FLUXLIST: words in pictures

[George Free]

Interesting links on this /. article to a text visualization project

http://slashdot.org/articles/02/04/16/0449204.shtml?tid=152

FLUXLIST: now and then...

[George Free]

It's interesting how this article on O'Reillynet by Linux programming 
author Andy Oram

http://www.openp2p.com/pub/a/p2p/2002/03/08/media.html

evokes the themes of Fluxus and the radical art of the 60's...

Make sure you read the second page...

"One of my favorite exhibits at the New York Museum of Modern Art 
(MOMA), when I would visit it as a child, was an abstract, smoky, 
shifting-color film that changed without interruption all through the 
day. etc.."

Actually, what he envisions sounds a lot like mail art and the Eternal 
Network...

cheers,
George

FLUXLIST: Ono article

[George Free]

Today's Globe and Mail has an article on Yoko Ono

http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/GIS.Servlets.HTMLTemplate?tf=tgam/common/FullStory.html&cf=tgam/common/FullStory.cfg&configFileLoc=tgam/config&vg=BigAdVariableGenerator&date=20020223&dateOffset=&hub=thearts&title=Arts&cache_key=thearts¤t_row=2&start_row=2&num_rows=1

on the occassion of her exhibit at http://www.ago.on.ca/ (follow the links)

cheers,
George

Re: FLUXLIST: Responsible Idiocy and Fluxus Ethics

[George Free]

Thanks for the reference, Josh. I enjoyed reading this article as it 
resonates with a lot of my own personal interests -- especially the 
connection between art and Buddhism.

The central theme of peace and art is very much connected to Buddhism, 
as Thompson notes. The Tibetan Buddhist teacher, Chogyam Trungpa, in his 
book Dharma Art, discusses art or rather "genuine art - dharma art" as 
an "activity of non-agression." Here's a quote from Trungpa Rinpoche:

"Dharma art is based on energy and conviction. In this regard, the 
perceptions of everyday life are seen as a resource, or working basis, 
for both the work of art and the practice of meditation. But there seems 
to be a need for two further types of energy -- the energy of 
nonagression and the energy of outrageousness

...Aggression is based on wanting to demonstrate something that you 
know, wanting to tell somebody the truth you have discovered. Although 
your demonstration might be okay, even fantastic, and the truth you have 
discovered may be relevant, the means and way the whole thing is 
presented seems to be a problem. From that point of view, we can't have 
rules and regulations as to what to say and what not to say, how to act 
and how not to act, particularly. The whole thing has to be genuinely 
intuitive."

I find it fascinating that contemporary artists, like Filliou, have 
discovered or focused on themes or perceptions that are also found in 
ancient traditions, such as those of the Vajrayana Buddhism of Tibet. It 
seems to indicate that these are basic truths that are the heritage of 
all peoples and available to us all.

cheers,
George

Josh Ronsen wrote:

> Chris Thompson's article "Responsible Idiocy and Fluxus Ethics: Robert Filliou and 
>Emmanuel Levinas" is printed online here:
> 
> http://a-r-c.gold.ac.uk/a-r-c_Five/i5_contsCT.html
> 
> 
> -Josh Ronsen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail account at 
>http://www.eudoramail.com
> 
> 

Re: FLUXLIST: What is Fluxus?

[George Free]

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 thought the point that Fluxus represented what was possibly the first
international organization of artists was interesting.

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

>From his remarks, I also understand now why he attacks the notion that Fluxus
stemmed from the encounter with Cage, etc...

It would be a good use of Fluxlist to discuss this article...

cheers,
George

On Sat, 01 Sep 2001, allen bukoff wrote:
> More discoveries.  Eric Anderson's idiosyncratic view of 
> Fluxus:  http://www.performance-festival-odense.dk/whatis.html

Re: FLUXLIST: test x

[George Free]

At 01:01 AM 7/14/01 +0200, Eric Anderson wrote:

>I still think Bukoff and the rest of the old listowners should step down
>asap.

And what purpose would be served by that?

The term "listowner" is a technical term related to the software, kindly 
hosted by scribble.com, that operates the e-mail list. The role of the 
listowner is simply to manage the various technical tasks that are part of 
running an e-mail list. E.g., unsubscribing e-mail addresses that are dead 
and other details.

The FLUXLIST listowner group is simply a collection of people who have 
agreed to carry out these mundane tasks. Sol and Allen have done the lion's 
share of this work and everyone should be grateful to them.

The "listowner" group has also been called upon to make various policy and 
administrative decisions, including the banning of 1 person.

Eric, and others: if you do not like how this e-mail list operates you are 
more than welcome to unsubscribe!

You are also more than welcome to start your own e-mail list that you can 
operate as you see fit.

George 

FLUXLIST: wap directory

[George Free]

Allen,

You might want to register your WAP gallery here 
http://www.wapaw.com/index.html

They have a large art section...

FLUXLIST: Larry Wendt's Fluxus page

[George Free]

i ran across this page on Fluxus by Larry Wendt. Don't know if its been 
mentioned/referred to before

http://cotati.sjsu.edu/spoetry/ng2.html

cheers,
George

Re: FLUXLIST: avantgarde?

[George Free]

To me, being avant-garde involves asking the question "Why?" In other
words, asking "What is the point of such and such?" ...and coming up
with a satisfying answer.

What is art?

To me, the most satisfying answers to this question have come from those
who point out that the aim of art is to enliven our perception of
everyday life, to highten our awareness and appreciation of the
phenomenal world, to make vivid and completely real the experience of
everything around us.

I think this is what Pound meant by the phrase "make it New" Making
it new, doesn't mean make it new and shiny ;-) in the sense of
commercial products, but rather to liberate our senses, to experience
the world as completely fresh, which it is always, from one point of
view.

Commercialism generally results in a degraded, impoverished version of
what the things we make could be That's whats interesting perhaps in
the alternative offered by some of the avant-garde artists that became
interested in design, like Moholy-Nagy for instance...


cheers,
George

Josh Ronsen wrote:
 >
 > Heiko Recktenwald writes:
 >
 > >When fluxus began in the Cage class, they were some of the
 > >most avantgarde people of its time. Those who call themself
 > >"fluxus" today are not.
 >
 > What does avantgarde mean, today? Who is avantgarde today? These are 
interesting questions and I do not know how to approach them.
 >
 > Don't hate me, but I have been reading an article about Online 
(Internet) Education in a recent issue of the New York Times Sunday 
Magazine. There is quote from a professor (my copy is at home) who is 
trying to get "top-notch" universities to let their faculty lecture for his 
online ed company: to paraphrase-- the avant-garde (in art) and capitalism 
as similar because they are both concerned with the "new."
 >
 > I disagree with this statement, or at least with the superficial aspects 
of it. My conception of the avant-garde is one of overturning established 
orders and ideologies, which I guess could be considered "new," but it is a 
new mentality. Capitalism is ALWAYS concerned with producing goods or 
services at a profit, and hasn't changed at all. There is a drive for new 
goods and markets and a silly marketing spin on Internet Business as "the 
New Economy" (tm), but it isn't.
 >
 > Now the relation between art and capitalism can be scary: is the 
avant-garde in art just the capitalist quest for new markets? Ack! I hope 
not. Maybe it has become that.
 >
 > For me, if the avant-garde is "overturning established orders and 
ideologies," the one it should be directed against is capitalism.
 >
 > I'd be interested in thoughts/reactions on this topic.
 >
 > -Josh Ronsen
 > http://www.nd.org/jronsen
 >
 > 
 > --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
 > Before you buy.

Re: FLUXLIST: Fwd: I want to know more about Allan Kaprow

[George Free]

This search brought up a lot of interesting links

http://www.google.com/search?q=kaprow+happenings&btnG=Google+Search


including a review of Kaprow's great collection "Essays on the Blurring
of Art and Life" by George Leonard (another favorite of mine).

http://128.138.144.71/abr/leonard.html

To contact Kaprow, one might try via U of Calafornia, San Diego visual
arts department. Perhaps they could forward inquiries to him. I believe
he's retired from his teaching position there...

cheers,
George


allen bukoff wrote:
> 
> Can anyone out there help this person 1.  get more info about Allan Kaprow,
> 2.  make direct contact with Allan Kaprow?
> 
> A side note about Allan Kaprow and "Happenings" on the internet.  The
> problem with finding info about Allan Kaprow and/or "Happenings" on the
> internet is that "Happenings" is a frequently used, generic word.  Many
> organizations refer to their calendar/coming events as "Happenings" so you
> get back a huge number of hits if you use that as a search word...almost
> all of which are false alarms.  If you search for Allan Kaprow you get far
> fewer hits and you are left with the suspicion that there are potentially
> many more websites/pages addressing past and current "Happenings" that
> don't refer to Kaprow.  Compare this to "Fluxus:"  Fluxus is such a unique
> word that most internet search engine hits are accurate.  Not every Fluxus
> site/page refers to "Maciunas" so searching only for "Maciunas" leads to
> far fewer Fluxus web pages.  Is it possible that Fluxus (because of the
> rise of the internet and the use of keyword searching) has an unfair
> historical advantage over Happenings because of this arbitrary
> difference?  Is it possible that Happenings is a victim of its own, greater
> cultural success?
> 
> Perhaps the Fluxus meme should stage a hostile takeover of the Happenings
> meme...to save it and give it a more unique home on the Internet.
> 
> >Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:06:20 -0600
> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: I want to know more about Allan Kaprow
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
> >
> >Hi!
> >My name is Alejandra Hidalgo, I am 22.  I live in Mexico and I have a
> >radio program that talks about contemporary art.  We talk about
> >surrealism, pop art, op art, dadaism, etc.  Now we are going to talk about
> >happenings but I need more information about his intellectual father Do
> >you have it o do you know about more links that talks about him? Please if
> >you know  may you send me something?
> >I really apreciate your help.
> >
> >I Would like to know more about Allan Kaprow, more about his biography.
> >
> >And my radio program call "Momento Creativo" something like "Creative
> >Time" and it pass in internet too,  Every thursday in
> >www.uady.mx  at 10pm (México Time).
> >
> >Thank you for your atention.
> >
> >Alejandra Hidalgo
> >
> >

