Re: HH - response

From: Cari Machet (email suppressed)
Date: Fri Jan 26 2007 - 16:30:29 PST

thanx so much 4 apologizing sam

i am sorry if what i was writing was provocative of such activity
it is super not the intent
(cause i ride a bike here in nyc i am well versed in the vocabulary of road
rage but...)
my major motif in my work is 'death' so...
it is of great import 2 me - re: the orig. post

i want to b clear - when i talk of 'academians'
i am not inclusive of proffessors
i am inclusive of people who think in an acedemic/pedantic manner
and hold such ideology above the trueth
for example posting for a call to b able 2 discuss video on the list
whereby video is consistently discussed here
with incredible ease


   1. Scholarly to the point of being unaware of the outside world. See
   synonyms at pedantic <>.
   2. Formalistic or conventional.
   3. Theoretical or speculative without a practical purpose or
   intention. See synonyms at
   4. Having no practical purpose or use.

stan was a proffessor and a good one
he illuminated much this way and thru his work
he was not academic - not the person i know -
illumination is much the purpose of art
sometimes that illumination is not pretty
- others don't want to look and listen but
wondering around the world superficially/formally bouncing off on things
(instead of being inside)
is not how i live nor do i think it has much to do with aliveness
just to b clear
when i speak about patriarchial activity
i am not specifying the activity as 'male'
sadly enough women are more often than not the gatekeepers of such activity
out of their own sickness and lack of intelligence so...


On 1/25/07, Sam Wells <email suppressed> wrote:
> OK Cari, I'm sorry about that.
> Sam
> __________________________________________________________________
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.

For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.