Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
I thought alot about Ulysses and "Ned" I think his name was...I'm not sure "Ned" had chums, but those mysteries were quite the steamy treat. Harry Enfield had chums. Couldn't beat the Fast Show, though. mn
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
me. Quite bland. I think Rimbaud's life was more interesting than his art. That's my Matineee d'ivresse ? Yes, but did you think that when you were a teenager? Exactly, he was a poetic prodigy. I really can't put my finger on it but the poems just didn't reach me on an affective/visceral level. They didn't strike Reached me on an affective visceral level. But perhaps that was only in 1972 or thereabouts, when my primary reading was greek drama and primary amusement booze. This poem is about smoking dope btw. Heiko
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
In a message dated 04/21/2000 8:31:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: me. Quite bland. I think Rimbaud's life was more interesting than his art. That's my Matineee d'ivresse ? Yes, but did you think that when you were a teenager?
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
Heiko Recktenwald wrote: me. Quite bland. I think Rimbaud's life was more interesting than his art. That's my Matineee d'ivresse ? Yeah, something like that. RA
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 04/21/2000 8:31:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: me. Quite bland. I think Rimbaud's life was more interesting than his art. That's my Matineee d'ivresse ? Yes, but did you think that when you were a teenager? Exactly, he was a poetic prodigy. I really can't put my finger on it but the poems just didn't reach me on an affective/visceral level. They didn't strike me as particularly lyrical like, for instance Rilke can be (which I like). Maybe I've just read too much brut stuff and it's ruined me for it I don't know. RA
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
Reed Altemus wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 04/21/2000 8:31:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: me. Quite bland. I think Rimbaud's life was more interesting than his art. That's my Matineee d'ivresse ? Yes, but did you think that when you were a teenager? Exactly, he was a poetic prodigy. I really can't put my finger on it but the poems just didn't reach me on an affective/visceral level. They didn't strike me as particularly lyrical like, for instance Rilke can be (which I like). Maybe I've just read too much brut stuff and it's ruined me for it I don't know. RA Reached me on an affective visceral level. But perhaps that was only in 1972 or thereabouts, when my primary reading was greek drama and primary amusement booze. Grew up in a little rural town where recreation was alcoholic, for everyone, really, except the pastor and the priest had to do it privately. And of course my parents didn't drink. Really. There are many many tales from that crazy little village. But they're all too tacky for the present moment of prosperity. AK
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
Terrance, Yes, artists are more spiritual. They've been given that duty. It makes them cease to function properly as people, which is exactly why they should be looked down upon or soundly thrashed by regular people for their friggin pretensions. Yeah, Andy Warhol said "Business is the best kind of art." and a lot of people agree with him. I, however, occupy an oppositional position on this particular matter. Juniper bushes, RA Terrence J Kosick wrote: Terrence writes; Like the way the New Yorker went? Kissing the ass of celebrity? I think Pop anything, its blatant lack of spirituality, its vapiness, is rewarding in a monetary way. That was one of the main points of what Pop was saying about the consumer world was it not? Blazingly so. The most amazing thing is that people actually have satifying jobs and they spend money on the most popular things as a pure utility of pleasure. Spirituality is administerd by the clergy. Thats what makes me worry. Thats what bring protestors out. Do you ever wonder if people actually care about life as much as an artist does? Do artists care more are they more connected? Are they more worldly and spiritual. Over all I think they are. I think pop art is critical of the world in its embrace of its forms. T. Reed Altemus wrote: Heiko YES IT'S A PREJUDICE! At least on my part. I find most Pop art especially abrasive especially Warhol, Hamilton, Palioluzzi (or whatever the hell his name was). I had a long argument with another copy artist about it. I find its blatent lack of spirituality vapid and unrewarding. RA Heiko Recktenwald wrote: I'm not sure that Fluxus is really a part of pop. Pop is very superficial, it only deals with things at surface level. Fluxus is much deeper than that. Isnt this a prejudice ? That POP is superficial. And thanks for the book title, Heiko
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
In a message dated 4/19/00 5:18:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: To my knowledge Ginsberg was never part of Fluxus the only beat who was involved in Fluxus was Brion Gysin and I've found precious little documentation on that. I saw Alan Ginsberg in one of Nam June Paik's videos at the Guggenheim, for what it's worth. Rip Van Wormer
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
I say AMEN, Sol! -Don Boyd Scott's question makes me think that we could profit from drawing up a list of people/movements associated with Fluxus. We could do this over time, next to the name of each person/movement would be a reference to the source which details their involvement in Fluxus. This would be an interesting and rewarding thing to do I think. cheers, Sol.
