OK - I guess I have been lurking long enought and should respond to the querry.
Ken Friedman and I just finished a double set of issues of the journal Visible
Language. The first is Fluxus and Legacy. The second is Fluxus after Fluxus.
This is the official version of the two issues:
Fluxus and Legacy examines the relationship between Fluxus and
a range of artistic and art historical concerns -- including the
question of historical consciousness in the work of specific artists.
Contributors include Bertrand Clavez on the relationship
of Fluxus to the artistic practice of recent decades, Ina Blom
on the historiographic dialectic of Ben Vautier's signature, and
a special collection of conversations and notes by children of the
Fluxus artists compiled by Hannah Higgins (herself a "Fluxkid").
Owen Smith examines Fluxus and learning strategies, and the issue
ends with an inquiry into historiography and legacy by Smith and
Ken Friedman.
Fluxus after Fluxus examines the relationship of younger artists
to the Fluxus work. Contributors include Anne Klefstad on the
difficult question of legacy, Celia Pearce on games as art and the
aesthetics of play, and a dozen contemporary artists on their view
of -- and relation to -- Fluxus. In addition, Lisa Moren has
organized a special collection of event scores titled Keep Walking
Intently, blending traditional Fluxus scores with parallel works
by other artists and an introduction by Ina Blom. Additionally there
is a selection 10 artists' statgements on the importnace of fluxus
for their work and ideas in contemporary practice. In the introduction,
Friedmand and Smith discuss the dialectics of legacy, and Ken problematizes
the question of legacy in a bibliographic essay on the literature of
Fluxus that accompanies a selective bibliography on Fluxus from
1961 to 2004.
Additionally if you Jelena (of anyone else) is interested I will be happy to
send yo and essay I wrote in the mid 90s about what I called the fluxus world
view (it was origianally published in the catalog Fluxus Virus). Since it is
long and amnot
sure that it is righ to send it to the list directly just send me you email off
list and I will send it as an attachment. Here is a brief selection of the
introduction of the essay:
Playing with Difference: Fluxus as a World View.
A consideration of Fluxus on the basis of identifiable visual distinctions (the
use of collage/assemblage, a design sensibility, or a particular form of a
work) or even seeming conceptual coherencies fails to recognize the more
fundamental change in
thinking: Fluxus no longer requires clarity of concept or purpose as it relates
to communication. This can be most generally seen in the processes of creation
in which Fluxus participates. These processes illustrate and enact the
diacritical
workings of communication (in art, language, music, etc); the joining of
disparate elements from within established meanings (and in relation to
expected actions) to create new and unexpected meanings and awarenesses. In
Fluxus, processes are
enacted to establish multiple possibilities and not set new transcendent orders
or associations and thus Fluxus might seem to contain patterns of the absence
or the ambiguity of meaning. To more fully recognize the nature of past Fluxus
actions and
even the possibilities for future actions I attempt to offer here a series of
related ideas that can inform one as to the conceptual field in which Fluxus
operates.1
Fluxus is by nature anti_reductivist, for it does not seek the illumination of
some end or fact but celebrates the participation in a non_hierarchal density
of experience. In this way Fluxus does not refer to a style or even a procedure
as such but
to the presence of a total of social activities. The attempt to place Fluxus in
history falls into the positivist (in the sense that human knowledge derives
from systematic study) as well as art historical trap of defining the presence
of something
by divining the presence of a core, whether it be of ideas, people or
activities. Thus as the debate rages as to who was part of Fluxus and who
wasn't, or when and where Fluxus existed, one of the most central and crucial
aspects of Fluxus is often
disregarded. Although some trace of Fluxus does exist in what was done and who
did it, such a narrow view obscures the key to Fluxus, that which I call a
world view.
Owen
[email protected] writes:
>
>you can also check on Hannah Higgins books and/or Owen Smith.
>
>----Original Message Follows----
>From: Kamen Nedev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: FLUXLIST: FLUXLIS
>Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 00:38:35 +0200
>
>
>On 02/05/2006, at 0:26, Jelena Zoric wrote:
>>
>>
>>I need an essay on fluxus ideology, on fluxus movement in general.
