Thanks to paying attention to the VUW Orientation guide, I had the opportunity on Thursday last week to meet Darin McFayden, aka DJ Freq Nasty, during an on-campus seminar of wanna-be DJ’s and electronic music producers. This turned out to be about a dozen keen musical types, John from Vuwsa, and me (the token journo).

Bryce Mason from Sandwiches carefully shepherding his international star aside, it was an amazing amount of access to get with someone who has a regular gig at Fabric in London, and splits his time between home in LA, gigs in the UK, and a family in Auckland, NZ.

Darin left Auckland for Sydney in the early 90’s, arriving in London in time for the big wave of rave and techno/electronic music production that powered the big club scene through that decade. Of that period, he said new genres were popping up all the time, taking about 3-4 years to mature, then the scene moved on to the next thing - now, new scenes go global much more quickly, there’s no time lag; producing your own work & getting it out to radio stations and club DJ’s is much more of a track to professional fame (and full-time employment), than just playing other acts’ tunes in a club.

The other big shifts he’s seen involve technology - the rise of social networking sites like myspace, YouTube, etc, where new bands and producers can get huge exposure very quickly; and the advent of software that lets music produced on a laptop have production studio quality - so the initial investment in moving form DJ to Producer is becoming less of a barrier. “As soon as you knock out a tune (you’ve produced yourself), you’re ahead of 90% of the competition” - prime advice to the young players in the room.

The industry bogey of downloads vs album sales was raised - Darin emphasized the value of collaborating with other up-and-coming producers on work, and used his own experience with web-published tracks to illustrate that it’s no longer an ‘either-or’ issue for most artists in the frontline, but a strategic use of media to gain maximum exposure. The other great tip from this was ‘cultivate a tech geek, to do your website stuff, so you can focus on producing tunes’. This man is very switched on! We did touch on techy stuff like software to use, bit-torrent download sites and the like, but they were very specific questions that only music producers need-to-know, so I won’t go into all that here.

So, fortified by this rare discussion, I joined the line shaking DJ Freq Nasty’s hand on the way out the door, Bryce whisked him away, and I bought my ticket to the gig.

Rolling into Sandwiches at 11.30pm-ish, I was surprised to see only a few peeps in the bar, and not a lot on the dance floor as the warm-up valiantly tried to fill the concrete box that is the main room. Walked smack into Darin, who smiled & said “So, you made it”, chatted for a minute, then excused himself to prepare for the beginning of his set, up in a few minutes.

The room began to fill as soon as he appeared in the DJ booth, just standing alongside P-Vans, and the 3-hour set that ensued was a mash-up of dubstep, breakbeat, old-school rave, and a bunch of Lee Perry classics. It was all that a good nite on dub should be, sweaty, smokey, amazing light-show (yeah, the lighting guy looked after my handbag; big props to him for the excellent flicks and shades) and a mad collection of dub fans jumping and bumping through the set.

When Dunsta took over at 3am, there was a general move to the bar, and a collective slump as we realised it was now raining heavily outside. I managed a quick last word to Darin after the floor cleared - he hadn’t known what to expect of a Welli Ori crowd, was pleased the floor filled up minutes before he started, and bemusedly said “Come along next time, we’ll bring a bigger show back & do this again”. Yeah, Darin, I will, and I’ll get a few more friends along with me, too...

Samurai’s on Willis Street if you’re interested in picking up his latest production, Fabriclive.42, and I’m reliably informed that they’re stocking a lot of dubstep, if you want more of the genre.

Check out the links below, Darin has made waves by setting up Giveback.net to allow artists to support causes with their musical talents. Great free download to support Tibetan Bhuddists, and see the article on his myspace blog about his efforts to support social justice while still running kickass dubstep parties.

links: freqnasty.com, tribe.net/freqnasty, giveback.net, myspace page.

Another book review I've published in Salient. OK, so not a technical act of aggression against the SIS/GCSB/CIA/FBI/ et al, just a tease ...

Secrets and Lies, By Nicky Hager & Bob Burton.
Salient, Mon, 9 Mar 2009.

This week, I’m going to diverge from recently published works to recommend a work of non-fiction, which carefully investigates and chronicles the actions of Timberlands, one of the poster-child State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) of the 90s, in its attempts to discredit opposition to its clear-felling practices in the West Coast Native Bush reserves during the late 80s through to late 90s. Hager and Burton used Official Information Act (OIA) requests to amass a huge volume of source data, from which this solid fact-finding book emerged. If you didn’t know anything about the derivation of environmental groups in Aotearoa/New Zealand, you might find the narrative difficult to follow; and the information is incredibly dense and heavily annotated.

