At 02:41 PM 7/11/99 +0100, Steev wrote:
>> I think the constant cause of most friction in this arena
>>is conflict between commerce and culture.
>>if no one cared to make money from
>> "art" then there would be no concerns about "piracy".
>> but that's why there needs to be a distinction made, because
>> the other side is going to use as it's main argument that
>> infringing copyright is done simply to make undeserved
>>cash. People need
>> to understand that there can be a motivation for it
>>that is not about money.
>>By condoning outright piracy we muddle that point.
** So here we are--thinking about commerce and culture or at least talking
about it). Why? Who am I? Perhaps I am a culture recycler--or perhaps an
artist--or perhaps both. Why? Are you answering any of these questions? Are
you even still reading this? Why? "WE'RE WASTING OUR TIME GOING OVER THINGS
WE'VE GONE OVER BEFORE AND I DON'T WANT TO THINK THAT THEY WARRANT GOING
OVER ANYMORE..."
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999 14:41:16 +0100, Anki Toner wrote:
>The fan bootlegging a complete Bob Dylan tour
>(73 conceerts all in all)
>surely has a much higher motivation than money.
>It's just that also he
>(and not only Negativland) needs some money to do so.
** Now. Why am I writing this? And what are my qualifications? Do you
assume I know what I'm talking about just because this is on this list, or
do you suspect that I am simply full of shit? Why? Is there a line between
art and self-indulgence, or are the two not mutually exclusive? Am I an
artist or merely self-indulgent? What day is it? Is this test art or
self-indulgence? Is there even a difference between the two? "WERE WASTING
OUR TIME GOING OVER THINGS WE'VE GONE OVER BEFORE AND I DON'T WANT TO THINK
THAT THEY WARRANT GOING OVER ANYMORE..."
Steev wrote:
>> there are limits to everything. fact of life.
>> ( case in point - on another list i'm on
>>there's been a huge argument about a performance
>> artist who goes by the name Death Squad,
>>who did a show here in san francisco
>>where he held a loaded gun up to audience members' heads.
>>Afterwards he claimed that the piece's artistic merits
>>provided sufficient blessing for his actions,
>>while others argued that even art is not an
>>excuse for violating other's civil rights.
>>I tend to agree with them. You can complain all
>>you want about restrictions of your freedoms (artistic or
>> otherwise), but face it, your freedom ends at
>>the point you're opressing someone else. period.)
** Many people believe that music which contains such "unconventional"
elements (which in turn tend to embarrass or confuse people) is
undesirable. Why do they feel this way? Undesirable in comparison to what?
To an arbitrary measurement of desirability, or are there set laws
governing desirability? Why does number 6 precede 7? And what do the
numbers 4 and 12 have to do with anything? If a piece of music is
undesirable to a majority of people in an arbitrary group, does this make
it undesirable? What if it is undesirable to the majority of the people
alive today? Does this make it undesirable? And, if it were, wouldn't such
extreme undesirability make the piece desirable? Why am I being forced to
listen to Muzak as I write this? Is it because it is desirable, or is
someone merely pointing a gun at my head? "WE'RE WASTING OUR TIME GOING
OVER THINGS WE'VE GONE OVER BEFORE AND I DON'T WANT TO THINK THAT THEY
WARRANT GOING OVER ANYMORE..."
-- Interrupt your reading to read Silence.
Anki wrote:
>What list is that?
** Why am I being forced to listen to Muzak as I write this? Is it because
it is desirable, or is someone merely pointing a gun at my head? "WE'RE
WASTING OUR TIME GOING OVER THINGS WE'VE GONE OVER BEFORE AND I DON'T WANT
TO THINK THAT THEY WARRANT GOING OVER ANYMORE..."
>Andrew Lander wrote:
>>It's arguable that holding a loaded gun to someone's
>>head has artistic merit.
>>What if the artist pulled the trigger?
* Why am I being forced to listen to Muzak as I write this? Is it because
it is desirable, or is someone merely pointing a gun at my head? What if
the artist pulled the trigger? "WE'RE WASTING OUR TIME GOING OVER THINGS
WE'VE GONE OVER BEFORE AND I DON'T WANT TO THINK THAT THEY WARRANT GOING
OVER ANYMORE..."
Anki wrote:
>How do they know it was loaded if he didn't?
>I don't know much about
>guns, or about people who like guns,
>but I do not see the pint in
>loading the gun if he didn't mean to shoot.
>And shooting in the air is
>probably ridiculous after all the tension he
>built up. May be he did
>shoot in the air first (then they didn't know
>if there was another
>bullet anyway). Sorry, just writing nonsense.
** Now. Why does Cage consistently repeat his ideas and observations over
and over again? Is he trying to make a point, or is he repeating himself
just to be monotonous? And why does he ask so many questions? Is John Cage
an artist, or is he merely full of shit? Am I consciously trying to write
like John Cage? Is there anything at all indeterminate about what I'm
writing? Is there ever such a thing as indeterminate? Is John Cage an
artist, or is he merely full of shit? And if I am trying to write like
Cage, does this mean that I am either an artist or full of shit? Have I
implied that I think that Cage is either an artist or full of shit? Or have
I simply baited you into thinking that these are the only two things that
Cage can possibly be? "WE'RE WASTING OUR TIME GOING OVER THINGS WE'VE GONE
OVER BEFORE AND I DON'T WANT TO THINK THAT THEY WARRANT GOING OVER
ANYMORE..."
-- Interrupt your reading and start at the beginning of this message again.
