MICROCUENCA QUEBRADA SAN GERARDO Geográficamente se encuentra ubicada en la

Liverpool’s Superchannel was launched with the intention of facilitating “two way dialogues between participants from the block and online participants globally.”475 A number of aims were outlined at the beginning of the project, including:

 To investigate the possibilities that this kind of interactivity opens up – the kinds of communication and dialogue provoked

 To provide creative tools for people to work with at various different levels to create and contribute to the development of communities in various different contexts – within the tower block itself, between Superchannel studios across the world and online

 To create an opportunity for an online audience to experience and respond to a particular view of the world

 To test out the potential intervention of technology as a tool within an existing community and the ways in which it can contribute to that communities future development476

These aims reveal that the project was ambitious at the outset, and they outline a desire to promote collaboration between a public body, LHAT, an art organisation, FACT, and a community group which had very little experience of, or past exposure to, these core concepts. These aims have evolved along with the project, although it is interesting to note that the tenantspin website does not currently list any specific aims for the project. Instead it details some less formally identified elements of its history and future which places regeneration, e-democracy and artists’ commissions at its heart.477 Furthermore, it also states a commitment to delivering an experience for participants that focuses on quality not quantity, despite stating that it feels a “‘moral’ obligation to include and involve an increasing number of people.”478

Without explicit or easily identifiable aims, the task of analysing its effectiveness and success is somewhat difficult, but certain assertions can be made about the project to date. Although the Superchannel was originally designed to last only a few months, tenantspin is

475 _{Superchannel: The Tower Block, Project Outline, (Available: FACT Archive, Box – Inactive} Superchannel (CP.16))

476

Superchannel, The Tower Block: Project Description, (Available: FACT Archive, Box – Inactive Superchannel (CP.16))

477 _{tenantspin (2012), History (Online)} 478

now in its thirteenth year and, throughout its history, has undergone a continual process of evolution that has mirrored the changing circumstances of the participants and policy. This transient nature is typical of community arts projects, and tenantspin has been adept at maintaining a pragmatic approach to its remit through its commitment to promoting a process that is as reciprocal as possible. As such, tenantspin runs a variety of projects, some of which are led by the artists who are commissioned to work with the group, and others which are community-led, and range from garden parties to karaoke.

Fig. 2.2.6 A tenantspin broadcast, Liverpool

Consequently, the partners in the collaboration are constantly changing, either due to alterations in staff, participants or artists, but the most notable change took place following the dissolution of LHAT and its replacement by a housing association in 2005.479

As outlined in its original aims, tenantspin was to be broadcast on the Internet as a live streaming platform, and it was this application of a revolutionary media tool that was intrinsic to the project. Despite its ambitions, tenantspin only had access to rudimentary computer hardware, with clunky Internet dial-up connections that were typical of the

479

Arena Housing, a social housing association, took control of managing the remaining tower blocks in Liverpool and won this contract due to pledging their commitment to tenantspin (Fox, P. (former

time.480 Furthermore, many, if not all, of the residents were new to computer technology, and with certain technological advancements still in their infancy, so too were some of the artists and facilitators. Computers were available for the tenants of the tower blocks to use in a communal area of Coronation Court, and later at the LHAT office, and FACT provided access to, and training on, the other equipment that was required, from cameras to microphones. As tenantspin evolved, so did the art projects with the gradual introduction of more diverse media, and its participants were given access to technologies, education and training.481 Consequently, a challenge for tenantspin has been keeping abreast of the technological advances that have pushed far beyond its original innovations in video streaming, in order to continue to drive how the Internet and media technology can be used creatively,482 and to deliver the more ephemeral benefits that are common to community arts: personal development, self-confidence and integration into a community.483

(L) Fig. 2.2.7 Screenshot of the first Superchannel website, 2000

(R) Fig. 2.2.8 Superflex’s second Superchannel studio, Coronation Court, Liverpool, 2000

Furthermore, by working with this particular community group, tenantspin has consistently dealt with issues of poverty, old age and access to society. In so doing, it has raised pertinent questions that have frequently been overlooked in contemporary society, with that of digitisation being particularly notable. The increasingly digitised world has seen many transactions, including shopping, banking and socialising, beginning to occur online, and although certain questions of social exclusion have been raised in other Collaboration

480 _{Dunn, interviewed by the author, 20 August 2010} 481

tenantspin, interviewed in Gorschlüter, P. (ed.) (2009), The Fifth Floor: Ideas Taking Space, Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, p.124