As a study of how PR firms help corporations to spin and manipulate public opinion, I’ve seen none better. The publication of this book came just before the public mass protests about GE, and long before any of the current protests about state coal mining in Happy Valley, near Westport, but parallels can be made between the tactics used by Timberlands, and those subsequently used against protesters by Monsanto, and Solid Energy: one a huge multinational, the other an SOE with an ostensibly greenwashed public face.

If you’ve ever struggled to make sense of claims of eco-terrorism happening in our fair land, this book will help you to understand the context in which PR firms have popularised the terminology in defense of their SOE and corporate clients. I found my reading copy in a library. I’m pretty sure the book is out of print, so if you’re interested, I suggest a scroll through the catalogue in your library of choice, or take time out to visit the little anarchist library, Revolting Books, based at 128 Abel Smith Street. I can vouch that they have multiple copies, along with a lot of other material about direct activism in Aotearoa NZ, including other works by Nicky Hager.

Misconduct

Linking 'cos I'm lazy, and a bit underslept form Orientation gigs. More about that later ..

Dodgy Slips, Deadly Sleds: the books and the Exhibition

The Exhibition is open until the 27th Feb, in Civic Square. Housed in two conjoined cargo containers, cleverly fitted out with Gallery-style white-painted walls and halogen downlights, it’s worth a look just to see how much innovation the guys at Weta have used to put the exhibit together.

Greg Broadmore has created some amazing artworks for Dodgy Slips, using the limited palette available on the Nintendo DS, and has exercised both his sense of humour, and a genuinely expressed love of the female form.

The naked ladies in Dodgy Slips are portrayed in all the luminous variety of womanhood - I’ve seen a lot of porn depictions of women, artificially displayed to appeal to the male gaze, to create desire and longing, and this selection of images was completely the opposite - natural variations in the forms of women, amazingly apt facial expressions, and more poses than I ever saw in gymnastic competitions. I could almost accuse Greg of having a feminist subtext, if I didn’t know better!

Christian Pearce’s contribution to the project, Deadly Sleds, is another dose of clever use of design limitations, and in-jokes abound for anyone familiar with the vernacular of chop-shops and drag racers. I discovered, eavesdropping on other participants at the opening night drinks, there are some drawings based on real, half-finished classic cars owned by other Weta staffers. There are some real cute spray-jobs in there, too.

There are 99 pictures by each artist (the number of slots Nintendo DS holds in memory at once), and originals are for sale, as well as the books of prints, at the site - all items priced at $99, eftpos on site and all sold items can be collected at the end of the exhibition period. The production standards on the books are excellent, a truly worthy effort to cater for those who may not be able to afford a block of the grouped prints. As a ‘side project’, unrelated to current production at Weta Workshops, the exhibition has full support from Richard Taylor to his artistic protegees. The exhibition is staffed by a rotation of volunteers, who are all local artists.

check the website:
http://www.99ds.net
play the slideshows!

Due to some misogynists causing bigotry in the Salient office, my e-mail address was blocked, and the Women's Issue editor, Tania Sawicki Mead, didn't receive my contributions until a week after they were sent. I'd had the 'flu when I sent them, so hadn't followed up in person, 'cos I didn't leave the house that week

So, two pieces were published:
Rita Angus: an Artists' Life
Plum Green EP review


And this one wasn't. Finally, I've decided to publish it, as it was written; this is my response to all the good, bad and indifferent stuff I've seen in the media around the White Ribbon Day events which took place around the country.
[For an example, try this: White Ribbon Day Windup ]

The post was ok, but the comments went into bigoted overdrive almost immediately.

Surviving sexual abuse

Being molested as a child is like having cancer, but without there being a way to actually destroy the disease. Paedophilia kills off a part of a child’s natural development, that of self-esteem and self-identity - for the abused person, the ‘other’, the abuser, is always the one in control, the one setting boundaries.

No wonder that those of us who make it through to adulthood (& a huge majority don’t - as a proper investigation of youth suicide statistics would bear out), often bear the scars in the form of disordered personality traits, poor choice-making (or none - the ‘spontaneous’ decision-making, abdicating to peer-groups, that masks anxiety and uncertainty) and low self-esteem that continues to plummet, as abusers identify the ‘survivors’ within their purview, to abuse again.

