KEITH ROWE SERVES IMPERIALISM
w.m.o/r
29
So.
I take it for granted that my caveats on this matter are known well enough. It’s impossible not to deal with the disc’s title; I only wish that Henritzi had stated his case with more clarity so dealing with it, positively or negatively, could have been more easily accomplished. Only about an eighth of the accompanying text—one paragraph—deals explicitly with Rowe (he’s mentioned in one other) and within that paragraph one looks in vain for the term “imperialism”. Much of the remainder of the text appears to deal (the translation from the French is doubtless wanting so additional caveats may apply) with Henritzi’s, and Bailey’s as well, dissatisfaction with the idea of recordings of improvisatory music, its commodification and reduction in many cases to “wall paper”. I take it he holds Rowe at least partially responsible for this.
The portion dealing with Rowe takes him to task, implicitly, for impugning Bailey as a practitioner of the “old language”, a distortion of was actually said and meant in the interview in question. But even if so, does categorization in terms of aesthetic advances automatically connote imperialism? When punks derided the excesses of prog and other pop forms in early 70s, were they imperialists? Were boppers who found Dixieland to be old-fashioned imperialists as well? Henritzi also, if I’m understanding correctly, lowers in value Rowe’s horizontalization (to coin a phrase?) of the guitar, asserting that the action was merely an extension of Cage’s prepared piano, which is true to an extent, and Hawaiian flat guitar playing, a more questionable point. He disagrees that introducing the radio into improvised music brings the outside world into the performance space. Rather, a performer doing so is merely “widening the concert hall.”
All well and good, though what this has to do with imperialism I’m hard put to say. Reading into it, I suppose one could argue that Henritzi is charging Rowe with cultural imperialism by virtue of implying that his (AMM’s) approach to improvisation is more profound or at least “newer” than Bailey’s. One could argue that but, in my understanding of the term, there needs to be a certain amount of coercive power behind any desire to force other people to come around to your aesthetic view before you can be branded “culturally imperialistic”. It’s risible enough when one understands what tiny numbers of interested parties exist in the first place, more so to think that any of them are likely to be forcibly swayed simply because one generally admired practitioner states an opinion.
Did I say “generally admired”? Ah, here’s something else that is perhaps hinted at in this text but has certainly come up in other group discussions over the years: that there exists a certain hierarchy in this music, Rowe positioned as eminence grise (or even “pope”!) with acolytes doing his evil bidding in the improvised world, allowing this but not that, garnering this recording here, nixing that one there. All artists refusing to kowtow before him are vanquished with a sneer. The very idea that some listeners can “rank” musicians and find themselves generally enjoying the work of one more than another on a fairly consistent basis smacks of imperialistic tendencies, of somehow enforcing a hegemony of taste onto the bovine masses. Throw in one pre-eminent label in the field and a producer who largely shares Rowe’s predilections and I guess for some people you have the eai equivalent of Blair and Bush, right? Stuff and nonsense, says me, but the issue surfaces surprisingly often.
Perhaps others can interpret the tract in a clearer manner. When Henritzi replied to a thread about the recording on I Hate Music, his response basically boiled down to an assertion that there’s a lot of uninteresting music being created and recorded these days in this field, not the most startling or provocative declaration. If he was simply taking the Tilbury-esque tack and criticizing Rowe for playing in the US, recording for US labels, etc., I assume he would have come out and said so. There’s also the unseemly aspect of knowingly wishing to cause some amount of personal pain for the individual under attack, someone who’s fought, implicitly and overtly, imperialist tendencies throughout his career. I get the sense that some Dadaist aesthetic was involved, of simply casting about to find an individual held in high regard and asserting that this regard itself is reason enough to pull him off of whatever pedestal he’s claimed to be perched upon. One might ask why append this to a recording and, if one is doing so, why not allow there to be some obvious connection to the music? If it’s there, I can’t hear it.
