abbi
some points to hopefully open discussion ( if i'm not too late and some one
has already done so)
we had this discussion 4 or so years ago, we should check the archives.
i don't think that we came to any concrete conclusion.
obviously, there are different viewpoints, was 'fluxus' only the stuff that
maciunas had a hand in? the editions he made and put a fluxus label on...
possibly - this could be a real purist approach. maciunas was 'mr fluxus'
in this sense.
fluxus wasn't intentionally a name for a group, it was supposed to be the
title for a publication which was later adopted as a sort of title for the
group shows...
art historians ahve done the rest!
fluxus now exists as a movement, for the most part, because people have
become to class it as a 'movement', rightly or wrongly etc, etc. you can
read books about fluxus that aren't just about maciunas, they are about lots
of associated artists who also were/are producing works apart from those
published under the fluxus banner. were these 'part-time' fluxus people?
or was george m just publishing the works that he considered to be fluxus?
?
sorry i'm rambling a bit - hopefully someone will take up the reins over
this
anyway abbi, in a past mail you said
..
>but what i am really
looking to write about is how Fluxus is not dead, but still has a place in
the art world.
obviously it still has a place because there are still pieces around to be
exhibited, bought sold etc that's one part of the art world
the other, is about the people who made/make fluxus work.
emmett williams is still including the name fluxus in his work, his windows
for the fluxus cathedral and his little fluxus folks are good examples:
last time i saw emmett he was wearing a fluxus t-shirt! so i guess for
emmett, fluxus is still going strong.
many of the artists i know are happy to be associated and known via fluxus -
ata recent party the fluxus spirit seemed very alive and kicking, however
many of these people are making works in there own name and have dropped the
fluxus tag.
alison knowles, i know for one, is getting a bit sick of people wanting to
know about fluxus 1965 and not about the stuff she's doing now - which is
still alison knowles' but a result in 2001 of fluxus 1965 (does this make
sense?......nope, thought not!)
will fluxus die with the last of the 'originals'? fluxus will be around as
long as the artists are.
can there be new fluxus people and work?
it's a name that has, for some come to represent a specific man, a specific
group of artists during a specific period.
for others it has come to represent a sort of
work, a way of thinking, possibly a way of life.
fluxus - fluxish - fluxlike - fluxist - ?
my work has been referred to as fluxus, fluxish, fluxlike - whatever. to me
it has similarities - i am not a fluxus artist ( i wish i were - i might get
a show!! ;-) )
for me, i wasn't there so i'm not fluxus for that reason, but i am more than
happy to have the flux prefix applied as it's the only way i can describe
what i do to people who need a reference point.
i'm sorry if this is pehaps nonsense - i have not given any answers, in fact
i haven't tried to, i just wanted to try and get the discussion going
again - i'm interested in this subject , especially as it seems almost
impossible to resolve.
although i'm sure eric andersen will disagree - eric?
sorry, erm.....bumblingly yours
ban alwoman
freeformfreakout organisation fuzzy division
