I want to make a comments, which is factual and based on my own personal expeience of being a co-director of Midwest.

The three co-directors of Midwest made a decision in Sumnmer 2007 to close the project and informed the Arts Council of their intention to do so at that time.

An announcement, as mentioned here, was made to the Midwest membership in September of 2007.

It seems appropriate to make clear that Midwest was not one of the organisations that has received Arts Council cuts and therefore should not be considered as such. Jason

Just think about everything Self Service has done with no or tiny amounts of funding.

Most of your criticism seems directed at the Midwest website. I wasn’t around for the first of the fallow periods you describe (still an undergraduate with no clue of what was going on outside of the university walls!) and only came across it when it was flourishing (26/01/05-11:48pm, according to my profile). Certainly it looks all but dormant now in comparison.

Not quite useless though - I still log on regularly, even if it’s not as frequently in the past. There’s no discussion there like there used to be though and that’s a shame.

Whose responsibility is that? Can we really lay that blame on the organisers? After all, they describe themselves as a catalyst: something to activate people to get on and do it themselves.

We’ve seen that the website is functionally able to provide the framework to support a range of online activity: calendar, message board, articles, profiles etc. So in that sense I think they’ve done their job. Approximately 1500 registered users but the chemistry’s not there any more for people to be as vocal as they used to be. I’ll take 1/1500th of the blame.

Maybe we’re just being vocal elsewhere: Brum’s online landscape had changed a lot over the last few years…

I’m not sure how accurate this memory is, but it seems to me things went a little bit shaky not long after one particular user of the website got quite abusive on the messageboard. I’m not saying there isn’t a place for certain levels of antagonism, but this seemed to over-step the mark and it’s my guess this caused a lack of confidence in all but a few core posters stopped putting their views across online quite so readily.

Generally speaking, is it possible for administrators of a forum-based site to artificially stimulate conversation if the users aren’t generating it themselves? Would that be obviously false and end up killing the site anyway?

My description in this post of the Midwest website as a closed community refers to its use predominantly by people within the arts community as opposed to being used by a more general public too. Your comments seem to imply your experience of Midwest has been one of further divisions and barriers within the arts community: “for those who managed to be involved with MidWest”. Is that right, is that what you mean?

I attend the Midwest events whenever I’m able to. Other than the quality of the content, the main attraction is that they give me the opportunity to meet artists and other professionals from outside the little circle that I usually have contact with. This includes others working in Birmingham, but also people from outside the region too.

I can’t remember an event where the speakers have been from Birmingham and I think it was absolutely critical that the three organisers of Midwest were not Birmingham-based either. Between them they have been able to inject fresh ideas and perspectives and provide kicks up the pants whenever local participants started slipping down the slope of “there’s nothing interesting happening in Brum”.

The ‘Casino’ events pre-date my awareness of Midwest but, judging by yesterday’s conversations, the simple act of taking a bus-load of Birmingham artists out to another city and meeting people involved in artist-led activity elsewhere seem to have had a significant effect on a) participants’ activity back here and b) perceptions of Birmingham from outside.

Where do you think the Birmingham-centric criticism has come from. Is it that other parts of the Midlands feel left out? I notice I’ve been continuously referring to the city of Birmingham rather than the region of the West Midlands…

Maybe the West Midlands remit really was too ambitious.

But I note that you’ve all but called the MidWest website useless, on your own blog…

“activity on the message board and calendar has gradually dropped off to the point where it’s no longer as useful as it was.”

And I think you’ll agree, if you remember, that it was also that way for several years after initial set-up. A relatively brief flurry of activity between two fallow periods doesn’t seem to be enough to me.

I guess the main criticism probably stems from the grand mission, presumably set by the Arts Council, being over-ambitious… to be a: “Professional development organisation creating networks, events and opportunities for visual artists across West Midlands”. One of the criticisms I’ve heard is that it always seemed very Birmingham-centric, unless when forced to go wider. Which I found to be true. And the opportunities were few and far between, and the publicity about them rather poor.

Doubtless it was useful for those few who it reached, but for the rest of us it was simply not much use. You yourself have written on your blog…

“I think this [MidWest] is another closed community type affair”