>----- Original Message ----- >From: "allen bukoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writ >"few if any of the remaining original-Fluxus artists or official Fluxus Art >Historians have much of any desire or interest to support an entirely new >Fluxus with new people and new approaches. Perhaps I am wrong about "
Dear Allen As you know, I've been fortunate to work with a number of the remaining Fluxus old-guard. On the whole I've found them appreciative and supportive of my work. (Ben even bought a piece, although he appears to be using a different definition of the term 'bought' than the one I'm used to, and he seems to have lost the ability to reply to emails too! I may have to send the boys round). I am though only one person ++ However, I think you're right Allen. And I think that it's the word Fluxus that causes the problems. As we all know, quite a few of these artists are not averse to distancing themselves from fluxus and then realigning themselves at opportune moments - in a way they help to perpetuate the so-called band-wagon they often like to accuse others of jumping on. Some do actively support new artists and work but I don't think that a show of 'New Fluxus' will ever be organised by one of them - due simply to this problem with the name. This "problem" exists because people believe it is a problem. If you don't believe it is a problem then......perhaps it isn't really one. I really don't know, I have struggled with this dilemna of that word Fluxus. I don't see myself as a Fluxus artist, mainly for 'historical' reasons, but have used 'Flux' derivatives and variations in my work and descriptions thereof. On several 'professional' occasions I have been introduced as a fluxus artist, and when I have tried to explain that this is not strictly true - been met by blank faces and a sort of "well what ARE you then if not fluxus?" The response being "....actually I'm not sure" My work is conceptually based, I suppose, but may involve virtually any medium and any, however banal, motive for execution. I make serious pieces and downright practical jokes and puns, drawings, film, video, music anything I feel like - how do I classify that? I really don't know. Not that I particularly want to, only when speaking to curious people. Anyway, mid sneezing fit and trip to make a coffee, I appeared to have lost my thread a bit (Get to the Point Bowman!!!) Oh yes, perhaps this cursed word Fluxus now has more meaning than was at first intended. Modern languages are constantly in a state of change (flux! ha ha!). English in the UK and in Europe, and I assume the US is gradually changing, we assimilate new verbs (to e-email) and eliminate defunct terms and grammatical elements (does anyone know the correct use of the classicly misused 'thou'?). In Italian we can now 'chattare', 'call-backare' etc etc. In my experience people are beginning to use fluxus to describe this sort of 'difficult to describe' art practice, which *is* hard to pin down. After 40 years, Fluxus has given us fluxus. Whether this is right or wrong, a testament to the effect of Fluxus or a slur on its good name, a credit to the original protagonists or an insult - I don't know. This 'fluxus' is not necessarily 'Fluxus', it is perhaps the 'New' stuff that you where talking about earlier. Those of us involved in this new 'fluxus' where not involved in 'Fluxus'. Perhaps fluxus is not Fluxus after all, it may involve the same ideals and sensibilities (of which examples are many, many, many and very, very different in aspect - compare Geoff Hendricks to Al Hansen), but does not include some of the key (physical) elements of Fluxus such as Maciunas*, Wiesbaden* or whatever *NB- these are just examples to illustrate the differences between what I think Allen is into and what history has transformed into this mythical beast called Fluxus. I'm not even sure that the 'original' artists can classify or quantify Fluxus now, after 40 years - some deny it's existence yet perform at Fluxus festivals, others are more than happy to use Fluxus in their works and publications as a concrete reference point and source of 'identity'. This is by no means intended as criticism in any form - I'm just trying, somewhat hopelessly, to try and resolve a problem. I'm not even sure it's resolvable. I think the artists are supportive of new fluxus, just not necessarily of things under the banner of new Fluxus - which for the difference of a capital letter is quite probably their loss. You have to think also--"Does Fluxus Midwest or Fluxus Heidelberg or Fluxus Whatever, need the approval of Fluxus Oldguard?" - It would be nice, in a sort of one big happy family sort of way, but not essential. Remember that also now, Fluxus is 'collectable'! This changes things a bit too, insofar as how Fluxus is 'promoted' nowadays, and here is a key point (even if it is only my opinion) - I have been taken, surprised and fascinated by works and ideas by artists involved in Fluxlist, and I have seen some works by established Fluxus artists which I wouldn't give houseroom to! Perhaps we could organise some sort of research, involving the Fluxsurvivors, to see if we can find out what, if anything, they actually think about artist currently working in this fluxus/ish/is/y way - perhaps they might have something simple to say which may just clear it up. Yours Alan PS my bit on the digest is waaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy out of date! PPS http://elfwood.lysator.liu.se/farp/thewriting/glarchthou/glarchthou.html#Use
