On Masks

>From what I have gleaned, K thinks that some kind of 'mask' is a natural p=
art of what it is to be 'human' while the >rest seem to think that a mask i=
s a cop out, a sign of insecurity etc.

its only a sign of insecurity if (1) you are aware of your mask ; and (2) y=
ou hide behind it as some kind of self-defense mechanism … a kind of secu=
rity blanket …

since most are unaware of their masks then they are not [hiding] behind them

K is a coward living in fear … because he is aware of his mask and CHOOSE=
S to hide behind it [in public]. the only people he reveals himself to is =
the members of this list.

david goldschmidt

Hi Jon,

Yep - funny really, the piece that I posted is actually a couple of years o=
ld now & it was not infact anything to do with K. Infact, K's got some pret=
ty interesting points - but I ain't got time to play his game, I'm enjoying=
life too much at present & I just wanna get on with it rather than waste m=
y time; arguing with someone when probably I agree with the content, but no=
t the way it is said, life's too short for the attraction of diversion alon=
e.

We all wear masks & 'Ballad of the electric sheep' is about myself, I alway=
s aim at myself - the sauce of doubt. People may think it's them, and yes i=
t is really (a twist), we are not as different or as individual, as some mi=
ght like to think. There is partly play going on, and the text is a mask, a=
game, a componant, a part of my many selves & sometimes someone else's per=
sona; could be similar to whatever one I decide to use at the time. K was n=
ot the focus, we are in it together & there are many links within us all th=
at possess similarity.

I agree with the flexibality of identity/persona as tool, not as a weapon -=
but that's just me…

marc


Hello

I have been reading lots recently on this list regarding an ongoing argum=
ent between various members of the list and Kandinskij regarding 'hiding be=
hind masks'. The latest I see is 'The Ballard of an Electric Sheep'.

From what I have gleaned, K thinks that some kind of 'mask' is a natural =
part of what it is to be 'human' while the rest seem to think that a mask i=
s a cop out, a sign of insecurity etc. However, I kind of find myself agree=
ing with K basic position when I think of Carl Jung' s idea of 'persona', m=
ediaeval masked balls and the amusement of fancy dress parties. Seems prett=
y natural to me to wear a 'mask' on occasion. I may even go as far as to sa=
y it may imply a flexible mind (but I am not sure about this).

Well, there is my 2 cents/pennies worth!

Bye

Jon

> Ape or not (well aren't we all anyway)

No 'we' aren't. You are.

> I'm glad you appreciate my approval.

Nobody appreciated your approval.

> If you have anything else you would like approved, just send it my way.

The easy cheap trick of self-delusional self-importance.

> Is that some sort of a reference to your new Pubic art? Can't wait to see
> where that's going to go. Especially when you throw in a smidgen of
> brainwashedzencultnonsensebabble.

There hasn't been any 'brainwashed zen cult babble' dearest.
Your arrogant dismissal of things you lack understanding of
is simply an impotent knee-jerk of your ego.

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

—– Original Message —–
From: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>
To: "furtherfield" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 10:37 PM
Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: On Masks

>
> Pubic / performance art is a tremendous responsibility and a capability
> which belongs to those willing and capable of it.
>
Finally K said something interesting. Hmm… pubic art….
>
>
> + new media rugby
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php

On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, David Goldschmidt wrote:

> its only a sign of insecurity if (1) you are aware of your mask ;

Drivel. It is in fact rather the opposite.

> and (2) you hide behind it as some kind of self-defense mechanism … a
> kind of security blanket …

Which never happens.

> since most are unaware of their masks then they are not [hiding] behind them

Absolute drivel. The 'unconscious mask' is exactly the passive asleep
reflection


> K is a coward living in fear …

Not at all dearest. The only 'cowards' 'living on fear' are the comatose
asleep morons like yourself. And YOUR problem with my mask is that it
isn't A PASSIVE REFLECTION of what YOU want it to be.


> because he is aware of his mask

Awareness of masks my dearest is a matter of conscious presence.

> and CHOOSES to hide behind it [in public].

MASKs are not about *HIDING*.
Youre projecting some non-existent problem on your part–and
attempting to condescend. Not going to happen.

> the only people he reveals himself to is the members of this
> list.

Drivel. The only ones 'revealed' here are the mechanisms of your
murderous idiocy.

The Being inside of a human is a mystety which is not_ to be revealed.

Keep your simpleton strip-tease impulses to yourself.


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

On Fri, 1 Nov 2002, furtherfield wrote:

> Yep - funny really, the piece that I posted is actually a couple of
> years old now & it was not infact anything to do with K. Infact, K's got
> some pretty interesting points - but I ain't got time to play his game,

Ah right. You ain't got time cause you got 'better things to do'.


> I'm enjoying life too much at present & I just wanna get on with it
> rather than waste my time;

Laughable attempt at condescension.

> arguing with someone when probably I agree with the content, but not the
> way it is said, life's too short for the attraction of diversion alone.

Wise.

> We all wear masks & 'Ballad of the electric sheep' is about myself,

As are all of your comments in public–which is what my commentary to
your poetry and your posts have been–that this narcissistic
self-projection obsession is the BASIS of the relations on these
lists, and the accompanying psychotic outbreaks which not rarely
lead to actions which damage many of the participants.



> I always aim at myself - the sauce of doubt. People may think it's them,
> and yes it is really (a twist),

Actually NO IT ISN'T. And this is precisely the damage of what you are
doing. IT IS NOT. The other 'person' is very much a 'separate' affair,
and it is precisely_ why one must have a certain insight into the human
being before playing these 'games' because this is not a GAME and
because you are BREAKING humans.


> we are not as different or as individual,
> as some might like to think.

> There is partly play going on, and the text is a mask, a game, a
> componant, a part of my many selves & sometimes someone else's persona;
> could be similar to whatever one I decide to use at the time.

Go figure. But this is mostly drivel.

> K was not the focus, we are in it together &

No dearest. There is no 'we' and nobody is in it 'together'.
Consciousness and existence is very much a PERSONAL: INDIVIDUAL
responsibility.
You're simply an irresponsible TWIT lashing out INSTEAD of dealing
with the 'problems' and doing so in 'public' with which there are
multiple problematic ascpetcs. Furthermore, a huge perversion of
aspects of perfoorming and public arts is being perpetuated by reducing
the lot of it to 'pictures of your dog'.


> there are many links within us all that possess similarity.

Drivel.

> I agree with the flexibality of identity/persona as tool, not as a weapon - but that's just me…


Yeah. Because you refuse to acknowledge your 'weapons'.
Not marc. Marc does not damage humans. Marc is asaint.

Really, and this is all a washing my hands off so that I'm the 'good
guy' pose again.

Pubic / performance art is a tremendous responsibility and a capability
which belongs to those willing and capable of it.

Instead, it has become an arena for lashing out at others and the world.

This is not all 'fun and games'. It is not a 'theatreical play'.
And most of all–it isn't art. It's an exultation of mediocrity and
psychic bullyism.

It's the equivalent of thrashing about irresponsibly, while self-
destructing and attempting to take down as many with you as you can.

And I sincerely hope that this is heard: the manoeuvers attempted
here and on thingist have been WEAK, impotent and MURDEROUS.

And the use of 'art' and various 'religions'
as justification for murder is psychotic.

On Fri, 1 Nov 2002, Pall Thayer wrote:

> Finally K said something interesting. Hmm… pubic art….

Oh look–the ape 'approves'. Shove it.