Re: FLUXLIST: artistic community experiment

[George Free]

On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Narcissus In Paradys wrote:
> As a writer, I find the idea fascinating, but I just have to ask how are the members 
>making money?
> 

I don't think they'll ever make money at it.  I just like the idea of how the
guy who posted the note on kuro5hin implemented an interactive web based
community facility.

cheers,
George


> --- George Free <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >The art may not be that good, but the community web tech is cool, I think.
> >
> >http://www.kuro5hin.org/?op=displaystory;sid=2000/9/19/2458/13427
> >
> >collective art (Media) 
> >Posted by luap on Tue Sep 19th, 2000 at 09:27:27 AM EST 
> >
>
> >
> >I've begun an experiment in my free time. I want to see if I can create an 
>online artistic community with
> >people posting their own works as well as commenting on others, sort of a 
>method for writers/poets to get
> >their word out and maybe even make money bypassing the publisher. Can it be 
>done? Will the produced
> >fiction/art be more/less real? 
> >
> >I haven't really seen the 'slashdot' for literature out there yet. Instead
> >of using one of the OS solutions out there for community type sites, I've
> >decided to program my own (php4 w/MySQL backend.) 
> >
> >I'll be honest with you, though, in that I'm an English/Journalism major, a 
>poet at heart. I've been
> >fascinated with the web since '95 or so, recently delving into scripting with 
>PERL and php. (Creating art,
> >but in another language, that of the computer.) 
> >
> >So... I guess I'm just looking for feedback on the concept and execution of 
>open source literature.
> >Thoughts/Suggestions/Comments appreciated...
> 
> ==
> "When the last human has died, trees shall cover the earth."
> "Man is the dream of the dolphin."
> 
> _
> Get premier, free, fast, 6Mb web-based email at ---> http://www.nabou.com

FLUXLIST: artistic community experiment

[George Free]

The art may not be that good, but the community web tech is cool, I think.

http://www.kuro5hin.org/?op=displaystory;sid=2000/9/19/2458/13427

collective art (Media) 
Posted by luap on Tue Sep 19th, 2000 at 09:27:27 AM EST 
   
 

I've begun an experiment in my free time. I want to see if I can create an online 
artistic community with
people posting their own works as well as commenting on others, sort of a method 
for writers/poets to get
their word out and maybe even make money bypassing the publisher. Can it be done? 
Will the produced
fiction/art be more/less real? 

I haven't really seen the 'slashdot' for literature out there yet. Instead
of using one of the OS solutions out there for community type sites, I've
decided to program my own (php4 w/MySQL backend.) 

I'll be honest with you, though, in that I'm an English/Journalism major, a poet 
at heart. I've been
fascinated with the web since '95 or so, recently delving into scripting with PERL 
and php. (Creating art,
but in another language, that of the computer.) 

So... I guess I'm just looking for feedback on the concept and execution of open 
source literature.
Thoughts/Suggestions/Comments appreciated... 

FLUXLIST: OpenCulture.org

[George Free]

This is kind of interesting
http://www.openculture.org/About/index.html

Its a sort of public patron system I guess.


"OpenCulture is a new way to make books and music freely available online, while 
making sure
that artists get fairly compensated. Using the Internet to let sponsors pool
their resources, we  purchase the right to enjoy
and redistribute works of art on behalf of the public. "

"With your help, we will build a world-class Digital Free Library of books and
music which can be freely downloaded and shared by anyone, anywhere. With your
help, we will buy the rights to make the best new music and writing available
to everyone, everywhere. "

Re: FLUXLIST: thoughts on fluxus part 2

[George Free]

On Sun, 24 Sep 2000, ann klefstad wrote:

> Isn't the notion of bodily presence I invoke below something that any of the 
>philosophers
> of the linguistic turn would describe as essentialist, positivist, naive? 

Possibly, but its worth considering too that, within the French context, the
critique of the subject entailed a new emphasis on materiality, for example, on
what Derrida calls the 'trace'. What Derrida sought to criticize is the notion
that there could be a sublimation of speech that would result in a pure
intentionality, a disembodied meaning -- the 'ideality' that Husserl tries to
rescue for the classical philosophical project that he saw threatened by
positivism.

Speech has been privileged by the Western philosophers because of its apparent
immateriality. By reversing things strategically, with an emphasis on writing,
Derrida sought to assert the irreducibility of matter. This same theme can be
found in Merleau-Ponty, who was of course important for emphasizing the
importance of 'embodied' experience.

The model of 'writing' and even more of "ecriture" is all very "literary"
though and bespeaks of a culture (French academic culture) that is very much
tied up with a rather classical conception of literary life and taste that I
think accounts for the artistic conservativism that I mentioned previously.
...The Americans didn't have this literary cultural baggage and are more of the
tradition of Walt Whitman and of living in a "new world" so to speak which
has allowed for a great breath of fresh air in the Western cultural tradition.

>Derrida's
> critique of logocentrism, after all, is also its establishing discourse.
> 

I think the issue of bodily presence that you're raising is difficult to
grasp within the Western philosophical tradition. It would seem that the
Buddhists are more helpful when thinking about the 'nonconceptual' experience
that I see you invoking.

> I do agree that Fluxus's continuing business centers on ideas and facts of bodily
> presence, a kind of subversion of too-ready substitutions of concepts like the 
>cyborg or
> the social for the elemental fact of the body, its possibilities, its 
>vulnerabilities. To
> me an absurd insistence on simple physicality opens a door to a complexity of 
>experience
> that is in danger of being glossed over--iced over, erased--by facile models that 
>attempt
> to supersede the body as corpus. That absurdity to me is the necessary business of
> whatever passes now as the avant garde, which is no longer avant but rather, and so
> appropriately, a derriere-garde.
> 

Yes, we should just see what's in front of us, what's as plain as the nose on
our face.

cheers!
George

Re: FLUXLIST: thoughts on fluxus part 2

[George Free]

I'm not sure if this got to the list. My apologies if it appears twice.

On Thu, 21 Sep 2000, Owen Smith wrote:
- the
> concept of difference is a potential model for looking at how
> intermedia functions as a kind of "not-media," or how the spaces
> between media types that intermedia exists in is a kind of cognitive
> space (rather than a media type, new or otherwise) that some into being
> through a process that Derrida has labelled as difference. 

I agree that it could be a "potential model". With his concept of writing
(ecriture) Derrida criticizes the phonocentrism of classical philosophy. As he
discovers in Saussure -- and this has been developed prior to Derrida by L.
Hjelmslev and other linguists -- the modern concept of linguistic structure
neutralizes the privilege of the phonic substance (speech). This is significant
in the history of philosophy, because philosophy (and by extension Western
rationality) has privileged the spoken word as part of its theory of meaning
and intentionality. This has influenced Western aesthetics, which has
privileged poetry over the other arts, as can be seen in Hegel's aesthetics.

With his notion of ecriture, Derrida is not reversing the traditional hierarchy
of speech over writing (and other so-called "external" forms of
representation, such as the graphic arts), but is working towards a notion of
creative labour or productivity that dramatically revises traditional notions of
intentionality and of the "subject". Derrida's thinking links to the
philosophical theories of the imagination and the role of aesthetics in
relation to reason (e.g., Kant). He clearly follows Heidegger and the latter's
reading of Nietszche to some extent here.

Relating Derrida to Fluxus would seem to involve relating two very different
philosophical and cultural traditions. However, there are links between the
French - German and Anglo-American traditions -- if it can be accepted that
Fluxus falls more into the later.

Dick first drew my attention to M. H. Abrams' remarkable work, which
I think provides an exceptionally strong basis for thinking about western
aesthetics and contemporary art issues. I would also mention George Leonard's
Into the Light of Things: The Art of the Commonplace from Wordsworth to Cage as
an exceptional book in this connection.

I think Dick Higgins stands in the tradition from Wordsworth/Coleridge to the
American transcendentalists --through Cage -- and beyond. This Anglo-American
tradition shares many points with the continental "idealist" tradition that
Derrida criticizes -- and in fact also continues... So it would be a problem of
how to relate these traditions and effect translations between them


> 
> The other connected point here is as a response to the many people
> (especially critics and historians) who have thought of Fluxus as only
> "Fun and Games" - for I want to more than suggest that Fluxus is a
> serious philosophical endeavour, in addition to being about fun and
> games, and that there is a complex set of questions that were/are asked
> by Fluxus about the nature of reality, or beliefs about reality and how
> we socially and culturally prioritize our values.

As the above indicates, I agree absolutely! The challenge is to show how
traditional philosophical questions are at stake in Fluxus -- and other art for
that matter. ...In fact, I think what the best contemporary art does is call
into question traditional aesthetics (philosophy of art) and demand radically
new notions that draw new attention to experience and the imagination. 

On the other hand, art does *not* need philosophy to validate it -- or to make
it "serious". As I think you're saying too, we (the intellectuals) need to
lighten up -- and appreciate what is derisively referred to as "Fun & Games".

cheers,
George
---

Re: FLUXLIST: thoughts on fluxus part 2

[George Free]

On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, ann klefstad wrote:

> To me the subtext that produces D's
> discourse has to do with the post-Holocaust perception of the faithlessness of the
> body. A rhetoric was needed that both subverted and transcended physicality.
> Language filled the bill, became the human in lieu of bodily presence.
> 

I am not sure about the comment above, but I agree with what you say below, and
think that you're really on to something here, Ann. 

