i think that John's response is a bit harsh, but....

some bozo posted this to the front of Rhiz and that's just stoopid.
it's fine for all of us on RAW to goof around with this stuff but
it's not suitable for the folks who wish to have the content filtered
a bit. the bozo should be relieved of his SU privileges.

At 7:09 -0700 7/16/03, Michael Szpakowski wrote:
><zip code
> nonsense>
> Unlike British postal codes in which the numbers and
>letters are arranged in an altogether more attractive
>and satisfying fashion.
> Little Englandism - alive and kicking within our own
>august arts council!
>michael
>--- john hartley <john.hartley@artscouncil.org.uk>
>wrote:
>> I'm sorry Curt,
>> but I resent this.

--
<twhid>
http://www.mteww.com
</twhid>

this one looks more interesting:

http://capefearfair.com/

wonder if de niro will be there?

++
my niece is going to show her pygmy goats again at the Lorain County
Fair which takes place in Wellington, Ohio, USA, Earth, Sun System,
Milky Way, the universe. ;-)

I was never into that stuff when i was a kid, but the fair is kinda
like a once-a-year woodstock for rural kids in the USA. The
fairgrounds is like a magical, free place where all their friends
are, parents who let them roam, no school, barely any rules or
responsibilities (except taking care of the animals), carnival rides,
junk food and (usually) romantic trysts (making out behind the hog
barn... what could be more romantic?)

++
and so, yeah, no matter how much I would like to distance myself from
my Ohioan farmer roots. voila :-)

++
what the f is HCCA?
--
<twhid>
http://www.mteww.com
</twhid>

that would be North Carolina, USA

http://www.ncgov.com/

>I'm sorry Curt,
>but I resent this.
>don't really care that this has nothing to do with net art, the net
>or art. Sure, it's really important and healthy that a community
>should try and grow through sharing broad interests and social,
>easy-going stuff. But where the hell is NC? I've never heard of NC
>is that somewhere in america (giant trucks are mentioned)? I have
>gathered that I am obliged to learn some trivia like zip code
>nonsense in order to make sense of the mass media that the US
>dominates. But the Rhizome community should have more egalitarian
>ambitions because of our use of the WORLD wide web. After all, I
>wouldn't invite you to local east london social events without
>making clear very early in the message that they were in London and
>that London was in England.
>Remember there are three W's.
>
>I do hope you enjoy your party in NC.
>
>curt cloninger wrote:
>

--
<twhid>
http://www.mteww.com
</twhid>

>My most recent grant rejection was almost entirely conceptual art. It has
>proven to me: Conceptual art is not a good foundation for a grant
>application.
>

MTAA hasn't quite figured that one out yet.

>As a conceptual artist, could I write a proposal to a grant committee that
>says my piece is based on thier rejection of my application, and that
>payment is to be expected in full if they reject said application? They
>would then have no choice but to accept, and pay me anyway. It may be weak
>ideologically, but it might just get me paid, and I owe money on a new
>Hyundai.
>
>Ultimately, this is the value of performance art, yeah?

i'm not sure i know what you mean...

the ultimate value of performance art is getting paid?

--
<twhid>
http://www.mteww.com
</twhid>

On Monday, July 14, 2003, at 08:08 PM, Mark River wrote:

> http://tinjail.com/promise.html

i think 15, 16, 18 and 32 are very relevant.

Sentences on Conceptual Art

by Sol Lewitt

1. Conceptual artists are mystics rather than rationalists. They leap
to conclusions that logic cannot reach.
2. Rational judgements repeat rational judgements.
3. Irrational judgements lead to new experience.
4. Formal art is essentially rational.
5. Irrational thoughts should be followed absolutely and logically.
6. If the artist changes his mind midway through the execution of the
piece he compromises the result and repeats past results.
7. The artist's will is secondary to the process he initiates from idea
to completion. His wilfulness may only be ego.
8. When words such as painting and sculpture are used, they connote a
whole tradition and imply a consequent acceptance of this tradition,
thus placing limitations on the artist who would be reluctant to make
art that goes beyond the limitations.
9. The concept and idea are different. The former implies a general
direction while the latter is the component. Ideas implement the
concept.
10. Ideas can be works of art; they are in a chain of development that
may eventually find some form. All ideas need not be made physical.
11. Ideas do not necessarily proceed in logical order. They may set one
off in unexpected directions, but an idea must necessarily be completed
in the mind before the next one is formed.
12. For each work of art that becomes physical there are many
variations that do not.
13. A work of art may be understood as a conductor from the artist's
mind to the viewer's. But it may never reach the viewer, or it may
never leave the artist's mind.
14. The words of one artist to another may induce an idea chain, if
they share the same concept.
15. Since no form is intrinsically superior to another, the artist may
use any form, from an expression of words (written or spoken) to
physical reality, equally.
16. If words are used, and they proceed from ideas about art, then they
are art and not literature; numbers are not mathematics.
17. All ideas are art if they are concerned with art and fall within
the conventions of art.
18. One usually understands the art of the past by applying the
convention of the present, thus misunderstanding the art of the past.
19. The conventions of art are altered by works of art.
20. Successful art changes our understanding of the conventions by
altering our perceptions.
21. Perception of ideas leads to new ideas.
22. The artist cannot imagine his art, and cannot perceive it until it
is complete.
23. The artist may misperceive (understand it differently from the
artist) a work of art but still be set off in his own chain of thought
by that misconstrual.
24. Perception is subjective.
25. The artist may not necessarily understand his own art. His
perception is neither better nor worse than that of others.
26. An artist may perceive the art of others better than his own.
27. The concept of a work of art may involve the matter of the piece or
the process in which it is made.
28. Once the idea of the piece is established in the artist's mind and
the final form is decided, the process is carried out blindly. There
are many side effects that the artist cannot imagine. These may be used
as ideas for new works.
29. The process is mechanical and should not be tampered with. It
should run its course.
30. There are many elements involved in a work of art. The most
important are the most obvious.
31. If an artist uses the same form in a group of works, and changes
the material, one would assume the artist's concept involved the
material.
32. Banal ideas cannot be rescued by beautiful execution.
33. It is difficult to bungle a good idea.
34. When an artist learns his craft too well he makes slick art.
35. These sentences comment on art, but are not art.

First published in 0-9 (New York), 1969, and Art-Language (England),
May 1969
--
<t.whid>
www.mteww.com
</t.whid>