Rub Linda the right way and she might show you wonderland

Rub Linda the right way and she might show you wonderland

http://www.electrichands.com/flowers/linda

only for high bandwidth …

joseph & donna
www.electrichands.com
joseph franklyn mcelroy
corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]

Comments

, Eryk Salvaggio

From Freud, "Civilization and its Discontents:"

"He must be very strongly impressed by the fact that some sources of
excitation, which he will later recognize as his own bodily organs, can
provide him with sensation at any moment, whereas other sources evade him
from time to time- among them what he desires most of all, his mothers
breast- and only reappears as a result of his screaming for help."

Or as Joseph spake: "Yes, I was getting immune to photos, so I created a
setting to make them shock me."

Trivialization of mass murder and human suffering so that Joseph McElroy can
have the experience of being "shocked" out of his own apathy at the expense
of others- much in line with his "flower" piece, but now he's added a
caricature of sexuality into the mix- but no, really, it's all about making
"art" with a "message."

I wonder if you would like to show this piece to some
Iraqi/Afghan/Palestinians who are feeling personally affected by thier own
lives, and you can explain to them how no, really, you're not just trying to
get a higher jolt of electricity off of the "entertaining" "shock value" of
thier dead bodies, no really, it's art, guys, it's cool, it's cool, it's
art. Why aren't you getting a jolt of electricity out of your own death? Why
do you have to get it from pissing on a pile of dead bodies thousands of
miles away? But I have to say I really don't care to hear an answer,
unfortunately I am not really willing to "go there" with you.

I'll admit, I have realized that a lot of my problem with you is actually a
problem with me- that I don't trust other peoples capacities, and I worry
that someone might mistake the spewings of your nature for insight, and you
might send people "astray." But this is not really my responsibility, and I
don't know why I mistook it for one. I don't know why I listen to the hard
christian radio stations talk about the war in Iraq when I know it will
infuriate me and distract me from driving. I don't know why I give up on my
resolve and go on looking at your art. Its all like insisting on burning my
hands to see if the stove is hot when its obviously burning bright red. It's
not really anything philosophically gratifying, its seriously just sadism,
and my misguided desire to "save people from themselves."

Emails like this are one more bullshit delivery device for my I attempts to
"save the world"- the same impulse that makes me leap to stop a rape in
progress is what makes me write an email to "warn people" about your "art".
I am not going to do that anymore- the emails- because after these pieces I
think it stands pretty blatantly clear, and nothing I could say would prove
your retardation more than these pieces have already. It's not my job to
protect people from you- it's yours.

Works like this make me wonder why it is that I ever worried people would
mistake you for having understanding or insight, when in fact you prey on
the weak and the dead in order to get your own kicks. I totally realize what
K meant when he called you a brute murderous ape- maybe these pieces of
yours are you realizing that and surrendering to it, I don't know. I don't
know what you have to do to get out of your zombie trance of power and
aggression, but I feel like I should say that "shocking yourself" out of
"apathy" isn't going to do it. Maybe it will, I guess you would know better
than me, but its none of my buisiness.

-e.





—– Original Message —–
From: "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) " <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>;
<integer@www.god-emil.dk>
Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2003 12:56 AM
Subject: [thingist] Rub Linda the right way and she might show you
wonderland


>
> Rub Linda the right way and she might show you wonderland
>
> http://www.electrichands.com/flowers/linda
>
> only for high bandwidth …
>
> joseph & donna
> www.electrichands.com
> joseph franklyn mcelroy
> corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com
>
> SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
> [email protected]
> ——————————————————————–
> t h i n g i s t
> message by "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) " <[email protected]>
> archive at http://bbs.thing.net
> info: send email to [email protected]
> and write "info thingist" in the message body
> ——————————————————————–
>

, Michael Szpakowski

Eryk
I must admit I'm slightly mystified by your virulent
reaction to Joseph's two recent pieces ( and you know
that I'm not of the 'if it says it's art its
brave/new/ and above criticism' brigade - I share for
example some of your eloquently expressed concerns
about the Mouchette pieces discussed on Rhizome last
week ).
Possibly we could argue about the execution of
Joseph's pieces but I think their intent is in a
pretty honourable line of Hogarth, Swift and more
recently Grosz and John Heartfield.
Do you think we should reject for example a "A Modest
Proposal" (Swift's satirical essay in which he
proposed that the starving Irish should eat their
children) on grounds of taste? Or on the grounds that
the Irish peasants would not understand/ be offended
by the piece?
Now maybe you know something about Joseph that I don't
- I would certainly have some philosophical diferences
with him, especially about the merits of a business
oriented approach to things - but in my few dealings
with him I've found him courteous, helpful and
straightforward.
So personally until something comes along to change
my mind I'll accept the pieces on face value as
shocking (yes) but nevertheless perfectly legitimate
pieces of anti war art in a long satirical tradition.
best
michael
— Eryk Salvaggio <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> From Freud, "Civilization and its Discontents:"
>
> "He must be very strongly impressed by the fact that
> some sources of
> excitation, which he will later recognize as his own
> bodily organs, can
> provide him with sensation at any moment, whereas
> other sources evade him
> from time to time- among them what he desires most
> of all, his mothers
> breast- and only reappears as a result of his
> screaming for help."
>
> Or as Joseph spake: "Yes, I was getting immune to
> photos, so I created a
> setting to make them shock me."
>
> Trivialization of mass murder and human suffering so
> that Joseph McElroy can
> have the experience of being "shocked" out of his
> own apathy at the expense
> of others- much in line with his "flower" piece, but
> now he's added a
> caricature of sexuality into the mix- but no,
> really, it's all about making
> "art" with a "message."
>
> I wonder if you would like to show this piece to
> some
> Iraqi/Afghan/Palestinians who are feeling personally
> affected by thier own
> lives, and you can explain to them how no, really,
> you're not just trying to
> get a higher jolt of electricity off of the
> "entertaining" "shock value" of
> thier dead bodies, no really, it's art, guys, it's
> cool, it's cool, it's
> art. Why aren't you getting a jolt of electricity
> out of your own death? Why
> do you have to get it from pissing on a pile of dead
> bodies thousands of
> miles away? But I have to say I really don't care to
> hear an answer,
> unfortunately I am not really willing to "go there"
> with you.
>
> I'll admit, I have realized that a lot of my problem
> with you is actually a
> problem with me- that I don't trust other peoples
> capacities, and I worry
> that someone might mistake the spewings of your
> nature for insight, and you
> might send people "astray." But this is not really
> my responsibility, and I
> don't know why I mistook it for one. I don't know
> why I listen to the hard
> christian radio stations talk about the war in Iraq
> when I know it will
> infuriate me and distract me from driving. I don't
> know why I give up on my
> resolve and go on looking at your art. Its all like
> insisting on burning my
> hands to see if the stove is hot when its obviously
> burning bright red. It's
> not really anything philosophically gratifying, its
> seriously just sadism,
> and my misguided desire to "save people from
> themselves."
>
> Emails like this are one more bullshit delivery
> device for my I attempts to
> "save the world"- the same impulse that makes me
> leap to stop a rape in
> progress is what makes me write an email to "warn
> people" about your "art".
> I am not going to do that anymore- the emails-
> because after these pieces I
> think it stands pretty blatantly clear, and nothing
> I could say would prove
> your retardation more than these pieces have
> already. It's not my job to
> protect people from you- it's yours.
>
> Works like this make me wonder why it is that I ever
> worried people would
> mistake you for having understanding or insight,
> when in fact you prey on
> the weak and the dead in order to get your own
> kicks. I totally realize what
> K meant when he called you a brute murderous ape-
> maybe these pieces of
> yours are you realizing that and surrendering to it,
> I don't know. I don't
> know what you have to do to get out of your zombie
> trance of power and
> aggression, but I feel like I should say that
> "shocking yourself" out of
> "apathy" isn't going to do it. Maybe it will, I
> guess you would know better
> than me, but its none of my buisiness.
>
> -e.
>
>
>
>
>
> —– Original Message —–
> From: "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) "
> <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Cc: <[email protected]>;
> <[email protected]>;
> <integer@www.god-emil.dk>
> Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2003 12:56 AM
> Subject: [thingist] Rub Linda the right way and she
> might show you
> wonderland
>
>
> >
> > Rub Linda the right way and she might show you
> wonderland
> >
> > http://www.electrichands.com/flowers/linda
> >
> > only for high bandwidth …
> >
> > joseph & donna
> > www.electrichands.com
> > joseph franklyn mcelroy
> > corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com
> >
> > SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE -
> send email to
> > [email protected]
> >
>
——————————————————————–
> > t h i n g i s t
> > message by "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) "
> <[email protected]>
> > archive at http://bbs.thing.net
> > info: send email to [email protected]
> > and write "info thingist" in the message body
> >
>
——————————————————————–
> >
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> 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


=====
*DISCLAIMER:This email any advice it contains is for the use is that of the sender and does not bind the precautions to minimise authority in any way. If you copy or distribute this by software viruses email. We have taken the risk of transmitting software viruses, but we advise that you carry out your own virus attachment to this message. Internet email that you observe this lack is not a secure communication medium, and we advise of security when emailing us. District Postmaster. http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/ *

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com

, joseph mcelroy

Excerpt from Power Session Twenty Nine entitled "Pushing the Power Button".

"Winners don't whine and whiners don't win. Other than sharing a number of the
same letters, winning and whining have very little in common. You rarely, if
ever, see a winner whining about this or that. They have already come to terms
with a harsh reality of life - whining keeps you from winning. If there is one
thing that defines the true achievers, it is their impassioned will to win.
Anything that gets in the way of winning has no place in their life - and
whining gets in their way big time.

Winners know full well that you don't have time to whine when you're busy
winning and you don't have time to win when you're busy whining. Griping,
complaining, fussing and fuming won't lead you to the winner's circle. Whining
siphons your energy, diverts your attention and squanders your focus. Don't
fool yourself into thinking, even for a moment, that you can do both. It's not
possible. Don't con yourself into believing whining won't adversely affect your
progress. It will."


Thanks for your "message" Eryk. I have repeatedly tried to get to a human
conversation level with you, only to be repeatedly rejected. You are the type
of person that is more dangerous to humanity that I could ever be. You
stereotype quickly and doggedly resist any contradiction to your initial
opinion.


joseph & donna
www.electrichands.com
joseph franklyn mcelroy
corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com

go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]





Quoting Eryk Salvaggio <[email protected]>:

>
> From Freud, "Civilization and its Discontents:"
>
> "He must be very strongly impressed by the fact that some sources of
> excitation, which he will later recognize as his own bodily organs, can
> provide him with sensation at any moment, whereas other sources evade him
> from time to time- among them what he desires most of all, his mothers
> breast- and only reappears as a result of his screaming for help."
>
> Or as Joseph spake: "Yes, I was getting immune to photos, so I created a
> setting to make them shock me."
>
> Trivialization of mass murder and human suffering so that Joseph McElroy can
> have the experience of being "shocked" out of his own apathy at the expense
> of others- much in line with his "flower" piece, but now he's added a
> caricature of sexuality into the mix- but no, really, it's all about making
> "art" with a "message."
>
> I wonder if you would like to show this piece to some
> Iraqi/Afghan/Palestinians who are feeling personally affected by thier own
> lives, and you can explain to them how no, really, you're not just trying to
> get a higher jolt of electricity off of the "entertaining" "shock value" of
> thier dead bodies, no really, it's art, guys, it's cool, it's cool, it's
> art. Why aren't you getting a jolt of electricity out of your own death? Why
> do you have to get it from pissing on a pile of dead bodies thousands of
> miles away? But I have to say I really don't care to hear an answer,
> unfortunately I am not really willing to "go there" with you.
>
> I'll admit, I have realized that a lot of my problem with you is actually a
> problem with me- that I don't trust other peoples capacities, and I worry
> that someone might mistake the spewings of your nature for insight, and you
> might send people "astray." But this is not really my responsibility, and I
> don't know why I mistook it for one. I don't know why I listen to the hard
> christian radio stations talk about the war in Iraq when I know it will
> infuriate me and distract me from driving. I don't know why I give up on my
> resolve and go on looking at your art. Its all like insisting on burning my
> hands to see if the stove is hot when its obviously burning bright red. It's
> not really anything philosophically gratifying, its seriously just sadism,
> and my misguided desire to "save people from themselves."
>
> Emails like this are one more bullshit delivery device for my I attempts to
> "save the world"- the same impulse that makes me leap to stop a rape in
> progress is what makes me write an email to "warn people" about your "art".
> I am not going to do that anymore- the emails- because after these pieces I
> think it stands pretty blatantly clear, and nothing I could say would prove
> your retardation more than these pieces have already. It's not my job to
> protect people from you- it's yours.
>
> Works like this make me wonder why it is that I ever worried people would
> mistake you for having understanding or insight, when in fact you prey on
> the weak and the dead in order to get your own kicks. I totally realize what
> K meant when he called you a brute murderous ape- maybe these pieces of
> yours are you realizing that and surrendering to it, I don't know. I don't
> know what you have to do to get out of your zombie trance of power and
> aggression, but I feel like I should say that "shocking yourself" out of
> "apathy" isn't going to do it. Maybe it will, I guess you would know better
> than me, but its none of my buisiness.
>
> -e.
>
>
>
>
>
> —– Original Message —–
> From: "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) " <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Cc: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>;
> <integer@www.god-emil.dk>
> Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2003 12:56 AM
> Subject: [thingist] Rub Linda the right way and she might show you
> wonderland
>
>
> >
> > Rub Linda the right way and she might show you wonderland
> >
> > http://www.electrichands.com/flowers/linda
> >
> > only for high bandwidth …
> >
> > joseph & donna
> > www.electrichands.com
> > joseph franklyn mcelroy
> > corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com
> >
> > SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
> > [email protected]
> > ——————————————————————–
> > t h i n g i s t
> > message by "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) " <[email protected]>
> > archive at http://bbs.thing.net
> > info: send email to [email protected]
> > and write "info thingist" in the message body
> > ——————————————————————–
> >
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> 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

, Eryk Salvaggio

Trungpa Rinpoche, Tibetan Buddhist:

In the case of ordinary craziness, we are constantly trying to win the game.
We might even try to turn craziness into a credential of some kind so we can
come out ahead. We might try to magnetize people with passion or destroy
them with aggression or whatever. There's a constant game going on in the
mind. Mind's game- constant strategies going on- might bring us a moment of
relief occasionally, but that relief has to be maintained by further
aggression.

