This is precisely the kind of discussion I did not want to engender. No one needs to agree with me on my principled claim concerning suspensions and expulsions in general. And I certainly do not think referencing the Kirby Olsen affair helps anyones cause (that was wrong too, prompted by someone's claim that he would leave rather than put up with Kirby. That too was overdramatic and unnecessary, and though I did not post to the list about it, I did vote on the matter, and I did write directly to the administrators about it). we all have spam filters. Enough said. Other forms of policing strike me as unnecessary, and ultimately counter the public nature of our environment. This is less an Aristocratic salon and more a bourgeois cafe.
In any case, a number of us stand at opposite ends on this matter. I respect that, and no one need justify themselves. Some disagreements are in fact respectable and not in need of 'resolution'. I just happen to think that, before we feel too satisfied with the present situation, we take stock of what is happening. And that entails registering dissenting voices on the matter. More substantively, however: Mr Conger, I too am fascinated by the notion of Myth and Reality. I am hardly an expert, but if you woudl like to pursue the notions, I would gladly participate and help lead a reading of some text or another. On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 9:51 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > In a message dated 3/4/10 8:22:45 PM, [email protected] writes: > > > > I happen to agree that Miller should not be tossed off the list. > > Free speech and all that. It's just that I can't deal with his outlook > > anymore and would prefer a list that is more attuned to cooperative > > intellectual discussion instead of using a faux discussion as a vehicle > to > insult and > > ridicule others and what they seem to represent. Without me (his > targeted > > symbol for contemporary art, art professors, museums, the art meritocracy > > and class bias, and so much more) his commentaries may reveal something > more > > interesting. I admit I see him as the Glenn Beck of art and aesthetics. > > > > > Nonsense. This is not about free speech and Miller's right to it, it is > > about basic manners. No manners, no list "more attuned to cooperative > inte > > llectual discussion instead of using a faux discussion as a vehicle to > > insult and ridicule others and what they seem to represent." I don't > actually > > care if Miller wants to be a proletarian neighborhood intellectual and > > cling to his view that the elite ruin everything-but he has to be > reasonably > > polite. He cannot continuously make slyly snide remarks in the hopes of > > provoking, he cannot make his numerous other habitual unpleasantries. > I > > don't care if he can't spell, doesn't know any art history, can't write > > decent English, and is completely uneducated,he has to be polite. This is > true > > for any other lister as well. It would be nice if some effort was put > into > > thinking, if there was some engagement in the concerns of this list > but > > the first requirement is to be reasonably polite-no studied insults, and > > some connection with the problems at hand. We were able to carry on > like > > that for years, and Miller was a part of it,so he is capable of it. > > Kate Sullivan