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
To my knowledge Ginsberg was never part of Fluxus the only beat who was So was Nauman, so what ?
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
To my knowledge Ginsberg was never part of Fluxus the only beat who was So was Nauman, so what ? From this Al Hanson catalogue, I got the impression that the most important time of "fluxus" was the time before the coining of the label, immediately after the Cage class. So who was a "fluxus" member then ? And how important is this label etc.. ? IMHO, might be wrong, "fluxus" members werent the only "fluxish" people. "fluxus" was just a part of pop. "fluxus" philosophy was just a part of pop philosophy. See the artists in "pop architecture", I know that Higgins was VERY proud, that he had made this book, it wasnt "fluxus architecture"...With Richard Hamilton on the coverwho wasnt less "fluxish" than Beuys, who...but this is another story. Heiko
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
I believe Paik did a video called something like "Allen and allan's complaint", which interspersed inteviews with Ginsberg and his dad and groovy paik video effects. Alex From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question) Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 07:21:08 EDT In a message dated 4/19/00 5:18:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: To my knowledge Ginsberg was never part of Fluxus the only beat who was involved in Fluxus was Brion Gysin and I've found precious little documentation on that. I saw Alan Ginsberg in one of Nam June Paik's videos at the Guggenheim, for what it's worth. Rip Van Wormer __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
Heiko wrote: From this Al Hanson catalogue, I got the impression that the most important time of "fluxus" was the time before the coining of the label, immediately after the Cage class. So who was a "fluxus" member then ? And how important is this label etc.. ? Before Maciunas coined the term Fluxus the label describing the kind of work that came to be associated with Fluxus was Neo-Dada. I don't know if the idea of "fluxus" members is relevant this early on. Perhaps one can identify artists working in a certain tradition who were later to be Fluxus members such as Hansen, Higgins, Brecht, Kaprow etc. but that doesn't account for the wider range of artistic practice that Maciunas was eager to include under the umbrella of Fluxus. Heiko also wrote: IMHO, might be wrong, "fluxus" members werent the only "fluxish" people. "fluxus" was just a part of pop. "fluxus" philosophy was just a part of pop philosophy. See the artists in "pop architecture", I know that Higgins was VERY proud, that he had made this book, it wasnt "fluxus architecture"...With Richard Hamilton on the coverwho wasnt less "fluxish" than Beuys, who...but this is another story. I'm not sure that Fluxus is really a part of pop. Pop is very superficial, it only deals with things at surface level. Fluxus is much deeper than that. However many Fluxus artists are probably considered to be pop artists by certain people. I think this is because of the range of work Fluxus people produced. For example, if you look at Al Hansen's Hershey bar wrapper collages you would think of him as a pop artist whereas if you look at his sculptures made from cigarette butts you would see him more in a Fluxus vein even though the subjects depicted (the venus image etc.) are often the same. I'd imagine that some people see "Fluxus" as a part of pop because there is far more literature available on Pop art than Fluxus and many members of Fluxus appear in the Pop art books. I don't know if any members of Fluxus considered themselves pop artists or not..maybe someone knows more about this. Someone like Ben Vautier is perhaps close to pop art but this is probably just an association in my head stemming from the fact that I always seem to see mass-produced Keith Haring multiples next to those by Ben Vautier in the shops. Heiko, I would agree that the Cage class at the New School for Social Research would be the logical starting point for a Fluxus history list. I think at this point Higgins and others were unaware of similar art attitudes in Europe and Japan although these are relevant later I think. BTW - Heiko have you read the "Playing with Matches" book by Beck and Al Hansen...I know you're an Al Hansen fan and I think you'd really enjoy it if you haven't read it alreadyit's still in print and easily available cheers, Sol.