In the case of primordial craziness, we do not allow ourselves to get
seduced by passion or aroused by aggression at all. We relate to these
experiences as they are, and if anything comes up in the midst of that
complete ordinariness and begins to make itself into a "big deal," then we
cut it down- without any special reference to whether it is good or bad.
Crazy "Wisdom" is just the action of truth. It cuts everything down. It
doesn't even try to translate falseness into truthfulness, because even that
in itself is corruption. It is ruthless, because if you want the complete
truth, if you want to be completely wholly wholesome, than any suggestion
that comes up of translating whatever arises into "your terms" is not worth
"looking into."








—– Original Message —–
From: "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) " <[email protected]>
To: "Eryk Salvaggio" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>; <integer@www.god-emil.dk>
Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2003 10:51 AM
Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: [thingist] Rub Linda the right way and she
might show you wonderland


> Excerpt from Power Session Twenty Nine entitled "Pushing the Power
Button".
>
> "Winners don't whine and whiners don't win. Other than sharing a number of
the
> same letters, winning and whining have very little in common. You rarely,
if
> ever, see a winner whining about this or that. They have already come to
terms
> with a harsh reality of life - whining keeps you from winning. If there is
one
> thing that defines the true achievers, it is their impassioned will to
win.
> Anything that gets in the way of winning has no place in their life - and
> whining gets in their way big time.
>
> Winners know full well that you don't have time to whine when you're busy
> winning and you don't have time to win when you're busy whining. Griping,
> complaining, fussing and fuming won't lead you to the winner's circle.
Whining
> siphons your energy, diverts your attention and squanders your focus.
Don't
> fool yourself into thinking, even for a moment, that you can do both. It's
not
> possible. Don't con yourself into believing whining won't adversely affect
your
> progress. It will."
>
>
> Thanks for your "message" Eryk. I have repeatedly tried to get to a human
> conversation level with you, only to be repeatedly rejected. You are the
type
> of person that is more dangerous to humanity that I could ever be. You
> stereotype quickly and doggedly resist any contradiction to your initial
> opinion.
>
>
> joseph & donna
> www.electrichands.com
> joseph franklyn mcelroy
> corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com
>
> go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
> call me 646 279 2309
>
> SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
> [email protected]
>
>
>
>
>
> Quoting Eryk Salvaggio <[email protected]>:
>
> >
> > From Freud, "Civilization and its Discontents:"
> >
> > "He must be very strongly impressed by the fact that some sources of
> > excitation, which he will later recognize as his own bodily organs, can
> > provide him with sensation at any moment, whereas other sources evade
him
> > from time to time- among them what he desires most of all, his mothers
> > breast- and only reappears as a result of his screaming for help."
> >
> > Or as Joseph spake: "Yes, I was getting immune to photos, so I created a
> > setting to make them shock me."
> >
> > Trivialization of mass murder and human suffering so that Joseph McElroy
can
> > have the experience of being "shocked" out of his own apathy at the
expense
> > of others- much in line with his "flower" piece, but now he's added a
> > caricature of sexuality into the mix- but no, really, it's all about
making
> > "art" with a "message."
> >
> > I wonder if you would like to show this piece to some
> > Iraqi/Afghan/Palestinians who are feeling personally affected by thier
own
> > lives, and you can explain to them how no, really, you're not just
trying to
> > get a higher jolt of electricity off of the "entertaining" "shock value"
of
> > thier dead bodies, no really, it's art, guys, it's cool, it's cool, it's
> > art. Why aren't you getting a jolt of electricity out of your own death?
Why
> > do you have to get it from pissing on a pile of dead bodies thousands of
> > miles away? But I have to say I really don't care to hear an answer,
> > unfortunately I am not really willing to "go there" with you.
> >
> > I'll admit, I have realized that a lot of my problem with you is
actually a
> > problem with me- that I don't trust other peoples capacities, and I
worry
> > that someone might mistake the spewings of your nature for insight, and
you
> > might send people "astray." But this is not really my responsibility,
and I
> > don't know why I mistook it for one. I don't know why I listen to the
hard
> > christian radio stations talk about the war in Iraq when I know it will
> > infuriate me and distract me from driving. I don't know why I give up on
my
> > resolve and go on looking at your art. Its all like insisting on burning
my
> > hands to see if the stove is hot when its obviously burning bright red.
It's
> > not really anything philosophically gratifying, its seriously just
sadism,
> > and my misguided desire to "save people from themselves."
> >
> > Emails like this are one more bullshit delivery device for my I attempts
to
> > "save the world"- the same impulse that makes me leap to stop a rape in
> > progress is what makes me write an email to "warn people" about your
"art".
> > I am not going to do that anymore- the emails- because after these
pieces I
> > think it stands pretty blatantly clear, and nothing I could say would
prove
> > your retardation more than these pieces have already. It's not my job to
> > protect people from you- it's yours.
> >
> > Works like this make me wonder why it is that I ever worried people
would
> > mistake you for having understanding or insight, when in fact you prey
on
> > the weak and the dead in order to get your own kicks. I totally realize
what
> > K meant when he called you a brute murderous ape- maybe these pieces of
> > yours are you realizing that and surrendering to it, I don't know. I
don't
> > know what you have to do to get out of your zombie trance of power and
> > aggression, but I feel like I should say that "shocking yourself" out of
> > "apathy" isn't going to do it. Maybe it will, I guess you would know
better
> > than me, but its none of my buisiness.
> >
> > -e.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > —– Original Message —–
> > From: "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) " <[email protected]>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Cc: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>;
> > <integer@www.god-emil.dk>
> > Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2003 12:56 AM
> > Subject: [thingist] Rub Linda the right way and she might show you
> > wonderland
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Rub Linda the right way and she might show you wonderland
> > >
> > > http://www.electrichands.com/flowers/linda
> > >
> > > only for high bandwidth …
> > >
> > > joseph & donna
> > > www.electrichands.com
> > > joseph franklyn mcelroy
> > > corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com
> > >
> > > SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
> > > [email protected]
> > > ——————————————————————–
> > > t h i n g i s t
> > > message by "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) " <[email protected]>
> > > archive at http://bbs.thing.net
> > > info: send email to [email protected]
> > > and write "info thingist" in the message body
> > > ——————————————————————–
> > >
> >
> > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > -> 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
>

, Eryk Salvaggio

—– Original Message —–
From: "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) " <[email protected]>


> Excerpt from Power Session Twenty Nine entitled "Pushing the Power
Button".
>
> "Winners don't whine and whiners don't win. Other than sharing a number of
the
> same letters, winning and whining have very little in common.


One thing they have in common, aside from similar letters, is that they are
both imaginary assignments given out by people who think they are "Pushing
The Power Button" in thier brains. What does that button do? Transforms
people into obstacle who need to be struck down, ie, "There are two types of
people in this world, winners and whiners." You create areas with which to
"compete" and then convince yourself of victory. Just like any other game,
sport, or war.



> You rarely, if
> ever, see a winner whining about this or that.


Of course, if you define a winner as someone who does not whine, you will
never see them both. They have already been defined in language-brain Joseph
as mutually exclusive values. Unfortunately these values have no
correspondance to reality- unless you "push the power button" and cover your
eyes with self-help rhetoric.


> They have already come to terms
> with a harsh reality of life - whining keeps you from winning.

The harsh reality pill they perhaps should swallow is that there is no such
thing as "winning"- what is called winning is merely losing with applause



> If there is one
> thing that defines the true achievers, it is their impassioned will to
win.


This defines the people who "win" and has nothing to do with achievement.


> Anything that gets in the way of winning has no place in their life -


Including dead Iraqi soldiers and civilians.


and
> whining gets in their way big time.


kill!kill!kill!


>
> Winners know full well that you don't have time to whine when you're busy
> winning and you don't have time to win when you're busy whining. Griping,
> complaining, fussing and fuming won't lead you to the winner's circle.


Poor me. I won't get a slap on the back from all the other sociopaths
trampling over one another to get to thier "safe spot."


Whining
> siphons your energy, diverts your attention and squanders your focus.


So too does "winning"


Don't
> fool yourself into thinking, even for a moment, that you can do both. It's
not
> possible. Don't con yourself into believing whining won't adversely affect
your
> progress. It will."


I shall not "win."


> Thanks for your "message" Eryk. I have repeatedly tried to get to a human
> conversation level with you, only to be repeatedly rejected.


You are incapable of a human conversation level. You are only capable of
screaming for your mothers breasts- and collecting a "winning team" to be
"pals" with. Anyone who disagrees is a "whiner" and "anything that gets in
the way of winning has no place" in your life.



> You are the type
> of person that is more dangerous to humanity that I could ever be.


I know.



-e.

, Christopher Fahey

> I'll admit, I have realized that a lot of my
> problem with you is actually a problem
> with me- that I don't trust other peoples
> capacities, and I worry that someone
> might mistake the spewings of your
> nature for insight, and you might send
> people "astray."

Eryk, I'd *love* to hear your take on the movie "Starship Troopers".
Have you seen it?


Also: I actually agree that Joseph's pieces are exploitative, although I
would guess unintentionally. He's just a bit hamfisted in his
expression. You've been there (ascii nudes), I've been there (most of
what I've posted recently), the people at the protests with the "Buck
Fush" signs have been there.

There's nothing wrong with calling his work exploitative. It doesn't
mean that he's secretly a murderer or that he gets off on violent
imagery any more than it means that Paul Verhoeven is a fascist.

-Cf

[christopher eli fahey]
art: http://www.graphpaper.com
sci: http://www.askrom.com
biz: http://www.behaviordesign.com

, Eryk Salvaggio

—– Original Message —–
From: "Michael Szpakowski" <[email protected]>


> Eryk
> I must admit I'm slightly mystified by your virulent
> reaction to Joseph's two recent pieces


Hi Michael. Let me say something first off.

There is obviously no universal definition for "good art." There is in fact
no definition for "good." What happens when we are born is we collect ideas
and values and begin to apply them to the world. Eventually they become a
habit, and you apply them to everything without a moments thought. Recently
I have decided to start choosing my values again. Not to choose values as a
means to an end, or to use them to reach some goal- not to "win," per se.
But to have values that I believe in because I believe in the values
themselves.

Right now, my problem with Josephs pieces has to do with thier honesty. They
are not anti-war art, Michael, look at them again. Or if you wish, read what
Paul Goodman writes about pacifist films:

First of all, such a film must at least not do positive harm by predisposing
its audience toward war. The images of senseless violence, horror, and waste
that are usually employed in the commercially successful "antiwar" films do
have a titillating effect and remain in the soul as excitants and further
incitements…in a work of genuine art the images of horror, etc., do not
have a pornographic effect and do not incite to repetitions, for the
experience is finished and cathartic: the fearful images are purged,
transcended, interpreted, or otherwise integrated with the rest of life. An
art work leaves its audience with a saner whole philosophy (more congenial
to pacifism in so far as pacifism is truth); and it has taken some of the
venom from the cruelty and arrogance in the soul.

Also:
If we consider spurious, kitsch, or propagandistic antiwar art, on the other
hand, its actual pornographic and provocative effect is equally to be
expected, for the fantasy and the art-working convey the disorder of the
weak artist and speak to the underlying wishes of the bad audience.



> Do you think we should reject for example a "A Modest
> Proposal" (Swift's satirical essay in which he
> proposed that the starving Irish should eat their
> children) on grounds of taste? Or on the grounds that
> the Irish peasants would not understand/ be offended
> by the piece?

I can't contrast this piece with the example you give. But I also have to
say that there are a long line of "honorable traditions" that have no honor
in them whatseover. Female Circumcision is an "honorable tradition." War is
an "honorable tradition." So, too, is using the murder of individuals as a
means to "shock" oneself- this is the definition of death as entertainment.
It runs directly contrary to Josephs self conception, and his assertions on
mailing lists, this idea that he is capable of "teaching" people about
"power" and "enlightenment." These pieces work on the basest level of the
human aggression impulse. I found his "flowers" piece to be exploitative of
the dead, and then I found his "Rub" piece to be exploitative of women, the
dead, and the viewer. Giving the viewer a cheap visceral reaction based on
the sex/death connection is not art. It is irresponsible and does a
disservice. We are responsible for what we broadcast into the world. If
Joseph gave up the idea that he is a moral human being, I wouldn't be so
offended, but the blatant hypocrisy of the piece and his "presentation" as a
human being is absurd and insulting.



> Now maybe you know something about Joseph that I don't

Just what you see on the mailing lists. Just what you see in his "art".


> - I would certainly have some philosophical diferences
> with him, especially about the merits of a business
> oriented approach to things - but in my few dealings
> with him I've found him courteous, helpful and
> straightforward.

These things are not hard to be, nor do they have any impact on the ideas
expressed in his "art."



> So personally until something comes along to change
> my mind I'll accept the pieces on face value as
> shocking (yes) but nevertheless perfectly legitimate
> pieces of anti war art in a long satirical tradition.


This is not anti war art. This is pro war art pretending to be anti war art.
I think that people should start looking at art on a level beyond face
value- to look at art means more than a surface reading of what the artists
wants you to believe about it. Also, lets not fall into the trap of saying
"If it has been done before and accepted, then its perfectly fine." Someone
had said that there is no end to where art ends and begins- that
exploitation, murder, and rape can constitute art if the artists choose it
to. So I guess I am deciding to view this work from the standpoint of a
human being, and not an "artist." Fine.

, Eryk Salvaggio

I thought Starship Troopers was well done- I knew going into it that it was
deliberately based on "Triumph of the Will." I think it's a film that works
on several levels, obviously one as cheap entertainment and lots of
explosions, but also as a wake up call to Fascism. The asteroid hitting
south america as a motivation to launch a war is particularly relevant to
this moment in history, not that it matters.

