you don't think being a "tyrranical old fart" would be alot of fun?
i'm looking forward to becoming a "tyrranical old fart" someday.
infact i may start as soon as i turn 40 to get a jump on all
the fun other tyrranical old farts are having.
jason
>Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 11:30:42 -0500
>From: "Porges, Timothy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: FLUXLIST: response Sol
>
>Back when fluxus was youngish (very early seventies) i would ask various of
>my teachers about it (at san francisco art institute) and they would tell me
>that it was nothing new; that the Dad-a-ists had already done it all.
>Meanwhile the then-living dadavets would chime in to let us all know that
>whatever we THOUGHT we were doing, what we WERE doing was neo-dada and we
>should stop or apologize or footnote ourselves into academic paralysis.
>Young fluxus was constantly told then that it was nothing new, nothing
>important, and so on. Amazing, what tyrannical old farts the dadaists turned
>into. So what does this mean for us now?
>
>Some times i think the Fluxus-died-with-Maciunas position is in some ways
>kindest to the survivers. Look at Higgins, Vostell, Brecht, Vautier,Knowles:
>wouldn't they have been just as well off if there had never been a fluxus? i
>must be missing something.
>
>My point is, everything is different now. old fluxus is: the cold war,
>snailmail art (this one is subject to rediscovery, like lithography),
>happy food fests (rirkrit has already rediscovered this one), indeterminacy
>and insane-control-freakdom in interminable, unstable balance. Old fluxus is
>now a RESOURCE, like old dada. New fluxus should avail itself of that
>resource, up to and including the appropriation of the name, without
>worrying for a second about the high-church issues that spoil(ed) some of
>the fun. New fluxus doesn't have to take on the burden of every crazy uncle
>in the old-fluxus family. This is not a blood tie, or the eurodisneyland of
>cold-war culture. Back in the sixties, we were forever being told by
>twenties and thrities people that we were just pale, uninteresting copies of
>their wonderful selves. Those of us who remember that owe people who are
>young NOW something better than just crapping all over each other about who
>was a big shot back in the day.
>
>i think the point i'm missing here has to do with fun. old fluxus had a lot
>to do with fun, though it was often twee, Unitarian-church-basement fun. but
>that was probably just me.
>
