Finis.
BIO
Re: Re: further question on the "rublinda" correspondance
On Thu, 10 Apr 2003 12:41:06 -0400, "curt cloninger" <curt@lab404.com>
said:
> still, i think it raises some important issues.
du think
+ continue to think that you think
+ lies, lies, lies
however, you're not thinking
tra le la
who holds your hand when you type
likely a fly
voila: 21c humanity
ridden by dustbunnies + vermin
--
-IID42 Kandinskij @27+
vivienn@fastmail.fm
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - mmm... fastmail
said:
> still, i think it raises some important issues.
du think
+ continue to think that you think
+ lies, lies, lies
however, you're not thinking
tra le la
who holds your hand when you type
likely a fly
voila: 21c humanity
ridden by dustbunnies + vermin
--
-IID42 Kandinskij @27+
vivienn@fastmail.fm
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - mmm... fastmail
Re: Ethics and Art
On Tue, 8 Apr 2003 01:16:20 -0400, "Eryk Salvaggio" <eryk@maine.rr.com>
said:
"Artists" will never be responsible as responsibility requires that one
gives up "opinionating" about things one does not know, while most
"modern"
art is based in loud-screaming of one's opinions in this or that medium
+ the one thing "artists" will never admit is that they are..
nothing
+ know..
nothing
quite rather the opposite they shall insist + insist towards the building
of the false persona.
It's easy to bomb WTC. Bombing "artist" identities--c'est difficile.
These days--more bloated than anyone else's.
Recognition of their *significant* contributions to war they shall never
deem to acknowledge + where there is no remorse, there is no forgiveness.
Parasitising one of the last available venues for humanity:
c'est ca votre "revoluticion".
--
-IID42 Kandinskij @27+
vivienn@fastmail.fm
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Choose from over 50 domains or use your own
said:
"Artists" will never be responsible as responsibility requires that one
gives up "opinionating" about things one does not know, while most
"modern"
art is based in loud-screaming of one's opinions in this or that medium
+ the one thing "artists" will never admit is that they are..
nothing
+ know..
nothing
quite rather the opposite they shall insist + insist towards the building
of the false persona.
It's easy to bomb WTC. Bombing "artist" identities--c'est difficile.
These days--more bloated than anyone else's.
Recognition of their *significant* contributions to war they shall never
deem to acknowledge + where there is no remorse, there is no forgiveness.
Parasitising one of the last available venues for humanity:
c'est ca votre "revoluticion".
--
-IID42 Kandinskij @27+
vivienn@fastmail.fm
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Choose from over 50 domains or use your own
Re: Kanarinka@CoSo - Boston
On Tue, 8 Apr 2003 11:59:43 -0400, "Kanarinka" <kanarinka@ikatun.com>
said:
> Brethren and Sistren,
We are not your "brethren & sistren".
Do avoid "lumping us".
> Please consider yourselves most cordially invited to the Copley Society's
> exhibit: "Manifest 2003: A Juried Exhibition of Visual Art in Digital
> Media".
Very cordially. Shame you're lying out of a manner of politeness.
> The opening reception is in Boston this Thursday, April 10th from 5:30 -
> 7:30PM. Details are in the message below.
That's good, but will you tell us why you "sell" third rate
interpretations
of something others did 40+ years ago as your own art without pointing
to
the original sources of the technology involved?
No, we don't suppose.
> Best wishes to all,
Do you enjoy turning the other cheek?
--
-IID42 Kandinskij @27+
vivienn@fastmail.fm
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - And now for something completely different
said:
> Brethren and Sistren,
We are not your "brethren & sistren".
Do avoid "lumping us".
> Please consider yourselves most cordially invited to the Copley Society's
> exhibit: "Manifest 2003: A Juried Exhibition of Visual Art in Digital
> Media".
Very cordially. Shame you're lying out of a manner of politeness.
> The opening reception is in Boston this Thursday, April 10th from 5:30 -
> 7:30PM. Details are in the message below.
That's good, but will you tell us why you "sell" third rate
interpretations
of something others did 40+ years ago as your own art without pointing
to
the original sources of the technology involved?
No, we don't suppose.
> Best wishes to all,
Do you enjoy turning the other cheek?
--
-IID42 Kandinskij @27+
vivienn@fastmail.fm
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - And now for something completely different
Re: further question on the "rublinda" correspondance
Or is everybodi fit to be an artist?
