their flight to Belfast'.
Barside1
'Has Vinoly designed any airport terminals?'
**** ******
'Not as far as I know'.
Barside1
says...
10:40pm Tue 12 Feb 13
'Have you seen the map that places Firstsite behind the Fire Station?'
**** ******
'Yes, and there is an online piece that describes Firstsite as being located in Chelmsford - it even mentions the shops there'.
Barside1
'Was it right that one of your 'front of house' was unable to assist in directing someone to Lewis Gardens?'.
**** ******
'Probably, I didn't even know myself, like - what gardens anyway?.
Bert_Stimpson
says...
10:54pm Tue 12 Feb 13
Jess Jephcott wrote:Jess, you're missing the point. The money should not have been allocated for this public sector folly in the first place. It is not a case of 'What town should have it instead of us?'
What a sad and miserable lot you are. What I don't understand is where you think the money should have gone. What town should have had it instead of us? Is this really all about the loss of that horrible squalid little bus station that you have lost? You are all a disgrace to Colchester. I wish you would all go and live someplace else. You won't be missed. We have such a wonderful town and all you lot want to do is drag us down to your miserable level.
This country is in a fiscal hole. The solution is to stop digging and stop funding stupid projects (wherever they may be) and start focusing on what really matters.
You may not understand this. If so I apologise and will let you get back to your potato printing.
Over and out comrades.
Barside1
says...
10:58pm Tue 12 Feb 13
'Tell me about the art critic from London'.
**** ******
'Oh yes, she asked if we had a fire evacuation or something going on'.
Barside1
'What did you do?'
**** ******
'I phoned back of house and they said we didn't have one and what was I on about'.
Barside1
says...
11:26pm Tue 12 Feb 13
'Tell me about the saucepan incident'.
**** ******
'Oh my god, I'd just come back from the dentist and a mother came running up to the desk with a little boy and he had a saucepan stuck on his head'.
Barside1
'Was it an exhibit?'
**** ******
'We didn't know where it had come from'.
Barside1
'What did you do?'
**** ******
'I phone back of house and **** offered to take them to hospital'.
Barside1
says...
11:47pm Tue 12 Feb 13
'Tell me about the Polish lady with the little girl'.
**** ******
'****** who was on duty, and the lady was speaking in broken English - something like - 'we want to do dollop'.
Barside1
'What did ****** do?'
**** ******
'****** took them around to the ladies'.
Barside1
'Unreal'.
**** ******
'Next thing she's back at the desk saying we come to do dollop'.
Barside1
'Then what?'
**** ******
'Oh ******* knew what it was, only it was the wrong day'.
Boris
says...
1:25am Wed 13 Feb 13
Bert_Stimpson wrote:Jess is always missing the point. I don't know why he declares so much love for the VAF, but I think it is just to wind the rest of us up. I wish he would get back to prancing round town dressed as a Roman centurion, he is quite good at that. Likewise he is good at maintaining the on-line guide to Colchester pubs. But he is an immigrant to our borough, and he has the effrontery to tell us to go and live some place else.
Jess Jephcott wrote:Jess, you're missing the point. The money should not have been allocated for this public sector folly in the first place. It is not a case of 'What town should have it instead of us?'
What a sad and miserable lot you are. What I don't understand is where you think the money should have gone. What town should have had it instead of us? Is this really all about the loss of that horrible squalid little bus station that you have lost? You are all a disgrace to Colchester. I wish you would all go and live someplace else. You won't be missed. We have such a wonderful town and all you lot want to do is drag us down to your miserable level.
This country is in a fiscal hole. The solution is to stop digging and stop funding stupid projects (wherever they may be) and start focusing on what really matters.
You may not understand this. If so I apologise and will let you get back to your potato printing.
Over and out comrades.
And when he says "you are all a disgrace to Colchester", he really displays his ignorance. I have the honour to know Barside1, who has personally done far more for Colchester than Mr Jephcott, and his contribution to the aesthetic life of our town has been far greater than that of all the VAF's top honchos put together.
Jess Jephcott
says...
9:44am Wed 13 Feb 13
Bert_Stimpson
says...
10:48am Wed 13 Feb 13
Jess Jephcott wrote:Standing up? You're the last line of firsts*ite defence. The rest are hunkered down inside the golden turd wondering how many more pay packets they can scrounge from public funds before this madness ends...
I am a nobody for sure but that need not stop me from standing up to you spiteful people. We have an amazing arts facility now, with some amazing people behind it. I opposed the VAF in the beginning for some of the reasons that have been stated here but, now we have it, where is the point in trying to destroy it? We need to move on for the good of our wonderful town.
I can understand why firsts*ite employees defend the status quo: self-preservation pure and simple.
We may be stuck with the building, but that doesn't mean we have to keep lining the pockets of the firsts*ite employees year after year.
I'm not sure how intelligent you are Jess. Sometimes your thought processes seem a bit simplistic. Do yourself a favour. Take a good long look at the firsts*ite accounts, staff costs, Colchseter Council spending data.
