noted. but this whole thread has been so taxing, and i feel it is the same comments on this list every year.
I am over it, that's why I endured the long list of whinging that goes on this list before I posted. sure it can be improved, why not. but what I realised, esp after going last year, and having spent this year in the states, is how hard it is just to get stuff going, planning an event, raising $ getting attendance etc, and while it's all well and good about hoping for the best, I think we can all cut Paxahau some slack and let the festival improve gradually. things can always be better but I don't know if you all realise how negative you all sound, as if it was better if it wasn't happening at all. On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 1:39 AM, JT Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > i think we can all agree that "it's not going to be like the first > > couple of DEMFs" and I really think that we should all stop bitching > > about how it could be or why it is. IT'S NOT GOING BACK THAT WAY SO > > GET OVER IT. > > No one is crying about it. You don't have to abandon all critical > discourse to accept what it is now. Some people care about that stuff. > How about you get over it and let people talk about what they want to > and you don't try and shout them down? Especially since it's actually > about Detroit for a change? > > I don't think anyone is wishing for the old DEMF, we want a new DEMF > that improves. We wanted that even after the first year. > > It's quite an assumption to assert the festival has been a loss or a > success because of the "fanatic" or popular appeal of the lineup. I > think you are wrong. I think this is simply an easy and safe approach > that mis-judges the audience. We exchanged headz for ravers, and I > think it doesn't take a brain surgeon to tell you which audience is > more loyal and less transient. Europeans were everywhere in the early > years. Attendance was exponentially larger, even taking into account > the flawed surveys. It was readily apparent that attendance was much > larger, and sure many would not have been there had it not been free, > but don't underestimate the appeal of an event that let's a population > celebrate their own culture. I'm sure as many people would have paid > for tickets then as do now, if not more. The big sponsors were there. > The media interest was there. The festivals were simply mis-managed, > and opportunities were missed. Spending was unchecked. Even small > artists were actually paid generously! There has been all sorts of > restructuring. You're jumping to conclusions that I really don't think > are substantiated.You don't have to assume that because things are the > way they are that's the best way they can be. A little criticism does > not mean you are renouncing the whole thing. I am thankful for the > festival and everything it brings to Detroit and all the people that > work to make it happen. > > FWIW 2006 was a super year from all I heard (I didn't make it)...But I > heard just as across-the-board that last year was dismal. >