The role of language and linguistics in Derrida's thought -- and that of the
French intellectuals following Barthes, Foucault, Althusser etc. is determined
by the status of linguistics as a new science -- and also of the anthropology of
Levi-Strauss -- in the French intellectual field of the 50s and 60s. The new
French philosophers used the new concepts of linguistics and anthropology to
attack traditional philosophy.

In this connection, I would say that their work shares a certain something with
the notions of bodily presence that you invoke below (as could be seen from
their interest in --and respect for-- Merleau-Ponty).

> And intermedia, and the american a-g, has very much to do with bodily presence,
> with a sort of taoist or zen or antiintellectual american notion of simple
> presence. Of the establishment of the physical through realtime attentiveness to
> what's in front of your nose eyes ears skin. A sensuality that has little to do
> with attributions of meaning and much to do with a notion of individual as conduit,
> through which  the world flows into the world, never pausing for the
> differentiation that produces meaning.
> 
> All of which is absolutely expressible only through action and sensation, not
> through discourse. This is taking the long way round, though one does, this way,
> reach a coign of vantage from which the immediate can be watched, though not
> experienced.
> 

I agree -- and I wonder if this is where Derrida could come in with
the criticism of logocentrism (the privileging of discourse and a pure
intentionality over the "body")?

But it raises the question, what is the body? what is experience and sensation?
--These are the radical questions that Fluxus addresses in a non-discursive but
in a certain sense "philosophical" way. It actually puts into question the
question "What is...?" --to make a Derridean/Heideggerian observation.

cheers!
George

Re: FLUXLIST: thoughts on fluxus part 2

[George Free]

On Fri, 15 Sep 2000, Owen Smith wrote:
> Intermedial activity, such as many
> Fluxus type works, does not signify a new combination of pre-existing
> categories of approaches or media, but rather it is a more general and
> crucial questioning of knowledge and experience as either discrete or
> quantifiable. Intermedia as a concept is grounded on a balanced, but
> shifting triad: media dispersal, experiential activity and a resultant
> post-cognitive awareness. With this as an understanding the Derridian
> concept of difference becomes significant not only as a means of
> accessing the gaps in which intermedial forms exist, but also as a
> lesson that interpretations of the concept of intermedia must shift
> from a retrospective stance, which attempts to construct original
> meaning or truth, to a prospective stance, which explicitly welcomes an
> indeterminacy of experience and meaning. 

I still haven't read Dick's postmodernism book, but I know that he didn't think
much of Derrida. He seemed to have had a rather strong aversion to Derrida's
notion of writing and differance -- but I can't remember exactly why.

I think Dick was a big Heidegger fan, which would make you think that he would
be open to Derrida ... but his view was probably determined in part by the
cultural politics of the 80s ... His aversion to Rosalind Kraus (if I
remember correctly) and others who were promoting deconstruction and declaring
the 60s/70s avant-garde dead..

Personally, you'd have to convince me, Owen, that the notions of intermedia and
Derrida's difference are fruitfully related.

I think the notion of intermedia could be thought of more in connection with
the notion of the concrete that you mentioned, and that the artist works with
ordinary materials, anything at hand... rather than a preconceived
"vocabulary"--for example, so-called musical notes/sounds which would be seen
to make up a 'genre' or a specific 'medium'. ---thus, generating 'intermedia'
which are not mixed media (e.g., opera) but manifestations of an artistic
perception, which is itself the only basis of the work 

"All the fine arts a different species of poetry. The same spirit speaks to the
mind through different senses by manifestation of itself, appropriate to each."
S. T. Coleridge, as quoted in D. Higgins "Some Poetry Intermedia"

Derrida's concept of writing, of generalized writing, of differance stems from
his critique of Husserlian phenomenology and the classical notion of subject.
Its a recognition within --and in part against -- the philosophical tradition
that the "subject", meaning could ever be singular, unitary, within itself.
More exactly, it registers the fact discovered by linguistics that meanings are
dependent upon the structure of language and can never be reduced to the
speaker's intention (which phenomenology says it can be). Derrida's notion of
play would have little to do, say, with Cage's notions of indeterminancy ...
And, I'm guessing, but Derrida would probably be influenced by Boulez's
rejection of Cage.. In general, I find that the literary avant-garde of the Tel
Quel bunch  (Boulez published in it) to be somewhat retrograde in
relation to the American a-g of the 60s, international Fluxus, and so on. 

...sorry if this is incoherent. ...a long --but good -- day

cheers,
George

Re: FLUXLIST: thoughts on Fluxus part 1

[George Free]

On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, Owen Smith wrote:

> 
> What Fahlstrom gives us as fundamental to his understanding of the
> concrete is also central to many of the radical challenges, by artists
> such as those grouped under the rubric Fluxus, to cultural modes of
> operation in the 1950s and 1960s. T

Indeed, the concept of "concretism" vs "abstractionism" is central to
Maciunas's "Neo-Dada in Music, Theatre, Poetry and Art" essay.

Personally, I'm not so sure what the larger value of this distinction is. What
is concrete? What is abstract? It seems Maciunas uses it to oppose
"artificiality" or, loosely, "formalism" in art in the name of the "real," the
"everyday" and so on.

This polemical opposition has been central to the arts --and to advances in the
arts-- since romanticism.  It is all part of a general process that I
would summarise under the heading of "demystification".

Demystification could also be described as de-fetishization as one can see in
the polemical oppositions between object and process, or between artist and
public even. The meaning of the work of art is not in the object, but in the
process of creation. The origin of art is not in the artist as unique creator,
but in the perception of art.

It is demystification and progress in the sense that what it does is help us
realize art is founded in human powers, in our own personal abilities, common
to all people, which can be cultivated and enhanced by engaging with works and
others...

Thank you for your stimulating thoughts, Owen.

cheers,
George

Re: FLUXLIST: Anti-Sinus Record

[George Free]

Ooops!!!

Sorry about that last message(s)!

I'm trying to get the hang of the Emacs mail reader, and goofed.

cheers,
George

Re: FLUXLIST: Anti-Sinus Record

[George Free]

   X-From_: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Aug  6 21:30:56 2000
   X-Authentication-Warning: scribble.com: majordom set sender to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] using -f
   X-Sender: kforer@mail
   Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 21:22:45 -0400
   From: Kathy Forer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
   Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
   Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Precedence: bulk
   Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   X-URL: http://www.fluxus.org/FLUXLIST
   Content-Length: 1253

   At 3:46 PM -0700 8/5/00, Josh Ronsen wrote:
   >"And talking of unorthodoxies, I am asking a curious and interesting 
   >Danish acquaintance of mine, Dr. Christian Volf, who is an expert on 
   >hearing, to send me care of you [his bother Julian], one of the 
   >special recordings he has made for relief of sinus trouble. One 
   >listens through earphones to a record of synthetic sounds in the 
   >lowest musical octave and the effect is to give an intense internal 
   >massage, vibrating the bones of the skull... I have heard of many 
   >people who keep sinusitis at bay simply by listening to the record 
   >every morning before breakfast."
   >
   >Searches on "Christian Volf" on Altavista and Google have turned up nothing.

   Though she and Huxley didn't marry until 1956, this also sounds very 
   Laura Archera Huxley-like. "You Are Not the target": /It works--if 
   you work/ http://www.lycaeum.org/graphics/people/huxley/lhuxley.html

   There's a message board at
   Aldous Huxley - soma web - Extensive information about Aldous Huxley 
   and Brave New World
    where you might 
   get a knowledgeable response if you haven't already.

   Prajna NOW


   http://www.legasthenie.de/lrs/volf.htm
   http://babelfish.altavista.com/translate.dyn

FLUXLIST: 100,000,000,000,000 poems

[George Free]

of Raymond Queneau

http://x42.com/active/queneau.html

Re: FLUXLIST: galleries

[George Free]

Boy, that took a while to come through. I sent it June 11. 

-Original Message-
From: George Free <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sunday, July 09, 2000 3:30 AM
Subject: FLUXLIST: galleries


>As they are currently organized, galleries separate artists from
>their public as much as they supposedly connect them.
>

FLUXLIST: galleries

[George Free]

As they are currently organized, galleries separate artists from
their public as much as they supposedly connect them.

Today, galleries are set up as a site of display. They consist of a room
or series or rooms where completed work is presented. The audience is
invited to contemplate objects, whose principles of construction are
difficult --if not, for many, impossible-- to apprehend. The audience is
reduced to worshiping idols or fetishes created by a group who
are correspondingly elevated to a kind of elite priesthood, an inner circle
of initiates into the "black arts". Appreciation of the arts is reduced
largely to snobbery and taste.

For the most part, artist-run galleries have not in any way challenged this
relationship. To the extent that do strive to challenge the established
relationship between art and the public, it is usually to draw in previously
excluded groups, presenting the art of these groups in a completely
traditional mode. This approach usually has the effect of undermining the
advanced achievements in the arts and
replacing avant-garde work with a popular (petty-bourgeois) aesthetic.

A genuinely popular art has to be established on the basis of a new
relationship between artists and their public.

Consider Filliou and Brecht and their shop Cédille qui Sourit. Filliou said
"we conceived the Cédille qui Sourit as an international center of permanent
creation, and so it
turned out to be. We played games, invented and disinvented objects,
corresponded with the humble and mighty, drank and talked with our
neighbors, manufactured and sold by correspondence suspense poems and
rebuses, started to compile an anthology of misunderstandings and an
anthology of jokes..."

A center of permanent creation, that is what galleries could be. Less a site
of viewing and more a workshop, a place where artists --both professional
and nonprofessional-- work to create works, where works are apprehended in
construction, where the public can grasp the modus operandi of art and
produce works themselves as a way of apprehending work.

cheers,
George

Re: FLUXLIST: NATIONALISTIC????

[George Free]

>> stance within one's national culture and doesn't free oneself from it.
Its
>
>What do you mean by that ? Isnt this naiv ? That one must "free" himself
>from something ?
>


Well if something is influencing you in a way that is detrimental to your
freedom and autonomy, you will probably want to free yourself from it. For
example, you might want to free yourself from hunger, if you're starving.