Steev wrote:
>> and since you asked, the main reason i started
>>this list is to get away
>> from the repetitive lowlevel crap of the
>>Negativland list, Snuggles. I
>> wanted there to be a place where a certain level
>>of background
>> information and common point of view could
>>be assumed, so that more
>> in-depth conversation could be had, and
>>where the focus could be on
>> concepts and ideas and artistic practice,
>>rather than fannish trivia and
>> the same old questions ("on track 9 of
>>'Escape from Noise' i think they're
>> using samples! right? hey, anyone heard of
>>a CD called 'Plexure'?")
Anki wrote:
>I mention the Negs because they have already debated on that.
** Now. Why do lists consistently repeat ideas and observations over and
over again? Are they trying to make a point, or are they repeating
themselves just to be monotonous? And why do they ask so many questions?
Are they artists, or are they merely full of shit? Am I an artist, or am I
merely full of shit? Anyone heard of a CD called "Plexure"? "WE'RE WASTING
OUR TIME GOING OVER THINGS WE'VE GONE OVER BEFORE AND I DON'T WANT TO THINK
THAT THEY WARRANT GOING OVER ANYMORE..."
Anki wrote:
> I totally agree with you about "Snuggles".
>Your list is much better, though sometimes
>redundant with "Pluderphonia", which is also OK.
** Now. Why do lists consistently repeat ideas and observations over and
over again? Are they trying to make a point, or are they repeating
themselves just to be monotonous? And why do they ask so many questions?
Are they artists, or are they merely full of shit? Am I an artist, or am I
merely full of shit? "WE'RE WASTING OUR TIME GOING OVER THINGS WE'VE GONE
OVER BEFORE AND I DON'T WANT TO THINK THAT THEY WARRANT GOING OVER ANYMORE..."
Anki wrote:
>Ok, forget it.
** Now. Ok. "WE'RE WASTING OUR TIME GOING OVER THINGS WE'VE GONE OVER
BEFORE AND I DON'T WANT TO THINK THAT THEY WARRANT GOING OVER ANYMORE..."
Steev wrote:
>> perhaps my shock and impatient attempts to understand have >>been taken
as an attempt to censor. that was not my intention. >>(On the other hand, i
reserve my prerogative
>>to try to keep the list focused, if neccesary.)
** Now. Why are you reading this? Why do you refuse to follow instructions?
Is it because you have read and digested all of the material and ideas
found within this list and its archives, or is it because you just don't
have the time to waste? Or is it because you are stubborn? Why are you
still reading this? When one does not follow instructions, does this mean
that they are necessarily wrong? Or do they just have a disdain for
authority? Whose authority? Isn't it possible that I am wrong for insisting
that you follow my instructions? What color is your car? Isn't it possible
that Steeve Hise is wrong? Why do I mention Steve and your car when I have
neither seen your car nor met Steeve? Is it because either of them are
relevant to detritus? Is it because I am stupid, or because I am ignorant
about recombinant culture? Why do you continue to ignore instructions and
plod merrily along your way, when you could comply with my instructions and
go back to that with which you are already familiar, ad infinitum, until
your demise?
-- Interrupt your reading to telephone Beethoven and ask him the last half
of every third question encountered in this test.
Anki wrote:
>Of course.
** Now. Why do I continue to waste my time writing this, when I now know
that no one will be reading this? Is it because I have nothing better to do
or is it because I already know that you will not follow instructions and
will continue to read on simply to spite me? Why do you continue to waste
your time by reading this? "WE'RE WASTING OUR TIME GOING OVER THINGS WE'VE
GONE OVER BEFORE AND I DON'T WANT TO THINK THAT THEY WARRANT GOING OVER
ANYMORE..."
Steev wrote:
>> here's a good question: is an intolerance for fools the same >>as
censorship?
** Now. Why do I continue to waste my time writing this, when I now know
that no one will be reading this? Is it because I have nothing better to do
or is it because I already know that you will not follow instructions and
will continue to read on simply to spite me? "WE'RE WASTING OUR TIME GOING
OVER THINGS WE'VE GONE OVER BEFORE AND I DON'T WANT TO THINK THAT THEY
WARRANT GOING OVER ANYMORE..."
Anki wrote:
>This is a good question indeed! Anuway,
>the concept of "fools" depends
>of your own psychic situation.
>I mean, there are days when there seem to
>be more fools around, and that probably
>depends on you. Apart from that,
>I also exert a great deal of intolerance
>for fools. But I am not
>generally proud of it.
** Now. What am I trying to prove here? Does something have to be proven in
order to be so? Is there even such a thing as proof? What do questions have
to do with anything? Do words really exist, or are they just symbols?
"WE'RE WASTING OUR TIME GOING OVER THINGS WE'VE GONE OVER BEFORE AND I
DON'T WANT TO THINK THAT THEY WARRANT GOING OVER ANYMORE..."
==> ** ALL OF THE ABOVE **'d portions were lifted (and in some cases
slightly altered) from The Importance of Wasting Time (and What to Do About
It...) by Phil Dink, from The Cassette Mythos, Autonomedia 1990.
Sorry, I couldn't restrain my cuttin'-and-pastin' self. ;)
Angela
----------------------------------------------------
Rumori, the Detritus.net Discussion List
to unsubscribe, send mail to majordomoATdetritus.net
with "unsubscribe rumori" in the message body.
----------------------------------------------------
Rumori list archives & other information are at
http://detritus.net/contact/rumori
----------------------------------------------------
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
N© Detritus.net. Sharerights extended to all.