Maybe you benefit financially from this gravy train somehow? I don't know. If that is the case, fair enough. If it is not the case, you've been hoodwinked. Did a firsts*ite bigwig say something nice to you once?
Barside1
says...
12:59pm Wed 13 Feb 13
CBC, Essex County Council and Arts Council England had all been in touch by late morning today.
The bottom line of this first issue is as follows.
There are two visitor projections for Firstsite in Year 2.
I have both of them.
Let's hope after meeting Firstsite we can get some information out to the public.
Jess - believe me, if I can do anything that helps Firstsite to engage in an improved way with the people of Colchester, then the several hundred hours I have put into this will be more than worthwhile.
I still believe the Visual Arts Facilty could have a great future - I think Firstsite got a lot of things wrong and I'm hopeful Matthew Rowe will do everything in his power to improve matters.
None of us are too big to be told we have got things wrong, and I have apologised to members of CBC in the last 24 hours for my method in seeking the truth.
wellnow
says...
1:32pm Wed 13 Feb 13
jut1972
says...
1:50pm Wed 13 Feb 13
Bert_Stimpson wrote:and thats different to other public sector funded organisations how?
Jess Jephcott wrote:Standing up? You're the last line of firsts*ite defence. The rest are hunkered down inside the golden turd wondering how many more pay packets they can scrounge from public funds before this madness ends...
I am a nobody for sure but that need not stop me from standing up to you spiteful people. We have an amazing arts facility now, with some amazing people behind it. I opposed the VAF in the beginning for some of the reasons that have been stated here but, now we have it, where is the point in trying to destroy it? We need to move on for the good of our wonderful town.
I can understand why firsts*ite employees defend the status quo: self-preservation pure and simple.
We may be stuck with the building, but that doesn't mean we have to keep lining the pockets of the firsts*ite employees year after year.
I'm not sure how intelligent you are Jess. Sometimes your thought processes seem a bit simplistic. Do yourself a favour. Take a good long look at the firsts*ite accounts, staff costs, Colchseter Council spending data.
Maybe you benefit financially from this gravy train somehow? I don't know. If that is the case, fair enough. If it is not the case, you've been hoodwinked. Did a firsts*ite bigwig say something nice to you once?
If your so anti the VAF go and list every councillor who supported it. Until they are removed nothing will change.
Bert_Stimpson
says...
2:20pm Wed 13 Feb 13
jut1972 wrote:Many public sector funded organisations deliver essential services and value for money. They deserve our support and even more funding in some cases.
Bert_Stimpson wrote:and thats different to other public sector funded organisations how?
Jess Jephcott wrote:Standing up? You're the last line of firsts*ite defence. The rest are hunkered down inside the golden turd wondering how many more pay packets they can scrounge from public funds before this madness ends...
I am a nobody for sure but that need not stop me from standing up to you spiteful people. We have an amazing arts facility now, with some amazing people behind it. I opposed the VAF in the beginning for some of the reasons that have been stated here but, now we have it, where is the point in trying to destroy it? We need to move on for the good of our wonderful town.
I can understand why firsts*ite employees defend the status quo: self-preservation pure and simple.
We may be stuck with the building, but that doesn't mean we have to keep lining the pockets of the firsts*ite employees year after year.
I'm not sure how intelligent you are Jess. Sometimes your thought processes seem a bit simplistic. Do yourself a favour. Take a good long look at the firsts*ite accounts, staff costs, Colchseter Council spending data.
Maybe you benefit financially from this gravy train somehow? I don't know. If that is the case, fair enough. If it is not the case, you've been hoodwinked. Did a firsts*ite bigwig say something nice to you once?
If your so anti the VAF go and list every councillor who supported it. Until they are removed nothing will change.
Unfortunately, firsts*ite does not fall into that category. It is a waste of money and has consistently failed to deliver. Its employees are the primary beneficiaries riding this public sector gravy train as long as they possibly can.
The councillors that support this ongoing fiasco should indeed be named and shamed. To say that until they are removed nothing will change is a defeatist attitude.
I support anything that draws fresh attention to this ongoing profligate waste of public money in Colchester.
Barside1
says...
7:44pm Wed 13 Feb 13
'I do wonder if they engage in any form of de-brief to measure the value of the community programmes...
....likewise, are they spreading the net too far by offering what amounts to a play school package?'
....I'm afraid I would do away with Dinky Disco's and hosting seasonal jolly up's, in fact, I would cull 30% of the programme and activities'.
ST
'There has always been this push towards education, and I used to think - well, some of the schools in Colchester are doing much better stuff than we were....
....yeah, it was a bit like, are we really the first and last word...there were a couple of local art teachers who said as much, in fact one of them went as far as to say - 'are you trying to put me out of a job?'
....I did look around the building and think - we could be doing something so much more exciting with this space, I know it will happen one day...
....they think they are forward thinking and cutting edge, but after sitting in on some of the meetings I was really disappointed'.