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
To my knowledge Ginsberg was never part of Fluxus the only beat who was involved in Fluxus was Brion Gysin and I've found precious little documentation on that. Indeed, and it's a shame too since what he did was so interesting and crucial (the cut up) Been trying to track down Wm. Burroughs too and little luck with THAT either. RA
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
Heiko There are examples of artists who were notable in Fluxus but also worked in a Pop style. Some Robert Watts work is very Pop and of course the work of Ray Johnson (who dissociated himself from Fluxus and everything else by doing "nothings") is considered very Pop. Also Claus Oldenberg who was associated at certain points with Fluxus but wasn't really Fluxus at all because of the ego problem. You have to remember that many artists associated with Fluxus did work which was not Fluxus and which might have been more Pop and also that the demarkation between Fluxus and other "movements" was at times quite fluid. RA Heiko Recktenwald wrote: To my knowledge Ginsberg was never part of Fluxus the only beat who was So was Nauman, so what ? From this Al Hanson catalogue, I got the impression that the most important time of "fluxus" was the time before the coining of the label, immediately after the Cage class. So who was a "fluxus" member then ? And how important is this label etc.. ? IMHO, might be wrong, "fluxus" members werent the only "fluxish" people. "fluxus" was just a part of pop. "fluxus" philosophy was just a part of pop philosophy. See the artists in "pop architecture", I know that Higgins was VERY proud, that he had made this book, it wasnt "fluxus architecture"...With Richard Hamilton on the coverwho wasnt less "fluxish" than Beuys, who...but this is another story. Heiko
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
Heiko YES IT'S A PREJUDICE! At least on my part. I find most Pop art especially abrasive especially Warhol, Hamilton, Palioluzzi (or whatever the hell his name was). I had a long argument with another copy artist about it. I find its blatent lack of spirituality vapid and unrewarding. RA Heiko Recktenwald wrote: I'm not sure that Fluxus is really a part of pop. Pop is very superficial, it only deals with things at surface level. Fluxus is much deeper than that. Isnt this a prejudice ? That POP is superficial. And thanks for the book title, Heiko
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
Reed: The cut-ups with Gysin and Burroughs were pretty durn fluxian. Check this first site out - also the concordance of Naked Lunch on the same site. The second site has Burroughs reading Gysin. http://www.bigtable.com/ http://www.nigelparry.com/diary/pa/iraq.html one of my favorite bookstores. http://www.citylights.com/beat/CLwb.html Best, PK Reed Altemus wrote: To my knowledge Ginsberg was never part of Fluxus the only beat who was involved in Fluxus was Brion Gysin and I've found precious little documentation on that. Indeed, and it's a shame too since what he did was so interesting and crucial (the cut up) Been trying to track down Wm. Burroughs too and little luck with THAT either. RA
Re: FLUXLIST: Fluxus History (was Scott Rigby's question)
Patricia bigtable is wonderful. I will look at the other later (busy). Having just read Rimbuad's "The Drunken Boat" and "Season In Hell" recently I can say that I infinitely prefer the Burroughs cut-up to the original. It has such great energy. I was completely unimpressed with the "Drunken Boat". It basically does nothing for me. Quite bland. I think Rimbaud's life was more interesting than his art. That's my 2 cents. Thanks for the pointer. You get my vote for best netsurfer on the list today. RA PS Yes, I used to be on the City Lights mailing list but they have stopped sending me catalogues. Yeah, them folks is hard to beat. Patricia wrote: Reed: The cut-ups with Gysin and Burroughs were pretty durn fluxian. Check this first site out - also the concordance of Naked Lunch on the same site. The second site has Burroughs reading Gysin. http://www.bigtable.com/ http://www.nigelparry.com/diary/pa/iraq.html one of my favorite bookstores. http://www.citylights.com/beat/CLwb.html Best, PK Reed Altemus wrote: To my knowledge Ginsberg was never part of Fluxus the only beat who was involved in Fluxus was Brion Gysin and I've found precious little documentation on that. Indeed, and it's a shame too since what he did was so interesting and crucial (the cut up) Been trying to track down Wm. Burroughs too and little luck with THAT either. RA