Also, I don't understand what you mean when you say I was hamfisted by my
ascii nudes? No one ever had a problem with them, Jess had merely asked
about how I differentiate the exploitation of children in Mouchette's art
with my own art which happened to include nudity. I explained my thoughts on
the subject- there is a difference between the choice of nudity and the
invitation to fuck- and no one else seemed to object. But I was never
pressured about any of it.

The only piece that I can see a parellel to between my own work and Josephs
is the "Exclusive" piece, which to me was actually mostly about aesthetics,
and the images I see in the world and what they mean, and how to express my
outrage at exploitation- which backfired, if you count two people calling it
bad art "hamfisting", I really don't know that term. For myself, I don't
know, maybe I am still not at a point where I can really see my own work
objectively, but I still stand by everything I've made.

Cheers,
-e.






—– Original Message —–
From: "Christopher Fahey [askrom]" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2003 2:18 PM
Subject: RE: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: [thingist] Rub Linda the right way and she
might show you wonderland


> > I'll admit, I have realized that a lot of my
> > problem with you is actually a problem
> > with me- that I don't trust other peoples
> > capacities, and I worry that someone
> > might mistake the spewings of your
> > nature for insight, and you might send
> > people "astray."
>
> Eryk, I'd *love* to hear your take on the movie "Starship Troopers".
> Have you seen it?
>
>
> Also: I actually agree that Joseph's pieces are exploitative, although I
> would guess unintentionally. He's just a bit hamfisted in his
> expression. You've been there (ascii nudes), I've been there (most of
> what I've posted recently), the people at the protests with the "Buck
> Fush" signs have been there.
>
> There's nothing wrong with calling his work exploitative. It doesn't
> mean that he's secretly a murderer or that he gets off on violent
> imagery any more than it means that Paul Verhoeven is a fascist.
>
> -Cf
>
> [christopher eli fahey]
> art: http://www.graphpaper.com
> sci: http://www.askrom.com
> biz: http://www.behaviordesign.com
>
>
>
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> 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
>

, Christopher Fahey

> Also, I don't understand what you mean when you say I was
> hamfisted by my ascii nudes?

I was referring to a recent post in which you mused that perhaps your
ascii nudes didn't say exactly what you wanted them to say, that they
seemed too open to misinterpretation. I'm not going to dig up your
email, but if I was wrong about my memory of your email I'm sorry. I
merely meant to point out that sometimes artists don't do a perfect job
looking at their work from another person's eyes, particularly when the
art is supposed to have a didactic or political element.

-Cf

[christopher eli fahey]
art: http://www.graphpaper.com
sci: http://www.askrom.com
biz: http://www.behaviordesign.com

, MTAA

On Saturday, April 5, 2003, at 02:27 PM, Eryk Salvaggio wrote:

>
> —– Original Message —–
> From: "Michael Szpakowski" <[email protected]>
>
>
>> Eryk
>> I must admit I'm slightly mystified by your virulent
>> reaction to Joseph's two recent pieces
>
>
>
>> So personally until something comes along to change
>> my mind I'll accept the pieces on face value as
>> shocking (yes) but nevertheless perfectly legitimate
>> pieces of anti war art in a long satirical tradition.
>
>
eryk wrote:
> This is not anti war art. This is pro war art pretending to be anti
> war art.
> I think that people should start looking at art on a level beyond face
> value- to look at art means more than a surface reading of what the
> artists
> wants you to believe about it. Also, lets not fall into the trap of
> saying
> "If it has been done before and accepted, then its perfectly fine."
> Someone
> had said that there is no end to where art ends and begins- that
> exploitation, murder, and rape can constitute art if the artists
> choose it
> to. So I guess I am deciding to view this work from the standpoint of a
> human being, and not an "artist." Fine.

Michael is right, it's antiwar art.

I don't think it's very good antiwar art, but the piece is definitely
intended to be antiwar. IMO it's not arguable that the piece is
INTENDED to be antiwar, perhaps it could be viewed otherwise. It uses
the a very simple and overdone method of juxtaposing USA pop imagery
with the horrors of war. It's been done again and again and Joseph's
done it once again. No offense Eryk, but IMO your energy could be
better used elsewhere, like writing a piece about 'Starship Troopers'
;-)

<t.whid>
www.mteww.com
</t.whid>

, joseph mcelroy

A large lounge chair,
contains a shock of hair,
left from a fanciful
man cutting his locks,
to express his distaste
with the inferior
taste of the
strawberries.

Poor man, he is now
bald in the company
of his lounging
friends, who don't
laugh, but instead
decide to cut
their hair as well.

Secretly, the man
is pleased at the
state of his crowd,
and at the next
gathering
expresses his
pleasure by
ordering
strawberries.

joseph & donna
www.electrichands.com
joseph franklyn mcelroy
corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com

call me 646 279 2309

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]

, joseph mcelroy

Quoting Eryk Salvaggio <[email protected]>:

> There is obviously no universal definition for "good art." There is in fact
> no definition for "good." What happens when we are born is we collect ideas
> and values and begin to apply them to the world. Eventually they become a
> habit, and you apply them to everything without a moments thought. Recently
> I have decided to start choosing my values again. Not to choose values as a
> means to an end, or to use them to reach some goal- not to "win," per se.
> But to have values that I believe in because I believe in the values
> themselves.


One should first establish oneself
in what is proper and only then
try to instruct others. Doing this,
the wise one will not be criticized.
- Dhammapada 158 -

joseph & donna
www.electrichands.com
joseph franklyn mcelroy
corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com

go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]

, Eryk Salvaggio

—– Original Message —–
From: "t.whid" <[email protected]>
> Michael is right, it's antiwar art.

Then why does it reward the impulse for violence?

>
> I don't think it's very good antiwar art, but the piece is definitely
> intended to be antiwar. IMO it's not arguable that the piece is
> INTENDED to be antiwar, perhaps it could be viewed otherwise.


If you want to say that whatever an artist "intends the piece to be" is what
the piece "is" then that's fine, but at that level you would have no right
to ever make commentary on any work, there would be no basis for criticism
and essentially, artists would be infallible.

All of my work is a social revolution- or at least masterpieces on par with
Picasso or Pollack. If I " intend" them to be, are they?


It uses
> the a very simple and overdone method of juxtaposing USA pop imagery
> with the horrors of war. It's been done again and again and Joseph's
> done it once again. No offense Eryk, but IMO your energy could be
> better used elsewhere, like writing a piece about 'Starship Troopers'


I agree my energy could be used in better places. Theres nothing offensive
about that…and Max Herman has already written brilliantly about Starship
Troopers. :)

But I am done with this thread now.

Moving on,
-e.

, D42 Kandinskij

On Sat, 5 Apr 2003 16:06:51 -0500, "Eryk Salvaggio" <[email protected]>
said:
>
> —– Original Message —–
> From: "t.whid" <[email protected]>
> > Michael is right, it's antiwar art.
>
> Then why does it reward the impulse for violence?
>
> >
> > I don't think it's very good antiwar art, but the piece is definitely
> > intended to be antiwar. IMO it's not arguable that the piece is
> > INTENDED to be antiwar, perhaps it could be viewed otherwise.


I intend the entirety of Rhizome Raw with all of its contents
© D42 Inc. I also intend everything posted on Rhizome Pro-WAR.

-IID42 Kandinskij @27+
[email protected]


http://www.fastmail.fm - Choose from over 50 domains or use your own

, Lewis LaCook

— Eryk Salvaggio <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> —– Original Message —–
> From: "Lewis LaCook" <[email protected]>
> > —–i don't see this piece as pissing on
> > anyone///it's simply exploring the (much-explored)
> > connection between the erotic and the
> violent///it's
> > no more a case of exploitation than your own
> > "memorial" for those who died in the sept. 11
> > tragedy—-
>
>
> Please point out where sex and violence were linked,
> or where exploitation
> of the dead entered into my September 11th, 2001
> piece? The piece was
> designed because I was failing to see the humanity
> of the event because of
> desensitization, but it was different from Josephs
> in that it was made to
> re-align the images I saw with the horror of what
> happened in a way that
> reflected the reality of what occurred. Which left
> it open to ambiguous
> readings; some saw the sheer number of names and
> felt overwhelmed, some saw
> saw politics in it, some saw a media critique in it-
> but it was just what I
> saw, and what happened, and an attempt to bridge
> that gap. There were no
> sexually suggestive titles, disco music, or
> violations of the Geneva
> Convention present in my work, as there was in
> Josephs. [The GC renounces
> "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular,
> humiliating and degrading
> treatment"] What my piece had that Josephs lacked
> was a sense of decorum and
> respect, as opposed to the desire to "shock myself
> back into feeling" at the
> any expense.
>

my point wasn't that YOU had explored that much-tamped
path, but to (perhaps too literally) point out that
ANY art that's ABOUT or purports to be ABOUT (as
opposed to just IS) exploits its subject matter,
regardless of intent…this is the horror of language
itself…in that sentence, i am in a sense exploiting
"language"…i can't get at the 'ding an sich' (not
sure if that's correct), only at the aura of
conventional meaning around it—so, in making a piece
refencing sept 11, you too exploited it, because
reference is to me a kind of exploitation…

REPRESENTATION IS EXPLOITATION…

and reverence and exploitation can conjoin in an
artwork…because when you make art ABOUT something,
you exploit it, you use that event to make an aura
around the material of your work…you use it to
affect…said affect and effect could be reverence, or
shock….

now, i'm not picking on you (especially as you have
seen the personal tyranny in all of us…something I
struggle with personally day-to-day, and in even
asserting my beliefs here (hell, in even HAVING
beliefs, or thoughts) struggle with)—-
>
> and while i'll admit you're (ack, typo!!!!)work
> > had very little "shock value"—i don't really
> find
> > anything about joseph's piece "shocking"–it was
> > still, in its own way, exploitive of the deaths of
> > others, if viewed with this paradigm—
>
>
> There is a difference between exploitation and
> reverence. Below is a start,
> but they don't quite get it it entirely:
>
> Exploitation:
>
> 1. The act of employing to the greatest possible
> advantage: exploitation of
> copper deposits.
> 2. Utilization of another person or group for
> selfish purposes: exploitation
> of unwary consumers.
> 3. An advertising or a publicity program.
>
> Reverence:
>
> 1. A feeling of profound awe and respect and often
> love; veneration. See
> Synonyms at honor.
> 2. An act showing respect, especially a bow or
> curtsy.
> 3. The state of being revered.
>
>
> Joseph specifically said in his email to Michael:
>
> "yes, i was getting immune to photos, so i created a
> setting to make them
> shock me."
>
> This is utilization of another person or group for
> selfish purposes.
>
>
>
>
> > —this is interesting–revealing–i've found that
> > those who feel that anyone can "go astray" needs
> must
> > have a "correct" path in mind, usually one they
> > themselves have defined—and this is an attitude
> no
> > different than those fundamentalist christian
> stations
> > you listen to—or, for that matter, the attitude
> of
> > junior bush—it's the first steps toward fascism,
> and
> > unfortunately it's quite natural—
>
>
> I said no different, and the reason I included that
> portion of the letter is
> to state that I am aware of this. But this is
> evident within everyone, and
> if we are aware of it we can keep it in check.


yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
bliss
l

>
>
> -e.
>
>
——————————————————————–
> t h i n g i s t
> message by "Eryk Salvaggio" <[email protected]>
> archive at http://bbs.thing.net
> info: send email to [email protected]
> and write "info thingist" in the message body
>
——————————————————————–


=====


http://www.lewislacook.com/
net art review: http://www.netartreview.net/
tubulence artist studio: http://turbulence.org/studios/lacook/index.html
furtherfield: http://www.furtherfield.org/home.html



__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com

, MTAA

yo,

i'm def from going to a little heavy metal concert in my 'hood in
support of the new book 'Sound of The Beast' by Ian Christie (an old
time williamsburger).
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/006052362X/
qid49605727/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/102-2129068-
5284968?v=glance&s=books&nP784

But I'll try to carry on.


On Saturday, April 5, 2003, at 04:06 PM, Eryk Salvaggio wrote:

>
> —– Original Message —–
> From: "t.whid" <[email protected]>
>> Michael is right, it's antiwar art.
>
> Then why does it reward the impulse for violence?
>
>>
>> I don't think it's very good antiwar art, but the piece is definitely
>> intended to be antiwar. IMO it's not arguable that the piece is
>> INTENDED to be antiwar, perhaps it could be viewed otherwise.
>
>
> If you want to say that whatever an artist "intends the piece to be"
> is what
> the piece "is" then that's fine, but at that level you would have no
> right
> to ever make commentary on any work, there would be no basis for
> criticism
> and essentially, artists would be infallible.

Eryk,

seriously? the subject or content of a piece that an artist intends is
much different then what an artist qualitatively intends, no?



>
> All of my work is a social revolution- or at least masterpieces on par
> with
> Picasso or Pollack. If I " intend" them to be, are they?
>

<t.whid>
www.mteww.com
</t.whid>

, marc garrett

Hi Michael,

I've been watching this debate & various things cropping up on here.

The most useful suggestion was from Karei - regarding copying the list. I
think that The rhizome database deserves the same treatment as hell.com; now
that it is only in-house, ignoring everyday people - isolating them from
viewing Net Art, pretty disgusting really.

I won't dwell too long - I've been ill the last few days, so will comment
briefly regarding Joseph's War piece.


I have a problem with this work -using dead/wounded people who have been
exploited by 'White corporate Neo-liberalism fascists; then turned into Art.
It seems like a sensationalist parody.

Why use these 'ripped up' people?

I believe that I understand Joseph's reasons (I think). With the
hopelessness
that he may feel in a world falling apart & run by 'backward' nihilists.

Yet to use people whom have been killed/maimed by the Alliance's military is
not emotionally stable or reflective/reevaluative.