....'I did think some of them were up themselves'.
Jess Jephcott
says...
10:00pm Wed 13 Feb 13
Barside1
says...
8:49am Thu 14 Feb 13
We are driven by truth.
One thing our findings do indicate is that information is being put into the public domain to mask reality.
Eliminate the PR stooges and we could all breathe clearer air.
And for the record, some of the information we have aquired has been offered and not chased down.
Barside1
says...
10:40am Thu 14 Feb 13
This leads to it being far less likely that any information being released from PR machinery will be challenged.
This is all quite interesting, because it allows even more un-verified information and data to enter the public domain.
Any media resource to challenge certain PR that may have existed say 10 years ago has been stripped away in the cuts.
What is happening here - is that we aquired data in advance of it's release to the public and challenged that data.
Those stats were no doubt on their way to others in the chain who would certainly not be challenging anything, however distorted it may appear.
What we found incredible, was that one political source in Colchester was actually using a press reference as verification of related data, that we later found, he himself had supplied to the media!
And that information was incorrect.
There could be a lot at stake here -
like the entire 'Cultural Quarter', or rather, the parts of it that are still to be built.
romantic
says...
12:20pm Thu 14 Feb 13
To those who are suggesting that pursuing this somehow suggests knocking Colchester as a town, I would say the opposite is true. If these people operate dishonestly on this specific job, chances are that they have done the same on other matters too. This is public money, our money, and it is absolutely the case that things should be above board and transparent.
If Firstsite is not getting the projected number of visitors, it is not a matter for celebration. It seems that you are in communication with Firstsite, and I hope they accept that this can be used as a way to improve the place and make it a place more people want to visit.
I feel a certain amount of sympathy for Matthew Rowe. Presumably, he was recruited based on the visitor numbers given to him, so it may well be a matter of concern to him also. He can use this as chance to put things right, but of course a lot will depend on those above him and their reaction.
Do take care with these people, because I am sure they will play dirty if cornered.
Another Point of View
says...
1:00pm Thu 14 Feb 13
Barside1
says...
1:08pm Thu 14 Feb 13
Parts of it resemble Monty Python on acid.
super waluigi
says...
2:03pm Thu 14 Feb 13
I have never been a man of art. Far from it in fact.
I would like to ask Barside 1 what his full time job is? and what makes him qualified to carry out these so called inquires? Just asking of course.
Bert Simpson and co have had a problem with Firstsite for a while now, and it is about time they tried to understand that some people have a different opinion of the building and its contents. I am no fan, but I understand that there are plenty of people who are.
Back in 1980 there was 50 gyms across the country. 2010 there was 50,000. Statistics like this prove that you cannot guess what the future brings.
You might not like it, but try to embrace it. All it takes is a change in mind state, and less tunnel vision.
Good luck Mr Rowe, I would like Colchester to have success on all possible fronts. Be it football, First Site or the park and ride.
Bert_Stimpson
says...
3:16pm Thu 14 Feb 13
Super Waluigi, imagine someone at work asked you to do your own performance review and pay review and they would take whatever you came up with as the complete truth? What would you do?
Barside1
says...
3:46pm Thu 14 Feb 13
As you asked I can give you a little insight.
I am independent.
Non political.
Contributing newsfeeds based on truth to Sky News, BBC, ITV and Channel 4.
I spent Saturday afternoon at Hollesley Bay Prison in Suffolk with Mr Simon Hall who is serving a life sentence for a murder he did not commit.
I have written nine books, made 4 television documentaries, and over 100 short films.
Is that ok for you?
Oh, and almost forgot, paid half of a transfer fee for one of the best players Colchester United ever signed.
x
Bert_Stimpson
says...
3:51pm Thu 14 Feb 13
Barside1 wrote:Joel Thomas?
Super,
As you asked I can give you a little insight.
I am independent.
Non political.
Contributing newsfeeds based on truth to Sky News, BBC, ITV and Channel 4.
I spent Saturday afternoon at Hollesley Bay Prison in Suffolk with Mr Simon Hall who is serving a life sentence for a murder he did not commit.
I have written nine books, made 4 television documentaries, and over 100 short films.
Is that ok for you?
Oh, and almost forgot, paid half of a transfer fee for one of the best players Colchester United ever signed.
x
Barside1
says...
4:12pm Thu 14 Feb 13
Super, if you are still reading - I'm also the only living person to get an interview with a certain axe-murderer from the mean streets of Glasgow.
super waluigi
says...
5:14pm Thu 14 Feb 13
The fact that you invested money into Colchester united is magnificent. But it is completely irrelevant to the question I asked of you.
So you are basically a journalist? One who would appear to seek what he believes and attempt to prove it. What happened to seeing both sides of the story and making a fair judgement?
Your facts about what people said about First site is laughable. It is basic journalism that only a tabloid paper would spout in an attempt to divert some home truths. 'Meeting a friend' is a reaction I would expect to see, after all this friend might have dragged a friend down to see some work. Granted the 'god' quote was weird, but that person might have said that regardless of where they were that day.