I'm not at all sure what you're asking though.

George

Re: FLUXLIST: NATIONALISTIC????

[George Free]

>i have some of my own views but i would very much like
>to hear any of your reactions about this idea..THAT
>ART should be nATIONALISTIC...it would really help me
>to hear what you have to say especially most of you
>who come from different NATIONALITIES?
>


One thing to consider is that art is inevitably nationalistic -- or at least
it reflects the fact that it is created within a certain nation and, hence,
national culture.

Of course art doesn't simply reflect or reproduce the culture. It can also
challenge and change it. Hopefully, art will appeal to and support the
universalistic dimensions of the culture and not the narrow particularistic
values of "nationalism" in the parochial and ethnocentric sense. It seems
Fluxus has always stressed internationalism, which I think at its best,
refers to the universal without ignoring the fact that people are distinct.


I remember reading about Emmett Williams criticizing the nationalism of his
Canadian students when he was teaching at the Nova Scotia school of art in
the 70s. Personally, I've always disliked Canadian nationalism in the arts,
even though it has been a left-nationalism (at least in the 70s). In
particular, I don't like the anti-Americanism in this country that
you find among the left-intelligentsia.

Even so, the internationalism of Americans and other dominant nationalities
can be a way of universalizing and thus imposing their own particular
culture. And simply adopting the international styles is also taking a
stance within one's national culture and doesn't free oneself from it. Its
complex needless to say


cheers,
George

Toronto, Canada

Re: FLUXLIST: Time pieces ...

[George Free]

I once took photos of the sky looking up over the rooftops from my front
porch everyday for a couple of months. When I showed them in a slide show
people couldn't believe how beautiful the changing weather was.

-Original Message-
From: Sol Nte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, July 03, 2000 5:37 AM
Subject: Re: FLUXLIST: Time pieces ...


>PK wrote:
>
>>I've always liked the time piece in the film "Smoke" where Harvey Kietel
>places his tripod/camera at the same spot in front of his shop every day
>at the same time and takes a photograph.
>
>This might be a great fluxlist group project.  Well, maybe not for a
>year, but for a month...photographing something every day (in a small
>way, maybe i-zone to conserve space) or small drawings or paintings, and
>compiling them for a specific time...a Fluxlist Month, or whatever<
>
>Tom Philips has done a similar thing for many years now photographing the
>same street corner in South London (unfortunately Ican't remember what the
>interval of the photographs is). His concern is to document the change of
>that corner...shops come and go, buildings change etc.
>

Re: FLUXLIST: Re: Conner Quote

[George Free]

I believe someone else posted this quotation. As for myself, I don't get it.
Lined paper is a useful technology which I find helpful. I also find it
helpful when people write from left to right, though thoughtful alternatives
can be stimulating ;-)

>George wrote:
>
>>
>>“If they give you lined paper, write the other way.”
>>Bruce Conner
>>
>>
>
>This is my favorite quote ever. I can't believe that you wrote it. I live
by
>this quote.
>Thanks for letting me know it was Bruce Conner who said or wrote it. I
>remember it from the front page of "Fahrenheit 451" by Bradbary.
>Anyways, thanx again George, that made my night.
>
>ac
>
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>

Re: FLUXLIST: Re: trial [freedom from transgression]

[George Free]

>The cultural absorbtion and conscious or unconscious perpetuation of
>this model (the artist as neccessarily subversive/ transgressive) by
>artists and 'non-artists' alike, severly limits the freedom of artists
>to participate in the transgression of rigid cultural norms, procedures,
>notions/ ideas, power structures, etc. in any meaningful way.

I believe that the real 'transgression' today is to be as ordinary and maybe
even as mild-mannered as possible. ;-)

George

Re: FLUXLIST: Trial by e-jury

[George Free]

>
>I appreciate brad's desire to have an open forum. I agree with him.
>

As has been pointed out, Fluxlist is completely open. One of the conditions
of maintaining an open list is that other's don't abuse people and thus
drive them out or try to silence them. With freedom comes responsibility to
be respectful to others.

George

Re: FLUXLIST: Vienna Actionists

[George Free]

>
>And don't people in some parts of the philipines actually crucify
themselves
>during holy week.

If I remember correctly I think Chris Burden once crucified himself on the
back of a Volkswagen Beetle.

Re: FLUXLIST: 1 fluxlist project

[George Free]

>
>http://kforer.com/cgi-bin/dbman/db.cgi?db=default&uid=default&view_records=
1&ID=*&nh=15&mh=1
>George, how did you take this photograph so you got the screen without
flicker?
>
>

the photo was taken with ordinary Kodak Gold film, using a 35 mm and a
flash. It just turned out that way.

cheers,
George

Re: FLUXLIST: RE: FLUXLIST-digest V1 #337

[George Free]

-Original Message-
From: higgins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 10:39 AM
Subject: FLUXLIST: RE: FLUXLIST-digest V1 #337


>Please take me off the list until August! This takes me 1/2 hour to
download
>and I cannot select not to open it in this program.  PLEASE<
>PLEASE
>


I've unsubscribed you. If you want to resubscribe to fluxlist or
fluxlist-digest at any time in the future, send a message to
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with the message

subscribe fluxlist

or

subscribe fluxlist-digest

in the body of the message. No subject.

George

Re: FLUXLIST: Poetry Update - Help Wanted

[George Free]

Gosh, 4 years on Fluxlist! I think this was my first post, and I was
thrilled when Dick Higgins responded.


>Ooops, haven't had coffee yet,
>try
>http://www.deluxxe.com/fluxus/postcard/index2.html
>
>Double click #43 for full text.
>
>Bless,
>PK
>
>Patricia wrote:
>
>> Hiya:
>> There's a very cool postcard about fluxus on the homepage by one
>> who elucidates well - George Free!!!
>>
>> http://deluxxe.com/cgi-bin/post2.cgi
>>
>> mee
>>
>> Roger Stevens wrote:
>>
>> > please reply to this to me at my home e-mail
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > thanks
>> >
>> > wanted
>> >
>> > 1  a one hundred word (or less) explanation
>> > of what FLUXUS is...
>> > (preferably from someone is is in the book)
>> >
>> > 2  a one hundred word explanation (or less)
>> > of what the FLUXLIST is
>> > (Sol, maybe?)
>> >
>> > cheers
>> >
>> > Roger
>
>

FLUXLIST: Re: who May 29

[George Free]

Hi Allen,

As you may have remembered by now, you need to send this to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

I believe also that you need to send a separate message for each command.

cheers,
George

-Original Message-
From: allen bukoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, May 29, 2000 2:24 AM
Subject: who May 29


>who FLUXLIST
>who FLUXLIST-DIGEST
>
>

Re: FLUXLIST: Imagine

[George Free]

> What seems to get the best results is when community groups
>and churches get coalitions for change and stuff happening.

I think this is really important. I'm more convinced myself that progress
will come from encouraging the development of local community organizations
of all types. It could be a soccer team or a club of any type. When people
have a chance to meet outside the officially mediated spheres (eg, the mass
media, government organizations), there is some chance that they can come to
understand their own experience and interests, and possibly act on them.

Its interesting to note that a lot of the revolutionary agitation in the
19th century came out of local working class clubs and associations. In
large part these don't exist anymore. Everyone is at home watching TV.

The populist thrust of Fluxus would seem to suggest that there might be some
hope of bringing advanced achievements in art to groups who are generally
outside of the elite. Something to think about anyway.

cheers,
George

Re: FLUXLIST: Imagine

[George Free]

>I agree. I (something of a socialist, though not Marxist) had a discussion
>with an anarchist friend of mine a while back where I defended the concept
>of property. To me, the essence of property is access. Say if I'm reading a
>book and set it down halfway through one day. I want to be able to come
back
>to that book the next day and know that it's there and that somebody else
>hasn't walked off with it. Say if I've assembled a collection of
>hard-to-find camping tools. If I want to go camping, I can just grab the
>tools I know I have and I know work for me, rather than scouring the town
>for the tools I need. A well-functioning, secure society is much more
>efficient and productive than some propertyless utopia in which everyone
>must only operate from first principles.
>
>That's not to say I don't support public ownership of certain land,
>services, or industries. I do think that certain things better serve the
>public when owned publicly or when regulated by a governmental force. But
>the concept of property is a valid one, and I do not agree with the
>anarchist statement that "property is theft."
>


The phrase "property is theft" is from Proudhon. His view was not at all
simplistic, but based on a critique of the capital - labour relation...

In their critique of private property, the early socialists were not
suggesting that people wouldn't have personal possessions or anything of
that sort. Its more like being a member of a housing cooperative. You would
have your apartment or house, but you wouldn't have the right to sell it.
Only to live in it. Nor was this view premised on the notion that people
would operate on "first principles". A socialist society would have rules
like any other.

...I've been reading about the revolutions of 1848, rereading Marx and
Engels, and planning on going through Proudhon, Saint-Simon, Fourier etc...
so these things have been on my mind. All while reading on the subway on my
way to and from work.

cheers,
George

P.S. I was fortunate to attend a talk by Linus Torvalds yesterday. He was
asked what he thought about Napster. He said he was ambivalent. He thought
the technology was interesting but didn't like it being used to violate of
copyright. After the talk I was reading a Linux user group newspaper I
picked up that included a short article by Richard Stallman talking about
the origin of copyright and how he thought that it was originally devised to
protect creators and was now being used by corporations to prevent people
from freely circulating ideas The debates from the revolutionary period
of the 19th century are still very much with us...

Re: FLUXLIST: Art and Economies

[George Free]

>I contend that the most engaging art tends to be created when the
>artist is working as closely as possible to a subsistance level, that is,
>with a minimum of "imported" raw material as possible so that the need to
>"export" (and be controlled by the market) is minimalized.