‘Getting over it' is not just a matter of a few chats with someone from a helping agency. Just as the grief process cycles backwards and forwards through denial, anger, despair and acceptance, when dealing with death, or another such stressful loss such as divorce or relationship loss, these stages can be seen in the progress of abuse survivors.

Latency in childhood leads to many adults ‘recovering memories’ of childhood sexual abuse later in life; often this is coupled with an experience of current abuse, which triggers the deeper fears, and the deep-seated memories guarded by the psyche.

‘Burnout’ amongst those who are activists in the area of rape support and abuse counselling is often related not only to the gruelling day-to-day contact with survivors of sexual abuse, but also the activists’ personal issues, dealing with their own experiences of abuse.

We live, here in Aotearoa/New Zealand, in a culture of violence, where child abuse segues into teenage rape victims, serial rapists who terrorise entire cities (such as Malcolm Rewa in the 80’s) and a casual attitude to rape that allows some morn ad-agency to get an ad funded for ALAC, making a woman who has had a few drinks responsible for the actions of her rapist. (No, SORRY! He committed the crime!)

Our TV coverage is saturated with advertising that reinforces these ideas - that women alone are necessarily vulnerable, that a trustworthy male is an important accessory for a night out, that macho behaviour is epitomised by the AB’s (who have had several members appear in Court in the past 12 months for violent, abusive behaviour, including domestic abuse) and that our aspirational spending habits would be positively influenced by reference to the above concepts. (Ok, so this could head off into a call for more women to go into advertising exec positions, but that would be a digression too far, even for me.)

As we run into Women’s Fest Week, go out, have fun - and look out for each other. Break out of the sterotypes, and think again about why one of your friends might drink too much, or recoil in horror from smoke blown in her face, or suddenly want to leave a venue you had all been enjoying. Set some ‘safety calls’ before you go out - have taxi money, or a designated sober driver - and never, ever, leave a mate passed out on a bench seat in a bar! (even the really comfy ones at the San Fran!)

Oh, and then November turned to shit when Clint Rickards was admitted to the Bar in Auckland:

Rickards becomes lawyer at Auckland ceremony.
But not without comment from the Dompost editorial .

Wgtn Meeting: In the Aftermath of the Urewera Raids: Discussing colonisation, courts and contempt

Monday, 22 September
6.30pm
St Johns in the City, cnr Willis and Dixon Sts, Wellington

Tena koutou,
We warmly invite you to a

Public Meeting
Monday, 22 September
6.30pm
St Johns in the City, cnr Willis and Dixon Sts, Wellington

In the Aftermath of the Urewera Raids: Discussing colonisation, courts and contempt

Speakers:
Steven Price (media lawyer, author of www.medialawjournal.co.nz)
Speaking about media law and contempt of court

October 15th Solidarity group panel
Speaking on the broader issues around the state terror raids of 15th October 2007 and the Search and Surveillance Powers Bill introduced to Parliament last week.

Followed by question and answer session and Open discussion.
Stay for tea, coffee and biscuits.

With the depositions hearing for eighteen of those arrested in the raids last year currently taking place in Auckland, and with Fairfax (the publisher of the Dominion Post) on trial for contempt of court in Wellington 15th - 18th September, it is a timely opportunity to look at the broader political context. We hope you can join us at the meeting.

(We regret to inform you that Moana Jackson can no longer speak at the meeting as he will be out of Wellington at a tangi).

For more info email info (at) october15thsolidarity.info

[Re-post from an anonymous Indymedia correspondent]

Closing arguments from the Crown and the respondents in the Fairfax contempt trial were heard in the Wellington High Court today. The judges have retired to consider their decision which they will deliver in writing.

The Solicitor-General (SG) closed his case against both Fairfax newspapers and the editor of the Dominion Post Tim Pankhurst by addressing all of the respondents' defences.

The Solicitor-General noted that the intercepted communications in the 'Terror Files' article published in the Dominion Post and on the Stuff.co.nz website was 1. inadmissible 2. highly memorable 3. was in breach of section 312(k) of the Crimes Act and 4. breached High Court and District Court orders with the combined effect of interfering with the administration of justice and prejudicing the right to a fair trial.

