BM getting too much attention?

[Lakshmi]

So this year will be my first to attend Burning Man and as time has passed since when I was first told about it I keep hearing talk of how Burning Man is beginning to get too much attention. It sounds like more and more people are learning about it not just through friends but also through TV. I haven't paid any of it much mind until tonight when to my surprise I saw it sited in a VH1 show that even had footage from a past event.

All of this has me wondering what long-time burners think of it. Are you concerned that BM is going to start (if it hasn't already) losing its essence with the ever increasing number of attendees?

On the other hand I've heard people have nothing but good things to say about BM so maybe its the type of event where the more really is the merrier.

As for myself, I'm concerned that Burning Man will get too large for it to keep its essence. I've seen cool things get too big and lose what made it cool in the first place. I worry that too many people will begin, if they haven't already, to go for the wrong reasons and that what Burning Man is really about will fade. But those are my concerns and seeing that I haven't even been before it doesn't seem like I can make a good judgement. So thats why I want to know what everyone who goes thinks.

Lakshmi

[Bob]

In the VH1 footage, you'll notice the Burning Man is set at ground level. Beginning in 1996, it was set on raised wood-frame pedestals, first surrounded by straw bales, then by large wood structures. So the VH1 shots are from 1995 or before.

A timeline might help -- up to you how many people and how much stuff you can tolerate.

http://www.burningman.com/whatisburning ... eline.html

[Lakshmi]

You're right, the footage is old. I've read that timeline before, but seeing the original setup of the man didn't register when I was watching the show.

Even if the footage is old though, the fact that its on a major television station still concerns me. And its not necessarily the growing population that concerns me but the way BM may possibly change as a result of it. Especially when hundreds of frat guys (sorry to use the stereotype, but the ones who live up to it are who I refer to) decide to join in on the festivities after seeing it on a growing number of TV stations.

I'm all for lots of people but only as long as they know that Burning Man isn't just a crazy place to get wrecked and have sex.

[Xhile]

as a noob, who's heavily involved in one of the regionals, i hope to get to the Nevada burn before it jumps the shark.

People were saying that years ago, but i do think things have a natural life before they go bad.

[gyre]

We could always convert the frat guys.
If they show up in the first place, they are already different from the average person.

[Steven bradford]

Seriously, you're too late. It got a more attention in the late nineties than it does now. Then it was featured in segments on various tv shows. One of the Turner networks did an hour long documentary (which was pretty good). In 97 when the event was "only" about 7500 people, there were satellite transmission trucks there. The Malcolm in the Middle episode was what, four years ago? For the most part, most print editors and tv producers consider it passe, an old story. It's part of the background culture now.

[the fire elf]

culture shock is indicative of a differential in a metaphoric 'social pressures'

the drastic change in lifestyle, even over a short amount of time,
is enough for most people to adapt the the frame of mind some call 'playa time'

acculturation is the main brunt of the dynamic shift



with soo little of the conventional environmental cues to shore-up people's misnomers
i'd compare any detrimental forces to lilly farts in a sage tornado

[Badger]

Well, there's the original Wired article from 1996 which many folks consider the death knell of the event ("Burningman was better before the Wired article")

http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/ ... 3/09/60262

Followed with another from 2003...

http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/ ... 3/09/60262

C-Net from 2005

http://news.com.com/Burning+Man+meets+T ... 53558.html

and so on...

Then there are the articles related to the event...

http://news.com.com/Burning+Man+vets+br ... 44724.html

Bottom line is that there's never going to be a way to not have the event picked up and reported on. The unfortunate thing is that often enough there are reporters who default to the easiest, laziest way of reporting which often ends up being an elaboration of their stereotypes and preconceptions (free, sex, LOTS of drugs, drunken raves, etc.) about the event.

[diane o'thirst]

I don't think the Burn itself has been adversely affected...fratboys and yahoos can be dealt with, lookie-loos ignored...but what does concern me is the attention the ONLINE community has gotten. I'm talking about spammers and hackers.

This community's been hit by more malware-istas than any other electronic forum I'm on and have been on in years.

[EspressoDude]

agreed, like who is peat122402...one post...fuck fuck fuckity fuck..

wants me to be a buddy

how many others got this buddy request?

[Lakshmi]

[quote="Steven bradford"]Seriously, you're too late. It got a more attention in the late nineties than it does now. Then it was featured in segments on various tv shows. One of the Turner networks did an hour long documentary (which was pretty good). In 97 when the event was "only" about 7500 people, there were satellite transmission trucks there. The Malcolm in the Middle episode was what, four years ago? For the most part, most print editors and tv producers consider it passe, an old story. It's part of the background culture now.[/quote]

Well thats good to know. I've known about it for only a few years now and thought that it wasn't until recently that BM started getting so much attention. I just hope that the people who are still reporting and filming it won't misrepresent it.

[Lakshmi]

And damnit how do you quote correctly?

[gyre]

Enable the bbcode on your profile and on the posts.
Why they don't put this info on the form, I don't know.

[Xhile]

I just hope that the people who are still reporting and filming it won't misrepresent it.

I'm not particularly worried about misreporting. To be honest, there are very few reports on ANYthing that aren't misreported. It's the nature of daily news reporting, imo. Maybe research articles are different.

i do think what matters is individual one-on-one talk. If someone who 'gets it' talks to a friend, explains the ethos, if and when they come they will hopefully also 'get it'.

can humans take something good, and keep it that way over an extended period of time? i'm cynical about that. I'm a "small is beautiful" kinda guy.

maybe it would be good for the Nevada burning man to shut down for 10 years? dunno.

[Badger]

maybe it would be good for the Nevada burning man to shut down for 10 years? dunno.

Some folks have suggested that very thing although I don't think they mean for a decade as you opine.

I know that the Glastonbury Festival in England has been doing their gig since 1970. During that time it has become the largest music festival in europe. Every third or fourth year the stop for a year to sit back and see where they're going and what they need to change rather than let the momentum of the event carry them in a direction which they find themselves only marginally in control of.

I don't know that BM could do that because they have this infrastructure in place in which they have to pay rent, salaries, health care, etc. I think it'd be kinda hard to put the brakes on that for a year and then try to start things up from where you left it at the point of shutdown.

[Xhile]

I don't know that BM could do that [shut down] because they have this infrastructure in place in which they have to pay rent, salaries, health care, etc. I think it'd be kinda hard to put the brakes on that for a year and then try to start things up from where you left it at the point of shutdown.

Indeed. Much as i love what the paid people do to make things happen, perhaps it's a noose around the organisation's neck? If the 'right thing' is to shut down, considerations like that shouldn't stop the 'right thing' from happening. Give everyone plenty of notice, and let 'em go.

I'm not saying i know what the right thing is, but it's interesting to discuss.

At kiwiburn (NZ regional event) i am an advocate for limiting numbers. If someone said to me "here, get paid for doing burner stuff", I'd find it hard to turn down. But i think that would be the right thing to do.

[actiongrl]

FWIW, if the VH1 Piece you're talking about is the show called "The Drug Years", that footage was obtained without permission from the organization.

Just so you know.

And just curious about this one, Lakshmi - how'd you first hear about Burning Man?

[helitack]

...but if it is editorial or news related, they don't need permission...

[actiongrl]

Yes, even news and editorial image use requires written permission to use footage in any public way. The VH1 producers happened to get footage from a news archive that was unknowingly offering footage for sale; the footage was entered into archive without the knowledge of the original producer. We notified the archive/news agency of their mistake, which was a violation of their original agreement, and they were very dismayed at the error and removed the footage from their archive.

[gyre]

That series doesn't qualify as news anyway.
I don't remember it being very hard on burning man though.

Some parts of the series were pretty well done.
Others were what you might expect.

[actiongrl]

Yep, to be considered "News" a piece must broadcast within two weeks of the event, and no archival use whatsoever may be made of that footage after that. And it still requires written permission to film it.

[helitack]

Even with an ultra long lens from the public highway and a directional microphone?

[actiongrl]

I don't know, Heli - are you saying that's what you plan to do, film the people at Burning Man without their permission? Because really nobody's tried to shoot like that before and it would seem to me to be kind of rude to do so. As for whether our rules and regulations regarding filming would apply to someone surreptitiously filming from outside the event, well, we haven't had anyone to try to test the theory, but then again, I don't know why anyone would want to do that to a community who have expressed that they don't want to be filmed without permission and have gone to great lengths to protect themselves from same. Seems rather asinine to me.

[Teo del Fuego]

if you think Burning Man represents something good and worth keeping in the other 51 weeks of the year, then you want to see it grow and attract more potential converts. I don't have a problem with growth as it means even more interesting people, fabulous art, etc. Yeah, I dont want to see it grow to become 70,000 plus up-tight yuppies trying to be "cutting edge," even though some might consider that tag would apply to me and everyone else who arrived on the scene after the straw-bale era.