Their souls have been stolen by Saddam, by Bush & Blair for their own
'faustian' Gains - why continue to dig their pain up, drag it up even more
for an audience to muse upon like CCN orgazm…

I'm sorry Joesph -

Let them rest in peace…

marc




> Eryk
> I must admit I'm slightly mystified by your virulent
> reaction to Joseph's two recent pieces ( and you know
> that I'm not of the 'if it says it's art its
> brave/new/ and above criticism' brigade - I share for
> example some of your eloquently expressed concerns
> about the Mouchette pieces discussed on Rhizome last
> week ).
> Possibly we could argue about the execution of
> Joseph's pieces but I think their intent is in a
> pretty honourable line of Hogarth, Swift and more
> recently Grosz and John Heartfield.
> Do you think we should reject for example a "A Modest
> Proposal" (Swift's satirical essay in which he
> proposed that the starving Irish should eat their
> children) on grounds of taste? Or on the grounds that
> the Irish peasants would not understand/ be offended
> by the piece?
> Now maybe you know something about Joseph that I don't
> - I would certainly have some philosophical diferences
> with him, especially about the merits of a business
> oriented approach to things - but in my few dealings
> with him I've found him courteous, helpful and
> straightforward.
> So personally until something comes along to change
> my mind I'll accept the pieces on face value as
> shocking (yes) but nevertheless perfectly legitimate
> pieces of anti war art in a long satirical tradition.
> best
> michael
> — Eryk Salvaggio <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > From Freud, "Civilization and its Discontents:"
> >
> > "He must be very strongly impressed by the fact that
> > some sources of
> > excitation, which he will later recognize as his own
> > bodily organs, can
> > provide him with sensation at any moment, whereas
> > other sources evade him
> > from time to time- among them what he desires most
> > of all, his mothers
> > breast- and only reappears as a result of his
> > screaming for help."
> >
> > Or as Joseph spake: "Yes, I was getting immune to
> > photos, so I created a
> > setting to make them shock me."
> >
> > Trivialization of mass murder and human suffering so
> > that Joseph McElroy can
> > have the experience of being "shocked" out of his
> > own apathy at the expense
> > of others- much in line with his "flower" piece, but
> > now he's added a
> > caricature of sexuality into the mix- but no,
> > really, it's all about making
> > "art" with a "message."
> >
> > I wonder if you would like to show this piece to
> > some
> > Iraqi/Afghan/Palestinians who are feeling personally
> > affected by thier own
> > lives, and you can explain to them how no, really,
> > you're not just trying to
> > get a higher jolt of electricity off of the
> > "entertaining" "shock value" of
> > thier dead bodies, no really, it's art, guys, it's
> > cool, it's cool, it's
> > art. Why aren't you getting a jolt of electricity
> > out of your own death? Why
> > do you have to get it from pissing on a pile of dead
> > bodies thousands of
> > miles away? But I have to say I really don't care to
> > hear an answer,
> > unfortunately I am not really willing to "go there"
> > with you.
> >
> > I'll admit, I have realized that a lot of my problem
> > with you is actually a
> > problem with me- that I don't trust other peoples
> > capacities, and I worry
> > that someone might mistake the spewings of your
> > nature for insight, and you
> > might send people "astray." But this is not really
> > my responsibility, and I
> > don't know why I mistook it for one. I don't know
> > why I listen to the hard
> > christian radio stations talk about the war in Iraq
> > when I know it will
> > infuriate me and distract me from driving. I don't
> > know why I give up on my
> > resolve and go on looking at your art. Its all like
> > insisting on burning my
> > hands to see if the stove is hot when its obviously
> > burning bright red. It's
> > not really anything philosophically gratifying, its
> > seriously just sadism,
> > and my misguided desire to "save people from
> > themselves."
> >
> > Emails like this are one more bullshit delivery
> > device for my I attempts to
> > "save the world"- the same impulse that makes me
> > leap to stop a rape in
> > progress is what makes me write an email to "warn
> > people" about your "art".
> > I am not going to do that anymore- the emails-
> > because after these pieces I
> > think it stands pretty blatantly clear, and nothing
> > I could say would prove
> > your retardation more than these pieces have
> > already. It's not my job to
> > protect people from you- it's yours.
> >
> > Works like this make me wonder why it is that I ever
> > worried people would
> > mistake you for having understanding or insight,
> > when in fact you prey on
> > the weak and the dead in order to get your own
> > kicks. I totally realize what
> > K meant when he called you a brute murderous ape-
> > maybe these pieces of
> > yours are you realizing that and surrendering to it,
> > I don't know. I don't
> > know what you have to do to get out of your zombie
> > trance of power and
> > aggression, but I feel like I should say that
> > "shocking yourself" out of
> > "apathy" isn't going to do it. Maybe it will, I
> > guess you would know better
> > than me, but its none of my buisiness.
> >
> > -e.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > —– Original Message —–
> > From: "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) "
> > <[email protected]>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Cc: <[email protected]>;
> > <[email protected]>;
> > <integer@www.god-emil.dk>
> > Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2003 12:56 AM
> > Subject: [thingist] Rub Linda the right way and she
> > might show you
> > wonderland
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Rub Linda the right way and she might show you
> > wonderland
> > >
> > > http://www.electrichands.com/flowers/linda
> > >
> > > only for high bandwidth …
> > >
> > > joseph & donna
> > > www.electrichands.com
> > > joseph franklyn mcelroy
> > > corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com
> > >
> > > SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE -
> > send email to
> > > [email protected]
> > >
> >
> ——————————————————————–
> > > t h i n g i s t
> > > message by "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) "
> > <[email protected]>
> > > archive at http://bbs.thing.net
> > > info: send email to [email protected]
> > > and write "info thingist" in the message body
> > >
> >
> ——————————————————————–
> > >
> >
> > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > -> 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
>
>
> =====
> *DISCLAIMER:This email any advice it contains is for the use is that of
the sender and does not bind the precautions to minimise authority in any
way. If you copy or distribute this by software viruses email. We have taken
the risk of transmitting software viruses, but we advise that you carry out
your own virus attachment to this message. Internet email that you observe
this lack is not a secure communication medium, and we advise of security
when emailing us. District Postmaster.
http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/ *
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
> http://tax.yahoo.com
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> 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
>

, Jim Andrews

Last night I chanced upon "American Psycho" on TV, which I hadn't seen. And channel surfed
between that and CNN on the war. The attractive female announcer on CNN was polite,
professional, and confidently smiling as she inquired into the number of American casualties in
the most recent 'friendly fire' incident, which has also, apparently, left at least a dozen
Iraqi civilians dead.

I thought of Joseph's piece and the debate here as to its morality. And the articles I read
earlier in the evening by Robert Fisk, among others, describing the slaughter of more civilians
in Iraq.

ja

, Eryk Salvaggio

Here we see the structure of the McElroy Language Brain:

1. Declare any calls on his "fallibility" as attacks re: "respect" [ie, "you
don't like my art, you are not showing me the proper respect"] - this is
related ultimately to his ideals of "being in control" and "having power"
which are impossible to actual obtain- what they call the fragility of the
masculine myth.
2. React to critiques and comments which are unfavorable to him with
personal insults- ["sweetheart", "your religion is toilet paper."]
3. Avoid Responsibility for those comments and his own work through
rationalization, rationalization, rationalization. [this entire post down
below- where instead of apologizing for sexist remarks, he insists that
because he made sexist remarks, he is not sexist, and that sexism would be
to not make sexist remarks.]

At the heart of this is something being covered up in step one. And I would
pose the question to Joseph: When you run the above program in your head-
which you do often- what is the fundamental underlying problem you are
trying to avoid seeing in yourself? It seems to me to stem from the idea of
control/power impulses. Perhaps you should look at how you relate to
control/power impulses and attempt to surrender this goal or at least avoid
succombing to them which usually results in your looking like an ass to
people on mailing lists. Then you will save tremendous amounts of energy by
the sheer fact that you will no longer have to lie and think up excuses in
order to avoid dealing with it. Odds are you'll feel less angry. [though I
think you pretend that you don't feel angry all the time, too, right? But
that is at the heart of your overcompensation with regards to negative
emotions- you get hurt, you not only "hurt back" but you "hurt back" "more".
Unfortunately this just makes you look like a mindless barbarian.] You'll
also be more at peace, lighter and more focused. Take it head on. You'll
feel better about yourself afterward.

Cheers,
-e.






—– Original Message —–
From: "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) " <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>; "Bethany Bristow" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, April 06, 2003 1:34 PM
Subject: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: [thingist] Rub Linda the right way and she
might show you wonderland


> > I didn't think much of the pieces nor your defense of them. There is
> > nothing wrong with satire or irony for that matter if it they work.
> > The opinion that I expressed was that those two pieces don't work.
> >
> > BTW, you might want to refrain from calling women that you aren't
> > romantically involved with "sweetheart" unless you want people to
> > think that you are sexist.
>
> My dear Bethany, what is there to defend? You argument is that you know
good
> art when you see it. How are you better than the cigar puffing guy in
bermuda
> shorts standing front of peice of abstract art he doesn't understand?
>
> As for being sexist, it has nothing to do with your sex. You response did
not
> merit respect. You are like the poodle nipping the heels of the big dog
in a
> dog fight.
>
> And since your intent and writing were disrespectful of me, I feel no
> obligation to be respectful to you. And if one has the intention of being
> disrespectful, that one will usually choose the easiest method of doing
so.
> Like I might call Eryk a pathetic wimp. In this regard, I am treating
you the
> same I would treat a man, thus disproving that I am a sexist.
>
> In fact, I would turn the tables and say that you are the sexist.
Expecting me
> to treat you differently than a man, you demand a status superior because
of
> your gender.
>
> joseph & donna
> www.electrichands.com
> joseph franklyn mcelroy
> corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com
>
> go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
> call me 646 279 2309
>
> SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
> [email protected]
>
>
>
>
>
> Quoting Bethany Bristow <[email protected]>:
>
> > Joseph,
> >
> > I didn't think much of the pieces nor your defense of them. There is
> > nothing wrong with satire or irony for that matter if it they work.
> > The opinion that I expressed was that those two pieces don't work.
> >
> > BTW, you might want to refrain from calling women that you aren't
> > romantically involved with "sweetheart" unless you want people to
> > think that you are sexist.
> >
> > -Bethany
> >
> > At 6:33 AM +0000 4/6/03, joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) wrote:
> > > > Good (for lack of a more precise word) art is
> > >> something that you know when you see it, and I did not see any in
> > >> those two links.
> > >
> > >My goodness, did you just say that?
> > >
> > >And it is not "ironic" sweetheart. It is "satiric" and there is a
> > difference.
> > >
> > >joseph & donna
> > >www.electrichands.com
> > >joseph franklyn mcelroy
> > >corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com
> > >
> > >go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
> > >call me 646 279 2309
> > >
> > >SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
> > >[email protected]
> >
> > –
> > ——————————————————————–
> > t h i n g i s t
> > message by Bethany Bristow <[email protected]>
> > archive at http://bbs.thing.net
> > info: send email to [email protected]
> > and write "info thingist" in the message body
> > ——————————————————————–
> ——————————————————————–
> t h i n g i s t
> message by "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) " <[email protected]>
> archive at http://bbs.thing.net
> info: send email to [email protected]
> and write "info thingist" in the message body
> ——————————————————————–
>

, joseph mcelroy

Quoting Eryk Salvaggio <[email protected]>:

> Here we see the structure of the McElroy Language Brain:
>
> 1. Declare any calls on his "fallibility" as attacks re: "respect" [ie, "you
> don't like my art, you are not showing me the proper respect"] - this is
> related ultimately to his ideals of "being in control" and "having power"
> which are impossible to actual obtain- what they call the fragility of the
> masculine myth.

Cheap analysis from your textbooks has nothing to do with reality. If you re-
read her post, she said absoluting nothing other than she didn't like it and
that was her opinion. And she gave no evidence to support her opinions. So it
was exactly like my description of a poodle who attacks a big dog engaged in a
fight with other dogs. Not only that, the email is addressed to me, yet she
refers to me in the third person. It was an insulting email with no purpose,
other than a purpose with a detrimental effect to me. Since she jumped into
issue with such purpose, I feel no obligation to treat her with high regard.
Oh, and if you look at the two sentences in question:

"And it is not "ironic" sweetheart. It is "satiric" and there is a difference."

The first could be considered ironic, the second makes it satiric (not a
particularly subtle form)

ms poodle wrote:

>The problem with the work has nothing to do with the content or even
> the intention. Make work about what ever you want, with what ever
> intentions you want; but at least try to make work that is effective
> in someway. Joseph's pieces were unoriginal and just plain weak, to
> the point that I felt almost nothing about them other than a slight
> chagrin (and this may have had more to do with their "ironic" nature
> or the ensuing discussion). War as subject matter in my opinion is
> deserving of much more. And then again my dislike for the work does
> not necessarily have anything to do with the subject matter (subject
> matter is in a way a bonus or adjunct to what can happen in art). If
> the pieces transcended the subject matter we wouldn't be having this
> lame discussion. Good (for lack of a more precise word) art is
> something that you know when you see it, and I did not see any in
> those two links.

> 2. React to critiques and comments which are unfavorable to him with
> personal insults- ["sweetheart", "your religion is toilet paper."]

My dear boy, if you were trully giving critique instead of cheap pschoanalysis,
I might respond differently. And might I point out that in your very first
response you said such things as "nothing I could say would prove your
retardation more than these pieces have already" and "totally realize what
K meant when he called you a brute murderous ape" and "your zombie trance of
power". You are not analysing the art, you are trying to analyse me. This is
a stupid excercise to do without knowing me other than via online activities.
In fact, this might present a compelling case for arguing that you have some
sort of control and power issues going on. Imagining that you have the power to
analyse a person via email. Sort of silly I think.

> 3. Avoid Responsibility for those comments and his own work through
> rationalization, rationalization, rationalization. [this entire post down
> below- where instead of apologizing for sexist remarks, he insists that
> because he made sexist remarks, he is not sexist, and that sexism would be
> to not make sexist remarks.]
>

Sexism would be to not insult a woman when I would insult a man for the same
activity. Sexism would be to expect superior treatment based upon gender.

