Curt, you ...

Hi Eric,

Nice to meet you. I'm not exactly sure what got you riled. I'm assuming it was this sentence in the blog vs. board thread:
"And then of course, the liberal majority always feels at liberty to perpetually slag all things un-liberal despite the fact that most of their screeds have nothing to do with new media art."

If from that sentence you construe that I support Bush, you've rushed to some conclusions. If I'm not with you, am I against you? Does everyone on the list so defacto agree with your presuppositions (whatever they are), that you need only do a little trolling and insinuating to tar and feather me? I get a creepy feeling when I get around an "insider" group of people who assume everyone agrees with them. It's like being around trailer trash rednecks and having them talk racist to you, assuming that because you are white you will surely agree with their undefended assumptions. You're tone is sort of creeping me out in the same way.

I'll respond to the stuff below, because you've misconstrued me.

c:
> The lack of any democratically sanctioned world view
> is the whole fun and challenge of rhizome.
>
> e:
> is fun a sanctioned event on this listserv?

c:
no, but the anarchy on the RAW listserv wound up being fun for me. (go figure.) if fun were sanctioned, it would probably not be as fun for me. Others might really enjoy it.



> c:
> How can I carry on a logical conversation with someone who doesn't
> believe in aristotelian logic?
>
> e:
> What idiot in the 21st century still ascribes to aristotelian logic?

c:
it seems you've come to your own conclusions on that one. the majority of humans on the planet I'm guessing. Deconstructivists will even lapse in and out of it, sometimes as an intentional rhetorical gambit, and other times because they can't escape the appeal of its unity.



> c:
> How can I carry on a conversation about aesthetics with someone who
> doesn't beleive in aesthetics?
>
> e:
> Which Aesthetic are we prescribing to? Please clarify, this is to
> general, I'd fail a student who uttered such a response.

c:
my comment is necessarily general because it was posted in the context of an entirely different topic. such aesthetics are hammered out artwork by artwork, critical dialogue by critical dialogue. All different sets of aesthetic presuppositions are brought to the list (including the presupposition that aesthetics are totally subjective), and the discussion begins in light of the inherent nature of the piece of work we are discussing.



> c:
> In some extreme situations, how can I carry on a meaningful
> conversation with someone who doesn't believe meaningful conversations
> are possible or even desirable?
>
> e:
> Who feels this way? You? Aren't all exchanges meaningfull? If I engage
> in a conversation with you doesn't it imply we have a meaningfull
> degree of engagement?

c:
many contemporary cyber-situationists feel this way. IID42 Kandinskij, NN, and others who occasionally post here. I can understand it, but I don't recommend it. They take relativism to its natural extremes, but at least they attempt to be consistent in their application of it.


> c:
> Thus the boundries of the community are hammered out rhetorically,
> post after post.
>
> e:
> Why are they hammered out? And what makes these efforts seem to be
> excercises in " meaningless post after post engangement? "
>
c:
they are hammered out because it's an open forum and not everyone subscribes to the same world view. some people choose to enter into dialogue about these differences, others choose to flame.

e:
No more Rhetoric, you've been called out.

> Use real language or silence yourself.

c:
I'm afaid you've trumped me on the rhetoric. I hope my respone meets with your satisfaction. Otherwise, you might have to "call me out" again and submit me to the rigors of your mental clarity.

true love always,
Ruprect the Monkey Boy

well, outrageous beahviour and flames are the grist of this mill.
it should be fun, and engaging.
take care,
Eric
(i guess the list is being served)

I hope that the list doesn't become an excercise in realism.