I think your writing is good, but I would prefer to see you less biased. Perhaps first site might be more compliant too if this was the case.
Bert.....
It does not make him more qualified to comment. Regardless of who he may/may not be. Many buildings have guest books and door sensors to collect data. Not just first site, and what a sad world you live in to assume that anyone would cheat this system. In fact, by stating that you would do this, highlights who you are what type of person you are.
My advice to you Bert is to try and embrace life. Some people like pop music, western or hip hop. People like music, art and drama. Take those blinkers off and try to experience life that others may enjoy.
Barside1
says...
5:17pm Thu 14 Feb 13
I don't know if the £150,000 transfer fee ( if that is what is was ) all went through, let's hope not, because he was valued around £30,000 by their fans and even less by the local sports reporters.
Having said that, when he returned to Hamilton, he did score a few cracking goals for them.
I think his total cost to Colchester United may well have been over £400,000 after wages etc.
Oh, Super,
Something else, I produced, directed and financed the DVD 'Made in Colchester'. £54,000 from my own pocket, no funding, no hand outs.
I figured if I wanted to put some film together I should do so at my own expence.
Just as well we by-passed insurance as we flew planes, went onto the roofs of office blocks and climbed around on the main stand at Layer Road in the middle of the night to get some different angles to film from.
Are you keeping up with all this Super W?
super waluigi
says...
5:23pm Thu 14 Feb 13
Barside1 wrote:Means nothing!!!!
More on Joel, we checked that one out in Scotland at the time.
I don't know if the £150,000 transfer fee ( if that is what is was ) all went through, let's hope not, because he was valued around £30,000 by their fans and even less by the local sports reporters.
Having said that, when he returned to Hamilton, he did score a few cracking goals for them.
I think his total cost to Colchester United may well have been over £400,000 after wages etc.
Oh, Super,
Something else, I produced, directed and financed the DVD 'Made in Colchester'. £54,000 from my own pocket, no funding, no hand outs.
I figured if I wanted to put some film together I should do so at my own expence.
Just as well we by-passed insurance as we flew planes, went onto the roofs of office blocks and climbed around on the main stand at Layer Road in the middle of the night to get some different angles to film from.
Are you keeping up with all this Super W?
Bert_Stimpson
says...
5:30pm Thu 14 Feb 13
You're not really keeping up with this debate are you?
Yes, this system is being 'cheated' to artificially inflate genuine visitor numbers through a number of means as previously explained by Barside.
Why are they doing this?
Because they can and their funding depends on it. Because there is no independent third party to inspect, challenge or verify the numbers they make up.
What a naive world you live in to assume that no one would ever attempt to cheat such a system.
Barside1
says...
5:35pm Thu 14 Feb 13
I disagree with your judgement that my writing is 'good'.
My style is fast, almost automatic writing, and I've no doubt there will be errors within this thread.
I think if you check out what I have written that I would actually like to help Firstsite.
I'm a giver - not a taker, someone who has very strong views about arts funding in particular.
Did Mr Banks ask for anyone to fund his re-branding of East London?
Real art evolves, at no cost to anyone.
All best wishes anyway.
super waluigi
says...
5:39pm Thu 14 Feb 13
Bert_Stimpson wrote:I cannot believe what I am reading.
Super W: "Many buildings have guest books and door sensors to collect data. Not just first site, and what a sad world you live in to assume that anyone would cheat this system."
You're not really keeping up with this debate are you?
Yes, this system is being 'cheated' to artificially inflate genuine visitor numbers through a number of means as previously explained by Barside.
Why are they doing this?
Because they can and their funding depends on it. Because there is no independent third party to inspect, challenge or verify the numbers they make up.
What a naive world you live in to assume that no one would ever attempt to cheat such a system.
"Yes this system is being cheated". No sitting on the fence here then?
Even if they did cheat the system, are you telling me that all other galleries don't? Or does your biased and blinkered world only aim your hatred at first site?
Your opinion is flawed from start to finish. I cannot believe how narrow minded you are. At least Barside1 is attempting something to prove this. You do nothing but moan about it.
super waluigi
says...
5:42pm Thu 14 Feb 13
Barside1 wrote:Good luck in your search for truth. I hope you are proved wrong. Colchester needs the success of first site.
Super,
I disagree with your judgement that my writing is 'good'.
My style is fast, almost automatic writing, and I've no doubt there will be errors within this thread.
I think if you check out what I have written that I would actually like to help Firstsite.
I'm a giver - not a taker, someone who has very strong views about arts funding in particular.
Did Mr Banks ask for anyone to fund his re-branding of East London?
Real art evolves, at no cost to anyone.
All best wishes anyway.
See my statement about the gym earlier. I think art galleries might boom. We may have a head start on every other town.
Bert_Stimpson
says...