Oh yes, the music. It’s actually pretty good, at least in part. There are four tracks, duos placing Henritzi with, in order, Shin’ichi Isohata, Bruce Russell, Mattin and Taku Unami. “Duos” in the sense of two musicians occupying each track—in all cases the music was produced in separate locations, at different times. Henritzi himself, if I understand the notes correctly, did not “improvise along” with the others’ music. Instead, the improvisation takes place “just through this arbitrary collage”; i.e., he chose which layer(s) of his music to overlay and intermix with which ten minutes (he chose to cut matters off at the 10-minute mark) of his collaborators. Given that aside from its title and text, the disc is dedicated to the memory of Derek Bailey and Masayaki Takayanagi, it may not be totally surprising to hear the former channeled in track 1, but it does force one to ask, “I guess imitation is anti-imperialistic?” I was previously unfamiliar with Isohata’s work but see that he was a student of Takayanagi’s and is something of a devotee of Bailey. In fact, noticing that Henritzi is credited with turntable on the piece, I’m not at all sure he wasn’t simply spinning some Bailey. Either that or Isohata’s doing a pretty fair imitation. In either event, the music is solid enough, though unexceptional, more improvisatory competence, as it were, than inspiration. Had it issued forth from, say, Henry Kaiser and were it released on Tzadik, I would’ve thought, “Yeah, that sounds about right.”
The pairing with Russell works much better, twin strands of ear-reaming feedback with assorted clanks and bumps. Hard to believe the conjunction of the two approaches was coincidental but, if so, it’s nice serendipity. Some rich sonorities here; I could’ve listened longer. But the track with Mattin, “Independence”, is the real standout on this disc. From Henritzi’s initial hammering (literally) of the guitar (hmmm, could Rowe have been in mind?) to the fuzzed, gravelly noises emerging via Mattin, it’s strong, rough, consistently engaging. In short, a helluva piece. Unami’s cut, unsurprisingly, is a tougher go and not entirely unrewarding but strikes this listener as a bit too scattershot and flailing. Henritzi manipulates a jack, presumably jostling it into and out of its socket, with Unami bleeps away at his computer. I’ve tended to find Unami more absorbing in live performance where the tension he creates with regard to “success” versus extreme likelihood of “failure” can be very exciting, not to mention the sheer fun of his toys.
So, a mixed bag sonically, though well worth hearing. If it pains you to purchase something so carelessly titled, you’re in luck since, as always, you can hear—and read—for yourself for free at w.m.o/r
Posted by Brian Olewnick on January 27, 2007 7:58 AMAs usual, Brian's first to nail a review! My own thoughts (along the same lines) in a month's time. The music is fun, and I enjoyed all four tracks, probably more than you Brian. The title's pure hard sell masquerading as (sick)joke; kind of ironic from a self-declared anti-capitalist like Mattin.
Posted by: Dan Warburton at January 27, 2007 10:07 AMMy first reaction to the title was as a joke also, something along the Dadaist lines I mentioned above. It may well be the case but, as with most jokes, the more I thought about it, the more I thought there was serious (if misguided) purpose lurking beneath. At the very least, were it only a joke, you might expect that they would have let Rowe in on it in advance; that would seem to have been the humane thing to do. btw, though it sounds like a Mattin line to me, since it was issued under Henritzi's name, I was ascribing it to him. I could easily be wrong about that; if so, please advise.
Posted by: Brian Olewnick at January 27, 2007 10:19 AMHK's new Tzadik disc is great. It is tough be objective about a good friend, but I think he is playing better than ever.
Posted by: damon Smith at January 27, 2007 10:30 AMUmm, don't see the link with this thread Damon, but I'll take your word for it :)
Posted by: Dan Warburton at January 27, 2007 11:24 AMI like "horizontilization," Brian.
Posted by: walto at January 27, 2007 1:54 PMI don't share Brian & Dan's po-faced response to the title. I suppose humour's as subjective as musical taste, but I smiled widely when I saw it.