In discussing the inadmissibility of the intercepted communications in pending Arms Act charges, the Solicitor-General said that Pankhurst had considered the inadmissibility of this evidence as a reason to publish. Because the communications could not be used in any court proceeding, Pankhurst reasoned, it would not influence the outcome of the trial. The Solicitor-General said that the contempt was aggravated because the intercepted communications were not admissible as well as being highly prejudicial (as admissible evidence might also be).

He described the publication as a 'different order of magnitude' to studies of media bias presented by the defence expert witness. Noting that the publication had the effect of confirming in the minds of people that the accused would use firearms, commit serious and violent offences, the articles made concrete threats which had been vague. Moreover, the front page story combined with Pankhurst's editorial on the day made clear that the threat the accused posed was credible. On the other hand, the SG disclosed that he had prepared a document analyzing the intercepted communications which created a very different picture, and which ultimate lead him to reject the police application to bring terrorism charges.

The publication was described as 'highly memorable' and expert defence witness Jim Tully was forced to agree on the stand with the Solicitor-General who noted that the article "added direct concrete evidence to threats to John Key, infrastructure and the Waihopai spybase."

The 'memorability' of the articles in the Dominion Post and Stuff was compounded by the nature of the internet. The SG argued that once published content is out of the control of the original publisher as it can be easily copied and pasted elsewhere. It is accessible 24-hours a day, everyday; thus the passage of time before trial and a change of venue were less likely to mitigate the effects of the articles. Moreover, the Stuff article, including links to the actual affidavit, continue to be available. The SG noted that as far as the mitigating effect of the passage of time, 'the clock started ticking yesterday'. Thus the defence's argument that publication in November of last year was unlikely to be within the period thought to be the window for recollection by potential jurors in a trial was refuted.

The articles were made more 'memorable' by the fact that the reporting of the intercepted communications became news in and of itself, generating continued interest and accessing of the articles long after the first date of publication.

The Solicitor-General called 'ludicrous' the defence's argument that because the affidavit had already been disclosed (it was emailed to them, and posted on the internet), they could use it. The SG said they had breached section 312(k) of the Crimes Act which deals with intercepted communications. Both the Managing editor, Paul Thomson and Pankhurst admitting being aware of the provisions of the act prior to publication. Their counsel continued to maintain this argument in his closing.

The SG noted that the now 20 people accused of Arms Act offences had been successfully characterised as terrorists, and did not accept the defence's argument that much of the material had already been published. He clarified that 9 of the 13 statements had not been published in any way, of the remaining 4, one of these had been substantially added to in order to include the more sensation parts. Of those that had been published previously, they had subsequently become subject to a further High Court suppression order. The SG further stated that the article was unbalanced, at least in part because only the most sensational bits of the intercepted communications had been used. He stressed that this was not a reason for the publication of further intercepted communications, but rather that this was an aggravating factor.

Of the 13 intercepted communications, it was agreed that 5 had never been used in either bail hearings or in the Police's composite statement of facts, but had come straight from the affidavit.

The respondents tried to suggest that they did not comply with existing suppression orders because they didn't know what was or wasn't suppressed. Yet, on the stand, Pankhurst admitted that he made no enquiries of the Crown, courts or police prior to publication and that he was aware that TV3 and the Herald on Sunday had had access to leaked material that they did not publish as a result of suppression orders and warnings from the Crown.

The SG said that the prejudice extended so far that he expected applications for a stay of the proceedings based on pre-trial publicity from all of the accused in the Arms Act trial. He noted that any application would 'have to be seriously be considered by the Courts and the Crown' and that there was 'no guarantee that the outcome will be favourable to the Crown'. He suggested that if committed to trial, the case might have to be subject to very heavy suppression orders. Pre-trial publicity may also be an avenue of appeal should any of those on Arms Act charges be convicted.

In his written submission to the courts, the SG argued that the Dominion Post and Fairfax were seeking to set a precedent to create a new exception for contempt. He noted that there was no 'public interest' exception in contempt proceedings, and that contrary to Pankhurst's assertion that he had a 'duty to publish' the SG said he had a 'duty to act lawfully'. Pankhurst's comments at a media conference that he was in 'show business' and his front page was the 'box office' demonstrated that his real reason for publication was not public interest but newspaper sales.

This was written by an activist colleague of mine, I'm just disseminating it further!

Dispatches from Wellington 1a - Fairfax contempt trial

(posted late on Monday, after Day 1 of the contempt trial)

"The Terror Files" - ten months ago the Dominion Post, Stuff and other Fairfax papers published several articles that were based on the affadavit that was used to get the search warrant for the raids on October 15th. In these articles they also published intercepted communications, in a random, cherry picked sort of a way (cherry-picking the cherry-picking - since search warrants don't generally include the perspective of people raided, or even counter-interpretations). Now, ten months later, they were being taken to court by solicitor general for contempt.

By now I'm used to the rhythm of court, so I knew that the first issue that was going to be addressed was media coverage and suppression orders (the reading of the charges didn't take three days this time). The judges' order stated that the media were not able to report, directly or indirectly, intercepted communications or Aaron Pascoe's affadavit, and that either party could apply for more suppression orders in the hearing (and one other question and answer was suppressed, although not a very important or interesting one).

This was followed by the Crown opening. David Collins, the solicitor-general was acting for the defence. His main points were the prejudicial effect of the Fairfax articles, and the effect they would have on the jury pool. He went into much detail in the various ways this article created fear towards the defendants.

He also pointed out that this limited. He said that there are realistically only two defences under arms act charges - one is an identity defence and the other that you were using the firearms for lawful, proper and sufficient purpose (which I don't think is true, because surely as well as arguing it wasn't you, you can also argue that it's not a gun, although that's a little beside the point). The solicitor general's point (and it's a good one) is that if the jury has half remembered intercepted communications that might mean that it'll be very hard for the defence to argue that there were lawful proper and sufficient purpose.

The argument of the solicitor general, that the communications were suppressed, they were illegally published (there's a law against publishing intecepted communications) and that they prejudiced a fair trial. With a little bit of bombasity about how judges, not newspaper editors, should make decisions about fair trials.

The judges suggested that he didn't need so many steps. The combination of the bar on publishing any intercepted communications, and the suppression orders on those. The fact that the communications were suppressed, coupled with the illegality of publishing intercepted communications would be enough in itself to demonstrate contempt. There wasn't necessarily the need to prove that the right to a fair trial was put at risk.

I found it quite hard listening to some of this, because it's frustrating to hear people talk about things when you know more than they do. When asked when the bail hearings had happened the solicitor general didn't know if they'd all been completed by the day the article was published. Because I was in court I had to listen to people burbling about what might have happened, rather than list off the various days that people got bail which I know, because I've been paying attention (also the day they got bail? I'm not going to forget that day).

The first crown witness was a woman, who I think worked in the crown law office, but I didn't catch her name. She played some role in putting together the Crown's evidence, but we didn't hear what, or see the Crown's evidence. It was a disjointed court hearing, as the witnesses briefs were taken as read. This meant we only heard cross-examination, and we never heard the substance of what the witnesses were saying. The cross examination focused on nit-picking the level of circulation of Fairfax (the figures that had been given included the Sunday Star Times and Auckland community newspapers), as well as discussing other coverage of these events.

Then Mr Burns, the Crown Prosecutor in the Arms Act charges, took the stand. After his non-brief the solicitor general asked him some supplementary questions. These were mostly on clarifying some of the issues of fact, such as when the bail hearings were (of course asking me would have worked just as well). One of the judges had asked when it was decided that the proceedings would be moved to Auckland. Mr Burns pointed out that it is only the preliminary hearings that have been moved to Auckland. There was some discussion about when the trial would happen, and he seemed to think that it could be before 2010 (which seems unlikely to me).

But the big news was that Mr Burns said that the Crown was considering laying additional charges of participating in an organised criminal group against some of those currently facing Arms Act charges. A quick perusal of Section 98a of the Crimes Act makes it clear that it'll be an uphill battle. An organised criminal group is defined as a group which has as one of its objectives either "obtaining material benefits from the commission of offences that are punishable by imprisonment for a term of 4 years or more" or "the commission of serious violent offences that are punishable by imprisonment for a term of 10 years or more." (Of course me first reaction was "I'll go on the stand to testify that you're not organised" - turns out that's not a legal requirement - legislators ruin all the best jokes).

It's such a bogus charge. If they had any reason to believe that anyone had committed serious violent offences (or minor violent offences, or property offences or anything which requires a concrete action), then they would have charged them ten months ago. But beyond the dubious Arms Act charges, they don't have anything, which doesn't stop them trying to punish the defendants any way they can.

