In a post on Wednesday, Richard lamented that while he had got some blog buzz about his idea, no one had actually written any entries. There's obviously a gap between people who think something's a good idea (art bloggers are so into this sort of stuff) and people who might actually do it (visitors to the IMA sculpture garden).
When I read the first post, I thought two things:
1. This would be a great things for galleries like Auckland and Christchurch, who have quite a lot of texts about individual works online, to be encouraging.
2. Maybe CreativeNZ, who funded a blogging reviewer, and this site about contemporary NZ art, could fund someone to do this for NZ's various creative industries. I've written before about the entries about our art galleries on Wikipedia; Black Grace doesn't have an entry, for example; nor does the Indian Ink Theatre Company. Yet when I type 'indian ink play' into Google, the first result I get is an entry about a Tom Stoppard play.*
In his first post, Richard wrote:
Maybe at this point you’re asking yourself why someone here just doesn’t make entries for the IMA collection. Well, I’ve thought about it some and decided against doing it myself because I work here and it might be a conflict of interest.
It's also known as astroturfing - the imitation of grass roots action by an institution, group, or corporation. For example; leaving comments under another name on your own blog to encourage others to comment, or seeding positive reviews of your product on forums.
Lastly, and on theme, for your Friday afternoon reading pleasure: while researching this post I found Hamish Keith's Wikipedia page, written by eastcoastpakeha last October.
*Out of interest, the first three results for 'nz contemporary art' in my Google search.