|
|
Re: Feedback on Articles
Posted:
Apr 6, 2005 9:27 AM
|
|
> Re:
> <Posted: Mar 28, 2005 4:05 PM
> I am wondering about the quality of thought in our
> communal exchange.
> Has it improved over our intial establishment of this
> post?
>
> coyote infinity>
>
> The above appears to be a valid question, to which I
> have seen no replies. Allow me to offer my
> perspective...
>
> I have not been involved since the "initial
> establishment of this post". However, I note:
> - the subject of this thread is officially "Feedback
> on Articles". I have seen (in my limited
> participation) very little that is specifically tied
> to any "Articles".
Welcome Jim to the "play". This is not a "blog" format that is controled by a singular ego or group. The beauty of these post is that very different and very real people can come into this space and "speak" freely. Those of us who seem to be "regulars" have over time created a "community" of sorts. The Nature of conversations on posts is beyond the control of any single person. That is a very beautiful thing. If you will recall your own oppression in other "artists spaces"(Artrujillo comes to mine) you can perhap appreciate that we accept each other in our own individual "voice". This is "real" democracy of discussion in a very undemocratic time in Minnesota Art history.
There are some that will agree with you that we should "stay to topic" in there "control issue world" I am sure they are right. But this is truly "free space". Most of those people would not understand the beauty of the MAS posts. In my harshly critical oppinion of art( and you have suffered my criticism of your work so you can gage that I do not give praise easily) the MAS posts are some best written responses to articles that this post is themed around.
> - Certain contributors appear to be very active (Ray
> Rolfe, Posts: 2,444 / Gabriel Combs, Posts: 1,174 /
> jaime longoria, Posts: 900 / Sam Spiczka, Posts:
> 1,464). This is not bad in itself, just revealing as
> to who is participating (and begs the question: Why
> do they participate?).
Each of us has his own reason.
I utilize this great venue to commune with the Artists that seek ideas on art. It has amazed me how "read" "Coyote" in all of it's forms. Although the "counters" can be manipulated, I have recieved enough "out of the Blue" emails from "lurkers" telling me that they enjoy our exchanges with much interest. I email about 15 regular "Coyote" followers when ever I engage anyone in an interesting "play of ideas".
I don't know if the counters
> are accurate.
> - Many of the postings I have read leave me baffled.
> Perhaps it is partly because of my lack of experience
> in this mode of discussion. But it is also obvious
> that certain posters do not proof-read nor edit their
> writing before hitting the "Post Message" button;
> they throw in references which are not widely
> understood nor explained; quote other posts without
> proper pointers to the original; and give the
> impression
"...impressions are a sign of a subjective disconnect,.... What is in front of you, that truly is new, is often baffling because of the person's lack of experience. But given time and an open heart on life can be understood. You need only to open your mind and leave your old grudges behind.
coyote infant at play"
of being more interested in the Play of
> participation rather than the Work of communication.
>
>
> En fin, my opinion is that the "the quality of
> f thought in our communal exchange" could be
> improved.
Each day Jim when I undertake my daily defecation I attempt to "improve", but sadly, in brutal honesty ofself evaluation I find it is pretty much the same old stuff, just different day.
FYI This post almost died. It was revived by a "play". It is hard work to keep Artists interested in meaningful issues when thier careers call.
It is a chitty job but some has to do it.
Some of us have lost long posts due to the "Spell Check" gremlins, so we are intent on impressing you with "lit. Stylings" that is best left to the "writers". We are more intent in talking about the worthless bribble of rah rah criticism. We are more intested in "ideas". Can you handle that Jim?
We are hear not patt each other on the back, but to the get at ideas; style and form of writing really don't matter here; it is "content" that is important. So welcome Jim.
And let's see what you really think about Art Ideas.
coyote infinity
|
|
