Back on Line...

After much shilly-shallying we have downloaded the means to properly upload ourselves to the aether. Our interface is repaired. We know more about microsoft than we ever cared to before. We are cybernetically enhanced, and at one with the aether. Resume transmissions. We are back online.

Driving with Scientists 1

It’s an unfortunate cliché that the brains of scientists and the brains of artists are incompatible. The stereotype that scientists are all about facts and knowledge and artists are all about feelings and expression is rather tired, and, in the face of so much collaboration between science and the arts in the contemporary art scene (think Symbiotica) clearly false.

However, recently I have been learning to drive an automobile, and I must say; while the brains and the quality of thinking of the relevant parties involved (myself; the artist, and The Instructor; the scientist) are both of high quality, I must admit to being totally flabbergasted, floored - sucker-punched, if you will - at the different manner in which we communicate, and what we seem to think is important in an exchange.

Now I’m aware of The Scientists preoccupation with detail, the need to give you all of the back-history with all tangents painfully explained, before getting to the point of an anecdote. Indeed I’ve even been driving with him once before where this need to chatter about what seemed irrelevancies resulted in me being stopped in the middle of a set of traffic lights…

So this time I had briefed him; “Give me lots of instruction on what you think I should be doing. Stay focused.”
Things were going well; “Go slower,” he’d say.
“Slower!”
“Okay good now speed up…”
“We’re going to go left, so indicate…”

The Scientist, in response to the question; “Which lane should I be moving to?” gives an appropriate answer, but then also – in his mind; helpfully – proceeds to give an explanation of why vehicle weight to vehicle speed is an important consideration and may affect the ability of the driver to turn the steering wheel… Indeed, so caught up is The Scientist in this detailed explanation of Newton’s three laws of motion as applied to torque forces and the physics of automotive engineering, that he seems oblivious to my repeated queries about the car coming up behind us;
“There’s a car coming up behind us, in the lane I’m moving into… Should I stop veering into the lane and let him pass or enter the lane? Should I enter the lane? Hello? I’m entering the lane – I think it’s okay, the other car seems a safe distance behind...”

Needless to say; if it were possible to stare daggers at someone, and it was also possible that said daggers could travel in a path out of my eyes straight ahead (because that is the only direction I’m looking, save for checks to rear view mirror, side mirrors and back to the windscreen) through the windscreen and do a u-turn to finish up buried to the hilt in The Scientists upper torso, then The Scientist would be sadly deceased.

Scientists, to generalise, and extrapolate from a sample size of one, to a wider population, seem to love to wax lyrical with detailed explanations of detail and excruciating minutiae, somewhat like someone with Aspergers, about the most banal of subjects. And they think this is communicating.

I, on the other hand, if I wanted detail, would read a book, or look up a reference. To me, sharing communication time discussing detail, is time wasted. I’d rather know your opinions on something important, I’d rather know about your feelings, your dreams and what makes you you. Or; if I’m driving a moving weapon at high speed, very inexpertly and possibly threatening the lives of those inside and outside the vehicle, then I’d like to know that I had your full attention, and that you weren’t lost in a whimsical world of excruciating textbook analysis of Newton.



Fortunately I have other driving instructors to draw upon; The Fiance, The Punk and The Human Machine.

I’m sure I’ll vent the aftermath of those experiences here as well.

Stay tuned.

And remember; I’m driving now, so stay off the roads.

Loving Sister Unity Right Now

So what am i doing right now?
I'm doing Sister Unity.
I wish!

She's so hot.

Not only does she manifest two of my favourite aesthetics (orange robes, white-face), but she does it through the OPI as a spiritual guide via youTube. It's so uber-hot-homo-meets-pomo, my keyboards ends up sticky every time.

Love and Laughter.

Slava Mogutin - NYC Go-Go

From the introductory essay by Bruce Benderson;
"a very common metaphor for desire itself these days is prostitution."