I will risk the slings and arrows of venomous replies by suggesting that stuff like Critical Tits does more to bring in the bad frat-boy vibe than anything else. But CT is part and parcel of the whole irreverence theme and shuking off the confines of Defaultia.

Burning Man will end one day, but probably because of a cataclysmic propane explosion on an art car taking out 20 or so attendees. but that's my apocalyptic take on things.

[Bob]

Um... AG, you aren't making this thread all about the org, are you?

Can it be proved that media exposure changes anything, unless you poll & interview people to assess whether media exposure was an influencing factor in deciding to attend Burning Man or not, or how it influenced what they did or didn't do at Burning Man? The org doesn't like some kinds of media exposure and tries to prevent it -- but this isn't the same as proving that it's harmful to the org other than in a legal sense.

The VH1 "The Drug Years" piece as a whole was pretty shallow, IMO, concentrating mostly on celebrities and phenomena well-covered in the media over the last forty years, so any footage of Burning Man in that context should be taken with a grain of salt. But really, with or without the VH1 & similar coverage, Burning Man looks, sounds & acts enough like a rave that many people think it's pretty much a rave. Deejays and promoters who have camps at the event look at Burning Man as a gig they can cross-promote just like any other gig. Whether or not the org tries to control a media article painting Burning Man as a rave, they can't prevent individuals putting it in their list of gigs on their resume.

And is this really different from professional or semi-pro artists or anyone putting Burning Man on their resume, or talking about it on websites or in interviews? How would ticket buyers even know what media publishers the org ever takes action against, or what media writers the org encourages & aids behind the scenes?

Bottom line, if you're deciding on whether to go to Burning Man for the first time, I think you have to rely on people you know first-hand, not the media, because anything you see in media is inherently unreliable, including what the org writes about itself.

[actiongrl]

I think i was just answering questions/concerns, Bob.

We appreciate and welcome media and documentary coverage of the event.

[MikeVDS]

I'm not really sure how I first heard of BM. It was in 97 that I was of legal age and wanted to attend. I remember reading a lot about it on-line, which may have been where I first heard of it. I'm pretty sure I did not hear about it from someone who had already gone.

[robotland]

The first media-thingie that I remember seeing about BM was a piece on The Travel Channel, along about '99 or so...but then, I'm out here in the sticks. Didn't attend until '03, and have been going ever since. The only subsequent media that I've seen that seemed to REALLY capture some of the spirit of the event has been "internally produced"- by Burners, more or less For Burners...."This Is Burning Man", "Folding Time And Space", "Beyond Black Rock". I still wonder exactly what happened to that Discovery Times piece- It seems to have vanished without a trace. (Thankfully I taped it, having some pals in the program that, like most people, DON'T get the Disco-Times Channel. Glad I didn't run into that idiot on the playa, but sometimes I watch the program just to watch Kernul Killbuck beep him on the nose...)

[Lakshmi]

And just curious about this one, Lakshmi - how'd you first hear about Burning Man?

You know, I was trying to remember where I had heard about it and I'm not really sure. I think it was through someone who had heard of it but hadn't attended. After that I just started asking around about it and looking it up on the internet.

The VH1 "The Drug Years" piece as a whole was pretty shallow, IMO, concentrating mostly on celebrities and phenomena well-covered in the media over the last forty years

I actually really enjoyed the show. You're right, they did concentrate a lot on celebrities and events well-covered by the media, but I think there was a reason in doing that. In the beginning certain drugs were too expensive for anyone but celebrities to afford. Then later on bad happenstances involving celebrities were included because those events were part of the catalyst that started the war on drugs. They shocked people into really looking at what was going on and gave them the drive to try and stop it. At the same time all of that stuff was good eye candy for the viewers but in a sense it was true. I think it would be fair to say that more than half of society is influence by the celebrity world.

[skygod]

What I see here is an feeling that as BM grows larger it will lose it's essence, that everything good turns bad as it gets larger.
Actually I don't think anyone knows what the essence of BM is, or what it is supposed to be.
I remember, as a child, going to Altamont to see the Stones and it was such a crazed, demonic scene, with people getting killed in front of me.
I thought jeez this is terrible, now I think maybe that was what it was supposed to be, a glimpse of reality we often hide from.
BM is just people, we can't ignore or exclude them cause they are yahoos or fratboys or whatever. We should let BM get as large as we can IMO and take the consequences.
Maybe I'm not expressing myself well.
Pogobear said "We met the enemy and they are us"
Sartre said "Hell is other people"