Nmherman on 18 Dec 2000 21:37:47 -0000

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[Nettime-bold] Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Dear Mrs.C. Herman

In a message dated 12/18/2000 2:46:10 PM Central Standard Time, 
jaimemartins@telus.net writes:

> It needs subtitling before any hopes of
>  exhibition let alone for Steve to review it. He is no doubt as busy and 
> squeezed
>  for time as you are.

It takes five minutes to write an email.  At least 80% of the tape is 
intelligible soundwise, and if you use the Transcripts, it's more like 99%.  
Never forget the meaning of the inaudibility.  So many people do that.  Steve 
didn't say word one about the audio, anyway, when he bought me lunch.  He 
questioned the validity of the utopian elements, chiefly.  (He won't do it in 
public though, no way.)  Eryk, Lichty, and a hundred others have reviewed the 
tape despite the audio, the cheap cover, the fifth-generation image, the 
unscripted conversation, ad infinitum.  Steve has no excuse, so why are you 
sticking up for him?

The only reason Steve won't review it is it's a no-win situation for him.  If 
he says it's bad, everyone will know he doesn't understand it or at least 
refuses to.  If he says it's good, he clears away another blockade of 
non-museum-sanctioned art.  He undermines his own authority.

I don't expect Steve to review it; I expect him to wait and just hope it all 
blows over quick so he can get back to curation as usual.

The problem is, I'm writing a book about Genius 2000 1998-2000, and so is 
Briggs Seekins of the University of Southern Maine.  Both will be on the 
shelves April 2001.  Steve can't win.  It's unfortunate, but when you hold 
yourself up as an authority you expose yourself to criticism.  Perhaps he 
isn't qualified to curate or evaluate my work.  In that case, he should admit 
it and get out of the way.


Nettime-bold mailing list