at the risk of sounding like a real 'elitist snob' (for which i apologise -but i feel that this is an important point)
in time spent with ben, ben patterson, alison knowles, emmett williams, eric andersen ( i name these artists as they are the ones i have heard express certain opinions) i have noticed that one thing that really does not seem to interest theses artists, and especially irritates eric, is people claiming to be 'fluxus' (i admit i've done that - my ideas have changed over the years, but i still did it). they really don't see the point in anyone trying to imitate or reproduce their pieces (unless they are going to benefit!) has secret fluxus had any contact with any of the, lets say 'originals' for want of definition - to find out their opinion of your performances? they could perhaps ask questions that i am unable to. i think you should try and find out. if secretfluxus is genuine historical research, then great, i'd be interested in your findings. i have not responded to your concert programs because i personally seen no point - the impression i have got so far (including the name) is that of a tribute act - the bootleg beatles of the avant-garde(?). i sincerely hope to be proven wrong! at present i don't see the point of secretfluxus, this is a personal opinion and not meant as anything 'nasty' it's just true. why replicate performances, even involving the 'fluxus' tag to advertise/report on your actions when even those who wrote the performances only perform them to keep the collectors sweet? (sweeping statement i know - but it's just to try and make a point - and it's very true in many cases) the fluxus cabaret circuit exists already, the weary performers don't care... alan
