to alan and allen and the rest of 'thou' why say New Fluxus? why not just say FLUXUS????
we don't say, 'how's the New weather" even though what we are asking about is very new, we say, 'how's the WEATHER'. i know that may be simplistic but for me there is only one FLUXUS be it old, new or what i am doing or not doing right now. which could be anything. for example, today looms large as 'shopping for food for thanksgiving' and that could definitely be an event, ie. alan's fruitscores and allen's many food events. of course all of these are recent (new) fluxus but IMHO very 'fluxus'. i need another cup of tea it's 4 degrees F this morning. bests, carol xx Alan Bowman wrote: > >----- 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