> At the heart of this is something being covered up in step one. And I would
> pose the question to Joseph: When you run the above program in your head-
> which you do often- what is the fundamental underlying problem you are
> trying to avoid seeing in yourself? It seems to me to stem from the idea of
> control/power impulses. Perhaps you should look at how you relate to
> control/power impulses and attempt to surrender this goal or at least avoid
> succombing to them which usually results in your looking like an ass to
> people on mailing lists. Then you will save tremendous amounts of energy by
> the sheer fact that you will no longer have to lie and think up excuses in
> order to avoid dealing with it. Odds are you'll feel less angry. [though I
> think you pretend that you don't feel angry all the time, too, right? But
> that is at the heart of your overcompensation with regards to negative
> emotions- you get hurt, you not only "hurt back" but you "hurt back" "more".
> Unfortunately this just makes you look like a mindless barbarian.] You'll
> also be more at peace, lighter and more focused. Take it head on. You'll
> feel better about yourself afterward.
>

Mr Museum of the Living Dead, it has been obvious to all that from the very
beginning of my entree onto this mailing list that you bear an unreasonable
dislike for me. This was evidenced recently by your response to Michael and
his request for participation in the Renga. You responded only with a diatribe
against me, slandered me, and then refused to participate if I did. You were
the one looking like an Ass.

It is my reasonable conclusion that you only have my worst interests in mind,
and that any critique is meant to humilate and discredit me. I do no know the
source of your rage, but it is obvious to most everyone. So expect my
responses to be hostile to your sophmoric attempts at critique.

joseph

, joseph mcelroy

Quoting "marc.garrett" <[email protected]>:

> I have a problem with this work -using dead/wounded people who have been
> exploited by 'White corporate Neo-liberalism fascists; then turned into Art.
> It seems like a sensationalist parody.

It would perhaps be sensationalist if I had career objectives in mind, however
I do not have a career as an artist nor do I benefit my business pursuits with
scandal. I started doing flower paintings, then set down to do some flowers
online and was motivated by a constant news barrage on NPR and the different
treatment of victims in American and Arab media. This resulted in an evolution
of the flowers.

>
> Why use these 'ripped up' people?
>

Artist like Delacroix (Shipwreck of Don Juan) and Goya (Disasters of War) have
used starkly realistic presentations of the victims of war and catastrophy to
present the horror of it. My intention was no different.


> I believe that I understand Joseph's reasons (I think). With the
> hopelessness
> that he may feel in a world falling apart & run by 'backward' nihilists.

These are not hopeless peices - I am still a idealist and a believer, and aim
these peices for reasons.

>
> Yet to use people whom have been killed/maimed by the Alliance's military is
> not emotionally stable or reflective/reevaluative.

Nor are they intended as such. I am a non-violent warrior. I fight and aim
weapons that do not cause death or physical harm. I fight only in defense, but
am ruthless when I do. I view the current adminstration and attitude of the
American public as the path to destruction, so I am fighting for myself and
progeny. I will use art or business or education, whatever is the best tool at
my disposal.

>
> Their souls have been stolen by Saddam, by Bush & Blair for their own
> 'faustian' Gains - why continue to dig their pain up, drag it up even more
> for an audience to muse upon like CCN orgazm…
>
> I'm sorry Joesph -
>
> Let them rest in peace…
>

I did not disturb their peace. You did. You fell prey to the same seductions
that marketing and propoganda uses to seduce the public. Your action revealed
the horrific pictures. Not mine.


joseph & donna
www.electrichands.com
joseph franklyn mcelroy
corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com

go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]





Quoting "marc.garrett" <[email protected]>:

> Hi Michael,
>
> I've been watching this debate & various things cropping up on here.
>
> The most useful suggestion was from Karei - regarding copying the list. I
> think that The rhizome database deserves the same treatment as hell.com; now
> that it is only in-house, ignoring everyday people - isolating them from
> viewing Net Art, pretty disgusting really.
>
> I won't dwell too long - I've been ill the last few days, so will comment
> briefly regarding Joseph's War piece.
>
>
> I have a problem with this work -using dead/wounded people who have been
> exploited by 'White corporate Neo-liberalism fascists; then turned into Art.
> It seems like a sensationalist parody.
>
> Why use these 'ripped up' people?
>
> I believe that I understand Joseph's reasons (I think). With the
> hopelessness
> that he may feel in a world falling apart & run by 'backward' nihilists.
>
> Yet to use people whom have been killed/maimed by the Alliance's military is
> not emotionally stable or reflective/reevaluative.
>
> Their souls have been stolen by Saddam, by Bush & Blair for their own
> 'faustian' Gains - why continue to dig their pain up, drag it up even more
> for an audience to muse upon like CCN orgazm…
>
> I'm sorry Joesph -
>
> Let them rest in peace…
>
> marc
>
>
>
>
> > Eryk
> > I must admit I'm slightly mystified by your virulent
> > reaction to Joseph's two recent pieces ( and you know
> > that I'm not of the 'if it says it's art its
> > brave/new/ and above criticism' brigade - I share for
> > example some of your eloquently expressed concerns
> > about the Mouchette pieces discussed on Rhizome last
> > week ).
> > Possibly we could argue about the execution of
> > Joseph's pieces but I think their intent is in a
> > pretty honourable line of Hogarth, Swift and more
> > recently Grosz and John Heartfield.
> > Do you think we should reject for example a "A Modest
> > Proposal" (Swift's satirical essay in which he
> > proposed that the starving Irish should eat their
> > children) on grounds of taste? Or on the grounds that
> > the Irish peasants would not understand/ be offended
> > by the piece?
> > Now maybe you know something about Joseph that I don't
> > - I would certainly have some philosophical diferences
> > with him, especially about the merits of a business
> > oriented approach to things - but in my few dealings
> > with him I've found him courteous, helpful and
> > straightforward.
> > So personally until something comes along to change
> > my mind I'll accept the pieces on face value as
> > shocking (yes) but nevertheless perfectly legitimate
> > pieces of anti war art in a long satirical tradition.
> > best
> > michael
> > — Eryk Salvaggio <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > From Freud, "Civilization and its Discontents:"
> > >
> > > "He must be very strongly impressed by the fact that
> > > some sources of
> > > excitation, which he will later recognize as his own
> > > bodily organs, can
> > > provide him with sensation at any moment, whereas
> > > other sources evade him
> > > from time to time- among them what he desires most
> > > of all, his mothers
> > > breast- and only reappears as a result of his
> > > screaming for help."
> > >
> > > Or as Joseph spake: "Yes, I was getting immune to
> > > photos, so I created a
> > > setting to make them shock me."
> > >
> > > Trivialization of mass murder and human suffering so
> > > that Joseph McElroy can
> > > have the experience of being "shocked" out of his
> > > own apathy at the expense
> > > of others- much in line with his "flower" piece, but
> > > now he's added a
> > > caricature of sexuality into the mix- but no,
> > > really, it's all about making
> > > "art" with a "message."
> > >
> > > I wonder if you would like to show this piece to
> > > some
> > > Iraqi/Afghan/Palestinians who are feeling personally
> > > affected by thier own
> > > lives, and you can explain to them how no, really,
> > > you're not just trying to
> > > get a higher jolt of electricity off of the
> > > "entertaining" "shock value" of
> > > thier dead bodies, no really, it's art, guys, it's
> > > cool, it's cool, it's
> > > art. Why aren't you getting a jolt of electricity
> > > out of your own death? Why
> > > do you have to get it from pissing on a pile of dead
> > > bodies thousands of
> > > miles away? But I have to say I really don't care to
> > > hear an answer,
> > > unfortunately I am not really willing to "go there"
> > > with you.
> > >
> > > I'll admit, I have realized that a lot of my problem
> > > with you is actually a
> > > problem with me- that I don't trust other peoples
> > > capacities, and I worry
> > > that someone might mistake the spewings of your
> > > nature for insight, and you
> > > might send people "astray." But this is not really
> > > my responsibility, and I
> > > don't know why I mistook it for one. I don't know
> > > why I listen to the hard
> > > christian radio stations talk about the war in Iraq
> > > when I know it will
> > > infuriate me and distract me from driving. I don't
> > > know why I give up on my
> > > resolve and go on looking at your art. Its all like
> > > insisting on burning my
> > > hands to see if the stove is hot when its obviously
> > > burning bright red. It's
> > > not really anything philosophically gratifying, its
> > > seriously just sadism,
> > > and my misguided desire to "save people from
> > > themselves."
> > >
> > > Emails like this are one more bullshit delivery
> > > device for my I attempts to
> > > "save the world"- the same impulse that makes me
> > > leap to stop a rape in
> > > progress is what makes me write an email to "warn
> > > people" about your "art".
> > > I am not going to do that anymore- the emails-
> > > because after these pieces I
> > > think it stands pretty blatantly clear, and nothing
> > > I could say would prove
> > > your retardation more than these pieces have
> > > already. It's not my job to
> > > protect people from you- it's yours.
> > >
> > > Works like this make me wonder why it is that I ever
> > > worried people would
> > > mistake you for having understanding or insight,
> > > when in fact you prey on
> > > the weak and the dead in order to get your own
> > > kicks. I totally realize what
> > > K meant when he called you a brute murderous ape-
> > > maybe these pieces of
> > > yours are you realizing that and surrendering to it,
> > > I don't know. I don't
> > > know what you have to do to get out of your zombie
> > > trance of power and
> > > aggression, but I feel like I should say that
> > > "shocking yourself" out of
> > > "apathy" isn't going to do it. Maybe it will, I
> > > guess you would know better
> > > than me, but its none of my buisiness.
> > >
> > > -e.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > —– Original Message —–
> > > From: "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) "
> > > <[email protected]>
> > > To: <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: <[email protected]>;
> > > <[email protected]>;
> > > <integer@www.god-emil.dk>
> > > Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2003 12:56 AM
> > > Subject: [thingist] Rub Linda the right way and she
> > > might show you
> > > wonderland
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Rub Linda the right way and she might show you
> > > wonderland
> > > >
> > > > http://www.electrichands.com/flowers/linda
> > > >
> > > > only for high bandwidth …
> > > >
> > > > joseph & donna
> > > > www.electrichands.com
> > > > joseph franklyn mcelroy
> > > > corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com
> > > >
> > > > SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE -
> > > send email to
> > > > [email protected]
> > > >
> > >
> > ——————————————————————–
> > > > t h i n g i s t
> > > > message by "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) "
> > > <[email protected]>
> > > > archive at http://bbs.thing.net
> > > > info: send email to [email protected]
> > > > and write "info thingist" in the message body
> > > >
> > >
> > ——————————————————————–
> > > >
> > >
> > > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > > -> 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
> >
> >
> > =====
> > *DISCLAIMER:This email any advice it contains is for the use is that of
> the sender and does not bind the precautions to minimise authority in any
> way. If you copy or distribute this by software viruses email. We have taken
> the risk of transmitting software viruses, but we advise that you carry out
> your own virus attachment to this message. Internet email that you observe
> this lack is not a secure communication medium, and we advise of security
> when emailing us. District Postmaster.
> http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/ *
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
> > http://tax.yahoo.com
> > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > -> 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
> >
>
>
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> 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

, marc garrett

Hi Joseph,

In relation to this, I thought that Jim Andrews had a strong point…

>I thought of Joseph's piece and the debate here as to its morality. And the
articles I read
>earlier in the evening by Robert Fisk, among others, describing the
slaughter of more civilians
>in Iraq.

Earlier this week on the Radio I heard the House of Commons, spluttering
away their ransid (isolationist) bile, complaining about Robert Fisk, like
many American corporate companies & hawk bunnies complain about Chomsky.

There is nothing more sensationlist than death. Whether one sees &
experiences it in real life (like I have & possibly others on this have to)
or when one dies one's self. If one of my (dead) close friends had been
photographed and used as art in such a way - I would not feel comfortable
with it.

You gotta understand what I mean by this - surely?

It does not matter if one is doing it for a career or not.

> I did not disturb their peace. You did. You fell prey to the same
seductions
> that marketing and propoganda uses to seduce the public. Your action
revealed
> the horrific pictures. Not mine.

Don't treat me like you do 'Karei' - he hates you - I don't…

my questions are as valid as your art, treat them with a similar respect.

I am open he is closed, big difference.

