Jim sends it back to Larry . . .

jimmason · Post by **jimmason** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:14 pm

Larry's response to the We Have a Dream Petition:
http://www.burningman.com/art_of_burnin ... ponse.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------

We Have a Dream Petition at: http://www.odeonbar.com/petition/1/petition.php?page=1

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's what I see in Larry's response, Jim

"The true leader is always willing to be led" (Carl Gustav Jung)

This is an impressive and well thought out document Larry. A document written like the pro that you are. You proved yourself to be an even more capable and crafty thinker than even I imagined, and you know, my friend, that I have deep respect for you- deep respect for your mind and your imagination. You clearly worked hard for this one- word after word after word. For days on end from what I understand. And from this rigorous and open engagement with all the issues on the table, what did we, the community, get in the end? We got a brilliantly executed smoke screen and word-smithing of the problem away. Whooosssshhh. . . all gone. . . In short, you gave us a 3,251 word exploration of, and elaboration on, the word "NO".

Unfortunately, I have tuned this document upside down, downside up, frontside back and backside front and I can't seem to get any leadership to fall out of it from anywhere. Instead, I find a finely crafted defense on all fronts and general retrenchment falling out all over the floor. In short, you used this grand opportunity to gather the people to give a State of the Man address to instead distract us from the real issues at hand- the state of community inspiration about the event, the awesomness of the art there, and how our grand experiment is going to go forward with beauty into the future.

You really didn't want to see how any of it this could possibly work, did you Larry? Your imagination certainly could have if you wanted to. You are trying really hard to keep your fingers stuck firmly in your ears, aren't you?

Instead of addressing the real and legitimate concerns of the participants, you skillfully and selectively cull from our weakest ideas and thought experiments concerning participant enfranchisement, elaborate on them opportunistically, show logistical "impossibility", and then announce that ALL attempts at enfranchisement around Burning Man processes are logistically impossible. Not even outside panels and guest curators, which most orgs in the world don’t seem too have much problem incorporating, you announce to be a morass of logistical difficulty and technical incompetence. You try to wipe away the entire petition by a long dissection of all the ways any form of voting is impossible, when your very own ePlaya tech admin has said "I am confident we can support the web aspect of this idea" and various other experts in online voting systems have recently come forward to say all this can be done at reasonable effort, technically and logistically. The question only seems to be where and how we might best use some type of voting to most interestingly engage the community in the larger project? We even have volunteers ready to build the system (as in free ones). We can explore the various ways this might work in detail elsewhere. But it is the refusal to engage it positively, and instead go after the ideas in the most opportunistic, negative and, worst case scenario forms that I find most disappointing.

If the people want this, surely we can come up with some checks and balances between the Guest Curators, the LLC, Ladybee, and voting. Voting might only be among those who have purchased thickets for the current year, encouraging people to buy their tickets early, or the enfranchised pool might be the current and preceeding year participants, so we don't exclude anyone, nor include too many. Surely some form of pre-jurying and post-jurying would be needed, and some final discretion to catch and affirm the good that might get missed in the voting. But I am confident the "missed" in some combination of voting and Guest Curation, with collaboration of the LLC/art dept, would be far less that what is missed currently, not to mention that which is not even sought out and cultivated with the present system. MAKE THE NET BIGGER LARRY. We can catch more art. And of course, we will still give you final veto so no sneaky artist tries to propose another AMD (Artwork of Mass Destruction), threatening to suck the very lungs from unsuspecting children at play in grassy fields as far away as Wadsworth. . .

Why do you shrink from such interesting and imaginative challenges Larry? There are so many possibilities here and so many people are experimenting thoughtfully with the ideas. I thought we were an experimental community, open to new ideas and challenges. Now all we get from you is a derisive summary that the whole thing would descend into a "People's Choice Awards" (suggesting that our people are, in fact, idiots and can't be trusted to be self-reliant and informed decision makers, after reasonable packaging of the choices).

