Man burns prematurely on Tuesday morning. Photos.

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:53 pm

At least the article manages not to drop the little fucker's name.

Burp! · Post by **Burp!** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 1:46 pm

The burning of the man jumped the shark once they started building him on the structures and not the hay bails. The hay bail burns were much better because the man actually burned more evenly, giving us that iconic Burning Man we all know. Since the addition of all the various structures he now gets engulfed by the flames of the structure below. This year for example. I think this is all somewhat indicative of the BORG, in an attempt to remain relevant or competitive, the borg has felt the need to take the man to a new level which in return has somewhat lost what really made the man so cool.

I think the guy burning the man early was a stupid stunt mainly for safety reasons, but at the same time it was nice to see just the man on fire. Bringing back some danger to what was once a "You take your own life into your hands" I think was a much needed change.

As a friend said to me one year "Fuck the burning man organization, they need us to be rebellious, else this thing will get stale" I still believe that.

Bring Fire and danger back to Burning Man !!!!!

T.

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 2:24 pm

Those were straw bales, not "hay bails". And the Man didn't sit on a pile of straw, it sat on a wooden platform built by the same carpenters who built the Man, and the straw was simply stacked around the platform. Even after the platform was raised higher they used straw bales to add cheap bulk fuel to the burn.

Maybe carpenters should stop building anything at Burning Man, and the Greeters should hand out Molotov cocktails so you people can spend the week burning each other out.

Burp! · Post by **Burp!** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 3:00 pm

Bob, could'nt agree more with you.

doramey fossillotti · Post by **doramey fossillotti** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 4:45 pm

I would be upset if BMORG actually pressed charges.

I think they should have made him do a walk-of-shame though.

Mollyg · Post by **Mollyg** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 7:29 pm

Lets start a defense fund for him!

Isotopia · Post by **Isotopia** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 9:29 pm

Lets start a defense fund for him!

Let's not and say we didn't.

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:07 pm

I think the online fund was set up for Radcliffe to recoup the bail money, not for defending the mental midget.

HughMungus · Post by **HughMungus** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:24 pm

Mollyg wrote:Lets start a defense fund for him!

Yes!

ZaphodBurner · Post by **ZaphodBurner** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 8:42 am

The concept that seems to be missing from all of this is "respect."

Unless somebody's going to build 40,000 men so we can all burn our own next year, I think I'll stick to torching my own art and let the folks that build the man decide when and how to burn it. Out of respect. You and I may enjoy watching me run up and torch the Temple on Thursday but out of respect for the builder and all of the other burners who have their own plans, for the scheduled burn, I won't.

Paul Addis was right about one thing, which is that a lot of Burners (including himself) need to get over themselves. You guys who keep saying you want "danger"... Here's an idea: Go hang out in New Orleans, Detroit or Kabul.

-zb

Burp! · Post by **Burp!** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:23 am

I'm not really saying we need to make the event more dangerous, I don't want to see people hurt. It just seems like every year it gets a little closer to the default world. What kept it real was that it didn't follow the rules of real world, but it seems like every year there are more an more rules, so what to do? It really is a catch 22

Safe and Sane = Sanitized

T.