5:52pm Thu 14 Feb 13
super waluigi wrote:Barside1 has clear evidence that the system is being cheated. So why would I sit on the fence?
Bert_Stimpson wrote:I cannot believe what I am reading.
Super W: "Many buildings have guest books and door sensors to collect data. Not just first site, and what a sad world you live in to assume that anyone would cheat this system."
You're not really keeping up with this debate are you?
Yes, this system is being 'cheated' to artificially inflate genuine visitor numbers through a number of means as previously explained by Barside.
Why are they doing this?
Because they can and their funding depends on it. Because there is no independent third party to inspect, challenge or verify the numbers they make up.
What a naive world you live in to assume that no one would ever attempt to cheat such a system.
"Yes this system is being cheated". No sitting on the fence here then?
Even if they did cheat the system, are you telling me that all other galleries don't? Or does your biased and blinkered world only aim your hatred at first site?
Your opinion is flawed from start to finish. I cannot believe how narrow minded you are. At least Barside1 is attempting something to prove this. You do nothing but moan about it.
Having lambasted me for not sitting on the fence, you then say: "Even if they did cheat the system, are you telling me that all other galleries don't?"
No, I'm not telling you that. But if lots of galleries engage in these underhand methods to inflate visitor numbers, does that somehow make it OK?
Barside1 has been quite nice and respectful to you and I'm glad to see you that you like him for that approach.
super waluigi
says...
5:59pm Thu 14 Feb 13
Never would I say that if all galleries cheating the system is ok, but merely pointing out your biased view of first site.
Tell me, how often do you visit first site?
Barside1
says...
6:10pm Thu 14 Feb 13
Your reference to gyms was interesting.
I don't think art galleries will boom and nor do the main players in Westminster.
Firstsite will be one of the final projects of this nature to rack up what will soon be £40 million, if you add £2 million per annum to run it, over £3 million to move the bus station and the on going cost to CBC.
In fact, the word is that Firstsite might be the the last of it's kind in the UK.
Still, fair play to you for putting your case.
Where's Nathan?
You watching this fella?
Bert_Stimpson
says...
6:12pm Thu 14 Feb 13
super waluigi wrote:You didn't point out a bias in my views. You simply highlighted the idiocy of your viewpoint and the chaotic thought processes behind your own simplistic take on the situation.
I too have been respectful of barside1. I simply asked some questions.
Never would I say that if all galleries cheating the system is ok, but merely pointing out your biased view of first site.
Tell me, how often do you visit first site?
I visited once - that was more than enough. (Although I suspect that counted as 10 visits in firsts*ite maths)
super waluigi
says...
6:20pm Thu 14 Feb 13
If I wanted to have some opinions about Iraq and its current conditions, I would take several sources from people who have been there. They too could be biased, but would be more accurate than some one who just reads what is put in front of them.
If you have been to first site once, how do you know that you don't like the art that changes regularly? How can you comment on how many people are in there? Or what type of people they are?
And I am done *rinsed hands*
Bert_Stimpson
says...
7:01pm Thu 14 Feb 13
super waluigi wrote:Keep digging SuperW. You constantly amaze me with your ability to plumb new depths of idiocy.
Bert Simpson, I will keep this short for you.
If I wanted to have some opinions about Iraq and its current conditions, I would take several sources from people who have been there. They too could be biased, but would be more accurate than some one who just reads what is put in front of them.
If you have been to first site once, how do you know that you don't like the art that changes regularly? How can you comment on how many people are in there? Or what type of people they are?
And I am done *rinsed hands*
Are you suggesting I should visit firsts*ite every day to confirm the fact the art is rubbish, I don't like the art and no one is there?
If they gave you a lecture series, I would be there in a flash...
*rinsed dishes*(!)
jim_bo
says...
10:06pm Thu 14 Feb 13
Why have you apologised to CBC Barside, they have lied, cheated and been down right dishonest over this project. It's they who should be saying sorry.
What else have the covered up?
Jess Jephcott
says...
10:37pm Thu 14 Feb 13
Barside1
says...
11:11pm Thu 14 Feb 13
I'll answer that for you.
My apology to CBC was about my method in communicating across the parties.
I got a bit of a telling off from one of the main players, ( rightly too ) and I apologised to him on a one to one basis ( by email, as yet we have not been properly introduced ).
I'm hoping that the CBC member and I meet up with Matthew Rowe shortly. To be fair to CBC, they have all replied to my emails except for one of them ( who lives nearby ).
I don't keep secrets. I'm in touch with Bob Russell, Anne Turrell, Tim Young and Paul Smith on the Firstsite issue.
In addition to this, and I don't have time to run through all the names, there are about a dozen or so others in the loop which includes some of the guys at Essex County Council and Arts Council England, and addionally current and former employees of Firstsite.
And for Super,
I mentioned some of the stuff I have done with Colchester United as I thought as a fan it might be of interest to you.
In fact, I've got another rough cut film in the pipeline that we shot at Layer Road on the final day v Stoke City.