482 _{ibid., p.123} 483

Programme projects, tenantspin has frequently addressed the issue of the ‘digital divide,’ something that the government has only recently discussed in their Digital Britain report of 2009.484 The digital divide is the gulf that has opened between young and old, with younger generations today being almost inherently computer literate whilst their forebears remain, to some extent, excluded from the new communities that have emerged through the Internet. At its inception, this understanding was at the core of the Superchannel

project, with Paul Kelly, an LHAT community worker, stating that:

Many disadvantaged communities still have neither access to the hardware nor the skills to take advantage of it. And where they do, older people are frequently excluded, with programmes prioritising employment and training outputs over access and quality of life potentials. Superchannel: The Tower Block was to be a project which would stretch the way new technology was used with a community generally denied access to it. Here was an opportunity to explore some of these issues, and to assess the impact of a set of new technological tools on a group of older people.485

Here, the project’s specific aim to enhance the democratic process with regards to social issues in Liverpool is clearly outlined. This demonstrates how the Internet, and art projects more widely, can be used to enhance democratic processes and enable communities to develop their voice where political engagement through voting and participation appear to fail. tenantspin has played an integral role, as a mediator and participant, in how Liverpool’s high-rise communities have been regenerated, both physically and psychologically, as well as assisting in the process of adapting to their new low-rise communities. As the project has evolved, it has become infused with a democratic approach to how collaboration is conducted, and although many of the projects that take place today can be understood as a very literal interpretation of regeneration, with tenantspin currently working in the Anfield and Breckfield areas of North Liverpool to develop communal gardens in wasteland sites,486 it has demonstrated a commitment to the regeneration of the concept of community and the individuals of which these communities comprise.

484

See DCMS and BIS 2009

485 _{Kelly (2002), “Case Study 02: Community Worker,” p.15} 486

Delivering a project of this nature is not without its problems, however, and it can be argued that by constantly raising questions like the ones outlined above, tenantspin has failed to allow enough time to explore some of the answers. As with many of FACT’s projects, the level of output is high and being under such intense time pressure, due to short-term funding, has meant that useful evaluation is rarely undertaken. This raises the risk of the impact of tenantspin being lost, particularly as many of the participants are elderly, a problem which is exacerbated by the pressures of funding on the project, which has always been obtained on a relatively short timeframe. Furthermore, the funders of community arts projects often place demands on organisations to demonstrate that they are meeting certain criteria, particularly those of reaching as many people as possible. Consequently, despite claims by tenantspin that it feels a “‘moral’ obligation”487 to involve as many participants as possible, it is more likely that these demands are made by funders. Both Alan Dunn and one of his successors, Patrick Fox, stated concerns that the objectives outlined by funders continue to miss the point of collaborative community projects488 and, as such, any attempts to prioritise an ethos of quality over quantity, whilst undoubtedly more important for the individual participants, are likely to be compromised.

tenantspin’s attempts to create a project which prioritised community participation can be understood as genuinely collaborative and was done with the intention of creating a model of community practice that could be applied elsewhere.489 Whilst Superflex launched many other Superchannels around the world, they did not succeed in creating a global network that included Liverpool’s Superchannel or was united by the same underlying values. However, Liverpool’s Superchannel “developed into a longer term, city-wide project”490 and

tenantspin, which is unique in its purpose and function, arguably operates so effectively because of its uniqueness to Liverpool. Attempts were made to develop the initial project into a model that could be applied elsewhere, through the publication in 2002 of a handbook entitled Supermanual,491 but Alan Dunn expressed concerns about the feasibility

487 _{tenantspin (2012), History (Online)} 488

Dunn, interviewed by the author, 20 August 2010; Fox, interviewed by the author, 12 August 2010 489 _{Superchannel: The Tower Block, Evaluation Report, (Available: FACT Archive, Box – Inactive} Superchannel (CP.16)); Superchannel: The Tower Block, Project Outline, (Available: FACT Archive, Box – Inactive Superchannel (CP.16))

490

Superchannel: The Tower Block, Project Outline, (Available: FACT Archive, Box – Inactive Superchannel (CP.16))

491

of adapting the idea to places without the socio-economic and political conditions of Liverpool, stating that it was “the energy and the quirkiness” of the component parts of

tenantspin that all came together at the turn of the century to make the project what it was.492 He identified the collaborative partners, politicised participants, socio-economic conditions, history of grassroots practice and the enthusiasm and pragmatism of the staff involved, as central to the project, and it has been its openness to change that has enabled the project to survive.