marc


> > I have a problem with this work -using dead/wounded people who have been
> > exploited by 'White corporate Neo-liberalism fascists; then turned into
Art.
> > It seems like a sensationalist parody.
>
> It would perhaps be sensationalist if I had career objectives in mind,
however
> I do not have a career as an artist nor do I benefit my business pursuits
with
> scandal. I started doing flower paintings, then set down to do some
flowers
> online and was motivated by a constant news barrage on NPR and the
different
> treatment of victims in American and Arab media. This resulted in an
evolution
> of the flowers.
>
> >
> > Why use these 'ripped up' people?
> >
>
> Artist like Delacroix (Shipwreck of Don Juan) and Goya (Disasters of War)
have
> used starkly realistic presentations of the victims of war and catastrophy
to
> present the horror of it. My intention was no different.
>
>
> > I believe that I understand Joseph's reasons (I think). With the
> > hopelessness
> > that he may feel in a world falling apart & run by 'backward' nihilists.
>
> These are not hopeless peices - I am still a idealist and a believer, and
aim
> these peices for reasons.
>
> >
> > Yet to use people whom have been killed/maimed by the Alliance's
military is
> > not emotionally stable or reflective/reevaluative.
>
> Nor are they intended as such. I am a non-violent warrior. I fight and aim
> weapons that do not cause death or physical harm. I fight only in defense,
but
> am ruthless when I do. I view the current adminstration and attitude of
the
> American public as the path to destruction, so I am fighting for myself
and
> progeny. I will use art or business or education, whatever is the best
tool at
> my disposal.
>
> >
> > Their souls have been stolen by Saddam, by Bush & Blair for their own
> > 'faustian' Gains - why continue to dig their pain up, drag it up even
more
> > for an audience to muse upon like CCN orgazm…
> >
> > I'm sorry Joesph -
> >
> > Let them rest in peace…
> >
>
> I did not disturb their peace. You did. You fell prey to the same
seductions
> that marketing and propoganda uses to seduce the public. Your action
revealed
> the horrific pictures. Not mine.
>
>
> joseph & donna
> www.electrichands.com
> joseph franklyn mcelroy
> corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com
>
> go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
> call me 646 279 2309
>
> SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
> [email protected]
>
>
>
>
>
> Quoting "marc.garrett" <[email protected]>:
>
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > I've been watching this debate & various things cropping up on here.
> >
> > The most useful suggestion was from Karei - regarding copying the list.
I
> > think that The rhizome database deserves the same treatment as hell.com;
now
> > that it is only in-house, ignoring everyday people - isolating them from
> > viewing Net Art, pretty disgusting really.
> >
> > I won't dwell too long - I've been ill the last few days, so will
comment
> > briefly regarding Joseph's War piece.
> >
> >
> > I have a problem with this work -using dead/wounded people who have been
> > exploited by 'White corporate Neo-liberalism fascists; then turned into
Art.
> > It seems like a sensationalist parody.
> >
> > Why use these 'ripped up' people?
> >
> > I believe that I understand Joseph's reasons (I think). With the
> > hopelessness
> > that he may feel in a world falling apart & run by 'backward' nihilists.
> >
> > Yet to use people whom have been killed/maimed by the Alliance's
military is
> > not emotionally stable or reflective/reevaluative.
> >
> > Their souls have been stolen by Saddam, by Bush & Blair for their own
> > 'faustian' Gains - why continue to dig their pain up, drag it up even
more
> > for an audience to muse upon like CCN orgazm…
> >
> > I'm sorry Joesph -
> >
> > Let them rest in peace…
> >
> > marc
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Eryk
> > > I must admit I'm slightly mystified by your virulent
> > > reaction to Joseph's two recent pieces ( and you know
> > > that I'm not of the 'if it says it's art its
> > > brave/new/ and above criticism' brigade - I share for
> > > example some of your eloquently expressed concerns
> > > about the Mouchette pieces discussed on Rhizome last
> > > week ).
> > > Possibly we could argue about the execution of
> > > Joseph's pieces but I think their intent is in a
> > > pretty honourable line of Hogarth, Swift and more
> > > recently Grosz and John Heartfield.
> > > Do you think we should reject for example a "A Modest
> > > Proposal" (Swift's satirical essay in which he
> > > proposed that the starving Irish should eat their
> > > children) on grounds of taste? Or on the grounds that
> > > the Irish peasants would not understand/ be offended
> > > by the piece?
> > > Now maybe you know something about Joseph that I don't
> > > - I would certainly have some philosophical diferences
> > > with him, especially about the merits of a business
> > > oriented approach to things - but in my few dealings
> > > with him I've found him courteous, helpful and
> > > straightforward.
> > > So personally until something comes along to change
> > > my mind I'll accept the pieces on face value as
> > > shocking (yes) but nevertheless perfectly legitimate
> > > pieces of anti war art in a long satirical tradition.
> > > best
> > > michael
> > > — Eryk Salvaggio <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > From Freud, "Civilization and its Discontents:"
> > > >
> > > > "He must be very strongly impressed by the fact that
> > > > some sources of
> > > > excitation, which he will later recognize as his own
> > > > bodily organs, can
> > > > provide him with sensation at any moment, whereas
> > > > other sources evade him
> > > > from time to time- among them what he desires most
> > > > of all, his mothers
> > > > breast- and only reappears as a result of his
> > > > screaming for help."
> > > >
> > > > Or as Joseph spake: "Yes, I was getting immune to
> > > > photos, so I created a
> > > > setting to make them shock me."
> > > >
> > > > Trivialization of mass murder and human suffering so
> > > > that Joseph McElroy can
> > > > have the experience of being "shocked" out of his
> > > > own apathy at the expense
> > > > of others- much in line with his "flower" piece, but
> > > > now he's added a
> > > > caricature of sexuality into the mix- but no,
> > > > really, it's all about making
> > > > "art" with a "message."
> > > >
> > > > I wonder if you would like to show this piece to
> > > > some
> > > > Iraqi/Afghan/Palestinians who are feeling personally
> > > > affected by thier own
> > > > lives, and you can explain to them how no, really,
> > > > you're not just trying to
> > > > get a higher jolt of electricity off of the
> > > > "entertaining" "shock value" of
> > > > thier dead bodies, no really, it's art, guys, it's
> > > > cool, it's cool, it's
> > > > art. Why aren't you getting a jolt of electricity
> > > > out of your own death? Why
> > > > do you have to get it from pissing on a pile of dead
> > > > bodies thousands of
> > > > miles away? But I have to say I really don't care to
> > > > hear an answer,
> > > > unfortunately I am not really willing to "go there"
> > > > with you.
> > > >
> > > > I'll admit, I have realized that a lot of my problem
> > > > with you is actually a
> > > > problem with me- that I don't trust other peoples
> > > > capacities, and I worry
> > > > that someone might mistake the spewings of your
> > > > nature for insight, and you
> > > > might send people "astray." But this is not really
> > > > my responsibility, and I
> > > > don't know why I mistook it for one. I don't know
> > > > why I listen to the hard
> > > > christian radio stations talk about the war in Iraq
> > > > when I know it will
> > > > infuriate me and distract me from driving. I don't
> > > > know why I give up on my
> > > > resolve and go on looking at your art. Its all like
> > > > insisting on burning my
> > > > hands to see if the stove is hot when its obviously
> > > > burning bright red. It's
> > > > not really anything philosophically gratifying, its
> > > > seriously just sadism,
> > > > and my misguided desire to "save people from
> > > > themselves."
> > > >
> > > > Emails like this are one more bullshit delivery
> > > > device for my I attempts to
> > > > "save the world"- the same impulse that makes me
> > > > leap to stop a rape in
> > > > progress is what makes me write an email to "warn
> > > > people" about your "art".
> > > > I am not going to do that anymore- the emails-
> > > > because after these pieces I
> > > > think it stands pretty blatantly clear, and nothing
> > > > I could say would prove
> > > > your retardation more than these pieces have
> > > > already. It's not my job to
> > > > protect people from you- it's yours.
> > > >
> > > > Works like this make me wonder why it is that I ever
> > > > worried people would
> > > > mistake you for having understanding or insight,
> > > > when in fact you prey on
> > > > the weak and the dead in order to get your own
> > > > kicks. I totally realize what
> > > > K meant when he called you a brute murderous ape-
> > > > maybe these pieces of
> > > > yours are you realizing that and surrendering to it,
> > > > I don't know. I don't
> > > > know what you have to do to get out of your zombie
> > > > trance of power and
> > > > aggression, but I feel like I should say that
> > > > "shocking yourself" out of
> > > > "apathy" isn't going to do it. Maybe it will, I
> > > > guess you would know better
> > > > than me, but its none of my buisiness.
> > > >
> > > > -e.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > —– Original Message —–
> > > > From: "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) "
> > > > <[email protected]>
> > > > To: <[email protected]>
> > > > Cc: <[email protected]>;
> > > > <[email protected]>;
> > > > <integer@www.god-emil.dk>
> > > > Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2003 12:56 AM
> > > > Subject: [thingist] Rub Linda the right way and she
> > > > might show you
> > > > wonderland
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Rub Linda the right way and she might show you
> > > > wonderland
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.electrichands.com/flowers/linda
> > > > >
> > > > > only for high bandwidth …
> > > > >
> > > > > joseph & donna
> > > > > www.electrichands.com
> > > > > joseph franklyn mcelroy
> > > > > corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com
> > > > >
> > > > > SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE -
> > > > send email to
> > > > > [email protected]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > ——————————————————————–
> > > > > t h i n g i s t
> > > > > message by "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) "
> > > > <[email protected]>
> > > > > archive at http://bbs.thing.net
> > > > > info: send email to [email protected]
> > > > > and write "info thingist" in the message body
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > ——————————————————————–
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > > > -> 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
> > >
> > >
> > > =====
> > > *DISCLAIMER:This email any advice it contains is for the use is that
of
> > the sender and does not bind the precautions to minimise authority in
any
> > way. If you copy or distribute this by software viruses email. We have
taken
> > the risk of transmitting software viruses, but we advise that you carry
out
> > your own virus attachment to this message. Internet email that you
observe
> > this lack is not a secure communication medium, and we advise of
security
> > when emailing us. District Postmaster.
> > http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/ *
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
> > > http://tax.yahoo.com
> > > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > > -> 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
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > -> 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
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> 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
>

, joseph mcelroy

Quoting "marc.garrett" <[email protected]>:

> Hi Joseph,
>
> In relation to this, I thought that Jim Andrews had a strong point…
>
> >I thought of Joseph's piece and the debate here as to its morality. And the
> articles I read
> >earlier in the evening by Robert Fisk, among others, describing the
> slaughter of more civilians
> >in Iraq.
>
> Earlier this week on the Radio I heard the House of Commons, spluttering
> away their ransid (isolationist) bile, complaining about Robert Fisk, like
> many American corporate companies & hawk bunnies complain about Chomsky.
>
> There is nothing more sensationlist than death. Whether one sees &
> experiences it in real life (like I have & possibly others on this have to)
> or when one dies one's self. If one of my (dead) close friends had been
> photographed and used as art in such a way - I would not feel comfortable
> with it.
>
> You gotta understand what I mean by this - surely?

marc, I understand there is a level of sensitivity that regards the use of
images of the dead with a horror based upon their own inner understanding of
what their response would be if such happened to a loved one of theirs. I have
the ability to empathize with this sensitivity. On the other hand, I am able
to understand the desire on the part of an impotent poplulation to express the
horror of what is happening to them by displaying their maimed dead for the
world to see. I want war to stop in Iraq, I don't want the taste for blood to
continue expanding. Given that the Arab world is displaying their dead for a
similar purpose, I don't feel I have violated them at all. Maybe I am
exploitive in the sense that Lewis described, where the choice of any subject
exploits it. But it is not for the intended purpose of personal fame or
fortune.

>
> It does not matter if one is doing it for a career or not.
>
> > I did not disturb their peace. You did. You fell prey to the same
> seductions
> > that marketing and propoganda uses to seduce the public. Your action
> revealed
> > the horrific pictures. Not mine.
>
> Don't treat me like you do 'Karei' - he hates you - I don't…
>
> my questions are as valid as your art, treat them with a similar respect.
>
> I am open he is closed, big difference.

Marc, my answer was not disrespectful. It was exactly what happened. I issued a
marketing document with a seductive come-on. You (and others) responded to the
marketing and went to the product. You succombed to the come-on (shoot and
destroy, rub and fuck) to click on the associated image (defenseless flower,
unsuspecting woman's body) to reveal not the wonders offered, but instead, as
you said, the disturbed peace of the dead. I am culpable to the extent that I
placed the opportunity within your reach, but I didn't make the guilty decision
to indulge in the sinful act. Isn't this what the government does? Tie in basic
impulses into their agendas via propoganda that people just follow, thinking it
is easy and as guilt free as clicking on the screen? In the US, I think that
the prevailing opinion is that all the blame lies with the entity placing the
opportunity within the reach of the person. For example, cigarette mfr getting
sued, theives getting large settlements, etc. But I think that each individual
should also be held responsible for falling prey to their own inner weaknesses.
It would be that sense of individual responsibility that would make people
think twice before following the propoganda of idiotic leaders.

joseph

, Lewis LaCook

xposting–again: perhaps it's because of windows xp?
later, i promise to compost…
joseph sez:Maybe I am
exploitive in the sense that Lewis described, where the choice of any subject
exploits it. But it is not for the intended purpose of personal fame or
fortune.

i didn't mean to imply that such exploitation was for fame or fortune::i meant for affect///communication (which is impossible without exploitation)
all of which is an extreme view, i know: but linguistics and semiotics brings it to us…
Jim sez:There is nothing more sensationlist than death. Whether one sees &
> experiences it in real life (like I have & possibly others on this have to)
> or when one dies one's self. If one of my (dead) close friends had been
> photographed and used as art in such a way - I would not feel comfortable
> with it.
>

some of my dead close friends would have wanted to be used as art that way…
this whole debate is a testament to the power of images of the dead///i WOULD ask why, if there's such a consensus on the piece's lack of value, why it's generated so much discussion///but such questions usually backfire on me;;;;
i brought out some counterarguments to eryk's words that he nor anyone has yet addressed: part of it's the "exploitation," part of it's eryk's calling the piece "kitschy" and no-one's talked about artaud's theatre of cruelty in relation to this work///all of which i think are valid ways to see this piece///
i maintain that it's a good piece////it communicates to me///it means///it's a distinctly american piece as well: it uses the american ideology and turns it back in on itself (there's eroticism masking murder)—while everyone's boiling with outrage over this, why hasn't anyone asked themselves why? and why hasn't anyone noticed that this is actually the power of this work?
who says net art has no content….

bliss
l





http://www.lewislacook.com/
net art review: http://www.netartreview.net/
tubulence artist studio: http://turbulence.org/studios/lacook/index.html
furtherfield: http://www.furtherfield.org/home.html




———————————
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more

, Michael Szpakowski

Short post as I'm away…but I still maintain that not
only are Joseph's pieces part of a perfectly
legitimate tradition of extremes in satire but that
they are also anti war and, I think, good pieces of
work.
In some ways as T. Whid points out they reprise old
ground both formally and in terms of content -I don't
find that a problem. Where I do think they score is
the way they implicate the viewer in the action of
"shooting" or of "touching".
When I posted that "it chills the blood" is was to
this I was referring - even for those of us who are
both horrified by and actively organising against the
war sometimes a kind of numbness over the casualties
can set in -it's something difficult to keep in the
front of one's brain.
To the extent that Joseph's pieces hits us with a
renewed sense of shock I think it is a valid and
succesful piece of anti war art.
As for the name calling -I'm not interested in being
involved on any side -I think personal animus should
be kept off the list.
best
michael
— kernel32 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> xposting–again: perhaps it's because of windows xp?
> later, i promise to compost…
> joseph sez:Maybe I am
> exploitive in the sense that Lewis described, where
> the choice of any subject
> exploits it. But it is not for the intended purpose
> of personal fame or
> fortune.
>
> i didn't mean to imply that such exploitation was
> for fame or fortune::i meant for
> affect///communication (which is impossible without
> exploitation)
> all of which is an extreme view, i know: but
> linguistics and semiotics brings it to us…
> Jim sez:There is nothing more sensationlist than
> death. Whether one sees &
> > experiences it in real life (like I have &
> possibly others on this have to)
> > or when one dies one's self. If one of my (dead)
> close friends had been
> > photographed and used as art in such a way - I
> would not feel comfortable
> > with it.
> >
>
> some of my dead close friends would have wanted to
> be used as art that way…
> this whole debate is a testament to the power of
> images of the dead///i WOULD ask why, if there's
> such a consensus on the piece's lack of value, why
> it's generated so much discussion///but such
> questions usually backfire on me;;;;
> i brought out some counterarguments to eryk's words
> that he nor anyone has yet addressed: part of it's
> the "exploitation," part of it's eryk's calling the
> piece "kitschy" and no-one's talked about artaud's
> theatre of cruelty in relation to this work///all of
> which i think are valid ways to see this piece///
> i maintain that it's a good piece////it communicates
> to me///it means///it's a distinctly american piece
> as well: it uses the american ideology and turns it
> back in on itself (there's eroticism masking
> murder)—while everyone's boiling with outrage over
> this, why hasn't anyone asked themselves why? and
> why hasn't anyone noticed that this is actually the
> power of this work?
> who says net art has no content….
>
> bliss
> l
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.lewislacook.com/
> net art review: http://www.netartreview.net/
> tubulence artist studio:
> http://turbulence.org/studios/lacook/index.html
> furtherfield: http://www.furtherfield.org/home.html
>
>
>
>
> ———————————
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms,
> and more


=====
*DISCLAIMER:This email any advice it contains is for the use is that of the sender and does not bind the precautions to minimise authority in any way. If you copy or distribute this by software viruses email. We have taken the risk of transmitting software viruses, but we advise that you carry out your own virus attachment to this message. Internet email that you observe this lack is not a secure communication medium, and we advise of security when emailing us. District Postmaster. http://www.somedancersandmusicians.com/ *

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com

, ruth catlow

Re 'Jimmy has a hard time shooting flowers'

> Where I do think they score is the way they implicate the viewer in the action of "shooting" or of "touching".
> When I posted that "it chills the blood" is was to this I was referring - even for those of us who are both horrified by and actively organising against the war sometimes a kind of numbness over the casualties can set in -it's something difficult to keep in the front of one's brain.