Rest assured I will push for the truth on Firstsite.
I do accept what
Barside1
says...
11:50pm Thu 14 Feb 13
PROOFREADER
says...
2:16am Fri 15 Feb 13
jim_bo
says...
7:49am Fri 15 Feb 13
Jess Jephcott wrote:That's one of the most hypocritical things you've ever written.
When all is said and done, all of this spite is coming from a bunch of cowards who hide behind pseudonyms. I used to write as Sdapeze but would regularly out myself. I hope that it was nos secret as to who I was. The Gazette gave me a warning about my posts so I reverted to my true name. I have no need to hide away nor am I interested in the true identities of these nasty people. I support Firstsite and wish them every success in the future. I don't pretend to understand what all the stuff is that they exhibit but then I have no need to. But then I can see no interest in a bunch of prima donnas kicking a ball about. This is all about Colchester's broad appeal. If we are going to carp about something, why don't we have a go at the **** poor police force that we have in Colchester, who allow all sorts of scumbags to roam free in the town at all times of day. Beggars, foul mouthed yobs, muggings in broad daylight, etc. The police are a disgrace and poor value for our taxes.
You were warned/outed by the paper because of your outrageous posts, often very inflammatory! I believe it's called trolling?
Now that your out in the open your gutted that those of us who choose to remain anonymous can still say and bring the truth to these pages.
CBC and ECC are very poor value for money.
Barside1
says...
8:30am Fri 15 Feb 13
I should imagine Jess, that after such an outburst you too wish you could take cover behind an AKA.
super waluigi
says...
9:07am Fri 15 Feb 13
By highlighting that she has no interest in football, but supports first site, she could go down the Bert Simpson route who earlier stated the reason he has such hatred for first site was purely down to the fact he does not like art. But she does'nt. in fact she highlights the fact that not all of our tastes are the same and if it works for colchester, lets get behind it.
The comment on policing???? I am no fan of the police, in any form, but I always thought we had a good balance of security cameras and police man numbers patrolling the centre, always. More over, bringing beggars in to this, and by beggars I am sure she means homeless people is sad. I read recently that colchester has the third highest amount of homeless people in east Anglian. (Luton and Peterborough being higher) these statistics are swept under the table to keep colchesters tidy lib/con policy. It keeps colchester more appealing. Everyone should have shelter, that's regardless. Perhaps barside1 would consider chasing up these statistics next? That is something I would find interesting and very worth while.
Jess Jephcott
says...
9:22am Fri 15 Feb 13
Bert_Stimpson
says...
9:35am Fri 15 Feb 13
You know things are bad down at firsts*ite when it is the Jess and SuperW brains trust fighting their corner.
Yes, let's have a go at the police Jess. Maybe they should have more funds to combat the problems you highlighted. Unfortunately, public money is limited and much of it is spent on non-essential services and vanity projects.
SuperW, I hate to shatter your world, but I think Jess is a bloke. I actually enjoy reading your incoherent arguments and childish reasoning, so please keep contributing.
romantic
says...
10:09am Fri 15 Feb 13
Bert_Stimpson wrote:Jess is indeed a bloke.
Awesome.
You know things are bad down at firsts*ite when it is the Jess and SuperW brains trust fighting their corner.
Yes, let's have a go at the police Jess. Maybe they should have more funds to combat the problems you highlighted. Unfortunately, public money is limited and much of it is spent on non-essential services and vanity projects.
SuperW, I hate to shatter your world, but I think Jess is a bloke. I actually enjoy reading your incoherent arguments and childish reasoning, so please keep contributing.
This debate does seem to be drifting a bit from the main point, which is that barside1 has pretty good evidence of activity somewhere in the range from fiddling the figures to white collar crime. He has had the good grace to arrange a meeting with Firstsite to discuss this. He is doing the job that the Gazette should be doing, actually, if they have any pretensions to be a serious newspaper.
On the question of anonymity: personally, I think it gives people more freedom to say what they really think. It can lead to trolling on occasion, but also allows people to sometimes be more candid than they would otherwise be. Jess, I always knew who you were anyway, and indeed know who a few of the regulars are, but respect that they prefer to be anonymous. It doesn´t detract from what they are saying.
Super W, I feel your world is indeed a happy place, but you are perhaps rather too trusting of authority. If barside1 has clear evidence of wrong-doing, it is not in some way anti-Colchester to get that information into the public domain. It should give Firstsite´s new guy an opportunity to get this cleared up. I want Firstsite to work, because we all have a lot of our hard-earned money tied up in it. But I also want it to operate above-board.
I do know who barside1 is, and he has done plenty of good investigative work in the past. It is good that he is doing this, I am intrigued to know what he has discovered, and hope he will get a chance to put it into the public domain.
Bobby Walker
says...
11:01am Fri 15 Feb 13
It needs to respond and adapt to provide what people want to see, in a way that also promotes art.
Hiding away will not achieve this. Any genuine transparency as to what is actually happening is welcome.
