From: Fred Camper (email suppressed)
Date: Wed Nov 19 2008 - 11:42:02 PST
Adam raises a bunch of interesting questions.
I don't mean to suggest that I think the artist's wishes must be
followed in each and every case. I can imagine lots of extreme cases in
which I personally wouldn't advocate that the artist's wishes be followed.
When someone makes, and exhibits, a work of art, that work enters,
however marginally, into art history. Almost certainly the making of it
depended on earlier works that the artist saw, and in many cases it also
influences later works. Both are *very* true of Conner's films. This is
an argument for showing them, in some situations, even against the
artist's wishes, and especially if that showing is not also illegal. I
don't really have a strong opinion one way or the other on the specific
question of Conner's films.
My only point is that the artist's wishes and intentions, and economic
survival, and the economic surival of the Coops and other distributors,
should also be considered, and taken very seriously.
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.