Yeah I understand what you're saying Michael. I really liked an earlier piece of Joseph and Donna's
http://www.electrichands.com/sketches/cult/ … in which, after I'd shot down a duck by clicking on it, I purged my violent instincts in an absurdly absorbing ritual with my nose pressed against the screen of my PC monitor. It was my first, and thought provoking, brush with cybershamanism.

However, 'Jimmy has a hard time shooting flowers' works on the idea that if you click your mouse on a piece of netart to see what happens, and Jimmy shoots his gun, that you are guilty of murder just for having the capacity to pull the trigger. The guilt by association is incapacitating, distracting and confusing. This guilt is a virus to many an otherwise informed liberal bold spirited activist. It gets us guilty about the wrong thing. We should not feel guilty for being able to click our mice…..

Joseph wrote:-
>But I think that each individual should also be held responsible for
>falling prey to their own inner weaknesses.
>It would be that sense of individual responsibility that would
>make people think twice before following the propaganda of idiotic leaders.

We should of course 'think twice before following the propaganda of idiotic leaders'- this might make some difference.
But I don't see how getting guilty for Jimmy's actions contributes to this process.

cheers
Ruth

http://www.furtherfield.org

, marc garrett

>marc, I understand there is a level of sensitivity that regards the use of
>images of the dead with a horror based upon their own inner understanding
of
>what their response would be if such happened to a loved one of theirs.

Good - I'm glad, so you'll also understand that it ain't ethical to use
people's dead bodies for something as disposable as a statement then?

>I have the ability to empathize with this sensitivity. On the other hand, I
am able
>to understand the desire on the part of an impotent poplulation to express
the
>horror of what is happening to them by displaying their maimed dead for the
>world to see.

I still believe that it could of been shown in a different way, not losing
impact.


>I want war to stop in Iraq, I don't want the taste for blood to
>continue expanding.

I know that you want war to stop in Iraq. I do not doubt this at all.


>Given that the Arab world is displaying their dead for a
>similar purpose, I don't feel I have violated them at all.

We are not isolated by distance
But by greed and our racist history
Just a wall's width away
Still impossible to reach across
This space in front of me
It's we who write this history
We who guard the money-tree
We support the companies
We stole the colonies

extract from a chumbawumba song…


>Maybe I am
>exploitive in the sense that Lewis described, where the choice of any
subject
>exploits it. But it is not for the intended purpose of personal fame or
>fortune.

This also I know. your intention is shrouded by the death of real people.
Picasso did not paint Guernica with photographs of the dead, he painted it
with his soul. This might sound corny, but so what - if emotion is seen as
corny, tuff. A bit more intuitve learning could bash the delusion of
theoretical hide & seek. You got that luv thang in you - and I see others
kicking your ass for not towing the line & filling in your text with
academic references to hide your real intentions - yes I now that you are
doing it for real.

This is not my beef - I feel that too many images of dead people have been
mediated, almost like their souls are being re-invented for other
functions - it's getting like a bloody 'Dirty Harry go-round otu there'.

What do we know of their history, their real lives? Nothing…
What do we know about them now - they are dead.

Now everything is consumed, mediated these days…I feel that a more potent
weapon against

death, is not an argument against death but an argument for life…

> Marc, my answer was not disrespectful. It was exactly what happened. I
issued a
> marketing document with a seductive come-on. You (and others) responded
to the
> marketing and went to the product. You succombed to the come-on (shoot
and
> destroy, rub and fuck) to click on the associated image (defenseless
flower,
> unsuspecting woman's body) to reveal not the wonders offered, but instead,
as
> you said, the disturbed peace of the dead.

No Joseph - you compiled it, placed the images there. Then I was invited to
shoot your visual prisoners unkowingly - then I shot them. It's like being
stopped by a cop & one of them plants some crack on me then says 'you're
nicked for possessing drugs'. I was framed.

I am culpable to the extent that I
> placed the opportunity within your reach, but I didn't make the guilty
decision
> to indulge in the sinful act. Isn't this what the government does? Tie in
basic
> impulses into their agendas via propoganda that people just follow,
thinking it
> is easy and as guilt free as clicking on the screen?

I agree with you regarding the psychology of consumer culture feeling
legitimate and valid, safe- shoppers of the world unite via corporate
products - death saves (cash), builds other nations. I prefer your other
version of the dancer - yet still have trouble with dead dead people
displayed. Yet, I may seem like a conservative here, and also I could be all
wrong.

'It ain't unusual to be wrong every now & then, dah, dah dah dooo'.

marc

, D42 Kandinskij

On Mon, 7 Apr 2003 10:30:21 -0700 (PDT), "Michael Szpakowski"
<[email protected]> said:
> Short post as I'm away…but I still maintain that not
> only are Joseph's pieces part of a perfectly
> legitimate tradition of extremes in satire but that
> they are also anti war and, I think, good pieces of
> work.

One can "maintain" lots of things:
humans have been known to "maintain"
delusions for centuries.

Realite is such that Joseph's "pieces"
are cheap + exploitative. Deminstrate
no real understanding or care for the
issues + perpetuate ridiculousness
which contributes_ to "war situations".


> When I posted that "it chills the blood" is was to
> this I was referring - even for those of us who are
> both horrified by and actively organising against the
> war sometimes a kind of numbness over the casualties
> can set in -it's something difficult to keep in the
> front of one's brain.

Nothing in those pieces "chills your blood".
Absolutely no-thing. You damage humans on a
daily basis w/o care.

> To the extent that Joseph's pieces hits us with a
> renewed sense of shock I think it is a valid and
> succesful piece of anti war art.

Joseph's piece doesn't do anything of the sort.
It's drab + appaling.

> As for the name calling -I'm not interested in being
> involved on any side -I think personal animus should
> be kept off the list.

Absolument. It's all "impersonal".
This list is full of *objective* individuals.
And your statements are not entirely subjective,
are they. Or is drivel acceptable if it's in
the *right form* but not acceptable if *you
can label it name-calling* regardless of
what it is?

> best

Glik. The insincerity.
There is nothing "best" in your post.

-IID42 Kandinskij @27+
[email protected]


http://www.fastmail.fm - Choose from over 50 domains or use your own

, joseph mcelroy

> However, 'Jimmy has a hard time shooting flowers' works on the idea that if
> you click your mouse on a piece of netart to see what happens, and Jimmy
> shoots his gun, that you are guilty of murder just for having the capacity to
> pull the trigger. The guilt by association is incapacitating, distracting and
> confusing. This guilt is a virus to many an otherwise informed liberal bold
> spirited activist. It gets us guilty about the wrong thing. We should not
> feel guilty for being able to click our mice…..

No, it is not the fact of clicking based upon curiosity, it is based upon
fallin prey to the come-on. Blackhawk on Thing correctly pointed out to me that
the whole piece depends upon you not mistaking the statement "Jimmy…" or "Rub
Linda.." as a title, but instead recognize it as an indicator of the lure you
are willinging going to have to accept (and thus becoming guilty). Some
people who are very poetically in sync with me have gotten this, others do
not. I am thinking about the ways I can improve the indicator… or someway
to inform you after the fact of what you have done (oblivious to the lure that
snares you - after all, curiosity is a search for gain).


joseph & donna
www.electrichands.com
joseph franklyn mcelroy
corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com

go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]





Quoting ruth catlow <[email protected]>:

> Re 'Jimmy has a hard time shooting flowers'
>
> > Where I do think they score is the way they implicate the viewer in the
> action of "shooting" or of "touching".
> > When I posted that "it chills the blood" is was to this I was referring -
> even for those of us who are both horrified by and actively organising
> against the war sometimes a kind of numbness over the casualties can set in
> -it's something difficult to keep in the front of one's brain.
>
> Yeah I understand what you're saying Michael. I really liked an earlier piece
> of Joseph and Donna's
> http://www.electrichands.com/sketches/cult/ … in which, after I'd shot down
> a duck by clicking on it, I purged my violent instincts in an absurdly
> absorbing ritual with my nose pressed against the screen of my PC monitor. It
> was my first, and thought provoking, brush with cybershamanism.
>
> However, 'Jimmy has a hard time shooting flowers' works on the idea that if
> you click your mouse on a piece of netart to see what happens, and Jimmy
> shoots his gun, that you are guilty of murder just for having the capacity to
> pull the trigger. The guilt by association is incapacitating, distracting and
> confusing. This guilt is a virus to many an otherwise informed liberal bold
> spirited activist. It gets us guilty about the wrong thing. We should not
> feel guilty for being able to click our mice…..
>
> Joseph wrote:-
> >But I think that each individual should also be held responsible for
> >falling prey to their own inner weaknesses.
> >It would be that sense of individual responsibility that would
> >make people think twice before following the propaganda of idiotic leaders.
>
> We should of course 'think twice before following the propaganda of idiotic
> leaders'- this might make some difference.
> But I don't see how getting guilty for Jimmy's actions contributes to this
> process.
>
> cheers
> Ruth
>
> http://www.furtherfield.org
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> 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

, joseph mcelroy

Quoting "marc.garrett" <[email protected]>:

>
> Good - I'm glad, so you'll also understand that it ain't ethical to use
> people's dead bodies for something as disposable as a statement then?

I don't agree with such a blanket generalization. It entirely depends upon the
nature of the statement.

>
> I still believe that it could of been shown in a different way, not losing
> impact.

Perhaps, but you would have to show me.

>
>
> >Given that the Arab world is displaying their dead for a
> >similar purpose, I don't feel I have violated them at all.
>
> We are not isolated by distance
> But by greed and our racist history
> Just a wall's width away
> Still impossible to reach across
> This space in front of me
> It's we who write this history
> We who guard the money-tree
> We support the companies
> We stole the colonies

Every person I know believes that no one else can understand them. It is not
racism, its selfism. You can expand that identity to your race. It is not
such a binary issue. My ancestors were indentured servants, cherokee indians,
and rural appalachian farmers living in poverty. Donna is african american,
and though I write here in first person, the final decision on released art is
with the both of us. Donna firmly believes it was important for the photos of
lynched slaves and africans in NYC to be displayed as an artistic statement.

>
> This is not my beef - I feel that too many images of dead people have been
> mediated, almost like their souls are being re-invented for other
> functions - it's getting like a bloody 'Dirty Harry go-round otu there'.
>
> What do we know of their history, their real lives? Nothing…
> What do we know about them now - they are dead.

I think you are shuddering to think of yourself, dead and lost in an ignoble
death. I shudder to think of such for myself. However, if a picture of my body
in death could be used to a good purpose, I would wish it so.

>
> No Joseph - you compiled it, placed the images there. Then I was invited to
> shoot your visual prisoners unkowingly - then I shot them. It's like being
> stopped by a cop & one of them plants some crack on me then says 'you're
> nicked for possessing drugs'. I was framed.
>

I explained to Ruth, perhaps my indicator was not strong enough. Regardless,
even curiosity bears responsibility. Though I do not like to condemn for such.

>
> 'It ain't unusual to be wrong every now & then, dah, dah dah dooo'.

as with me.

joseph

, marc garrett

Hi Joseph,

We could discuss this till the bombs come home…

We've just had a car catch fire in our yard (sheeesh!) & its just reached
another car now, it's wild.