I agree that the actual essay is unclear, not particularly original, and certainly doesn't make a convincing case for Keith Rowe as an imperialist. However I like its spirited defence of Derek Bailey, whose playing never got stuck in a rut of "old language" as far as I'm concerned.
I don't know Henritzi's work, but part of Mattin's interest is that he's always prepared to stir things up and hit out at any received truths. This sometimes makes him seem a bit childish or annoying, sometimes a bit scary, but his playing hits home enough of the time that I allow him some slack.
Whilst I like a lot of Keith Rowe's work, I don't think he should be exempt from either criticism or piss-taking, as long as it's not vicious (which I don't think this is). I'm old enough to remember the fractious 70's in the UK when Cardew led Rowe and a number of others away from fascinating and ground-breaking work to a dogmatic cul-de-sac of Proletarian Music. (And I write this as an old socialist who still thinks Marxism has something going for it if you take it with a pinch of salt) As one of Cardew's eager cultural revolutionaries, Rowe was at the time all too quick to denounce others (including old friends) who took a slightly different position than his own. And his denunciations sometimes were vicious. It's not a period from which he emerges with a great deal of credit.
Which obviously does not mean that what he's done since is tarnished, let alone reactionary. He's played some great music and made some great CD's with AMM and elsewhere. But I don't think you need to rush to his defence with disapproving frowns if Henritzi/Mattin want to cok a snook at him.
Posted by: simon r at January 27, 2007 1:59 PM--I like "horizontilization,"
I went back and forth between that and deverticalization...
Simon, had the disc been issued with the title and no accompanying essay or had the essay not referenced Rowe or been written in a lighter tone itself, I too would have written it (the title) off as a joke. Perhaps it was still meant to be but when Michel responded at IHM, I didn't get that sense. In fact, in that response he basically says that the title was his own. He also implies that Rowe was chosen simply because of his icon status in the field and that icons shouldn't be above criticism. Well, of course not and some things he's been involved with, including the Peoples Liberation Music you cite above are highly criticizable, no problem. Other things that I happen to enjoy, I also have no issue reading criticism of. Why on earth not?
But Cardew wasn't joking when he wrote about Stockhausen, however much we can argue about the validity of his point. By repositioning Rowe in Stockhausen's place, I can only assume, absent other evidence to the contrary, that Henritzi isn't joking either. Again, all well and good, people are free to believe that. I'd just like to see some more specific support for the imperialist position, more than just "cocking a snook" (lovely phrase, that!) else why use the term?
Posted by: Brian Olewnick at January 27, 2007 2:52 PMSimon, it's just a pretty shoddy essay, as we've discussed in depth here (both Michel and Keith have weighed in).
http://ihatemusic.noquam.com/viewtopic.php?t=5691
Michel made up half of the quote he attributes to Keith, the other part is from a 4-5 year old Wire article by our friend DW, and is obviously at least slightly out of context. Keith clarifies what he meant by it in the above thread. no one's above criticism, but making up quotes is lame, no matter who does it.
I haven't heard the record, not very high on my list.
Posted by: jon abbey at January 27, 2007 3:23 PMthe fact that cardew wasn't joking about stockhausen shouldn't imply that henritzi isn't joking. it's not funny to retell a joke. cardew's title is ripe for parody, simply because it is so serious. i wish henritzi hadn't tried to actually support the thesis of his title, because it could have been kind of funny.
it's a good way to get everyone to talk about your CD, though. wasn't henritzi the guy who ran a bruit secret? (having put out toshi's no-input mixer II and dorner's trumpet, i don't see how he can attack abbey and rowe!) i didn't even know the guy made music, and now his CD is getting more press than anything else in the last few months.
Posted by: William Hutson at January 27, 2007 3:26 PMHenritzi made it pretty clear in his statement that the title was not a joke. That excuse can be firmly ruled out. His intentions remain somewhat clouded, but the title was carefully chosen, and by Henritzi not Mattin.