Wouldn't control by the market be minimized most often when the artist has
an independent income?

GF

Re: FLUXLIST: Napst.er/Freenet

[George Free]

Myke writes:

>>It may be, "If this whole thing catches on", that we will begin to
question
>> the very institution of private property itself.George
>
>Yeah.  But you don't know what you've got until it's gone.
>
>The good thing about private property is that people always have greater
>incentives to keep their own stuff clean - and to take better care of it,
>especially if they've had to work their ass off to get it like I work
>my ass off to get what I privately own.

Many others have higher motivations than you seem to have...

>Public housing is a joke and a complete misappropriation of my tax money.

Tell that to the people without housing.

I'm not advocating the kind of state public housing projects that you are
alluding to. There are many, many examples of successful, collectively owned
cooperative housing projects throughout the world.

George

FLUXLIST: web logging

[George Free]

Apropos "information wants to be free" ...

An article on web logging:

http://www.feedmag.com/feature/cx329_master.html

JORN BARGER IS A COLLECTOR, of a sort -- though you wouldn’t know what sort,
exactly, from gazing on his worldly possessions. A long-haired,
thick-bearded former artificial-intelligence (AI) programmer in his forties,
Barger lives in genteel poverty, sharing an apartment with roommates in
Chicago’s scruffy West Rogers Park neighborhood. 
http://www.robotwisdom.com/

Includes link to Granny Artemis mail art site

http://www.drizzle.com/~rhondaj/mailart/mailindex.html

cheers,
George

Re: FLUXLIST: Napst.er/Freenet

[George Free]

>  "If this whole thing catches on," Mr. Clarke said,
> "I think that people will  look back in 20 to 40 years and look at the
> idea that you can own information in the same way as gold or real estate
> in the same way we look at witch burning today."
>
 
Why stop with information? Why don't we free housing and gold?

It may be, "If this whole thing catches on", that we will begin to question
the very institution of private property itself.George

Re: FLUXLIST: Napster/ArtsJournalArticle/ArtistsRights

[George Free]

Two articles on the subject that I've found interest are:

Information as a global public good:A right to knowledge and communication
Oxfam International campaign proposal 
by Danny Yee
http://danny.oz.au/free-software/advocacy/oicampaign.html


The Value of Gnutella and Freenet
by Andy Oram
http://webreview.com/pub/2000/05/12/platform/index.html?wwwrrr_2512.txt


cheers,
George

Re: FLUXLIST: Cage

[George Free]

>> politics: cage refused to vote in ANY elections -
>> hated the idea of "leader" (whether glenn branca
>> or bill clinton) - his "teaching" duties
>
>Dont think this is a good idea for a real life human beings. In real life
>you have to decide and make mistakes etc.. take part in politics.
>
>

I agree. While our democratic institutions are flawed, not participating --
or believing that modern societies can exist without government -- is
avoiding responsibility and indulging in an illusion.

For me, the issue is how do we extend democracy, make it real?

Re: FLUXLIST: Poetry

[George Free]

>So, what is a voice? And what is "the habitual voice"? in your opinion?
>


Well, I was winging it when I said that, but now that you call me on it...
;-)

Actually, I think Cage was more exactly concerned about how our taste was
conditioned. Our likes and dislikes. He used chance operations and various
techniques to get beyond these conditioned judgements. ...conditioned by
up-bringing, personal background etc. He tried to develop a practice -- and
his mind -- to the point where he could appreciate everything. This is where
he was particularly influenced by Buddhism and Eastern philosophy
generally...

A voice, I suppose, is a distinctive mode of speech, a way of talking that
is unique to the individual. Is that voice conditioned by its background or
free? Does it reproduced patterns or is it truly creative? ...those might be
questions to consider. Of course, they beg as much as they ask, because we'd
also need to know what we mean by "free" and "creative". ...I think in Cage
being creative means letting things manifest as they are...

But there I might be winging it again ;-)

best BP

George

Re: FLUXLIST: Poetry

[George Free]

>Yes. Or so he claimed. And made art out of Thoreau's writings etc. I'm just
>saying there's a difference between the naive anarchism of some so-called
>"cultural workers" and the actuality of political situations. The point I
made
>to my friend about Cage was "Sure, he was an anarchist, but only in the
>cultural sphere." What I meant was talking about "anarchy" and doing it are
two
>different things.

I see what you're saying and am inclined to agree. Cage was resolutely
anti-political -- or maybe you could say he embraced an anti-political
politics.

In this sense too, anarchism is defined by its attempt to get rid of the
state (ie. of the political sphere).

I think that's a great limitation in Cage, and in anarchism  not to
mention even Marxism, which sees the elimination of the state as an ultimate
goal.

In another way though, Cage saw his work as very political in the sense of
working with the (power) relations between people (e.g., the people in an
orchestra). ... You'd be right to say that this is only in the cultural
sphere, but I guess Cage saw his work as possibly being a model for other
social relations.


>So, George, let me put this question to you. Do you think what Cage did
really
>changed the world for your garbageman?
>


Well, I've never discussed music or anything else for that matter with the
guy who picks up my garbage, but of course it would be safe to assume he's
never heard of Cage. We live in a class society and most people don't have
the luxury of receiving a musical education that would include avant-garde
art. ... Cage himself -- or no artist -- can change the class structure of
society through their work. The relations between classes is the product of
social and political struggle... ..Back to politics again.

cheers,
George
>

Re: FLUXLIST: Poetry

[George Free]

>Did he have a day job? Stuff like that interests me. If the
>artist really wants to be depersonalized, let him/her get a day job in a
>factory, corporation or fast food restaurant.

The interesting thing is that Cage's works are filled with hardly nothing
but anecdotes and other snippets from his life!

While working in a factory or a corporation can be deadening, I think Cage's
works can help us enliven that situation. Working can be good too. I think
its possible to appreciate it -- which is not to say we shouldn't try to
improve our work situations in light of what we can appreciate about it

cheers,
George

Re: FLUXLIST: Poetry

[George Free]

>Of course, I'm not a Fluxus poet, and I rather like seeing the persona of
the
>writer expressed.

I don't see Cage's work as "depersonalization", in the sense of eliminating
personality. ...what would that end up being? Nihilism. And Cage was by no
means a nihilist.

I think what he's working with -- both from his connection with Buddhism,
but also with Western traditions of aesthetics  -- is a bigger conception of
mind. Non-expression is not the abscence of expression, but an activity that
allows things to manifest in a completely free or absolute way (not
subjected to the pre-conceived intentions of the artist).

In Cage's work we always hear his voice ;-) ! Literally, reading. All his
works are distinctively "his", because he is part of the condition of their
realization. But their realization comes from somewhere else... He created
situations in which we could hear. In which he could participate too as a
member of the audience.

...don't know if I'm making myself clear here.


I don't fully understand the other position, but I see
>capitalism as one big effort to wipe out the human voice and eccentric
(read
>non-commodified) persona and replace it with manufactured voices or, worse,
>no voice except the "voice" of the commodity.

Cage's work is the antithesis of "commodification" or commercialization of
poetry or music, so I don't see a parallel in that sense. However, Cage was
very interested in modern technology and sought to use it for artistic (and
noncommercial) purposes.

When I think of all the
>beautiful voices of the poets I've read in my life, I shiver to think of a
>world where this kind of poetry did not exist, where poetry becomes only a
>trick of language and not an expression of human experience or vision.
>

What is a voice? ... I think what Cage was against was the habitual voice.
He wanted to transform speaking, music.


>What is the prejudice against expression? Perhaps someone can explain.
>

Its not a prejudice, but a considered criticism of traditional notions of
artistic expression. At the same time, it is also consistent with some
traditional ideas of expression. ...for example, artists have often talked
about how they didn't actually create the work, but were somehow a vehicle
for its realization...

>I know people fear sentimental manipulation (which I consider poetic
>obesity), just as I fear the poem devoid of the human touch (which I
consider
>poetic anorexia). Personally, I love the persona. Besides, underneath the
>poem, or beside it, over it or through it, is indeed the persona that
created
>it . . . and isn't literature (and art) in general just an excuse to reveal
>one's psychic guts and vision to a reader (futile as that desire might be)?
>Even the desire to hide the persona reveals such. Of course, this is a big
>world and there's always room for both. But personaly speaking . . .
>


I think Cage's work was more a practice of working on who he was. In this
sense, it was intensely personal. His works are filled with his life and his
life filled with his work. From the moment he would get up in the morning
and water his plants. All part of his musics.

thanks BP!

George

Re: FLUXLIST: Poetry

[George Free]

>
>Well, I do agree with you about Cage. I made the point recently to someone
that
>Cage was never the anarchist he claimed to be in all his interviews and
books.
>Real anarchy would have threatened his position as an artist.

How so? Cage was an anarchist in the American individualist tradition of
Thoreau.

There were certain
>admirable qualities Cage had though. For instance, during most of his
career he
>really lived hand-to-mouth and had to teach etc..

Why is this admirable? ...Not that I don't think Cage was admirable, but
working can be admirable too, no?

It wasn't til later in his
>career that he became self-sufficient as an artist and then he adopted a
very
>strange attitude: he maintained a strict work-ethic.

Art is a discipline Where's the contradiction between art and hard work?

After all that talk about
>how unemployment was the state of Budhhist enlightenment  (which I believe
he got
>from Berlin Dada) , he proceeded to become a professional composer/aritist.
>Ironic, no?
>

I don't remember seeing any glorification of unemployment in Cage's work.
 apropos: enlightenment; it takes a lot of discipline to become
enlightened! How long did the Buddha sit under the tree at Bodhgaya?


>The reason I don't do my writing and art anonymously is that it has been
done to
>death and why make that sacrifice to cover old ground. I mean Duchamp said
"go
>underground" but it reflects such a cynical stance.
>

Again, interestingly. Cage's works were filled with his signature.
Literally. Which was so beautiful.