The fire brigade are popping round to extinguish the blaze, I hope.

marc



>
> >
> > Good - I'm glad, so you'll also understand that it ain't ethical to use
> > people's dead bodies for something as disposable as a statement then?
>
> I don't agree with such a blanket generalization. It entirely depends upon
the
> nature of the statement.
>
> >
> > I still believe that it could of been shown in a different way, not
losing
> > impact.
>
> Perhaps, but you would have to show me.
>
> >
> >
> > >Given that the Arab world is displaying their dead for a
> > >similar purpose, I don't feel I have violated them at all.
> >
> > We are not isolated by distance
> > But by greed and our racist history
> > Just a wall's width away
> > Still impossible to reach across
> > This space in front of me
> > It's we who write this history
> > We who guard the money-tree
> > We support the companies
> > We stole the colonies
>
> Every person I know believes that no one else can understand them. It is
not
> racism, its selfism. You can expand that identity to your race. It is
not
> such a binary issue. My ancestors were indentured servants, cherokee
indians,
> and rural appalachian farmers living in poverty. Donna is african
american,
> and though I write here in first person, the final decision on released
art is
> with the both of us. Donna firmly believes it was important for the photos
of
> lynched slaves and africans in NYC to be displayed as an artistic
statement.
>
> >
> > This is not my beef - I feel that too many images of dead people have
been
> > mediated, almost like their souls are being re-invented for other
> > functions - it's getting like a bloody 'Dirty Harry go-round otu there'.
> >
> > What do we know of their history, their real lives? Nothing…
> > What do we know about them now - they are dead.
>
> I think you are shuddering to think of yourself, dead and lost in an
ignoble
> death. I shudder to think of such for myself. However, if a picture of my
body
> in death could be used to a good purpose, I would wish it so.
>
> >
> > No Joseph - you compiled it, placed the images there. Then I was invited
to
> > shoot your visual prisoners unkowingly - then I shot them. It's like
being
> > stopped by a cop & one of them plants some crack on me then says 'you're
> > nicked for possessing drugs'. I was framed.
> >
>
> I explained to Ruth, perhaps my indicator was not strong enough.
Regardless,
> even curiosity bears responsibility. Though I do not like to condemn for
such.
>
> >
> > 'It ain't unusual to be wrong every now & then, dah, dah dah dooo'.
>
> as with me.
>
> joseph
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> 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
>

, joseph mcelroy

oh my!!! Two years ago someone torched our van. It is going to be one hell of
mess to clean up, let me warn you.

joseph & donna
www.electrichands.com
joseph franklyn mcelroy
corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com

go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]





Quoting "marc.garrett" <[email protected]>:

> Hi Joseph,
>
> We could discuss this till the bombs come home…
>
> We've just had a car catch fire in our yard (sheeesh!) & its just reached
> another car now, it's wild.
>
> The fire brigade are popping round to extinguish the blaze, I hope.
>
> marc
>
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > Good - I'm glad, so you'll also understand that it ain't ethical to use
> > > people's dead bodies for something as disposable as a statement then?
> >
> > I don't agree with such a blanket generalization. It entirely depends upon
> the
> > nature of the statement.
> >
> > >
> > > I still believe that it could of been shown in a different way, not
> losing
> > > impact.
> >
> > Perhaps, but you would have to show me.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > >Given that the Arab world is displaying their dead for a
> > > >similar purpose, I don't feel I have violated them at all.
> > >
> > > We are not isolated by distance
> > > But by greed and our racist history
> > > Just a wall's width away
> > > Still impossible to reach across
> > > This space in front of me
> > > It's we who write this history
> > > We who guard the money-tree
> > > We support the companies
> > > We stole the colonies
> >
> > Every person I know believes that no one else can understand them. It is
> not
> > racism, its selfism. You can expand that identity to your race. It is
> not
> > such a binary issue. My ancestors were indentured servants, cherokee
> indians,
> > and rural appalachian farmers living in poverty. Donna is african
> american,
> > and though I write here in first person, the final decision on released
> art is
> > with the both of us. Donna firmly believes it was important for the photos
> of
> > lynched slaves and africans in NYC to be displayed as an artistic
> statement.
> >
> > >
> > > This is not my beef - I feel that too many images of dead people have
> been
> > > mediated, almost like their souls are being re-invented for other
> > > functions - it's getting like a bloody 'Dirty Harry go-round otu there'.
> > >
> > > What do we know of their history, their real lives? Nothing…
> > > What do we know about them now - they are dead.
> >
> > I think you are shuddering to think of yourself, dead and lost in an
> ignoble
> > death. I shudder to think of such for myself. However, if a picture of my
> body
> > in death could be used to a good purpose, I would wish it so.
> >
> > >
> > > No Joseph - you compiled it, placed the images there. Then I was invited
> to
> > > shoot your visual prisoners unkowingly - then I shot them. It's like
> being
> > > stopped by a cop & one of them plants some crack on me then says 'you're
> > > nicked for possessing drugs'. I was framed.
> > >
> >
> > I explained to Ruth, perhaps my indicator was not strong enough.
> Regardless,
> > even curiosity bears responsibility. Though I do not like to condemn for
> such.
> >
> > >
> > > 'It ain't unusual to be wrong every now & then, dah, dah dah dooo'.
> >
> > as with me.
> >
> > joseph
> > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > -> 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
> >

, joseph mcelroy

Hey K+, your voice has changed!


joseph & donna
www.electrichands.com
joseph franklyn mcelroy
corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com

go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]


Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:

> On Mon, 7 Apr 2003 10:30:21 -0700 (PDT), "Michael Szpakowski"
> <[email protected]> said:
> > Short post as I'm away…but I still maintain that not
> > only are Joseph's pieces part of a perfectly
> > legitimate tradition of extremes in satire but that
> > they are also anti war and, I think, good pieces of
> > work.
>
> One can "maintain" lots of things:
> humans have been known to "maintain"
> delusions for centuries.
>
> Realite is such that Joseph's "pieces"
> are cheap + exploitative. Deminstrate
> no real understanding or care for the
> issues + perpetuate ridiculousness
> which contributes_ to "war situations".
>
>
> > When I posted that "it chills the blood" is was to
> > this I was referring - even for those of us who are
> > both horrified by and actively organising against the
> > war sometimes a kind of numbness over the casualties
> > can set in -it's something difficult to keep in the
> > front of one's brain.
>
> Nothing in those pieces "chills your blood".
> Absolutely no-thing. You damage humans on a
> daily basis w/o care.
>
> > To the extent that Joseph's pieces hits us with a
> > renewed sense of shock I think it is a valid and
> > succesful piece of anti war art.
>
> Joseph's piece doesn't do anything of the sort.
> It's drab + appaling.
>
> > As for the name calling -I'm not interested in being
> > involved on any side -I think personal animus should
> > be kept off the list.
>
> Absolument. It's all "impersonal".
> This list is full of *objective* individuals.
> And your statements are not entirely subjective,
> are they. Or is drivel acceptable if it's in
> the *right form* but not acceptable if *you
> can label it name-calling* regardless of
> what it is?
>
> > best
>
> Glik. The insincerity.
> There is nothing "best" in your post.
> –
> -IID42 Kandinskij @27+
> [email protected]
>
> –
> http://www.fastmail.fm - Choose from over 50 domains or use your own
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> 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

, marc garrett

The fire crew have been & gone now…

5 trees burnt - 2 cars completely gutted, black smoke engulfing everything -
it stinks. I can go to bed now…

And yes - it is a bit of a mess out there…

marc


> oh my!!! Two years ago someone torched our van. It is going to be one
hell of
> mess to clean up, let me warn you.
>
> joseph & donna
> www.electrichands.com
> joseph franklyn mcelroy
> corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com
>
> go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
> call me 646 279 2309
>
> SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
> [email protected]
>
>
>
>
>
> Quoting "marc.garrett" <[email protected]>:
>
> > Hi Joseph,
> >
> > We could discuss this till the bombs come home…
> >
> > We've just had a car catch fire in our yard (sheeesh!) & its just
reached
> > another car now, it's wild.
> >
> > The fire brigade are popping round to extinguish the blaze, I hope.
> >
> > marc
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Good - I'm glad, so you'll also understand that it ain't ethical to
use
> > > > people's dead bodies for something as disposable as a statement
then?
> > >
> > > I don't agree with such a blanket generalization. It entirely depends
upon
> > the
> > > nature of the statement.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I still believe that it could of been shown in a different way, not
> > losing
> > > > impact.
> > >
> > > Perhaps, but you would have to show me.
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >Given that the Arab world is displaying their dead for a
> > > > >similar purpose, I don't feel I have violated them at all.
> > > >
> > > > We are not isolated by distance
> > > > But by greed and our racist history
> > > > Just a wall's width away
> > > > Still impossible to reach across
> > > > This space in front of me
> > > > It's we who write this history
> > > > We who guard the money-tree
> > > > We support the companies
> > > > We stole the colonies
> > >
> > > Every person I know believes that no one else can understand them. It
is
> > not
> > > racism, its selfism. You can expand that identity to your race. It
is
> > not
> > > such a binary issue. My ancestors were indentured servants, cherokee
> > indians,
> > > and rural appalachian farmers living in poverty. Donna is african
> > american,
> > > and though I write here in first person, the final decision on
released
> > art is
> > > with the both of us. Donna firmly believes it was important for the
photos
> > of
> > > lynched slaves and africans in NYC to be displayed as an artistic
> > statement.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > This is not my beef - I feel that too many images of dead people
have
> > been
> > > > mediated, almost like their souls are being re-invented for other
> > > > functions - it's getting like a bloody 'Dirty Harry go-round otu
there'.
> > > >
> > > > What do we know of their history, their real lives? Nothing…
> > > > What do we know about them now - they are dead.
> > >
> > > I think you are shuddering to think of yourself, dead and lost in an
> > ignoble
> > > death. I shudder to think of such for myself. However, if a picture
of my
> > body
> > > in death could be used to a good purpose, I would wish it so.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > No Joseph - you compiled it, placed the images there. Then I was
invited
> > to
> > > > shoot your visual prisoners unkowingly - then I shot them. It's like
> > being
> > > > stopped by a cop & one of them plants some crack on me then says
'you're
> > > > nicked for possessing drugs'. I was framed.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I explained to Ruth, perhaps my indicator was not strong enough.
> > Regardless,
> > > even curiosity bears responsibility. Though I do not like to condemn
for
> > such.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 'It ain't unusual to be wrong every now & then, dah, dah dah dooo'.
> > >
> > > as with me.
> > >
> > > joseph
> > > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > > -> 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
> > >
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> 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
>

, joseph mcelroy

I send you my virtual brawn…best of luck

joseph & donna
www.electrichands.com
joseph franklyn mcelroy
corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com

go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]





Quoting "marc.garrett" <[email protected]>:

> The fire crew have been & gone now…
>
> 5 trees burnt - 2 cars completely gutted, black smoke engulfing everything -
> it stinks. I can go to bed now…
>
> And yes - it is a bit of a mess out there…
>
> marc
>
>
> > oh my!!! Two years ago someone torched our van. It is going to be one
> hell of
> > mess to clean up, let me warn you.
> >
> > joseph & donna
> > www.electrichands.com
> > joseph franklyn mcelroy
> > corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com
> >
> > go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
> > call me 646 279 2309
> >
> > SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
> > [email protected]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Quoting "marc.garrett" <[email protected]>:
> >
> > > Hi Joseph,
> > >
> > > We could discuss this till the bombs come home…
> > >
> > > We've just had a car catch fire in our yard (sheeesh!) & its just
> reached
> > > another car now, it's wild.
> > >
> > > The fire brigade are popping round to extinguish the blaze, I hope.
> > >
> > > marc
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Good - I'm glad, so you'll also understand that it ain't ethical to
> use
> > > > > people's dead bodies for something as disposable as a statement
> then?
> > > >
> > > > I don't agree with such a blanket generalization. It entirely depends
> upon
> > > the
> > > > nature of the statement.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I still believe that it could of been shown in a different way, not
> > > losing
> > > > > impact.
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps, but you would have to show me.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >Given that the Arab world is displaying their dead for a
> > > > > >similar purpose, I don't feel I have violated them at all.
> > > > >
> > > > > We are not isolated by distance
> > > > > But by greed and our racist history
> > > > > Just a wall's width away
> > > > > Still impossible to reach across
> > > > > This space in front of me
> > > > > It's we who write this history
> > > > > We who guard the money-tree
> > > > > We support the companies
> > > > > We stole the colonies
> > > >
> > > > Every person I know believes that no one else can understand them. It
> is
> > > not
> > > > racism, its selfism. You can expand that identity to your race. It
> is
> > > not
> > > > such a binary issue. My ancestors were indentured servants, cherokee
> > > indians,
> > > > and rural appalachian farmers living in poverty. Donna is african
> > > american,
> > > > and though I write here in first person, the final decision on
> released
> > > art is
> > > > with the both of us. Donna firmly believes it was important for the
> photos
> > > of
> > > > lynched slaves and africans in NYC to be displayed as an artistic
> > > statement.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > This is not my beef - I feel that too many images of dead people
> have
> > > been
> > > > > mediated, almost like their souls are being re-invented for other
> > > > > functions - it's getting like a bloody 'Dirty Harry go-round otu
> there'.
> > > > >
> > > > > What do we know of their history, their real lives? Nothing…
> > > > > What do we know about them now - they are dead.
> > > >
> > > > I think you are shuddering to think of yourself, dead and lost in an
> > > ignoble
> > > > death. I shudder to think of such for myself. However, if a picture
> of my
> > > body
> > > > in death could be used to a good purpose, I would wish it so.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > No Joseph - you compiled it, placed the images there. Then I was
> invited
> > > to
> > > > > shoot your visual prisoners unkowingly - then I shot them. It's like
> > > being
> > > > > stopped by a cop & one of them plants some crack on me then says
> 'you're
> > > > > nicked for possessing drugs'. I was framed.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I explained to Ruth, perhaps my indicator was not strong enough.
> > > Regardless,
> > > > even curiosity bears responsibility. Though I do not like to condemn
> for
> > > such.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 'It ain't unusual to be wrong every now & then, dah, dah dah dooo'.
> > > >
> > > > as with me.
> > > >
> > > > joseph
> > > > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > > > -> 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
> > > >
> > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > -> 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
> >

, D42 Kandinskij

On Tue, 8 Apr 2003 01:39:40 +0000, "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) "
<[email protected]> said:
> Hey K+, your voice has changed!

Toujours. Who's speaking, dear?

-IID42 Kandinskij @27+
[email protected]


http://www.fastmail.fm - Choose from over 50 domains or use your own

, joseph mcelroy

I wouldn't know, not that evolved. But I know that "dear" is said differently,
more amusement.

joseph & donna
www.electrichands.com
joseph franklyn mcelroy
corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com

go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]





Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:

> On Tue, 8 Apr 2003 01:39:40 +0000, "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) "
> <[email protected]> said:
> > Hey K+, your voice has changed!
>
> Toujours. Who's speaking, dear?
> –
> -IID42 Kandinskij @27+
> [email protected]
>
> –
> http://www.fastmail.fm - Choose from over 50 domains or use your own