The whole subject has been given a lot more space than it deserves elsewhere, but there is one set of questions that haven't really been discussed that I find odd...
If the CD is such a terrible idea that turns improvised music into a wallpaper-like commodity then why on earth is this piece of music available as a CD to purchase? Surely that, coupled with the fact that Mr Henritzi appears to still be actively distributing A Bruit Secret discs (although the label has ceased new production) and also the fact that Mattin has released more CDs than anyone else I can think of in the last twelve months stacks up to some degree of hypocrisy?
Yes I know that the disc is available for free as a download, as are most of Mattin's other releases, but even so if one of the points of this CD is to show how CDs destroy the purity of improvised music then why can I go into a shop and buy it on a disc? Not that I will be doing so.
Posted by: Richard Pinnell at January 27, 2007 3:46 PM"Yes I know that the disc is available for free as a download, as are most of Mattin's other releases"
actually for all of Mattin's talk about making all of his work DLable for free, almost nothing from the past year is up there yet.
http://mattin.org/discography.html
Posted by: jon abbey at January 27, 2007 4:25 PMwell, Mattin makes public only records he put on his own label and records that others agree to go for public download..
he can not make public "Formed"'s albums or "Absurd"'s - but I think those also could be online in some time...
as Mattin's label only is concerned, all its material its up for public download...
greetings from Vienna
Posted by: Jono Abe at January 28, 2007 2:13 AM"he can not make public "Formed"'s albums or "Absurd"'s"
sure, I understand why, but he could of course choose to not release discs on those labels if they didn't let him post them on his site immediately as part of the deal.
and don't steal my Japanese name! :)
Posted by: jon abbey at January 28, 2007 2:39 AM"Jono Abe": I asked Mattin to wait a while before putting S3 and Going Fragile up for free download. I think that this is a fair compromise.
"I asked Mattin to wait a while before putting S3 and Going Fragile up for free download. I think that this is a fair compromise. "
sure, again, I of course know why and it makes sense, Chris did the same thing with the MattinBarnes. but my only point is he made a huge deal of saying "MY WHOLE CATALOG WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR FREE DL NOW", then pretty much just kept doing things the same way he was before that.
a side point to this discussion, not really worth this kind of analysis, just a simple factual point in response to Richard's post.
Posted by: jon abbey at January 28, 2007 8:25 AM"he made a huge deal of saying "MY WHOLE CATALOG WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR FREE DL NOW"
Dear John, you talk much about how bad is to distort quotes is but you do it yourself. Where have I said that my whole catalogue is online?
I basically just did it.
Other people have talked about it, I have just mentioned very few comments on w.m.o/r and on my stands on intellectual property.
When I release something I talk to the labels to arrange a time when I can put them online to let them time to cover the production cost.
Several reviewers have made mistakes saying that everything that I put out is immediately on line .
That is not right and is also not my fault. They just did not check properly my website as you did.
Luka, who seems to be your official spokesperson on IHM, started a thread titled "MATTIN goes completely ANTI COPYRIGHT" last January, contents as follows:
"Hello!
Mattin has taken his anticopyright philospohy to the extreme. His complete discography is now available as a free dwnload from his site:
www.mattin.org/discography.html "
http://ihatemusic.noquam.com/viewtopic.php?t=3522
I notice you didn't chime in to correct him there, that's what I was basing my comments on. and my name is Jon, not John, thanks.
Posted by: jon abbey at January 28, 2007 9:21 AM"Had it issued forth from, say, Henry Kaiser and were it released on Tzadik, I would’ve thought, “Yeah, that sounds about right.”"
Posted by: damon Smith at January 28, 2007 10:19 AMSorry Jon:
At one point all my discography was available, so Luka might have been right.
Unlike you I am not up for policing all the things that have been said about me.
Mattin
"At one point all my discography was available, so Luka might have been right."
no, it wasn't true even then, as that discussion points out.