Barside1
says...
11:46am Fri 15 Feb 13
'There seemed to be a stage when they started to shift the goalposts, the term 'conference centre' started to get mentioned more and more, at one point they wanted to plug the building as one of the leading conference centres in the East of England'.
'There must have been a conflict of interest because one of the council members said we can't have two of our venues in Colchester that both make the same claim'.
'It was like, well, we were told from the research that we couldn't expect the targeted footfall on exhibitions so we needed a plan B, and what better way than to re-invent the entire project'.
'I didn't do an MA to be a hostess in a second rate conference facility, nor did I spend 5 years training to be a nursery nurse,
'They certainly needed a plan B for the restaurant after **** walked, that was pretty much game over for that part of the operation'.
Hamiltonandy
says...
4:41pm Fri 15 Feb 13
.
The community/football stadium only went ahead after a huge public debate. I do remember lots of hopeful predictions from football enthusiasts but everyone realised the financial returns depended on the success of the football club.
.
Unfortunately it is an Art Council requirement, as a condition of the original grants, that there would not be a charge for entry to the VAF. At the time the VAF was proposed, Colchester Council refused meaningful debate and concealed the eventual destruction of the bus station without replacement.
.
Colchester Council have repeatedly misinformed the public both during the VAF construction and for the operating period. Colchester Council sold 15, Queen Street without any form of advert to Firstsite at whatever grant could be obtained from the Arts Council so undervaluing the property.
.
When you have a municipal authority so lacking in morality they inevitably become despised by most people. Some work in the background to ensure the Council moves smoothly from one disaster to another. The most recent was the Tymperleys sale that has humiliated the council executive. The next may be Travelodge hotel chain abandoning its redevelopment plan for St James/Roman House. The unviable plans for the old police station will mean another white elephant. I look forward to the wacky council ideas for the old bus station.
Barside1
says...
8:30pm Fri 15 Feb 13
'Tell me about the rogue exhibit that appeared during Camulodunum'.
*** ******
'Oh, yes, it was a small framed pastel of Postman Pat and his black and white cat'.
Barside
'Has Colchester been twinned up with Greendale before?'
*** ******
'I don't think so'.
Barside
'Any connection with the Trinovantes Tribe?'
*** ******
'No, Severalls I believe'.
Barside
'Did it go down well with the visitors'?'
*** ******
'It was probably the highlight of the show'.
jut1972
says...
8:53pm Fri 15 Feb 13
Barside1
says...
10:07pm Fri 15 Feb 13
'Actually, now I come to think of it, there were a series of rogue exhibits that got swept up in the rush in the first few days'.
Barside
'Like what?'
*** ******
'Well, there was a buggy parked up under the Two cows for about 4 hours'.
Barside
'Very much in keeping with Gupta's take on everyday items though'.
*** ******
'Mmm, but one of the visitors said, do you call that ******* art?
Barside
'What did you say?'
*** ******
'I said, I'm sorry sir, I think someone may have left it there'.
Barside
'Did that pacify him?'
*** ******
'Actually, not at all, it made him worse, he said 'No one would know if a ******* buggy was an exhibit or not in this place'.
super waluigi
says...
6:27am Sat 16 Feb 13
Don't try and make other people look stupid mr Barside1.
While I have no interest in art, with or without a buggy included, the art work may contain symbolism with in it. If someone (and I mean anyone) does not understand it, it does not make it wrong.
Should the buggy have not meant to have been there, I am sure it was Burt Simpson on his lonesome visit that put it there or some other knuckle dragging Neanderthal.
Barside1
says...
8:32am Sat 16 Feb 13
'Some of the people that came to Camulodunum were probably entering an art's facility for the first time'.
Barside
'And last'.
*** ******
'We were briefed to make sure the cleaners and contractors had not left any mops or paint tins laying around, just in case they should have been mistaken for exhibits'.
Barside
'I'm surprised this didn't spark an idea - mops and tins hanging from wires in aspic clouds?'
*** ******
'Mmm, yes, I do see where you're going with this'.
Barside
'I was also a little surprised there were no sharks in tanks on view'.
*** ******
'Oh, they were all back of house on the bubbly'.
Barside
'So by the time Camulodunum closed what was highlighted in the aftershow debrief?'
*** ******
'To slash the visiting hours and close the gallery space on Mondays'.
Barside
'Did that come as a surprise to you?'
*** ******
'Well it did, because we thought they were going to close the gallery on Tuesdays too'.
Barside1
says...
5:57pm Sat 16 Feb 13
'Right guys, make sure your headphones are fitted on properly, keep your eyes fixed on the lyric sheet, ****** will take the lead vocal and all you've got to do is sing the chorus each time you see it highlighted in the yellow marker'
Let's go -
La, da da da da,
La, da da da da,
La, da da da da,
La, da da da da,
'Spin, spin, sugar'
'Spin, spin, sugar'
'Spin, spin, sugar'
'Spin, spin, sugar'
******* ace!
( Nathan, can you unplug the keyboard ).
jut1972
says...
