[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> no people.(moderate me, I'm scared)

["matt king" <fabdude@ic24.net>]

<<to most respondents to this th read>>
my brain your words
if ever connected would
 sleep lightly
 annoy the hell
from heaven anger would spill
 meaning power isn't yours
it is Alan's and mine
how quiet since the post
 has author been

I dug the poem
 you deconstruct

by the way I repeat as in an earlier "moderated" post
nettime is my f***ing spam
and that's how I like it

please re"moderate" the drunken unintellectuals
 to keep things smooth, That would kill this list;
 in fact I think that the accepted style of braininess it has,
 has made it alot more tedious than it should be
(point 103)
how many "net artists" actually make money
doing commercial IT; most I bet

I remember doing pages in the mid 90's when
it felt expressive,

never gave a shit about hits

this list is a bore APART from
things like Alan's poem
and the odd post I browse
like the Scientology trial

but I think its a great list
just keep this kind of stuff out

yours sincerely
a non-drone doing a job most of you
 brainy language worshipping freaks would balk at.

internet+critique=mostofnettime
stuffIfindinteresting=thinsliversofnettime
only very occasionally do these overlap
as the internet is only as stimulating as the
 authors behind it; fully (un)paid up(but there nevertheless) "net"artists
being usually
 the most tedious of the bunch

yoo finks I'm common incha?
£££££****00****~~~====#####++++%%%
$$$$$%%%%><><><><>????@@@{}{}{}{
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Dery" <markdery@mindspring.com>
To: <nettime-l@bbs.thing.net>
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 5:17 PM
Subject: Re: <nettime> no people.


> McKenzie Wark wrote:
>
> >>Those 'nature' documentaries annoy the hell out of me. They are part of
> an endless reduction of the life of the animal to the human, the measure
> of all things, apparently. The whole biological world is read in terms of
> its mirroring of our vanity. All of which is much better expressed in Alan
> Sondheim's 'no people'. I'm surprised that Mark would take objection to
> this, of all the nettime texts. Its better theory than a lot of the
> theory on nettime, as well as being better writing. Like a lot of Alan's
> writing, its looking at the meshing of writing with other things, the
> heterogeneous world in which words partake. Unlike a lot of literary
> modernism, his work (to me at least) is not about language. Its to do with
> words, and the work they do amongst other orders of things. Codework, i'd
> call it. Which might not be a bad thing to be thinking about, in an age
> when media make so many more worlds in which words and other codes get to
> mess with things.<<
>
> Ken, I almost always come away from your posts enlightened, not to mention
> entertained, but in this instance I'm simply baffled. There's no debating
> taste, of course; if Sondheim's writing sets your hair on fire, who am I
to
> disagree? Even so, I have no idea what you mean by the vaporous phrase
"its
> looking at the meshing of writing with other things." (Why the resistance
to
> using the correct contraction, rather than the incorrect possessive, by
the
> way? I don't mean to be catty, but my Inner Safire has always wondered.)
What
> "other things"? Inarguably, *all* writing, everywhere and always, has
something
> to do with things other than writing; one needn't be a card-carrying
> Foucauldian to believe, as the old, bald devil did, that the "frontiers of
a
> book are never clear-cut.it is caught up in a system of references.it is a
node
> within network." In any event, onward: Sondheim's writing is about words,
not
> language. How does he manage the neat trick of disentangling the two? Last
time
> I checked, words and language were inextricably intertangled. Nor am I at
all
> clear on what you mean when you say his writing is about "the work [words]
do
> amongst other orders of things." *What* sort of work among *what* other
orders
> of *what* sort of things? Trying to pin down your meaning, here, is like
trying
> to hit a blob of mercury with a nail gun. I catch your general
drift---that
> Sondheim's writing considers or critiques words as an instrumental
> technology---but beyond that, it's all ectoplasm to me.
>
>
>
> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
> #  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> #  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net




_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold