Re: For Kj (evolution, revolution)

> Quoting Wally Keeler <[email protected]>:
> > In this case, could it be that you are referring to evolution rather
than
> > revolution. Sometimes the social/cultural difference between Canada and
the
> > USA has been explained away because the USA was born from revolution
whereas
> > Canada was born from evolution. Or perhaps you are involved in
revolution by
> > stealth, which may also be evolution, but evolution by direction, yours
of
> > course.
>
> Actually, I never said I was involved in either - just that I would prefer
it.

You wrote:
| No, I use revolution in the sense of first destroying old institutions and
| then creating new ones. My preferred method is to assume control of old
| institutions and then take them apart peacefully and rebuild them over a
| period of time - such that a population never knows that a "revolution"
took
| place.

Your "preferred method is to assume control… and then take them apart…
and rebuild them…
And you claim that you are not "involved in either"? Ok. :-)

> Look back a bit for a Liza Sabatur post about integration and the Cosby
show.

That's US-cultural-centric. There's a big world outside of the USA which
does not share the myopic nuances of USA-specific culture. What is a Cosby
show anyway? Is that an old vaudeville act? Just a typo for Bingo Cosby
show? Shrug.

> How a "revolution" in the perception of african-american family life was
> accomplished not by startling force, but by a gradual acceptance of the
change
> as normal.
>
> Evolution is perhaps a better term.

Yes, but you engage yourself in influencing it – I presume. Effectively, in
some instances, I hope.

On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Joseph Franklyn McElroy Cor[porat]e [Per]form[ance] Art[ist] wrote:

> Actually, I never said I was involved in either - just that I would prefer it.

That's because he's hidden. I love Andy Warhol.

> Look back a bit for a Liza Sabatur post about integration and the Cosby show.
> How a "revolution" in the perception of african-american family life was
> accomplished not by startling force, but by a gradual acceptance of the change
> as normal.

> Evolution is perhaps a better term.

No, it isn't. And there is no 'evolution' without a startling, outside
jolt. There is no gradual, there is no safe, there is no common sense
sensible, reasonable 'evolution'. This is not that Middle path.

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

No Bill Cosby Show reruns where you are? Well, it introduced an African-
American family as a normal (albiet funny) American family with a normal home
life… in other words it made it natural to assume that African American
families were just like white (being normal?) families in the eyes of White
America.

> Yes, but you engage yourself in influencing it – I presume. Effectively, in
> some instances, I hope.

Somebody came by one our shows, a middle class businessman, and wrote in one of
our wall murals (where people got to write their services) and wrote "I am the
inside outsider, advancing creative destruction" - I thought he was pretty
silly. So I stopped trying to be an inside outsider. However, I am neither
an outsider or insider. So I observe, promote issues to both outsiders and
insiders, and go about with Donna creating a niche.

–
Joseph Franklyn McElroy
Cor[porat]e [Per]form[ance] Art[ist]