8:45pm Sun 17 Feb 13
Barside1 wrote:Wasn't two cows the bike made from thousands of hand cast pieces?
*** ******
'Actually, now I come to think of it, there were a series of rogue exhibits that got swept up in the rush in the first few days'.
Barside
'Like what?'
*** ******
'Well, there was a buggy parked up under the Two cows for about 4 hours'.
Barside
'Very much in keeping with Gupta's take on everyday items though'.
*** ******
'Mmm, but one of the visitors said, do you call that ******* art?
Barside
'What did you say?'
*** ******
'I said, I'm sorry sir, I think someone may have left it there'.
Barside
'Did that pacify him?'
*** ******
'Actually, not at all, it made him worse, he said 'No one would know if a ******* buggy was an exhibit or not in this place'.
If so that was an amazing bit of work.
For someone so supposedly "pro" these supposed conversations are getting really tiresome.
bullybob
says...
12:53am Mon 18 Feb 13
Barside1 wrote:Would this 'one of their own' be a miss Daisy Courtauld by any chance?
I doubt they will play dirty, especially since some of our information is coming in overnight from Australia from 'one of their own'.
Parts of it resemble Monty Python on acid.
romantic
says...
8:58am Mon 18 Feb 13
jut1972 wrote:I disagree! This is fascinating stuff. Barside1, I think this thread will be taken downat some point today. (Not through some huge Gazette plot, just because they allow a week and then that´s it). So we´re relying on you to keep us updated on this, because I for one am very interested to know more about this.
Barside1 wrote:Wasn't two cows the bike made from thousands of hand cast pieces?
*** ******
'Actually, now I come to think of it, there were a series of rogue exhibits that got swept up in the rush in the first few days'.
Barside
'Like what?'
*** ******
'Well, there was a buggy parked up under the Two cows for about 4 hours'.
Barside
'Very much in keeping with Gupta's take on everyday items though'.
*** ******
'Mmm, but one of the visitors said, do you call that ******* art?
Barside
'What did you say?'
*** ******
'I said, I'm sorry sir, I think someone may have left it there'.
Barside
'Did that pacify him?'
*** ******
'Actually, not at all, it made him worse, he said 'No one would know if a ******* buggy was an exhibit or not in this place'.
If so that was an amazing bit of work.
For someone so supposedly "pro" these supposed conversations are getting really tiresome.
Barside1
says...
10:46am Mon 18 Feb 13
Apologies Subodh / Firstsite if this is not so.
x
boxted ave resedent
says...
12:44pm Mon 18 Feb 13
romantic wrote:LOL !!!!
jut1972 wrote:I disagree! This is fascinating stuff. Barside1, I think this thread will be taken downat some point today. (Not through some huge Gazette plot, just because they allow a week and then that´s it). So we´re relying on you to keep us updated on this, because I for one am very interested to know more about this.
Barside1 wrote:Wasn't two cows the bike made from thousands of hand cast pieces?
*** ******
'Actually, now I come to think of it, there were a series of rogue exhibits that got swept up in the rush in the first few days'.
Barside
'Like what?'
*** ******
'Well, there was a buggy parked up under the Two cows for about 4 hours'.
Barside
'Very much in keeping with Gupta's take on everyday items though'.
*** ******
'Mmm, but one of the visitors said, do you call that ******* art?
Barside
'What did you say?'
*** ******
'I said, I'm sorry sir, I think someone may have left it there'.
Barside
'Did that pacify him?'
*** ******
'Actually, not at all, it made him worse, he said 'No one would know if a ******* buggy was an exhibit or not in this place'.
If so that was an amazing bit of work.
For someone so supposedly "pro" these supposed conversations are getting really tiresome.
boxted ave resedent
says...
1:45pm Mon 18 Feb 13
The whole family have been on incapacity benefit all there poxy life's the sponging mother has now acquired loads more Chavez. these types need sorting out they just breed crim'sI've just been told the mother of this rapist is a child minder , someone in social services has got to be on drugs.””
bullybob
says...
10:18pm Mon 18 Feb 13
"Ray Hollingsworth paid for sex on Ipswich's streets before the deaths of five women in 2006."
http://news.bbc.co.u
k/local/suffolk/hi/p
eople_and_places/art
s_and_culture/newsid
_9346000/9346058.stm
Bert_Stimpson says...
5:04pm Mon 11 Feb 13
You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.
The visitor numbers are whatever Firsts*ite want them to be - there is no independent verification and no statistical validity to the purported figures.
The money wasted on firsts*ite is a disgrace. The self-serving self-appointed 'arts elite' employed by this organisation are riding a public sector gravy train.
The Gazette needs to do a forensic examination of the money wasted on this fiasco starting with the last set of filed accounts and the Council spending data.
As a publicly funded body, maybe Mr Rowe would like to divulge his annual salary and pension contributions? All in the interests of complete transparency of course.
Public money wasted.