"Unlike you I am not up for policing all the things that have been said about me. "
ha! is that why every single offhand statement about any of your sets at ErstQuake from the IHM discussion is archived at the link below, including one I made as a joke about a set you didn't even bother showing up for?
http://www.mattin.org/reviews/live+reviews.html
Posted by: jon abbey at January 28, 2007 10:33 AMWhat a nice change of pace!
A fight inside of aebly's little Narnia.
Posted by: uli at January 28, 2007 10:51 AMFrom a dictionary online on policing:
to regulate, control, or keep in order by or as if by means of police.
Which is not exactly the same as just reading, copying and paste. I do not go constantly to people saying you are right or you are wrong.
About Luka as being my official spokesperson on IHM, this is a term which you have invented out of your own conclusions, which basically are far from the truth.
Posted by: Mattin at January 28, 2007 11:12 AM"I do not go constantly to people saying you are right or you are wrong."
isn't that exactly what you're doing here? I mean, with little basis in reality, granted, but you did try.
but I'm aware that's not your general modus operandi: you'd prefer to print and circulate half-assed essays including made-up quotes, and let the world make of it what they will, you're a self-described "provocateur". but evidently you don't like when people say things about you that you think aren't true, and neither do I.
"About Luka as being my official spokesperson on IHM, this is a term which you have invented out of your own conclusions, which basically are far from the truth."
use your own term, he posts all of your doings there, he's also the one who started the thread on the CD formerly under discussion here. but that's besides the point, as you well know.
Posted by: jon abbey at January 28, 2007 11:26 AMI used the word "constantly", didn't I Jon?
Basically I am saying I am not Luka nor Michel.
I gave total freedom to Michel to do a release in my label and he came up with this record, all words are his words (even if the the translation is far from great)
As you are so good at finding the right quotes (and supposed it is not intention to lie or invent):
you're a self-described "provocateur"
Can you find where exactly where exactly have I said this?
I do not recall using this specific term.
I used the word "constantly", didn't I Jon?
Basically I am saying I am not Luka nor Michel.
I gave total freedom to Michel to do a release in my label and he came up with this record, all words are his words (even if the the translation is far from great)
As you are so good at finding the right quotes (and I suppose it is not intention to lie or invent):
you're a self-described "provocateur"
Can you find for me where exactly where exactly have I said this?
I do not recall using this specific term.
I don't see a reference online, maybe you told me in person. if it's an incorrect attribution, I apologize, but I was under the impression it was what you felt your role in this world to be. is that mistaken?
Posted by: jon abbey at January 28, 2007 11:54 AMSee what happens when you start spending more time arguing over words rather than the music they're supposed to accompany (clarify? explain?). If you'd released the album with zero info, Mattin, like Michel did with most of his Bruit Secret releases (a notable exception being the notoriously pretentious verbage that came with Techne by Brandon Labelle), people might discuss the music instead. As it is, Jon hasn't even heard it.
Also (as we've discussed privately, Mattin) next time you use a text of Michel's leave it in the original French or engage the services of a professional translator.
For the record, I have described Mattin as a "provocateur" on a couple of occasions, I think.
"if it's an incorrect attribution, I apologize"
Yes Jon, it is incorrect attribution.
So please, in the future be more careful about criticizing others by inventing or distorting quotes, and do not do it yourself.
I accept your apologies.
In my work I try to bring questions and show contradictions about the specific issues that I am involve. Some of them might be provocative, some of them childish, some of them stupid and some of them interesting.
What it is not that interesting nor provocative is to declare oneself as a "provocateur".
"So please, in the future be more careful about criticizing others by inventing or distorting quotes, and do not do it yourself.
I accept your apologies."
I'm not really apologizing, I'm pretty sure you said it, I just don't have a record. you're also splitting hairs to avoid the main point, which is that Michel's essay is shoddy, and I doubt the original French helps much.
"Some of them might be provocative, some of them childish, some of them stupid and some of them interesting."
now that I'll agree with. :)
Posted by: jon abbey at January 28, 2007 12:29 PMAfter reading the essay, albeit in its awkward English translation, it certainly provoked a few questions on my part:
Is the essay arguing that Mr. Rowe serves imperialism because he releases recordings that serve as wallpaper or that all of his music (live and recorded) is boring or "lacks passion" as seems to be implied in some of the quotes that punctuate the essay?
Is it arguing that a recording of improvised music is by nature dispassionate and wallpaper-like because one is not experiencing the "aura" (no Walter Benjamin references? Quelle surprise!) first-hand? In which case, how is the Mattin record any different? Is the author even asserting that the CD that the essay is appended to isn't also serving imperialism?
Personally, I don't buy the argument that a record available for free download from the musicians' website is any less a commodity (prone to fetishization) than one only available for purchase.
As far as the process for creating this CD, I can see the argument that it somehow has "more integrity" as it was constructed as a recording out of recordings, rather than as a "gratuitous" marketing effort. However, I can also see the response, there isn't much of a difference - the resulting products share the same commodity form.
This essay and discussion reminds me of something John Zorn said at a talk I attended a couple months ago - that he strives to create attractive packaging in order to make his recordings fetishizable objects. What with those orange camo pants of his - in terms of the essay's view of service of imperialism - Rowe's got nothing on Zorn.
Posted by: Sarah Lockhart at January 28, 2007 3:42 PMJON, I AM TELLING YOU:
I HAVE NEVER DESCRIVED MYSELF AS A "PROVOCATEUR"
AND I HAVE NEVER SAID THAT MY WHOLE CATALOGE WILL BE AVAILABLE ONLINE FOR FREE.
One thing is wanting to be always right and another thing is stuffing words in my mouth. Please Jon I am begging you to stop doing this.
Posted by: Mattin at January 28, 2007 6:47 PMwow, all caps, you don't like it when people put words in your mouth, huh? gee, that must be rough for you.
again, I half-apologized for the 'provocateur' thing, although I really think you're just quibbling semantically, you say in the very next sentence that some of your work might be 'provocative'. but I agreed when you said you're more multifaceted than that, as you know I like some of your work, so not sure what your problem is there.
as for the catalogue thing, your problem is with Luka, not me, so take it up with him. if it's really such a misrepresentation, maybe you can clarify it on the IHM thread above, since clearly I'm not the only one who is under a mistaken impression.
Posted by: jon abbey at January 28, 2007 7:32 PMOnce again, Jon “What, Me Worry?” Abbey has vanquished another foe through several rounds of pithy & pointed repartee. Congratulations. Let’s move on.
Posted by: narew ramsh at January 28, 2007 8:16 PMIndeed.
Good questions, Sarah. Yes, the Lester Bangs quote bangs on about passion, but it could refer to any improvised music, it seems. The key to the essay for me is the pair of quotes that opens it: Bangs (again) on the solidification / codification / stagnation of the performance practice (Radu Malfatti's "rules emerged) - what I call Improvised Music as opposed to Improvisation - and Bryars on musicians who work up several "tricks" and pretend they are improvising. Henritzi's working method then, the "blind date" superimposition of solo material to make duos, is an elegant comment on the impossibility of making an improv record. And, yes, Jon, it is better and easier to understand in the original French.
Orange camo pants, yeah!
"Orange camo pants, yeah!"
And this from Monsieur Dan who lives in the fashion capital (arguably) of the world.
Fwiw, during the most recent conversation I had with Mattin I described him as a provocateur, something that he denied vehemently. But, of course, in his performances it would be hard to deny that some of his actions are provocative. I take his point, however, that provoking and proclaiming oneself a provocateur are rather different things.
Also fwiw, provocation only works well in a live situation, when performer and audience are cooped up together. It's hard to feel provoked by a CD or an MP3 download.