When the very adorable fluxus artists
complimented the audience as their artwork
+ offered them liberation from the
institutionalized prisons of museums
which are constructs of their delusions
the very unadorable audience respondi:
"we should build our own 'world'"
thusly demonstrating their inner lack
+ ability to accept compliment
+ status of absolutely undesirable
princesses
+ flippantly + idolatrously destroying
their "fathers"
+ demanding a double-secure imprisonment
both in their own perversion + that of museum
01 spartacus spoke: je suis ici to liberate vous
from the imprisonment of
the museum-stone grave of
blind physical manifestation
the ignorant audiensz responded: nei! we are going to change
the unchangeable
destroy + revolt
+hensz spartacus was killed
01 jesus spoke: have come to liberate toi
+ the ignorant audiensz perverted his words into religion
+hensz jesus was crucified
"freedom is impoooooooooooooossible"
bleat the ignorant + masochistic masses screaming
(breaking the laws is ultra "fashionable"
since 6576 AD)
+ bashing down those who try to act apropos
the laws of consciousness
the "responsibility" of the artist is to face itself
in all its cowardice + filth + its contribution to
world misery
only then + then, when he truly sees + faces himself
as he is_ can he begin la creacion of that which is
capable of genuine good
--
-IID42 Kandinskij @27+
vivienn@fastmail.fm
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - The professional email service
When the very adorable fluxus artists
complimented the audience as their artwork
+ offered them liberation from the
institutionalized prisons of museums
which are constructs of their delusions
the very unadorable audience respondi:
"we should build our own 'world'"
thusly demonstrating their inner lack
+ ability to accept compliment
+ status of absolutely undesirable
princesses
+ flippantly + idolatrously destroying
their "fathers"
+ demanding a double-secure imprisonment
both in their own perversion + that of museum
01 spartacus spoke: je suis ici to liberate vous
from the imprisonment of
the museum-stone grave of
blind physical manifestation
the ignorant audiensz responded: nei! we are going to change
the unchangeable
destroy + revolt
+hensz spartacus was killed
01 jesus spoke: have come to liberate toi
+ the ignorant audiensz perverted his words into religion
+hensz jesus was crucified
"freedom is impoooooooooooooossible"
bleat the ignorant + masochistic masses screaming
(breaking the laws is ultra "fashionable"
since 6576 AD)
+ bashing down those who try to act apropos
the laws of consciousness
the "responsibility" of the artist is to face itself
in all its cowardice + filth + its contribution to
world misery
only then + then, when he truly sees + faces himself
as he is_ can he begin la creacion of that which is
capable of genuine good
--
-IID42 Kandinskij @27+
vivienn@fastmail.fm
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - The professional email service
Re: Re: Re: Dia article in NYTimes Mag
It's very simple: quality is not a constant of quantity. That is:
quality's source is irrelevant to physical manifestations. Your
"arguments" are all steeped in "material brain calculations". As
such ++full of cliches. fallacious + programmatic connections.
.assumptions .erroneous nonsense .idolatry of words.
On Tue, 8 Apr 2003 18:21:45 +0000, "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) "
<joseph@electrichands.com> said:
> > I don't think that the open source model of software engineering is going to
> > work for artwork.One doesn't have this sort of certainty when it comes to
> > making art and who wants to freely follow a tyrant that wants everyone to toe
> > the line re: subject and content of an artwork.
Subject + content of the artwork as "appropriate" cannot be perceived
by
everyone, and not by beginners. "Your" idea of a "tyrant" is anyone who
doesn't let you knee-jerk in whatever fashion you're accustomed to.
"Do as you please. You are an individual. Born that way".
--
-IID42 Kandinskij @27+
vivienn@fastmail.fm
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Email service worth paying for. Try it for free
quality's source is irrelevant to physical manifestations. Your
"arguments" are all steeped in "material brain calculations". As
such ++full of cliches. fallacious + programmatic connections.
.assumptions .erroneous nonsense .idolatry of words.
On Tue, 8 Apr 2003 18:21:45 +0000, "joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) "
<joseph@electrichands.com> said:
> > I don't think that the open source model of software engineering is going to
> > work for artwork.One doesn't have this sort of certainty when it comes to
> > making art and who wants to freely follow a tyrant that wants everyone to toe
> > the line re: subject and content of an artwork.
Subject + content of the artwork as "appropriate" cannot be perceived
by
everyone, and not by beginners. "Your" idea of a "tyrant" is anyone who
doesn't let you knee-jerk in whatever fashion you're accustomed to.
"Do as you please. You are an individual. Born that way".
--
-IID42 Kandinskij @27+
vivienn@fastmail.fm
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Email service worth paying for. Try it for free