Most astonishingly, you go so far as to suggest that democracy *itself* is inherently a fractious endeavor that will divide us and we should be happy for the calm seas of the benevolent dictatorship we currently have. Brilliantly executed Larry. Great to know that Democracies and Republics just don't work in the end. I thank you for this revelation of deep political truth. Oh, and by the way, do you think you might be able to give that Ring back to Frodo? The Ring Larry. Yes, THAT Ring. You should give that thing back to Frodo right about now. That Ring is clearly messing with your mind Larry.

Aside from the MIA on leadership, let's also take a look at what else is MIA in the document. You show not even the slightest inclining of interest in introducing other people into the art curation and decision making process with any real voice. You suggest the need for maybe some extra grunt labor, cause there are going to be so many grant applications this year, but you give no indication of how this potentially new position might be used interestingly to bring in new ideas and visions each year, resulting in guaranteed change each year. Aside from this vague staff addition, nothing is offered. Not a single crumb. Nothing.

No acknowledgement that many feel the event is not on a good path and there is widespread dissatisfaction and unrest amongst the participants as well as the BMorg office staff itself. No acknowledgement there were any real issues with the art this year other than some challenges from the weather (What? Anyone remember the weather in 2000 and the art we had that year? Hint Larry: PEOPLE MAKE ART WHEN THEY ARE INSPIRED). No acknowledgement that we seem to be mindlessly reproducing old forms and ideas and we are desperately in need of an infusion of new blood and inspiration. Just silence on this and silence on most everything else.

Your document shows itself to be an expertly crafted document of defense, and not a document of leadership, by the issues it chooses NOT to engage- issues that we reference throughout the We Have a Dream proposal, issues that have been at the core of the current dissatisfaction and discussion on every online forum, listserv and email exchange around this petition.

Larry, you also skillfully play the "We-San-Francisco-People-Don't-Get-It" card on the regional issue, when our proposal specifically suggests ways to use the guest curators to offer the regionals real and interesting roles around the planning and orchestration of the central event. In fact, the New York and Boston regionals have already voiced their support for the proposal, unsolicited. We have yet to start a discussion with the other regionals, but plan to do so. The online forums have been coming up with more ways for using our basic ideas to greater invest and involve the regionals in concrete aspects of the cultivation, curation and facilitation of art towards the playa, as well as their own regional events.

You call the guest curator idea a myopic SF proposal? Larry, really . . . You cynically list only The Shipyard and The Odeon Bar as example guest curators, when over half of our proposed list is drawn from regional and international groups. Go read the list again. Not a very honest representation of what was proposed Larry. Nor really a good faith effort at considering how these ideas might be interesting, potentially workable, and at the same time IMPROVE regional participation in the main event. You simple brush these ideas off the table, like so many annoying crumbs.

But most disturbingly Larry, you do not comment on the 10,000LB ELEPHANT in the room. That we, as a community, have lost our focus on the ART. That once upon a time, Burning Man was an Art Festival. Now it is a Community Festival. The delicate flower we discovered out in the desert long ago was the realization that collaborative creative work is a radically powerful vehicle for building strong and meaningful community. In fact, it was once argued to be a new founding principle for society itself, or at least you used to like to ramble on at length about this back in the day, and I thought you still believed it. We still believe it. Don't you?

But what do we have now at the event? What we have now is a rather impoverished direct lunge at community in the form of a big hug and vague sense of belonging by gathering for a big party, sparsely decorated with art, with many feeling that a week long E binge is a relevant form of radical self-expression. What we had before, and want to move forward with again, are the deep and strong ties formed in the crucible of WILDLY COLLABORATIVE ART-MAKING, in the harshest of conditions, challenged constantly by our inexperience and inability, but ultimately realized by the people that join together to make it happen- and stay together afterwards as a community as a result. Rastafaran working with Raver working with Redneck working with Yahoo working with Bitter Old Fart - building the fabulous things together and actually not beating each other with hammers in the process.

It was in this crucible of unlikely creative collaboration that we saw the magic happen. It was and is the SECRET SAUCE. You know this to be true Larry. It is the CORE TRUTH of Burning Man and it should be the core truth that we are projecting outwards through the regional communities. It is the mechanism that might truly reform civilization as we know it, if Burning Man does in fact offer this potential in any of its ideas. This is the magic and new discovery we have to offer the world. So why are we hiding it? Why are we deprecating our MASSIVELY COLLABORATIVE and intensely unusual art-making to a simple notion of community with the snake oil cultish promise of "belonging" "identity" and "instant community" under the Burning Man banner?

Again Larry, thank you for your elegantly constructed document. Or rather, maybe I should thank you for this elegantly constructed obfuscation. You make it too easy. Your document is a complete obfuscation of the real issues screaming out from every nook and cranny of the Burning Man community. How can you simply ignore all this dissatisfaction, unrest and people simply walking away in droves in frustration. The current state of affairs is not the rosy bloom and calm sea you suggest in your note. Larry, let me say this clearly again: WE DO NOT WANT TO LOSE EVERYONE! WE DO NOT WANT TO LOSE THE MAGIC! WE DO NOT WANT TO LOSE THE ART!

Why in the face of these challenges, in the face of so many diverse voices standing up to say they want change and they want this project to be vital again, do you not offer us visionary leadership? Visionary leadership is what you are all about? You can conjure it up like few others on the planet. So why didn't you offer it here? Why instead do you respond to this upwelling of passion, reawakened interest and attempt at creative thinking with a simple dismantling of our first imaginings of possible solutions. WE ARE TRYING TO IMAGINE HOW TO MAKE THINGS BETTER. Can't you engage with us on this and make our ideas better? Or would you rather just eviscerate the loose ends of our first thoughts so you can keep it all for yourself and your immediate circle? I thought you said in your text that, "Burning Man belongs, in fact, to everyone who gives to it. . ." In truth, that does not really seem to be the case.

What have you offered us in the end Larry? You have offered us nothing. The answer is: "We own it all". The answer is: "Everything is just fine as it is." Did everyone hear else hear that throughout the document? "EVERTHING IS JUST FINE AS IT IS RIGHT NOW SO LEAVE US ALONE". "Maybe we'll tweak some things here and there, add a little money, be explicit about the number of funded projects that can deviate from the theme or interactivity requirements, but the system is sound and producing good things". In short: "We are not interested in your input. We don't want you participating in the process, but we *do* want you to "participate" and we will continue to affirm "participation" on every document and communication related to the project. What?

Kinda rough Larry, but at the same time, it was a damn smooth read on the first pass. So smooth, so seductive, so calmly in control of the "facts". I felt like I was listening to Cheney in the debate. Wow! No wonder all those Nevada politicos ultimately fell to your schemes. As usual, I continue to be amazed by and learn from your force of will and strength of intellect- even when misguided and in opposition to what so many people out here are saying they desperately want to build together with you.

So Larry, I congratulate you. That was an extremely impressive bashing of the ball back across the net. I think I was still feeling the wind at my face for at least an hour after the ball flew by. The wind has now subsided a bit, but I'm still not really sure where the ball went. Do you know? I can't see it? Can you? Can anyone else around here see it? Maybe there was, in fact, no ball?

What I do know now is that this is going to take some work. Larry is not going to swallow the populist pill easily, in any form. It is going to take lots of discussion, collaboration and organizing amongst the community. The community wants to find some appropriate modes of enfranchisement so as to more interestingly give away their creativity. And we are going to figure out a way that Larry will have to accept this trade of increased creativity for increased enfranchisement- which anyone not in possession of that damn Ring would only see as fair and right.

Unfortunately Larry, you have now said clearly in public and for all to see, that you are not interested in allowing any new forms of community input, co-curation or co-orchestration of the art at the event. You want to run it by yourself with your immediate posse. And that we should just stay out of things. You want it to stay just as it is right now. If that is the case, we should expect this to produce about the same results as seen in 2004. And that, as we all know, is not acceptable.

So what do we do now everyone? Larry has clearly dropped the vision ball. Do we want to pick it up off the ground? And if we do, what are we going to do with it?

Jim

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:31 pm

jeeezzz

jimmason · Post by **jimmason** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:52 pm

well, you guys are always asking me for more details, so i have to write more details. and details added to details lead to length which leads to annoyingly long things to read. so there . . . ;-)

to really flush out how the voting and guest curation thing might work, we are putting together some doc just on that, in detail.

but many are doing the same already in the tribe forums, not so much here for some reason.

again, the point was to frame some goals and provide some initial forays into potential solutions towards them. they are not the only solutions. how we propose to use guest curators or direct voting is not the only way to do it. many of you have come up with better ideas. they will be incorporated.

so if there is a hole in our presentation, i request that you not treat it as a hole in the argument or validity of the goals. rather, treat it as an opportunity for someone to think about how to fill it with an idea, or 10 ideas.

we are just the framers here. the community has to build out the rest of the house. or decide they think our framing is crap and start again with a new frame. or agree the current house is working just fine and leave it as it is.

j

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 12:06 am

um,

double jeeeezzzz.

jimmason · Post by **jimmason** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 12:17 am

ummm. . . what is the jeeezz theme?

i am an athiest. i don't understand these christian things too well.

might you elaborate on the "jeeeezz" a bit?

j

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 12:24 am

jimmason wrote:ummm. . . what is the jeeezz theme?

i am an athiest. i don't understand these christian things too well.

might you elaborate on the "jeeeezz" a bit?

j

Oh Jeeeezzzzzzz.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 12:25 am

my head is starting to hurt......Jeeeeeezzzzzz.

Tancorix · Post by **Tancorix** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 1:39 am

Jim Mason posted a reply to Larry's letter. This is my response...it's raw, emotional, but it is what it is.

After reading through the petition, Larry's response and now this...I find myself questioning both and their intentions. I'm trying to apply critical thinking processes, trying to give each a fair and unbiased assessment, and make a decision as to who's beliefs I support. And it's been hard to do.

I have two sayings that I repeat constantly: 1: And this too shall pass. 2: The only thing constant is change. Those words have given me comfort and helped me push out of safe waters and on to explore things. And those words are in my thoughts right now as I type this. With that being made clear......

I am siding with Larry and his view. I know that art was important to BM, and will continue to be important to the event. But it should not become the primary focus of the event like Jim would have it if he gets his way. To me, the art is important, but it's just a backdrop. I go to BM for the community it offers, for the people that are there. It's the people I care about. Here I sit 3 months after the event and while I have fond memories of the art, it's the people that attended who I think about the most. Those people are the ones I have linked up with after the event. I am involved with the eplaya, Tribe, the KC regional group and the 3playa. The art is gone, much of it packed away, burned, whatever. Yet the people are still here. The spirit, the creativity, the inspiration lives on and empowers me 1800 miles away from the playa.

Larry's focus on the regionals and expanding the event will let others build the same ties and connections that I have. Ones that will inspire them year round. Ones that can change others around them, then expand on to a regional or even national level. To subscribe to Jim's vision is to limit the event to an art festival. BM is not an art festival anymore than it's considered a rave or a big party. It's got parts of those things but that's not all it is.

I honestly tried to give Jim my support. But I feel that he's out of touch with the reality on the ground. You can't go forward with your life if you're always looking back or trying to recreate the good old days. The event has changed, adapt with it. Larry has laid out a vision I agree with. It offers growth, it offers diversity, it's so much more complete than Jim's vision.

Another concern with Jim is the overall hostilty in the posts. The posts are dripping with anger, with a desire for control. I wonder if Jim has fallen victim to the lure of the almighty dollar and this is just a power play to capture more of BM's funds to further his own personal agenda? Does he really care about art as much as he says? Or is this really about money and power? It's hard to tell but the gut check says that instead of accusing Larry of rolling out smoke and mirrors, he's just as guilty.

I've followed this since it began, I've tried to not take sides and I've flipped flopped back and forth. Jim's latest rant pushed me off the fence. I'm throwing my support behind Larry and his vision, I will help the regionals make it happen, and that's where I stand on this issue. Thank you for reading this and letting me vent.

(If I could never return to the playa, the art will not be what I remember most. It will be the friendships I made, and the things I learned from those around me.)

jimmason · Post by **jimmason** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 2:14 am

well, if burning man is no longer interested in building community through the primary vehicle of creative work, i will rest my case and walk away.

that was and is the magic. it is the secret sauce and sacred truth of this whole experiment. this is what build the strongest communities out there and here and elsewhere. and it is what will carry us forward uniquely and powerfully into the future in many lands.

if it seems reasonable to many/most of you that we have and should eliminate the primacy of the vehicle of collaborative creative work towards the end of community, then we have truly travelled much further down the road than i ever understood. or rather, we veered off onto another one.

and yes, if many/most of you see this as primarily a community event, with the art as a nice component, but not THE fundamental tool, then it will truly be time for us to part ways.

maybe this is really the core of the issue here now. thank you for clarifying it so clearly kinetic. wow. really sobering how clear you made the choice. you nailed the options. and the options are two. its an up/down vote. real simple.

larry? ladybee? marian? crimson? harley? m2? will? . . . what is your vote on this issue? no more 3000+ word essays. just a simple vote or sentence or two about what we are about and our core idea(s).

we might, after all, be able to resolve this whole thing in a matter of minutes and be done.

jim

natthebat · Post by **natthebat** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 3:23 am

Kenetic,
Riding the fence causes a rash. Is it the people or is it the art? What were you doing when you loved the people? Probably watching something burn or enjoying some beautifully silly or powerful space. These things were built by people, for people. Someone with love for their craft gave and you gave too. Inspiration in the music and the sights and the people. It is impossible that this place could exist. But it does. The impossible can exist because we are human's and that's what we do. We build. We build together. It is only through our teamwork to survive and create that we grow and live. Therefor, the art and it's creative process are essential to the spirit of Burning Man. If we must adapt in a new direction, it must not be without the art. The art is the pulse of the people. A city with no art is DEAD. Community is not based on the existance of people but rather the presence of their spirit. Humans are not happy if they are not buliding the spirit. The spirit of Burning Man is people investing in the impossible together. Peace be with you, Kenetic.

Jim,
I want you to stay. I love what you're doing in your willingness to stand for something. I think negotiating in the intrest of the complications and details is wise, you have made it clear that you want to. Thank you for helping to start something.

Larry,
You have a lot to think about. It must be a hard job you do and I thank you for doing it. I think you should reconsider your belief in the impossible. I believe you will. I'm not afraid of you.

Natalie

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 3:41 am

Ok,

That's it.........

You guys dont even know what is missing from Burningman.

It's been in front of you guys for years and you did'nt even know it.

You know what Burningman has been missing that it despreately needs something awful?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

ME.

That's right.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 4:10 am

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 5:15 am

Ok.....so the above post was a joke (for those of you that did'nt get it.) and not a very good joke.

But hey, I was sober.

Man I'm never doin that again.

Papa Bear · Post by **Papa Bear** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 7:08 am

jimmason wrote: and yes, if many/most of you see this as primarily a community event, with the art as a nice component, but not THE fundamental tool, then it will truly be time for us to part ways.
jim

You're right, Jim. This may well be one of the fundamental disconnects at the source of our disagreement.

To me, the single most important aspect of burning man is the creation of a space that provides these things for it's participants:

a) a safe space to express themselves and their creativity in ways that might not be accepted in their everyday lives.

b) the power and responsibility to create their own experience, rather than have someone else create it for them.

Those two key ideas naturally create a fertile ground for art. They also create fertile ground for transformational spiritual experience, public nudity, intimate conversation, close-knit community, marathon dance sessions, sexual experimentation, drug use, general lunacy, and one heck of a camping trip.

IMHO, when you say it's all about the art, you confuse cause and effect. You're picking one item from the list of effects, and defining it as the core of all that is burning man. That's a fine thing for your own personal definition. But other people resonate with other items on that list. You can't expect art to be primary to them, any more than they can expect what motivates them to be primary to you.

You've contributed a great deal to the event in the past, Jim. And while the tone and presentation of your petition irritated me to no end, there's no question that you've also contributed a lot of ideas and energy to the discussion of how to make burning man a better place for art. It would be sad to see you walk away from all of it, and I hope that doesn't happen. But in the end, you have to do what feels right to you.

Zulegoona · Post by **Zulegoona** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 10:50 am

I started to try to pull the points out of the rhetoric of all three issue posts late last night but fuck all the hard core analyses I was planning to do today. Kintic and Papa Bear's posts got to the point beautifully.
Maga art and architecture isn't cheep to make transport, assemble or operate if it requires gas or electricity. I can appreciate the need for there to be grants to pull some of them off. Particularly the iconic pieces of the Man that represents the secular side of the community and temple or something to represent the spiritual esthetic side of the community are important for the community to support.

That said I don't think funding is or should be required for building community through the primary vehicle of creative work directly. A focus of creating the environment and facilitating the community to bond by creating art on it's own is more important. We may not all be professionals or sculptors but we are all freed by Burning Man to explore our creative facilities in our own ways. The quality of the art isn't really even all that important it's the act of making it that is. That is the true populist aspect of Burning Man not having the power to decide what someone else is going to make. I do like having more of the Maga pieces supported they do help create the environment but they really aren’t as important as the smaller pieces created by small groups, on their own.

jimmason · Post by **jimmason** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 4:11 pm

zulegoona,

i don't find this to be a debate about mega art versus the vast array of personal expressions on scales other than mega. i think that is a misreading of the docs we have put forward and the discussion that has followed.

creative expression should and needs to happen on all scales. and yes, often the most interesting stuff is very intimate and easily misable. i reference those sorts of truths in various lines in the original prop. my art project two years ago was simply welding the steel pot holding an orchid to the bed of my crane truck, and then through doting care and constant fussing with a mister and muslin, trying to keep it alive for a week on the playa- despite brutal heat, heavy construction taking place all over with the truck, drunken humans on the truck constantly, and general stupidity on all fronts. cost? 18 dollars. and it was one of my favorite projects ever.

i think i was the first recipient of any appreciable art grant from burning man. in 1997, larry gave me $4500 to build temporal decomposition. see http://www.whatiamupto.com/TemporalDeco ... index.html. at that time, most business with larry was conducted in the International Cafe on Haight Street, in SF, so i took my model in there and made the pitch and he agreed. what followed was an insane odessy that can only be described in hindsight as a misguided adventure of massively delusional hubris to try and build a 40,000 lb ice sundial in the middle of desert, in shear defiance of the blistering august sun. but we did it. it tooks month of work and 100s of people in the end, nearly all of whom i did not know in the beginning and many of whom continue to this day as good friends and community as a result.

you might find it surprising to know that the next year, when larry was proposing to expland the art grants program, that i argued this would be a terrible mistake, and burning man should not give any more money to artists whatsoever, that it should all stay as volunteer efforts and gifts to the community, me included. i argued that if you start giving grants to some, then those who don't get them are going to stop contributing their efforts without grants, and burnnig man will quickly fall apart. larry said no, and argued that he believed the community would understand that pojects of certain scales simply need funding to happen, and that the community benefits of those projects are clear to all, and that it won't lead to resentment and that everyone will continue to volunteer their art when it is of a nature that they can. i told him he was wrong, but time proved him to be right. both funded and non-funded art have coexisted nicely and grown together for 5 years or so.

so the core of this is not about mega art and those who do it wanting more money.

the core of this is about reaffirming creative work as our central tool for creating community, and to do that well, how we need to fix some of our processes so people are INSPIRED again to do the creative work that leads to community. it's very simple: people make art when they are inspired. the current lack of art is a symptom of the people not being very inspired.

so our proposal tries to diagnose why the people are not inspired and offer some solutions that might make them inspired again.

the last tome to larry is really the metadiscussion about who we are as a community and what are our tools towards generating that community. it is long and winding, but i think it gets to the read meat of the matter. i hope you can find the time and interest to read through the whole thing.

thanks for discussing,

jim

Zulegoona · Post by **Zulegoona** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 5:53 pm

To your credit Jim, I've already read somewhere on the boards about a group I think in Detroit that was inspired by all of this discussion to start working on a big un-funded project for next year. Stirring up the community has been doing good things.

samtzu · Post by **samtzu** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 6:49 pm

Jimmason wrote:

well, if burning man is no longer interested in building community through the primary vehicle of creative work, i will rest my case and walk away.

And not a moment too soon...

Jesus-In-A-Jumpsuit (for the Athiest; Jesus was a sorta' spiritual dude) Get a fucking clue! Once again (for the incredibly dense)

1) This is simply a money grab; nothing more, nothing less. This has absolutely nothing to do with Art. This is politics, and really bad politics at that.

2)If you want to bring magnificent art, BRING IT! Don't depend on some organization to provide the funding for you. IF YOU ARE SERIOUS ABOUT YOUR "ART", YOU WILL DO IT ANYWAY!! I really hate to shout, but you don't seem to get it, do you? Van Gogh painted the absolute best fucking art ever painted by anyone, and he only sold two paintings in his entire life, and his brother bought them both!!! Where in the hell is the glory in that? I'll tell you... it was in the Art itself. If you feel that you need to be surported by someone, apply for a grant to the National Art Foundation... they will carefully study your proposal and give it all the consideration it deserves. This 'petition' reeks... fucking REEKS of greed... give it a fucking rest.

3) I am bringing art to the Playa this year, and I am not asking the fucking BMORG for a fucking penny... and I am not an 'artiste' (well, not of your caliber, anyway) and I am doing it simply because I got; a) an idea; and b) a desire to present that idea. Try it... I know you have before, try it again.

4) You have done this before without funding... try it again this year. Check your fucking motives for this petition. Would you still pursue it if you eschewed all financial remuneration? Would you? If you renounced all financial funding for the next five years in exchange for BMORG changing their policy to fit your mold, WOULD YOU STILL PURSUE IT? Think about that before you answer it.... then answer it....

Listen, BMORG is people just like you and me, and they have their weaknesses like you and me, and POWER is one of them. If you are only seeking to shake that power, go for it. They need it. If it is to gain that POWER for yourself... well, fuck that. You need to 'repent' (Christian word; it means "to turn from a course of action or thought") and set yourself on the right course.

Of course, even if you got everyone that ever attended Burning Man to follow you, that wouldn't make you right. Only 'being right' would make you right.

ibdave · Post by **ibdave** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 8:26 pm

[quote="jimmason"]Larry's response to the We Have a Dream Petition:
http://www.burningman.com/art_of_burnin ... ponse.html

Unfortunately, I have tuned this document upside down, downside up, frontside back and backside front and I can't seem to get any leadership to fall out of it from anywhere.

Jim, I think that your hung up on the Leadership . I think that Larry and the LLC are just here to Guide us. In doing so, each and everyone of those attending gets to be their own Leader.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 8:28 pm

OK Ok,

Now I'm not joking............JEEEEEZZZZZZ!

sputnik · Post by **sputnik** » Thu Nov 25, 2004 8:39 pm

Zulegoona wrote:To your credit Jim, I've already read somewhere on the boards about a group I think in Detroit that was inspired by all of this discussion to start working on a big un-funded project for next year. Stirring up the community has been doing good things.

That would be me. I'm tired of hearing from people who live so fricken close to the event complaining about how much their art costs them. I say, don't do it unless you can personally afford it, or have some way to raise the funds. For the past 3 years UberCarney has brought out a 10 ton home built roller coaster from Detroit on a trailer. This was an amazing feat of devotion, time and effort on the part of many people. Mainly masterminded by Len Puch. Some will ask, "Is this really art?" I say yes, but won't answer why here.

Could we get funding for something from the org? According to Larry, we probably could, and it's apparently easy. Will we apply? I don't know, but given that we haven't in the past, I wonder if we will in the future. if it were just me, then no. I would find a way without the org's money.

All I'm trying to do is corral a bunch of people, get them on the same page and make something spectacular for next year. We'll see what happens. Michigan is a big place with burners scattered far and wide. I need to somehow tap into that and use it as a resource rather than allow it to be a hinderance.

Rian Jackson · Post by **Rian Jackson** » Fri Nov 26, 2004 8:49 am

Jim, your plans for enfranchisement would make sure i don't vote. Why? I never know if i'll be in the country that many months before. And i buy my ticket from those who need to sell theirs, so i'm on no official lists. yet word has it i'm a burner. word has it i bring art. word has it there's photographic and written proof that i'm part of this community. but i guess i'm not as good as you are, am i???

btw, INSPIRE YOURSELF.

sparkletarte · Post by **sparkletarte** » Fri Nov 26, 2004 8:55 am

it's very simple: people make art when they are inspired. the current lack of art is a symptom of the people not being very inspired.

I don't think giving people money makes them inspired, except in the way that it inspires them to spend more money. In fact, having less money can be more inspiring, because then you are forced to be very, very creative and clever with that which you do have.

Rian Jackson · Post by **Rian Jackson** » Fri Nov 26, 2004 8:56 am

Jim Mason wrote:when your very own ePlaya tech admin has said "I am confident we can support the web aspect of this idea"

cites?

technopatra · Post by **technopatra** » Fri Nov 26, 2004 11:14 am

Jim is referring to a private email I sent to the Project staff list, and cc'd him out of courtesy, in my first response to the petition.

I stated that the idea of voting was worth discussing, and that I believed we were technically capable of it - but I qualified that to refer to a different process than in the petition - if we did it another way, e.g Larry & LadyBee et al pick "finalists" for folks to vote on.

I initially thought the idea of sharing the final decisions had some merit, as a way of getting people interested and invested in the art before they got to the playa. I felt that if more folks felt this going to the playa, their would be a ripple effect of respect for the art, respect for the artists, respect for other particiants and so on.

I subsequently learned more about the funding process, like the sheer numbers of proposals that come in and the fact that folks send models & other not easily webified media, and about the need for dicussion among the deciders, Larry, LadyBee & Crimson. While I still believe it is technically feasible, I am no longer certain that the web team has the resources to do it without de-prioritizing our other work - which I am not in favor of, nor am I entirely sure that we could convey the power of some of the proposals. I am also no longer in favor of it based on two of the reasons Larry described in his response - the probablity for popularity contest mentality in group selection, and the lack of actual artistict talent inherent in the populist selection process. I had only to remember something that happened in 2003 to exemplify this:

I go into the office for team meetings and occasionally just to do work. When the proposals start coming in , they get displayed around the office., someitmes intentioally and sometimes just because they need a counter to sit on. During the grant period for the 2003 event, there was one model that was in the middle of the office for a couple of weeks. It was a couple of styrofoam pieces glued and strung to some plastic pieces in a rough circle. I remember passing it several times that month, every time think, "man, that is going to totally suck, I SERIOUSLY hope they don't fund it. It literally irritated me when I saw it.

Well, it turns out I was wrong. The Temple of Gravity was one of the most powerful pieces ever seen on the playa. And had it been up to me, I'd have turned it down. I think that the web interaction model will allow peopel to do what I did - make uninformed decisions because some, perhaps most will look at the picture and make a judgement, and not read the actual intent and logistics. Or if they do, they wouldn't be able to visualize itthe way the artist does. Seeing the potential in a model really isn't a talent everyone has.

I don't care what anyone says, I have seen both Larry & LadyBee's art criticism at work and I have respect for both of their aesthetics and confidence that they do indeed pick the best pieces. I did not know of Crimson's involvement at the time of the original posting but the same goes for her.

Jim sends it back to Larry . . .

Jim sends it back to Larry . . .

details . . .

um . . .

Re: um . . .

wow, stunned again.

Re: wow, stunned again.

mega art

Re: Jim sends it back to Larry . . .

~