George Free wrote:
>Actually, I didn't find this account that idiosyncratic. For example,
Eric's
effort to distance Fluxus from what Maciunas tried to define it as is one
that
can be found in varying degrees in a lot of the original accounts of
Fluxus.<
I must say that Eric's participation on Fluxlist often left me disappointed
but this article was pretty interesting from several points.
whilst one can distance from Maciunas I think the whole Fluxus phenomenon
would not have happened without him, he was the engine if you like..and
Fluxus was the car that had been around for years (ideologically) but now it
could finally go somewhere. As with most experimental art it leaves precious
few traces unless someone shouts about it and Fluxus was born out of
Maciunas's desire to shout about it. The thing to remember is that Maciunas
did define Fluxus and whilst one can distance Fluxus from Maciunas in some
ways it does not take long before one arrives at a completely different
place. Let's be honest without Maciunas we would have just had Neo-Dada
Festivals instead of Fluxus Festivals.
>I thought the point that Fluxus represented what was possibly the first
international organization of artists was interesting.<
That's one of the most impressive things.
>I appreciate Eric's effort to distinguish living Fluxus from what some art
scholars try to turn it into -- and would like to learn more about that. For
example, the attempt to define Fluxus as a movment begining and ending with
Maciunas seems highly contentious<
I think the Maciunas-centric view comes from two points. 1) it's the only
explanation that is conceptually/historically easy to absorb. 2) Gilbert and
Lila Silverman don't want to wake up one day to realise they've spent their
fortune on some crappy plastic boxes - if the end isn't firmly associated
with the end of Maciunas then Maciunas's place in Fluxus falls because in
the years since his death many other Fluxus artists have produced large
bodies of work, in turn this would reduce the value of Maciunas-produced
artefacts. So there seems to be an economic argument for certain historical
perspectives. The Fluxus Codex is the best example of this.
>From his remarks, I also understand now why he attacks the notion that
Fluxus
stemmed from the encounter with Cage, etc...<
Well I think Eric is trying to point out how important the European
contribution was..that Fluxus isn't just some New York thing?
>It would be a good use of Fluxlist to discuss this article...<
Well, I'm pleased to see I'm engaging in good use ;-)
cheers,
Sol.