What did Duchamp mean by "go underground"? relate art to life??? Where's the
cynicism?


just some questions

cheers,
George

Re: FLUXLIST: Poetry

[George Free]

>If production was involved, it should be of the non-expressive,
>non-intentional sort -- a la Cage, Mac Low etc.

of course Emmett Williams, Dick Higgins and Allison Knowles  

Re: FLUXLIST: Poetry

[George Free]

>
>What makes Fluxus poetry different from other varieties?
>

I think it might just involve hearing and seeing words differently -- with
"happy new ears" (Cage).  And not necessarily writing or otherwise saying
these words. Just being receptive and open to the the linguistic world
around you.

If production was involved, it should be of the non-expressive,
non-intentional sort -- a la Cage, Mac Low etc. The productions should have
the effect of producing the above mentioned state of openness in others...

cheers,
George

Re: FLUXLIST: Sensitive Issues

[George Free]

Hi Carol,

Its just from a catalogue of an exhibit that was in Vancouver that I happen
to have. The catalogue is of a show called Luxe, calme et volupte: aspects
of French Art 1966-1986 at the Vancouver Art Gallery. There's a nice little
interview with Filliou in it too.

I imagine there's some books on/about Buren that cover this too. I don't
know off hand though.

Investigations is better, I agree.

cheers,
George

-Original Message-
From: Carol Starr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: George Free <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, April 03, 2000 9:12 PM
Subject: Re: FLUXLIST: Sensitive Issues


>hi george,
>can you give us the text for the buren/duchamp critisism?
>perhaps when we think of criticism we might better say investigations.
>alot of study is required if one isn't going to go around thinking one
>has invented the wheel.especially early on in one's career.
>
>carol starr
>taos, new mexico, usa
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>

Re: FLUXLIST: Sensitive Issues

[George Free]

>Terrence writes;
>
>I find it sad how many artits are taught to be so critical. They seem to
create
>under such burdons and with theortical restraints. I am anti bordom.
>

If you aren't critical, though, you will just repeat the past -- and
actually you will only repeat the outward appearance of the past, without
getting to the true essence of things (if I can put it that way).

Being critical, as I understand it, is trying to understand the past and
realize the best potential that is in it. That is what Buren is saying in
the passage below. He says that Duchamp was great, but because he didn't
take into consideration the context that he was working in he did not fully
realize his intentions -- or his intentions were subverted.

Perhaps Duchamp wasn't in a position to appreciate the limits of his work,
for various reasons. Now we can see those limits, so if we want to be true
to Duchamp, then we have to be critical. Duchamp was the ultimate "critical"
artist, I think.

Buren is saying that he is trying to realize what is best in Duchamp

>Everyone born a child. I can see more clearly what is ahead as I respond to
>what is before me not behind. Why relive what is done?  Art is techne.
Humans
>are tool makers, use them. Just play. Be observant. Poke fun my mon.
>

Criticism is often seen as intellectual, and opposed to spontanaeity and
being "natural". I don't think it has to be seen that way. Being "critical"
is just trying to understand and respond to one's situation in as full a way
as possible.

The future is a product of the past, so we are always reliving it in one way
or another

Just some quick thoughts

cheers,
George




>terrence kosick
>artnatural
>
>George Free wrote:
>
>> >What did Buren say ? In relation to Duchamp.
>> >
>>
>> from an interview:
>>
>> B.M. According to you Duchamp's path leads to a cul-de-sac. In a way he
>> wanted to be the last artist. Is this what you criticize?
>>
>> D.B. In its time this position was interesting. But subsequently,
Duchamp's
>> radical criticism of art has becomes the opposite of what Duchamp himself
>> criticized. Duchamp was able to decontextualize an ordinary object --
thanks
>> to the gallery, where the context contradicts the object -- but the
context
>> itself was not thought about in any critical way. It didn't take long for
>> the effect; the banal object is fetishized. The context and place exerted
>> their influence. The object placed there to destabilize painting became
like
>> a painting, a work of art with the rest. And, in this case, obsolete.
>> Duchamp thereby introduced a form of production which is no more, and no
>> less, than the mirror image of what he criticized. For the last twenty
years
>> I have been against Duchamp in my work, I never took an 'anti-art'
position,
>> even if some people would have loved to find this so. One of the
fundamental
>> and serious questions I ask myself is: "What is art?" Of, if you will,
what
>> are the processes which operate so that a work becomes -- or does not
>> become -- a work of art? And if one finds these rules, or, if not, how do
>> they fluctuate? And under what pressures? Duchamp gave a deliberately
>> comfortable answer to these questions. For myself, they are still
unresolved
>> even if a solution appears from time to time in my work.
>
>

Re: FLUXLIST: Sensitive Issues

[George Free]

>What did Buren say ? In relation to Duchamp.
>


from an interview:

B.M. According to you Duchamp's path leads to a cul-de-sac. In a way he
wanted to be the last artist. Is this what you criticize?

D.B. In its time this position was interesting. But subsequently, Duchamp's
radical criticism of art has becomes the opposite of what Duchamp himself
criticized. Duchamp was able to decontextualize an ordinary object -- thanks
to the gallery, where the context contradicts the object -- but the context
itself was not thought about in any critical way. It didn't take long for
the effect; the banal object is fetishized. The context and place exerted
their influence. The object placed there to destabilize painting became like
a painting, a work of art with the rest. And, in this case, obsolete.
Duchamp thereby introduced a form of production which is no more, and no
less, than the mirror image of what he criticized. For the last twenty years
I have been against Duchamp in my work, I never took an 'anti-art' position,
even if some people would have loved to find this so. One of the fundamental
and serious questions I ask myself is: "What is art?" Of, if you will, what
are the processes which operate so that a work becomes -- or does not
become -- a work of art? And if one finds these rules, or, if not, how do
they fluctuate? And under what pressures? Duchamp gave a deliberately
comfortable answer to these questions. For myself, they are still unresolved
even if a solution appears from time to time in my work.

Re: FLUXLIST: Sensitive Issues

[George Free]

>>
>> > Is it possible not to have a context? I don't see how it could be.
>> > "Contextualization" would only be making the context explicit. In this
>case,
>> > analyzing and stating motives.
>>
>> Well, that is what "contextualisation" meens. But I think, we must be
>> grown up enough, to take things for themselves.

Part of what your post was, was the intentions or motivation behind it. To
assert that the email was a thing wholly unto itself is clearly false. It
exists in a context and cannot exist without the context. For example, it is
written in the English language. You cannot understand it without having
that context (the linguistic community of English speakers).

Like the pissoir in the
>> museum. Did Duchamps, well, I am in another league ;-), make
>> context "explicit" ?
>>

Does any artist make the context explicit? Well, yes ... Haacke, for one.
Buren has criticized Duchamp precisely on this point.

>> Please wake up.
>>

Thank you.

George

Re: FLUXLIST: Sensitive Issues

[George Free]

>> I think most people here find the posting of such material witout some
>> contextualising statement somewhat offensive to say the least.
>
>This is a point of view I dont accept. Contextualisation...
>
>

Is it possible not to have a context? I don't see how it could be.
"Contextualization" would only be making the context explicit. In this case,
analyzing and stating motives.

cheers,
George

Re: FLUXLIST: Why?

[George Free]

Heiko writes:
>
>The "baby boom" is to simple as an explanation for what was going on in
>the 60s, my first idea when I read this.

I agree. Its not a matter simply of a quantitative population increase, but
of the effect that this increase has on the existing social structure (see
below).

>>
>> Bourdieu's sociological studies are extremely sophisticated, though I'm
>> unable to go on at length about them here.
>
>He is read all over the world ;-)

To be sure. As chair of sociology at the College de France, he is one of
France's leading intellectuals. Bourdieu is currently very active
politically as well, speaking out against the current free market philosophy
that pervades everything today. His book On Television (a searing critique
of contemporary journalism) and his book with Hans Haacke (dealing with the
relationship between art and politics) may be of particular interest to
people on this list.

>
>But where did those many "new entrants" come from ?
>


They were born as part of the baby boom. They could become "new entrants"
into the art world because, as Davidson pointed out so well, they were born
during a time of liberalization and expansion of the educational and
cultural system.

Normally, during static periods, the art world is stable, reproducing itself
through the gradual integration of a small stream of new entrants who follow
established strategies for achieving success. During the period of
expansion, however, the art world --and the educational and cultural system
in general-- was thrown into crisis because it could not *truly* absorb the
influx
of new people. While the system expanded, it continued to exclude. For
example, many people, "new entrants", began to see that the degrees
and qualifications that would normally guarantee them a position within the
established hierarchy (e.g., professor) no longer had the value they once
did. This deflation of qualifications lead them to criticize "the system"
and reject the values of the social world that didn't live up to its claims.

But, I explain this poorly. The best book to read on this is Bourdieu's
monumental (and very difficult) book Homo Academicus.

In general, we definitely continue to live in a period of conservative
reaction against the 60s and early 70s. In many, many cultural and
scientific fields (including, for example, computer science), we are still
living off the cultural innovations of the 60s/70s (e.g., with respect to
computers, TCP/IP, GUI, O-O programming and more -- Alan Kay is great for
making this point). The current "free market" policies of governments will
result only in continued cultural stagnation... In fact, I wonder if its
possible that they may lead to eventual sterility and an eventual decline in
profits which more and more rely on scientific innovation? A new version of
Marx's crisis theory??? ;-) ... Now, how do we organize politically for this
coming crisis!! ;-)

cheers,
George

FLUXLIST: test - please ignore

[George Free]

Please ignore this message. 

Re: FLUXLIST: Why?