"This metaphor embraces so much about our current civilisation. In the sleazy gestures of go-go dancers, the naked gyrations of partiers at hole-in-the-wall clubs and the chance exhibitionists, we find desiring bodies in deliberate but often sham postures of exploitation, aping prostitution as a way of cruising or partying. And most incredible of all is the fact that many aren't forced to. Postures of exploitation are, instead, their joy, their choice, their wielding of power and even their quest for love. The language of prostitution, then, may be the only means of erotic communication available to some in our new society of exploitation."

"Slava Mogutin has understood that exploitation is the new flirtation."

Assimilation

So the New York Times has an article on Gay Marriage, this weekend just gone, that reads like a love-in on the virtues of assimilation, by intelligent folk that should know better, to whit; Jonathan Rauch (author of: "Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America") and David Blankenhorn (author of: "The future of marriage"). There is also this article / interview with Rauch on NPR about how gay marriage is causing a shift in gay culture; ie from "outsider" to "insider", from despised freaks to "seat-at-the-table".
Both authors and both books treat marriage itself as the most important element of the alleged "marriage debate", and neither really engage with the serious alternate stratagems to couple-dowm (like empowered singledom, for a start). The arguments are essentially American (ie the need for marriage to ensure self-less devotion of one partner to another in a society without ready accessto state funded social services, aged care or health), but in the wake of the Howard era and the Christian right's wholesale importation of American "Family Values" crusading to Australia, not so alien to debates here about civil unions.
But it would appear as though arguments about what and how to do relationships have been wholly hijacked in the mainstream press by people who can't think beyond big frou-frou frocks and those diamond rings. The NPR interview does give some counter views from radical Queers (like there was any other kind...) but doesn't delve into alternate forms of relationships or living outside of relationship structures or even why it's so important to have state sanctioned relationship recognition at all (and i'm sure someone would say, "But what about the children?")
Very boring.

Tired

I'm tired of negotiating with the heteroid.
I'm tired of them thinking they're so terribly liberal and loving for being your "friend" and then having them be outraged that there are differences between us.
I'm tired of the liberal assumption that we all share the same boring safe middle class morality and liberal value system.
I'm tired of the constant onslaught of them flaunting their "sexuality" (which always seems more like abuse, sex-negative self abuse, sexist abuse of their partners, etc), and their privilege, and then having them be uncomfortable when we flaunt our sex, and are vocal about our lack of privilege.
I'm tired.
I'm tired of them flaunting their marriages, like a relationship is an end, and not an ongoing process of mutual self-creation and re-creation.
I'm tired of them expecting us to be overjoyed they've reproduced, when there are many excellent reasons for thinking that it's a form of eco-terrorism, and in the west, a continuing form of resource exploitation that's implicitly imperialist and racist.
I'm tired of the expectation that out of self-less love for their children i will subsidize their care, when really it's just another way the heteroid exploit queer labour.
I'm tired of the expectation that out of self-less love for their children i will subsidize their care, but are then outraged when i want to queer the raising of these children, that my taxes support.
I'm tired of their assumption that i'll respect their authority over their children, their authority to inculcate them into the values of compulsory heterosexuality, when in fact i'm going to do everything i can to liberate these poor inmates of a nuclear family asylum from the tyrrany of hetero-soc.
I'm tired of them never venturing out of their hetero-ness, but constantly feeling free to pass judgement on queer practises they've never experienced, can barely comprehend and don't want to have to think about because of the new vistas it might open up for them.
And i'm tired of Queers who think this is okay; that its okay to spend most of your time socialising with and emotionally supporting The Enemy.
I'm tired of the bleating of the assimilationists who whimper; "But it's easier..."
So i'm going to have a nap.

Just one day out of life

In the words of Madge;

If we took a holiday
Took some time to celebrate
Just one day out of life
It would be, it would be so nice

It is nice. It's been SO nice. For weeks.
My holiday continues; i'm in Sydney.
Give me a call if you wanna see me.

Next week; i'll be in Melbourne.