At 20/04/98 14:35:23, Alaric Sumner <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
# Why are photographs more threatening than language?
The arts have always attracted attention: the Lord Chancellor can still
close plays if it wants - although this power has been revoked (?) We have
a whole censorship structure for Films and Video's - and now PICs for the
WWW. In the past, books have burned. It is not long since the trial of
"Lady Chatterly's Lover", of various writers being forced to publish under
obscure prints in France.
And what about Salmon Rushdie? The print there inflamed emotions, caused
deaths (more than Mabblethorpe ever did)...You've got to pick your targets
well, that's all.
# Of course, here it is the organ of the State (Police Force) rather than
# self-Established Guardian of Morals Mary Whitehouse that is bringing the
# This morning on BBC Radio Four Rabbi Lionel Blue discussed his 'affair'
# with Christianity in terms of a homosexual relationship - breakfast
# listening. But he is such a NICE man.... Established.
# To what extent is/was Section 28 of the Local Government Act a (partial)
# consequence of the Gay New conviction? (This is the section that
# 'promotion' of homosexuality.)
# Can anyone explain to me (I am speaking ironically of course) why the
# European Court has found the behaviour of a few men in their own
# with no financial transactions (ie fully consenting) criminal, but has
Not strictly true, AFAIK. The European Court does something called
"Administrative Review": they compare the law of the land against the EU
treaties that the various parties have signed up to. In this case, the
treaty allowed British to be extant. This may change.
the "UN Declaration of Human Rights" is scheduled to be incorporated into
UK law. Why aren't you supporting that?
# found the public displays for money of such Established performance
# as Marina Abramovic, Jim Rose, Ron Athey, Chris Burden, Andre Stitt,
# Nitsch, Gina Pane, Franco B, Paul Buck, Viennese Actionists, Genesis P
# Orridge, Cosy Fanny Tutti etc etc etc criminal? Not that I am suggesting
# they should criminalise the latter, you understand!
# Isn't the purpose of art to become coopted, Established?
# Isn't the purpose of current 'cooption' capitalism to blandize
# Isn't the purpose of the media to make the medium the message/massage so
# that anything appearing on the screen is merely somethingelse appearing
# the screen and therefore by extension make anything in the world (or out
# it) into merely somethingelse that could appear on the screen? Celebrate
# difference. Difference Established. As different as Major and Blair.
# side. Two co(i)ns.
I care little for this kind of thing. It is merely the peacock displaying
his pinko feathers.
# Isn't the purpose of current (male) homosexual 'lifestyle' politics to
# 'difference' into consumerism (we're all pinky-dinkys (dual income no
# after all)? [The venom in that comment comes from fury at the corruption
# Gay Liberation Front ideas now being worn as fashion statements in Soho
# bars. Is this what I fought for in the seventies?]
Old radicals never die...they just rage away.
Each generation pays their money, makes their choices. What one generation
sets up, the other may tear down. Or not.