Re: protest nyc's proposed film and photo law Thurs Aug 2 Union Sq

From: Doug (email suppressed)
Date: Thu Aug 02 2007 - 23:20:31 PDT

On 8/2/07 6:31 PM, "Jim Carlile" <email suppressed> wrote:

> Trust me, I've set up a lot of 'guerilla' shots and it took me less than 30
> minutes to do so. L.A.'s rules make perfect sense, too-- without them, there'd
> be chaos.

    Please understand, we don't care what *you* do and how long it takes
you to do it. See, 30 minutes is not enough time to do some things that one
can do with more time, and that one can do without "chaos." And you know
that, don't you? I'm not sure why you're ducking this point.
    If you saw that there can be filming without chaos, would it change your
mind about the new rules? Is the chaos risk crucial to your defense of the
    And you haven't spoken to question of 30 minutes. Why not 5 minutes or
five hours? Oh well, as William Burroughs had his judge advise, "If you
can't be just, be arbitrary."

    Here's a radical notion: shooting is more important than strolling.
You don't have to accept this to oppose the permits, but as long as we're
talking rights here, people can stroll anywhere, but that artist may only be
able to make that art right there, taking longer than 30 minutes to do it.
    Maybe you think of making art as deviant and strolling as more
legitimate. That doesn't fly, especially among the people you're trying to
condescend to here.
    Every use of public space robs some of their free use of it. Shooting
doesn't have to be a greater burden than chatting in groups or strolling
with baby carriages.

    Your argument seems to partly be based on "It could be worse and we can
stand it if it's only this bad."
    Sorry, I want it as good as it can be, not as bad as we can stand it.


Q: How many Martians does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A: 1.6


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