Anyway back to court today; Hugh Rennie's cross-examination of Mr Burns mostly focused on issues that he explained in more detail in his opening remarks, so I won't go into any detail. In response to comments about confusing suppression orders, the judges asked Mr Burns if anyone from the media contacted the Crown prosecutors to clarify the situation with the various suppression orders, and Mr Burns replied that they hadn't.

Aaron Pascoe, the lead detective for Operation Eight was the last prosecution witness. The questions for him were mostly about the nature of the affidavit. He gave evidence that the version of the affidavit leaked was the version that was the version that was provided to defence lawyers on the 18th of October. There was also some discussion about the leaked version of the affidavit on the internet. Hugh Rennie implied that the affidavit was leaked on the internet before they got bail. I don't know whether he was being tricky, or if he was fact-free, but the affidavit wasn't leaked on the internet until after the Dom Post article came out. One of the reason I was reading the leaked affadavit was to evaluate the Dominion Post article, and see if any of the quotes came from anyone I knew.

That was all there was from the prosecution, although we didn't hear most of their case because it was in the briefs and bundles of documents that had already been produced.

Hugh Rennie's first argument was that the information published by Fairfax wasn't substantially different from publications that were already in the public domain. That Howard Broad, Helen Clark and Annette King (among others) had all made equally prejudical comments, which had to some degree relied on the intercepted communications. He's not wrong. I think my favourite bit was when he quoted the solicitor general's decision not to proceed with the terorrism charges which included a statement that solicitor general agreed with the police decision to investigate under terrorism legislation and that the raids had put an end to very disturbing activities. The judges didn't have much time for 'they did it first arguments', but Hugh Rennie succeeded in pointing out that Fairfax was somewhat of a scapegoat for the extraordinary media coverage and public statements from many people (which was in turn covering up how much of a mess operation 8 was).

He then made a rather spurious argument that the comments quoted didn't have anything to do with the Arms Act charges people now face. Which ignores the argument about a legal, sufficient and proper purpose defence that the crown had already made. But things got really complicated when he started discussing existing suppression orders that arose from bail hearings.

Those who were around at the time will remember that there were a series of bail hearings (I could probably give you the dates of most of them if I thought about it). At most of these bail hearings some intercepted communications were introduced, and then suppressed. Hugh Rennie was trying to argue that the suppression orders about the intercepted communications only arise if people learn about them from the bail hearing. In this case they came from the affadavit rather than the bail hearing, and under those circumstances they weren't suppressed. This didn't sit very well with the judges - who pointed out that names are often suppressed at bail hearings, and it wouldn't be OK for journalists to find out the name from a different source and then go and publish anyway. At least part of the case will hang on this issue of whether or not there were suppression orders that covered the intercepted communications (Hugh Rennie is also arguing that Tim Pankhurst didn't know about the suppression orders - I don't know if that's a defence).

Although that's not the only issue because possession and distribution of intercepted communications is also illegal under the Crimes Act. Therefore the Solicitor General doesn't necessarily need to rely on the suppression orders (and wasn't in his opening address).

More tomorrow - it's getting late.

Rita Angus An Artists Life, by Jill Trevelyan, published by Te Papa Press, 2008

This is my second visually lush review book in the past short while, and is written by the co-curator of the Rita Angus retrospective now exhibiting at the Te Papa Museum, so is necessarily a companion volume for those who are really keen on this, one of Aotearoa's most iconic, most independent, feminist and pacifist artists.

Angus's life astonished me, even though I thought I knew her works very well - after all, since her death in 1970, all her works, bar a very few sold during her lifetime, have been available to Galleries for showing; and I was a regular at the National Art Gallery in Buckle Street. The appearance of Douglas (Gordon) Lilburn's private papers after his recent death have changed the popularly-accepted view of Rita, and added so much material to the biographer's task that I wonder she didn't falter.

So I cheekily asked Jill Trevelyan, how did she manage? The biographer's primary task being, 'what to leave in, what to leave out?'.