[George Free]

Heiko writes:


>> Population explosion -- the sudden flood of "new entrants" into a
cultural
>> field is major explanation of why cultural fields change, according to
>> sociologists of art like Pierre Bourdieu (who's work I greatly admire).
>
>And why is french art today so boring ? The pill ???
>

huhhn?

>No, I dont believe such cheap theories.
>
>

Bourdieu's sociological studies are extremely sophisticated, though I'm
unable to go on at length about them here.
In a nutshell, he has shown that when a cultural field, like the art world,
cannot absorb an influx of new entrants, who's expectations have been raised
to achieve positions within that field, then these new entrants are often
driven to abandon traditional strategies for achieving success and adopt
'revolutionary' strategies that seek to overthrow the principles and social
structure that excludes them.

Re: FLUXLIST: Why?

[George Free]

Davidson Gigliotti writes:
>
>Another element that contributed to Fluxus's lack of acknowledged
>influence in the arts (and the same lack might apply to other distinct
>art groups as well: Judson to some extent, the early New York video
>artists, the Living Theater, the Wooster Group, the various "body"
>artists, the avant-garde filmmakers, the art and technology people, and
>many others) was the fact that the art world  — New York's and everyone
>else's — was undergoing an enormous population explosion accompanied by
>vigorous aesthetic, moral and economic challenges from many quarters
>starting in the mid to late sixties. There was so much change going on
>it was hard not to get lost in the shuffle.
>

Population explosion -- the sudden flood of "new entrants" into a cultural
field is major explanation of why cultural fields change, according to
sociologists of art like Pierre Bourdieu (who's work I greatly admire).
Because the field (in this case, the art world in NY) cannot absorb so many
new entrants, there is a tendency for a certain segment of this young
population to adopt 'revolutionary' strategies aimed at overturning the
existing order. While opposing the dominant model of art, the new entrants
who adopt a revolutionary strategy are driven towards a kind of
"purification" of art, criticizing the old in the name of a new, more pure
aesthetic. Thus, the groups mentioned above all strove to emphasize the
experiential, "living" nature of art over and against the objectified forms
of traditional works.

[snip]
>The result, of course, was a rich explosion of art and art activity; one
>of the very best and liveliest art periods ever to come along, the
>consequences of which are still playing themselves out thirty years
>later. The artists of the sixties and seventies managed to completely
>change the face of art in America, much to the dismay of many who
>thought that art was based on fixed principles (and are still sore about
>it!).
>

Uhh, "right on!" as we used to say. :-)

Thanks for your wonderful post.

George

Re: FLUXLIST: Satie et alii

[George Free]

For a collection of Satie midi files, visit and enjoy:

http://www.teledyn.com/fun/ErikSatie/

Trois Gnossiennes (1890)
Gnossienne 5 [1]
Danse de travers No 1 (1897) [1]
Petite ouverture \340 danser (?) [1]
Gymnopédies (1890?) [3]
Gymnopédies 1 [1]
Gymnopédies 3-1 Sarabande No.1 (1887) [5]
Sarabande No.2 [5]
Sarabande No.3 [5]
Ogvie No.1 (1886) [5]
Ogvie No.2 (1886) [5]
Ogvie No.3 (1886) [5]
Ogvie No.4 (1886) [5]
Le Piccadily [4]
Première pensée Rose + Croix (1890) [1]
Trois Véritables Préludes Flasques (pour un chien) (1912) [2]
La Diva de l'Empire (1919? 1900?) [2]
Choral inappétissant (1914) [1]
La Balancoire (1914) [1]
Vexations (excerpt) [7]
Embryons #2 'd' Edriophthalma' [7]
Sonatina Bureaucratique (1917)
[6] Passacaille [8]

Re: FLUXLIST: new list owner

[George Free]

Ahh! They smell --and look-- lovely. Thank you, Ms. Petal.

>Congratulations!!  To help you celebrate, this email contains the fragrance
of
>the newly opened blooms of 24 roses in the colours of rose, purple, mauve,
lilac
>and zinzolin.  You may arrange the scent in the container of your choice,
or,
>let it float lazily around.
>
>smell here
>
and
>here
>
>sniff
>herem, and
here
>
>
wafting
>beautifully here
>
>yum,
>yum   the zinzolin
aroma
>is wonderful
>
>
>bliss
>
>zing!!
>
>Best!!
>
>Patricia Petal

FLUXLIST: new list owner

[George Free]

Greetings all,

You might see the occasional piece of mangled email in the next few days, as
I am now taking on list-owner duties and still learning the ropes.

cheers,
George

Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus as an obscure(d) influence

[George Free]

>With all due respect, "traditional artworld terms" I would think would
imply
>interpretation and sales of art in the fluxus genre as commodities, and
while
>sales of objects in the conceptual vein IS now done, many contemporary
galleries
>do promote conceptual art sans sales for the love of showing it, and depend
on
>other artists they represent to keep the business going.  Thus, I think
there
>was a cultural revolution in that respect.
>

I was having second thoughts even as I wrote this. I think it depends a lot
on what aspects of Fluxus one is looking at.

I was thinking of those aspects that were aimed at overturning the
established notion of the artist and of art as separate from the activities
of everyday life. (A big story, I know.)

Re: commodification, I would suggest thinking about "traditional artworld
terms" as *fetsihization*--turning the object/act (whatever it is, e.g.,
words written on a gallery wall) into an object of contemplation and
"worship". To me, Fluxus was/is "radical" to the extent that it communicates
a new way of relating with the world in one's everyday life. Its not about
becoming knowledgeable about "art", but about changing the way one lives and
perceives the world. What that change consists of... now there's a
bigger question.

George


>Best,
>PK
>
>George Free wrote:
>
>> One thought: as a "radical art movement," Fluxus was opposed to the
>> established art world and its mode of operation (the established
galleries,
>> e.g.). Fluxus (if I may be allowed to speak in generalities) was not
playing
>> the artworld game and, consequently, it is to be expected that it would
not
>> be recognized by those who up-hold and seek to profit by playing this
game.
>> Fluxus could be recognized only if it succeeded in its "revolutionary"
>> activity and over-turned the existing artworld, establishing new
rules
>> Needless to say, this cultural revolution didn't happen. Fluxus, however,
is
>> now being recognized, but it would seem that its being recognized in
>> traditional artworld terms.
>>
>> George
>
>

Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus as an obscure(d) influence

[George Free]

Ken writes:
>
>If one studies the general, large history of Fluxus and intermedia, one
>will readily see why so many of these influential artists went
>unacknowledged.
>
>Most of us lacked effective, market-savvy dealers.


Thanks for posting this Ken. I hope to read your Art Economist articles some
day.

One thought: as a "radical art movement," Fluxus was opposed to the
established art world and its mode of operation (the established galleries,
e.g.). Fluxus (if I may be allowed to speak in generalities) was not playing
the artworld game and, consequently, it is to be expected that it would not
be recognized by those who up-hold and seek to profit by playing this game.
Fluxus could be recognized only if it succeeded in its "revolutionary"
activity and over-turned the existing artworld, establishing new rules
Needless to say, this cultural revolution didn't happen. Fluxus, however, is
now being recognized, but it would seem that its being recognized in
traditional artworld terms.

George

Re: FLUXLIST: paik

[George Free]

I've been thinking about Paik a bit and wondering why I like his work so
much -- the little I know of it or think I know of it anyway . What's
interesting to me about his use of television is that in a lot of ways he
focused or called attention to the *hardware*. Unlike many other "video
artists" who used TV, Paik calls attention to the environment in which the
video is displayed (or not). In this connection I thought too of a remark of
Trungpa Rinpoche. Reportedly, when asked by some students if watching TV was
a bad thing (if it had a negative effect on mindfulness practice, e.g.), he
said something like "Not if you are aware of the wall behind the TV."
...i.e., being aware of the broader environment of the experience. ..A lot
of art makes us aware like that. .

FLUXLIST: Re: fluxus in canada

[George Free]

>Is there or was there alot of ppl that are/were part of fluxus in Canada?


There were some connections. I looked into this a while back (2 years ago?).
There may be some trace of it on the web archive.

In the early 70s there were a number of connections through some of the
alternative galleries, I believe, like Western Front, one in Calgary and to
some groups like General Idea in Toronto... These connections, as I
understand it, were generally a long the lines of younger artists admiring
the Fluxus artists...

Robert Filliou came to Canada a number of times. And there's a book about
him by a Torontonian who's name I could look up for you. (I should remember,
but my mind's blank at the moment =Clive R..?)

Emmett Williams taught at the Nova Scotia school of art.. In one of his
books, he criticizes his student's nationalistic streak, as I recall.

Ken Friedman also spent time in Canada,  I believe, so could probably answer
this question very well.

I'm not sure if any of the Canadians "got it", but that's always a
subjective judgement needless to say (and probably arrogant on my part as
well). ...my own view, (please no flames), is that the artistic break
throughs of the 60s and early 70s were side-swiped by artists who wanted to
be more directly "political" and in Canada that frequently meant
nationalistic... but I'm not sure how well I can defend that. Perhaps others
have more insight...

I'm generally of the view that everything culturally has gone down hill
since 1974, but I'm odd that way

George

Re: FLUXLIST: toronto panel

[George Free]

>toronto does not offer much to a fluxus fan 

Toronto has everything a fluxus fan needs:

bright cold winters
hot steamy summers
sad autumns
and soggy springs

here you can look up
and see the world is
large & beautiful

Re: FLUXLIST: Austria How-To-Respond!

[George Free]

Communication can be a dangerous thing, if it breaks down barriers and
allows people who have previously been denied a voice to speak and
articulate a vision.

That seems to have been the revolutionary aspect of the internet so far
(e.g., amongst the "civil society" protesters in Seattle). It has been
seized upon by those who previously didn't have access to the media and
allows for the creation of new public forums and spaces that are not
controlled by the existing authorities (in whatever field of power).

Its all a matter of making connections or networks--and technology is
helping people do that.