Posted by: Bryan Merely at January 29, 2007 1:29 AMSince my name was mentioned by Jon i have to jump in. I am far from being Mattin's spokesman anywhere not only on IHM. I posted threads that Jon mentions cuz i thought they were interesting enough (the first merely as info) and in ''Keith Rowe serves ...'' case to raise a few eyebrows and stimulate discussion which may be interesting. And Mattin is right- when i posted notice about his discography being free online it was almost all of his back then discography there (except some releases that were just out by that time and some he didn't put up there yet). And when the ''Keith Rowe Serves ...'' thread started people immediately linked it to Mattin but it was clear all the time that it was Michel's project, Michel's essay and his title ...
Posted by: lukaz at January 29, 2007 2:47 AMIndeed yes but if I wanted to release an album called F*** You Derek Bailey or Evan Parker Is A Child Of Satan, you would expect, I think, that the label releasing the album would have something to say about it, right? The fact that Mattin OK'ed Michel's album title amounts, as far as I understand it, to tacit approval, so I think it's not unjustified to have a go at Mattin in this particular instance. In any case, we're still going round the houses rapping on about the title and the essay instead of talking about the music, which I'd much prefer to do :)
Posted by: Dan Warburton at January 29, 2007 4:31 AMMay I have a cup of tea please?
Also, Dan, I sent you today the package with the trio at Jemmapes and my last ARR release...
Euuuh... well; I really enjoyed that ROVA thing, pfffouaaa!!!
Ah sorry... euh... is it... ooopps
Best,
Al!!!
Posted by: Bellenger at January 29, 2007 7:15 AMSeems like thought, personal stuff, etc. and music are not really independent spheres in this aomud.
Posted by: schicksal at January 29, 2007 7:17 AMIn fact I should have not said "my last ARR release..." BUT
"my latest..."
I know there will be others... but its not really the question here I think...
in fact with BAGATELLEN I learn HOW TO CHILL OUT
and
LAY BACK
Cooooooooooool
Tranquille
Busy working -
Constance,
Yep,
Regards,
A
(that Rova Ascension was really interesting...)
Posted by: Bellenger at January 29, 2007 7:32 AMMattin:
One thing is wanting to be always right and another thing is stuffing words in my mouth. Please Jon I am begging you to stop doing this.
Jon Abbey:
wow, all caps, you don't like it when people put words in your mouth, huh? gee, that must be rough for you.
again, I half-apologized for the 'provocateur' thing, although I really think you're just quibbling semantically
Walto:
Certain exchanges can be so mysteriously satisfying....
I just read this in the Mattin press page that Jon linked above, and thought it was well worth re-posting here:
"(Mattin's) recent "Body and Linux action" appearance at Ausland was no exception. Setting up camp in the middle of the room, Mattin stoically
stood his ground, silent as a statue, with one hand on the laptop and the other holding a microphone to his unmoving lips for exactly ten
minutes. Knowing what to expect, I pushed plugs deep into my ears while the rest of the audience waited patiently, whispered nervously, popped the tops of their beer bottles or even played solitaire on the "handy" during the strained pause. At the ten minute marker, a massive tone exploded in the room and again Mattin waited patiently (his microphone arm must have been throbbing at this point) the next ten minutes while the sound faded away.
To understand how dangerous and confrontational this strategy can be, consider a London show a week later. Londoners can be several thousand shades less considerate than Berlin audiences, and Mattin's "stand and not deliver" tactics were met with jeers, taunts, shouts, offers for a chair to sit down in and even spit. At the end of this ten minutes, however, Mattin played back the protests of the audience which had been recorded through the microphone in his (trembling?) hand. The whole scene changed, with the hecklers frozen in their tracks. "Thanks for making me look like a dickhead!" one "polite" Londoner shouted back at the end. 'Nuff said..."
Posted by: Gerardo Alejos at January 29, 2007 10:02 AMFYI
http://www.paristransatlantic.com/magazine/monthly2007/03mar_text.html#7
Though you've probably already seen it
.................................................. © 2003 - 2006 bagatellen ..................................................