From: Jonathan Walley (email suppressed)
Date: Mon Sep 08 2008 - 12:42:59 PDT
Cari (and everyone),
The constitution and bill or rights protects us from the government.
We're talking about the rules of this list, which is not a government
institution (thank god). If "rules" sounds to "controlling," then maybe
a better way to think about it is in terms of expectations people have
about then purpose of this list, which was explicitly set forth by the
people who created it. It seems reasonable to expect that the
conversations on this list are going to be about experimental film and
not other things, though of course there are always grey areas, as
others have rightfully pointed out.
You're right that if you don't like the posts on this list you can
avoid reading them, or read them and then ignore (not respond to) them.
But this list is a community of members with widely varying opinions,
beliefs, backgrounds, etc., and the list benefits from people
expressing themselves, INCLUDING about whether or not certain topics
are appropriate for the list. There is a distinction between voicing an
opinion and controlling/censoring someone, and you're conflating the
two here. You can disagree with someone's position, but immediately
inflating people's complaints about political content to the level of
control, censorship, and oppression seems extreme, especially when
nobody on this list can control what anyone else writes.
Finally, I don't get the anti-academic sentiment. As an academic
myself, I know there are some bad professors out there. I'm sorry if
you've had bad experiences in academia, because as a teacher of both
film studies and production I aim to create precisely the opposite. But
to equate academics as a group with control, lack of inclusiveness,
being boring, is unfair. There have been some artists who held beliefs
I'm sure you wouldn't like (you mentioned the futurists in a recent
post - they were fascists after all), but I wouldn't generalize about
all artists from those few. There are plenty of academics on this list
who keep things lively.
Assistant Professor, Cinema Department
Granville, Ohio 43023
On Sep 8, 2008, at 2:34 PM, Cari Machet wrote:
> you can make a post about green sox if you want as far as i am
> there is a reason in the constitution of the united states
> written oh in the 1700's
> and amended to include the bill of rights later
> was inclusive of freedom of speech
> wonder why those crazy white guys would give a crap about that?
> the ones in power now seem to understand just how crazy they were
> believe it or not
> (as there are way too many boring - academic - repetitively rehashing
> old crap films in the supposed experimental film world)
> experimental film is an inclusive genre of art/film
> if you don't like the posts in a given subject use your civil rights
> to not read them
> control freakism is boring and lifeless
> unfortunately some people are interested in such things
> On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 8:41 AM, James Cole <email suppressed>
>> "But surely 'rules' 'from above' are antithetical to experimental
>> Can I make a post about the Red Sox, then? Dustin Pedroia is really
>> swinging a big stick as of late.
>> I guess I don't really see how there can be any debate about whether
>> or not this is germane to the list. Does anyone here think Obama
>> knows who Joyce Wieland is?
>> I signed up for a list on the discussion of experimental film. In
>> the last few months, I've gotten that thing about joining some social
>> networking site, something asking me to send money to Nigeria, and
>> now political propaganda. Does any of this really wall under the
>> category of "subversive," Jack? I mean, hell, I wouldn't want to
>> receive emails about the new Coen Brothers movie, and I certainly
>> didn't give out my email so I could be subject to campaign material.
>> Certainly I don't think any of the people who "broke" the rules
>> should be kicked off the list or put in jail or anything (that would
>> indeed be "absurd"); but a whole mess of people gave out their
>> private email addresses so they could receive discussion about
>> experimental film, not so they could get information about Democrats,
>> Republicans, Lyndon Larouche, etc. It would be nice if people were
>> respectful of that.
>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 7:07 AM, Jack Sargeant <email suppressed>
>>> If we are going to follow rules (absurd) then surely "subversive"
>>> cover at least some political statements.
>>> But surely 'rules' 'from above' are antithetical to experimental
>>> > There are supposed to be rules about this list -
>>> > http://www.hi-beam.net/fw.html
>>> > Frameworks is "an international forum on experimental film,
>>> > film, film as art, film as film, or film as visual poetry; film's
>>> > expressive qualities, aside from or in addition to its
>>> > capacity. Any genre of experimental film, such as film diary,
>>> > footage, abstract, flicker, lyric, subversive, expanded, etc.,
>>> can be
>>> > discussed, as well as those films which fall into the cracks
>>> between the
>>> > genres, or those not covered by other lists.
>>> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
>> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
> cari machet
> nyc 347-610-5199
> AIM carismachet
> Skype carimachet - 646-652-6434
> __________________________________________________________________ For
> info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.