KT: How hard was it, going back to Rita Angus after already co-authoring one book* on her life and work?
JT: Not hard at all: when I did the first book I felt a sense of frustration with the limited archives available - felt I couldn't add much to the RA story. The Lilburn letters changed all that. Plus, other archives came to light too.
KT: Do you have much regard for the serendipity of finding Lilburn's papers while researching another project?
JT: Oh yes - I've always love the unexpected things that turn up in the process of doing research - even tho they can be a terrible distraction!
KT: How wonderful is it to be able to research a subject with 600 pieces of original work held at Te Papa?
JT: It was great having so many works here in Wellington. Plus the main archives were in Wellington too. I first discovered the RA collection now held at Te Papa when I was a curatorial intern at the National Art Gallery back in the late 1980s.
So I already had some familiarity with it.
KT: I've been to the exhibition twice, and am encouraging everyone I know to do the same! I can't imagine how great it must have been to view everything, then choose which works had the most significance, for exhibition.
JT: That's great! It's a big exhibition and I think it really pays to make several visits, rather than try and see everything in one hit.
Working on the bio and the exhibition has been a privilege - I feel very lucky to have had the opportunity!

I'm not going to say too much more about the life of Rita Angus, except to say that the book is well worth the 420 pages to read; take heart, much of that is stunningly well-reproduced artworks, augmented by private snapshots sourced form family and friends. If you have any interest in the Group, a Christchurch art society of the 30's - 50's, you also don't want to miss reading this biography, as Jill has tracked down as many of them as are still alive, and their relatives and friends. This is a very complete work, and brings a perspective on the NZ art scene which has been in need of illumination.

I'm grateful to Jill for her generosity in our discussions over the past week, as she has had Te Papa Events** to run as well as a day-job at MFAT.

*Rita Angus: Live to Paint & Paint to Live, co-authored with Vita Cochrane, pub Godwit/Random House, 2001

**floortalks, and the first showing of Gayleen Preston's Doco, Lovely Rita, which was in Soundings theatre 21st August - see Te Papa's website for upcoming events related to the exhibition. Te Papa's website here.

The Crafting of Narnia by Weta Workshop designers Paul Tobin and Daniel Falconer.

This is the second release by Weta Publishing, the new venture aimed at taking publication royalties back to Weta Workshops from the iron grip held by NewLine films over the past 8 years. And what an exceptionally beautiful take-back it is.

I interviewed the two designers responsible for this volume in the Boardroom at Weta Workshops in Miramar, and couldn't conceal my fan-girl background - having worked for Weta on the set of LOTR, we had a few colleagues in common.

Paul Tobin, responsible for art direction and content director, revealed he was heavily influenced by the artefacts of the late 19th/early 20th C Arts & Crafts movement, which suited the period of CS Lewis's childhood. As Lewis did not use up pages on descriptive writing, there was more conceptual leeway for the designers than with the Tolkein design-work, although this did add to design difficulty, with concepts not fully rounded within the narrative. Though a lot of the armour design team were redeployed from LOTR, the amount of new people involved meant there was not significant carry-over, which shows in the imagery - Narnia has a very different look, much 'softer' than LOTR.

Daniel Falconer, the writer and editor of the book project, gave me some insights into the machinations of a publishing contract that included Walden Media, HarperCollins publishing, and Weta Publishing, in what became a very amiable 3-step dance. The book aimed to show the 'what-if's' of the design project, and includes many sketches and variations on character development, no-where better illustrated than in the sketches and development art for the White witch, a character who has some of the sexiest artwork I've seen. (..but this is Disney/Walden media .. so it's not in the film!..) Tilda Swinton is a very different witch in final cut than the development designs, which were much darker. The lion Aslan, the 'good', must as 'triumphing force' have more presence in film than the witch, the 'evil' force.

Greg Broadhead, whom I have interviewed previously about his graphic novel project, also had significant input to Narnia, designing the Minotaur, as well as doing a lot of creature work, and the Witch's goblet, as part of a stable of designers and artists whose work are identified by initials throughout the lavishly illustrated book.

My review copy was well-handled by the time we finished speaking, and to the surprise of the interviewees, I asked if they would mind signing it, for the purposes of being auctioned at the upcoming Green Party AGM. There was a rapid lunge for the pen, as Paul expressed his support for the idea, then the book was taken back to the workshop and signed by as many principals of Weta Workshops as he could locate in a quick 5 minutes.

Never let it be said that creative types are not generous and ethically motivated people!

Paul Tobin candidly stated "The thing is, you see the film, it's an hour-and-a-half or a two hour experience. But for us, it's two-and-a-half years". This definitely is borne out by the development of design variations that are shown throughout the book. I thoroughly recommend that anyone with an interest in design checks this out, not just film buffs!

The book was launched on June 11th at Dymocks in Wellington, with Richard Taylor in attendance.