Craig wrote:

>How to respond to the current situation in Austria!
>For Fluxlist Artists
>Collaborationists:
>Socio-Poetics since the 1950s
>
> The specter of artists and intellectuals as Nazi or Stalinist
>collaborationists has made collaborations-as-experimental art both more
>difficult and more interesting, especially during the 1950s and 60s.  We
>see a similar struggle with a tainted language in the work of Heinrich
>Böll, who "trained in the Catholic Rhine tradition" was disheartened to
>acknowledge that the Nazis had transformed his language into "a stinking
>quagmire."  Böll, and his generation of writers, "had their work cut out
>for them. In order to realize their dreams as artists, they would have to
>do nothing less than reinvent the German language."  We see a similar
>reinvention of a tainted language in the work of Kurt Vonnegut, who
>"pointed the way to another approach for a writer to deal with his
>language. While Boll worked with a German language contaminated by the Nazi
>gang, Vonnegut wrote in the sandy terrain of the mass media in which the
>English language had been transformed.  During the sixties, he was the
>author most read by young people; they realized that he had taken their
>tame English and turned it inside out, that Puritan English, smelling of
>the sixteenth century, full of pious interjections.  He set about equipping
>it with the language of the millions of voiceless people.  And he did it
>with an ingenious alchemy, becoming at the same time a highly intelligent
>and concise writer."  In the arts, collaboration itself became a way to
>transform the tainted languages of mass bureaucratic organizations.  This
>was no easy task, and often presented enormous risks for artists involved
>in reinventing collaborative organization that would neither serve the
>nationalist state nor the corporate soviets.   My term "sociopoetic"
>describes artistic practices that seek to use social situations or social
>networks as a canvas. It does not define my methodology, then, but rather
>the subjects of my study.
> The visual poets and artists involved in many of the
>collaborations-as-artworks during the 1950s and 60s used many of the
>techniques of modernist poetics.  Instead of the moral authority of the
>tainted High Modernism, favored by the authoritarian state powers, these
>artists work was defined by a tone of smirking seriousness.  Their dry wit
>made fun of authoritative terms, official-sounding institutional names, and
>the trappings of academic research.  The Neoists, for example, invented a
>name that both spoofed and bettered any effort at riding the wave of the
>next new thing or neo-old thing.  In reaction to this threat, authoritarian
>governments did target artists interested in collaboration-as-art.  The
>examples of the oppression of these experimental artists and poets are
>unfortunately and surprisingly numerous.  As a particularly apt example,
>the Uruguayan dictatorship jailed Clemente Padin, the visual poet and
>mail-artist, for "hurting the morale and reputation of the army."  This was
>not a trivial offense, and the court sentenced him to four years in jail;
>he served two years and three months of this absurdly harsh sentence.  His
>work in assemblings and among artists' networks often spoke against the
>brutality of the dictatorship in his country from 1973 till 1985.  The
>government's fantasy, that Padin posed a threat to the national security
>and moral of the army, reached a high point after Padin staged a "Counter
>Biennial" in front of the Latin-American Section of the 10th Biennial in
>Paris in 1977.  Soon after he staged this event, the police arrested him.
>Under intense pressure from an international group of mail-artists
>including Dick Higgins and Klaus Groh, the dictatorship released Padin
>early.  There are other examples just from Latin American governments
>reacting to mail-artists as if they posed some serious threat.  The
>Brazilian military closed the "II International Exhibition of Mail Art"
>organized by Paulo Bruscky and Daniel Santiago in Recife in 1976.
>Oppressive governments in Latin America imprisoned, exiled, tortured, and
>put under house arrest many other mail-artists and editors of assemblings.
>Of course, governments' paranoid fantasies about, and corollary oppression
>of, these poets and artists are not limited to Latin America.

Re: FLUXLIST: modernist and post-in Dieter Roth [was Re: FLUXLIST: Re: FLUXLIST-digest V2 #473

[George Free]

This is not an original thought, but it strikes me that the difference
between the modernists and the post-war avantgarde is that the former were
concerned with the integral unity or the purity of the artistic object.
(E.g., Tschichold talks about the new typography as considering "the blank
white spaces on the paper as formal elements just as much as the areas of
black type") while the later emphasized that the artistic object existed in
a context... or that it was not really an "object", but a temporary and
temporal objectification of a process or activity that is more fundamental
or constitutive of "art". ...and that it was communicating this activity
that was most important...

I remember too from our discussions on this list that Dick Higgins was a big
fan of Moholy-Nagy... so there was a lot of overlap and continuity of
interest ... but also a change in emphasis


>I think Rod summarized the falling out between Jorn and Bill
>nicely (see Raiding the Icebox by Peter Wollen for more about the
>specific disagreement' or, Greil Marcus's Lipstick Traces for
>overview of Letterist activities) ... and Eric's mention of
>StereoLab's work reminds me of how Jorn has (finally) got his day
>in the contemporary zeitgeist ... My thought is that Fluxus
>publications reflect an interest in both the Concrete poetry (that
>grew from Max Bill's theory of concrete art) and concrete actions
>(that is similar to work that arose from Jorn and others).  I have
>found some tangential connections between Fluxus folks and
>Letterists (etc), but nothing really literal (any avtual
>connections -- letters/collaborations/meetings? -- that anyone
>might know about between Fluxus and CoBrA). Craig Saper
>
>
>

Re: FLUXLIST: modernist and post-in Dieter Roth

[George Free]

Craig wrote:


>George wrote about the shift in Dieter Roth's work from his early
>collaborations with poeple like Eugen Gomringer (who worked with
>Max Bill at the new Bauhaus) to the later work ... we might also
>want to discuss the debate between Asger Jorn and Max Bill in
>terms of the split between the two tendencies

I don't know anything about this debate. Do you recommend any sources on the
subject?

George

Re: FLUXLIST: Dieter Roth's pain

[George Free]

>Dieter Roth was connected with the Vienna Aktionists (who also collaborated
>on at least one famous symposium with Fluxus), and his work is often
>autodestructive ... there is in this destructiveness of the object, event,
>etc. and joy connected to potlach like gift giving ...


This auto-destructiveness seems to be related to the transitory or temporal
nature of the object. I do not know Deiter Roth's work that well, but have
been deeply impressed by what I have seen.

Craig, you referred to the shift in his work from "the efforts at producing
a universal aesthetic language ... to the process oriented, transient, and
autobiographical works."

I find this quite interesting as well. It seems that the modernists of the
first part of the last century (I'll have to get used to saying that!) were
very much concerned with purity and clarification and with a conception of
the absolute. ...I'm reading Jan Tschichold at the moment who's illustrative
of this. It seems that the post-WWII artists challenged this with their
emphasis on time, events, change, immanence etc. However, I think beneath
this change in approach the two avant-gardes had a lot in common. Maybe
Roth's shift in orientation might reveal the common, underlying interests as
well?

It seems in recent years that the post-WWII aesthetic (I avoid the word
postmodern) has reached its limit too; and, if I'm not mistaken, there's a
renewed interest in the modernist avant-garde. Certainly I find their
idealism refreshing in contrast to the facile cynicism that seems everywhere
present today--though thats another story.

Re: FLUXLIST: DIETER ROTH REVIEW BY C. SAPER

[George Free]

  What
>he wanted to achieve was the impossibility of expressing the struggle and
>pain involved in his life and art.
>


this is most interesting and contrasts with Robert Filliou's statement (that
I posted a day or two ago) about joy etc being the basis of art. I don't
think the two statements are contradictory though. Suffering and joy are
flip sides of the same thing from a certain perspective. According to the
Buddhist traidition--and Cage picked up on and emphasized this--that same
thing is *change*.

Thanks for posting your review Craig.

cheers,
George

Re: FLUXLIST: Dada and Fluxus

[George Free]

>Robert Filliou felt Fluxus and Dada quite
>different. Wrote eloquent, concise letter on
>the point. Don't have letter at hand, but
>quoted in in full in my 1972 book The
>Aesthetics.
>
>

"Of course, the Fluxus group is composed of individuals who differ much in
their personality and their work. The general human approach of all,
however, is sensiby the same, I think, namely to fight hard *against* the
bottomless stupidity, sadness and meanness that keep plaguing our lives; and
*for* a world in which spontaneity, joy, humour, and -- why not? -- some
sort of higher wisdom (many of us have been influenced by Zen Buddhism), and
true social justice and welfare (most of us are politically of the left)
would become as common as green are my woman's eyes.

"Some program ! I know. I know. Still, we're busy at it. Our main problems
are, as I see it, to avoid: --falling into mere slapstick, or into the trap
of anti-art (neo-dadaism); --being slack in the choice of works, by fear
that the bad (the imitations) should drive out the good (the original
contributions); --becoming prisoners of a 'system'. After all, art is what
artists do, and we all write, paint, compose, love, perform,
etc.., because we know how. What I means is, we're not alone.
Our aims are fundamentally everyone's. Everyone's defects are also our own.
As for me, anyone who at least helps me to fight off the worst is mhy
friend, if he wishes."

R.F. 21-12-63

Re: FLUXLIST: What is Fluxus? What is Dada?

[George Free]

-Original Message-
From: Eric Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, January 12, 2000 5:17 PM
Subject: FLUXLIST: What is Fluxus? What is Dada?


>"Fluxus came out of the teachings of Cage"
>
>This is pure nonsense.
>


That's funny!

Re: FLUXLIST: Remote Painting demo.

[George Free]

Heiko wrote:

>Lots of animated background gifs, more or less ok. Running gags. Cgis etc
>dont work and some knowledge of the german language might be usefull.
>Sotosay the dramatisation of one very simple idea. Works nicenst in the
>lan, xpaint, xanim and xv, mostly even with windoze, have a look at
>http://www.uni-bonn.de/~uzs106/demo/. 

hmmm... manpage art. You may have invented a new genre ;-)

cheers,
George